# Z rumors might be starting soon



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

> on't know where to begin, so I'll riff... --*Cavs lost the series in Game 6, not Game 7.* Though what happened in Game 7 ought to be a lesson. Cavs need a new offensive strategy. It's not that Mike Brown's system doesn't work, I mean the Spurs use it. Obviously the Cavs changed what they do after Hughes went down, but the system was not designed with all the Cavs weapons in mind.
> 
> _*--Before you talk about any trades/signings, etc., the first thing the Cavs must decide is how they are going to play offense. They know how they are going to play defense. If they want to join the hip trend of playing fast then they have to go that way. If they have another idea, they'll do something else. Yes, this directly involves Zydrunas Ilgauskas. I have plenty of information on this but I'm holding off until I get into the paper. Based on what I'm hearing Z will be a topic in the front office.*_
> 
> ...


http://blogs.ohio.com/cavaliers_blog/


----------



## remy23 (Aug 15, 2002)

Unless Cleveland can deal Z to fill a positional need, I'm not in favor of it.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Z to the Bulls for Kirk Hinrich or Ben Gordon?


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> Z to the Bulls for Kirk Hinrich or Ben Gordon?


I would be completely on board with the Kirk Hinrich trade. Unfortunately, I don't see the Bulls giving him up. I know they really need a big man in the worst way, but given the age difference I doubt they'd do it. 

Gordon on the other hand might be something they'd look at. I still have mixed feelings about him. When I used to watch him his rookie year, he struck me as a bit of a chucker. Once he got the ball, rarely would it come out of his hands unless it was headed towards the basket. And I think he shot around 40% that year (although they were mostly long 2s and 3s). I didn't get to watch him much this year.

That being said, now I'm beginning to believe he could fill the role that we need. He's not a distributing point guard, so we'd still have to rely on Lebron to draw attention and do a lot of passing, but he has a shooter's mentality. We saw it when we got Flip this year. When we have someone willing to take and make big shots (and actually shoot with confidence), it gives Lebron a lot more room to work. He might actually fit very well on this team.

One thing that I worry about is getting one-dimensional players (not yet sure whether Gordon fits this description). We saw the problems with it this year. With Snow in the game, we did a little better defensively on the perimeter, but LBJ could be freely double teamed because Snow can't shoot. When Damon came into the game, we could easily stretch the defense, but opposing guards could walk around him and score or get our bigs in foul trouble. I don't think we need more one dimensional players, which is why I would be excited about Hinrich. He can hit shots and defend well. I thought he did an admirable job denying Wade's penetration in the first round, and if he can do a good job denying penetration while contesting shots, he's already done more that either of our point guards this year. Sadly, I just don't see the Bulls giving him up.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I look at Gordon as an undersized Ray Allen. Flip Murray with range. He can slash, but he also has one of the purest strokes from outside. If Lebron hit him with the pass, and he was wide open, I'd like to think it's going down the hoop everytime. So long as you don't need him to be a real point guard...y'know. He is kind of a chucker though.

He's kind of what we wanted Dajuan Wagner to be.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

futuristxen said:


> Z to the Bulls for Kirk Hinrich or Ben Gordon?


Cavs do it, Bulls don't.


----------



## SamTheMan67 (Jan 4, 2004)

hinrich would be almost perfect a 3 shooting awesome defender with court vision cept he might dribble too much for lebrons liking


----------



## Benedict_Boozer (Jul 16, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> Z to the Bulls for Kirk Hinrich or Ben Gordon?


I'd be all over the deal for Hinrich. We really dropped the ball not pursuing him earlier, I think Hinrich's trade value has risen quite a bit.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Gordon would be sick on this team. That smooth stroke would be just what the doctor ordered for this team


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> I look at Gordon as an undersized Ray Allen. Flip Murray with range. He can slash, but he also has one of the purest strokes from outside. If Lebron hit him with the pass, and he was wide open, I'd like to think it's going down the hoop everytime. So long as you don't need him to be a real point guard...y'know. He is kind of a chucker though.
> 
> He's kind of what we wanted Dajuan Wagner to be.


Gordon is a great shooter. I'd be on board with him coming here. With the way our offense has struggled at times this year, I wouldn't mind having a bit of a chucker if he can shoot well, and Gordon can certainly do that.


----------



## hendrix2430 (Mar 21, 2005)

both gordon and hinrich would fit this team well, butwith hinrich it's a match madein heaven IMO.


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

I'm not much of a Gordon fan, but I'd love to get Hinrich. That being said I still think that deal helps Chicago more than it does Cleveland. No team other than maybe Phoenix needs and interior offensive presence as much as Chicago. I think that Z would give them that and the tandom of him and Chandler would be pretty daunting on the inside. 

Hinrich kinda reminds me of a poormans Marc Price (with better defense) which is exactly what this team needs.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

...



> Zydrunas Ilgauskas: Possible Trade Bait
> 
> RotoWire.com Staff - RotoWire.com
> Thursday, May 25, 2006
> ...


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

> The Cavaliers will be in evaluation mode for the next few weeks.
> 
> They have three picks in June's NBA Draft and four of their own free agents to deal with, but the largest and first decision could involve center Zydrunas Ilgauskas.
> 
> ...



http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/sports/basketball/nba/cleveland_cavaliers/14663133.htm


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Z/Gooden for Telfair/Pryzbilla?
Z/Jones for Nene/Miller? Doubt this will happen as Denver likes to break


----------



## Bron_Melo_ROY (Apr 12, 2004)

SamTheMan67 said:


> hinrich would be almost perfect a 3 shooting awesome defender with court vision cept he might dribble too much for lebrons liking


This would be perfect...I'd be all for it.


----------



## The OUTLAW (Jun 13, 2002)

Pioneer10 said:


> Z/Gooden for Telfair/Pryzbilla?
> Z/Jones for Nene/Miller? Doubt this will happen as Denver likes to break



To be honest, Denver needs to develop a half court offense. They are pretty ineffectual if you prevent them from running.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

What about Maurice Williams?


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

The OUTLAW said:


> I'm not much of a Gordon fan, but I'd love to get Hinrich. That being said I still think that deal helps Chicago more than it does Cleveland. No team other than maybe Phoenix needs and interior offensive presence as much as Chicago. I think that Z would give them that and the tandom of him and Chandler would be pretty daunting on the inside.
> 
> Hinrich kinda reminds me of a poormans Marc Price (with better defense) which is exactly what this team needs.


Why would the bulls do this when they have the #2 pick and plenty of Cap space t go after a Big FA this offseason?


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

And isn't Nene a RFA this summer?


----------



## Bron_Melo_ROY (Apr 12, 2004)

The Krakken said:


> And isn't Nene a RFA this summer?


I thought he was.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

The Krakken said:


> Why would the bulls do this when they have the #2 pick and plenty of Cap space t go after a Big FA this offseason?


 It's a pipe dream on the Cavs side because Hinrich in Cleveland in many ways would be a perfect match between what a team needs, what player can bring in, and the perfect complement of teammates to feed the strengths of that player.


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

So if Z gets traded, does that mean Gooden stays?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

The Krakken said:


> Why would the bulls do this when they have the #2 pick and plenty of Cap space t go after a Big FA this offseason?


There is nobody on Z's level available in free agency or the draft.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

garnett said:


> So if Z gets traded, does that mean Gooden stays?


I think so. Depends on what comes back for Z though.


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

Pioneer10 said:


> http://blogs.ohio.com/cavaliers_blog/


There is a Cavs dealing Z on ESPN/Insider is this the same article.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

The Krakken said:


> Why would the bulls do this when they have the #2 pick and plenty of Cap space t go after a Big FA this offseason?


Because you can't draft or sign a big man as good as Z.


----------



## Like A Breath (Jun 16, 2003)

Aldridge is going to be better than Z, I would bet a good amount on that.

Good to see that he is at least being brought up in trade talks. You have to learn from your mistakes sometimes, and the fact is that any scrub center could've replaced Z in the playoffs and the Cavs would not have missed a beat. 13 games is not a fluke, no way should an All-Star center disappear like that. Cavs just have to get good value for him.

The Bulls would not part with Hinrich. They have mixed feelings about Gordon though, so maybe Z+draft pick for Gordon+contract filler.


----------



## Larry Hughes for Retirement (Jul 5, 2004)

Deng/Duhon for Z 

Possible pick included, who knows, I dont see many Z takers. Centers have gone absolete in this league alot of teams are going with the two power foward looks and getting away with it.


----------



## hendrix2430 (Mar 21, 2005)

True, plus Gooden/AV would be a great combo. From what I recall, they play well together. These two together would grab so many rbs!

Plus, it's not like they're 6-8 or 6-9, both of them are 6-11 which is what most true centers are anyways.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

LBJ to LJ for 3 said:


> Deng/Duhon for Z
> 
> Possible pick included, who knows, I dont see many Z takers. Centers have gone absolete in this league alot of teams are going with the two power foward looks and getting away with it.


They won't go obsolete for long. Oden, Bogut, Yao to name a few. Kaman, the two young centers in Seattle, Curry and more. 

It's not truly about a center, true. But it is about having a frontcourt. And one center brings you a lot closer than one power forward. 3 of the 4 teams in the conference finals have dominating frontcourts. Last year the NBA champion started two 7 footers.

The reason Z is being shopped is because there are takers. Z and Andy are the two most called about players apparently on the team. Most teams think we don't use Z properly, and that they could get more out of him. See also Diop.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Like A Breath said:


> Aldridge is going to be better than Z, I would bet a good amount on that.
> .


I'd take that bet. Aldridge is garbage. There are no good american big men in this draft. This is the Stromile Swift draft all over again. If Aldridge ever makes an all-star team I'll eat my hat.

I'll go a step further and suggest that if Tiago Splitter is drafted in this draft he will be better than Aldridge.


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

I know that Z is a pretty valuable commodity, being a 7'3" center with a good offensive game, but the impression that I'm getting is that nobody would want to give much up for him. Other teams see him as old and declining and a huge contract to take on, and they don't want to give up any young pieces for him. Some of the fans on the Blazers board said they wouldn't want to give up Pryzbilla for Z straight up, let alone having Telfair anywhere near the trade. 

I'm beginning to think more and more that we should keep Z and hire a competent offensive coordinator that will implement a system to take advantage of his skills. It seems like we're not going to get equal value back for Z, and I don't expect him to have bad playoffs like this every year, especially if we put him in a position where he can be effective.

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing him in the high post a little more. Maybe in the position where Webber excels. Although he's not as good of a passer as Webber, he's still a very good passer and he can hit that shot if his man sags off him. He just gets outmuscled too much when he tries to back down his man in the low post, and he hasn't mastered his sweeping hook shot. If we put him in the high post and get a lot of off the ball movement from Larry and Lebron cutting to the basket, I think he could be best played there. 

Overall, I think we should bring in someone to implement an actual offensive system that gets everyone involved. If we keep Drew Gooden, we should run some plays for him. And I'm not talking about our usual "Throw him the ball and let him iso" play, but actual playcalling with off ball movement. He's a much more effective player when he's involved in the play on the offensive end.

I'm starting to think that we should change this team up as little as possible. We need a point guard. No question about that. And we're likely going to have to give up Gooden to get one. Perhaps we could work out a sign and trade with Pheonix to get Barbosa our way, but his stock is rising very quickly. But other than that, we were able to hang with the Pistons playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end, so a complete shakeup might hurt the team.


----------



## shyFX325 (Jul 28, 2002)

The OUTLAW said:


> To be honest, Denver needs to develop a half court offense. They are pretty _ineffectual_ if you prevent them from running.


ineffectual.....


----------



## potbellynine (May 30, 2006)

Brandname said:


> I'm starting to think that we should change this team up as little as possible. We need a point guard. No question about that. And we're likely going to have to give up Gooden to get one. Perhaps we could work out a sign and trade with Pheonix to get Barbosa our way, but his stock is rising very quickly. But other than that, we were able to hang with the Pistons playing 4 on 5 on the offensive end, so a complete shakeup might hurt the team.



I agree. I'm afraid that with too many moves, everything the Cavs learned and accomplished last year would need to be relearned, re-accomplished, and that has a tendency of not working a second time. It was nice seeing the teamwork this year, and the chemistry, and with just one more ingredient, the Cavs can get that big bang they've been striving for. (okay, now that I've cliche-d y'all :tongue To shake that up too much would be disaster, and I think we, as Cavs fans, have had enough of *those* years to last us for a good long while.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Brandname said:


> I know that Z is a pretty valuable commodity, being a 7'3" center with a good offensive game, but the impression that I'm getting is that nobody would want to give much up for him. Other teams see him as old and declining and a huge contract to take on, and they don't want to give up any young pieces for him. Some of the fans on the Blazers board said they wouldn't want to give up Pryzbilla for Z straight up, let alone having Telfair anywhere near the trade.


The thing about teams that suck is that their fans are on the potential train, and loathe to see that pipe dream encroached upon in even the slightest manner. The fact of the matter is, a team like the Blazers has too many young players, and they will eventually unload them for veterans, or they will continue to suck. Look at the Clippers. They had young players forever. But they didn't make strides until they jettisoned half of that core, and brought in Cassell and Mobley. They still have young players, but they are a veteran team now, and now they win.

And the Bulls have a glut of players that play the same position. Young or old, it's stupid to sit there and yo-yo Ben Gordon in and out of the starting lineup. Gordon has at times been very displeased in Chicago, and it's a direct result of the problem of having too many undersized guards in the backcourt. Sure if the Bulls want to keep going young they can. But I think they think they are a piece away from contending. And that piece isn't going to be found in this draft. And Z is better than any big man on the free agent market this summer.

You have to remember, Z isn't a popular player with fans, but he's popular with people whose job it is to builid basketball teams. It was reported that Z and Verejao were the two players Ferry got the most calls on during the season, which is why we are even considering shopping Z.

At the end of the day, it's dumb to keep Gooden and Z on huge contracts when either one could be dealt to fill a need. Verejao and whoever stays is all the frontcourt we need with Marshall and Henderson on the bench(people forget we have Henderson, who is a very capable player in his own right, he was just the odd man out this year, but when asked he stepped in and performed marvelously).

As an aside, I wonder if Baron Davis is available? It's not like he had a great year in Golden State.


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

futuristxen said:


> At the end of the day, it's dumb to keep Gooden and Z on huge contracts when either one could be dealt to fill a need. Verejao and whoever stays is all the frontcourt we need with Marshall and Henderson on the bench(people forget we have Henderson, who is a very capable player in his own right, he was just the odd man out this year, but when asked he stepped in and performed marvelously).


If I had my way, I would want to use Gooden as a way of trying to pry Barbosa away from Phoenix. I think Gooden is the type of player that would thrive in the Pheonix system. He has a good offensive game, good touch around the basket, and he usually finishes pretty strong. They don't have any great defenders anyway, so that deficiency of Gooden's could be masked. 

I'm not convinced we're destined to be a running team, as so many are saying right now. So Z might still have a spot on our team if we decide to play to his strengths. 

I would want to try to work out a trade with Pheonix to trade Gooden for Barbosa (with less consequential players thrown in to make it work). Then I think we should try to go after someone like Reggie Evans. He fills the role we've been giving to Gooden all year (rebounding, scoring only when things break down), only he does it better while playing defense. He's not the offensive player Gooden is, but he's a much better defender and an even better rebounder. It's not like we utilized Gooden's offensive game anyway. 
I think those 2 moves would be solid enough to get us to the finals.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I don't agree with getting Reggie Evans. I don't see time for him at the PF with Marshall, Henderson, and Anderson all able to play the 4.

After a starting point guard, we just need to get some young players to develop in the background, like another Martynas to develop. But after you get a good point guard, it sets everything else up. Then you don't touch anything else. Just do a good job with your drafts, and build internally.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

*IF *we can get a good PG for Gooden then I would look into Reggie Evans as a backup PF using our MLE. Frankly if management doesn't find anything good for Z and Gooden this offseason, I'd be favor of keeping both. Gooden may be more valuable after another year getting good stats with Lebron and with signed contract then as an restricted FA.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I really want to clear space for Andy to play though. I think Andy has to start next year, and that means one of Z or Gooden will sit, it would be wise to not travel that path. Gooden sucks off the bench, and Z may retire.

I refuse to believe that something can't be done with Z or Gooden. When you have teams like Portland, Chicago, and New York who have 3 and 4 decent point guards, the idea that they refuse to part with any of them for a good big man is rather daft. Despite what their fans say.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

futuristxen said:


> I really want to clear space for Andy to play though. I think Andy has to start next year, and that means one of Z or Gooden will sit, it would be wise to not travel that path. Gooden sucks off the bench, and Z may retire.
> 
> I refuse to believe that something can't be done with Z or Gooden. When you have teams like Portland, Chicago, and New York who have 3 and 4 decent point guards, the idea that they refuse to part with any of them for a good big man is rather daft. Despite what their fans say.


 I agree as long as we get something and despite Z's lackadaisacal postseason, AV is a natural 4 so that means Gooden in gone.

Gooden/Snow for Crawford/James if it works cap wise makes a lot of sense for both teams. NY gets some much needed veteran leadership and D plus some more size up front at a cheap rate. Meanwhile they finally get rid of some bad contracts as well. For us we take back two bad contracts but a guy in Crawford whose strenghts fit our needs. Thank God if we get him that we have Lebron and Hughes who can handle the ball


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

Pioneer10 said:


> I agree as long as we get something and despite Z's lackadaisacal postseason, AV is a natural 4 so that means Gooden in gone.
> 
> Gooden/Snow for Crawford/James if it works cap wise makes a lot of sense for both teams. NY gets some much needed veteran leadership and D plus some more size up front at a cheap rate. Meanwhile they finally get rid of some bad contracts as well. For us we take back two bad contracts but a guy in Crawford whose strenghts fit our needs. Thank God if we get him that we have Lebron and Hughes who can handle the ball


We're in a bit of a unique position in that we need exactly the type of player that so many teams are trying to get rid of, such as Crawford or possibly Marbury. We need players that are willing to step up and take big shots so that Lebron is not the only one stepping up late in games. Hopefully we can take advantage of the fact that these players are not in high demand to get a good deal for them.


----------



## potbellynine (May 30, 2006)

Why does the thought of Marbury on the Cavs, talent or no....possible great compliment to LeBron or not,...why does the thought of him in Cleveland scare the snot out of me? The thought gives me the feeling in the pit of my stomach kind of like you get when you're sitting in traffic for so long that you KNOW there is some truly terrible accident ahead that you will HAVE to look at, in all it's gory detail.


----------



## remy23 (Aug 15, 2002)

potbellynine said:


> Why does the thought of Marbury on the Cavs, talent or no....possible great compliment to LeBron or not,...why does the thought of him in Cleveland scare the snot out of me? The thought gives me the feeling in the pit of my stomach kind of like you get when you're sitting in traffic for so long that you KNOW there is some truly terrible accident ahead that you will HAVE to look at, in all it's gory detail.


Agreed. When I watch basketball players, I try to imagine what it would be like to play with them and how I'd fit alongside them. Marbury's style is tic-for-tac the same as a guy who plays at park near my house. I can't stand that guy's game. If we held a one-on-one tournament, he'd win all day but since basketball is a team game, his teams usually lose.


----------



## TyGuy (Apr 19, 2003)

Space doesnt need to be aquired for us to keep av. i dont know why a lot of people are always under the impression of that when trying to re up our own free agents. Andy is going into his third year here and we are over the cap. If we felt like it we could give him a max deal, wont happen of course but we definitely dont need to be thrifty in order to keep av. I would like to packagve a resigned drew gooden and damon jones for a starting point guard, use the draft to pickup a combo guard(allan ray) then use our mle to pickup a backup center.


----------



## Benedict_Boozer (Jul 16, 2004)

I like the Baron Davis idea Future brought up. Obviously huge question marks with his durability (our backcourt would be Mr. Glass with him + Hughes) and his horrid shot selection, but he is a legit all-star counterpart to Lebron. Recall just a year or two ago he was an early frontrunner for MVP. 

We would need a strong draft to fill in the roster and use the MLE/S&T to acquire another big man. I actually think acquiring him could be possible with them developing Monta Ellis


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Monta Ellis can play...yesterday. That kid is ****ing good.

We actually know Baron CAN play well with others. Baron and Lebron is kind of like Baron and Mashburn. Baron is a guy who has actually stepped up in the playoffs as opposed to disapear. It just depends how disatisfied he is with GS and how much they blame him for underachieving last year. Lord knows they didn't give up much to get him.

Someone like Z would really solidify the Warriors front court, and losing Baron opens up more shots for J-Rich.


----------



## blackops1998 (Jun 1, 2006)

Heh, has anyone heard about K.G. wanting to come here? What would it take to get a deal like that done?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

blackops1998 said:


> Heh, has anyone heard about K.G. wanting to come here? What would it take to get a deal like that done?


Blackmail and/or extortion.
And probably at least five dead bodies...one of which has to be a hooker.

Even then you'd need a minor miracle.

It's nigh impossible to match the salaries, and talent, and still end up with a team that's not worse than the wolves currently are.


----------

