JJ makes more sense than Milsap or Smith. He is what this team needs and is only 22 y/o. I would not hesitate to give up a 1st for him depending on how long he is under contract. I would not trade the pick for a rental.
Edit: He is under control for 2 more years @ 2.3 and a little over 3mill.
Getting him would be 10x better than the other PF's mentioned. He is already a better rebounder and athlete than Milsap ever will be.
Last edited by troyc11a; 06-17-2011 at 09:04 PM.
JJ Hickson is absolutely, positively not a better rebounder than Paul Millsap. Athlete? Sure. But Millsap is a superior player at this juncture, and will always be a better rebounder. Millsap led the nation in rebounding in college, and is certainly no slouch in the NBA either.
I have read on several sites this evening that Irving is not a lock. That Cavs may take Williams at 1 and Knight at 4. They may also be looking to trade JJ to gat a SG or SF. They will be heavy in both positions PF/PG. Just a thought.
How is Milsap a better rebounder when Hickson outrebounds him? Hickson averages a rebound more every game and is doing it at 22 years of age. If you want to argue better player, that is fair. Arguing that a guy who rebounds less is actually a superior rebounder. I am not buying that.
If we are too look at the PF options that MAY ( or may not ) be on the market......players like Josh Smith or Milsap.....IMHO...I think that either of them are going to cost too much for us to get. But if ALL the Cavs are asking for is #15 for him...I'd easily take him...heck, I'd even expand it to #15+BRush for Hickson+32 .Hickson was at one point considered a major building block for the Cavs, but he struggled under Byron Scott, especially at the offensive end where he shot 46 percent, a significant drop off from previous seasons once he was given more minutes. Hickson is still young, though, and on a team that isn't, you know, hemorrhaging like roadkill, he could be a useful frontcourt rotation player. Maybe Cleveland can ship him to a contender needing talented big men who aren't aging, somewhere that needs depth. Oh. like Miam....oh. Nevermind.
Salarywise....he makes $2.3 mil in 2011-2012 and can become a RFA in 2012-2013...so we don't lose out on losing any real capspace if he's a total failure.
At worst, he's a rental ( just like BRush is ) and he's certainly better then anybody that we can get at #15 ( assuming that Brooks and Jimmer are drafted before 15...which is the likely case ). At best, we get a 13/8 athletic and somewhat experienced PF that cost us IMHO very little in a draft that happens to suck IF we are left with a pick of Klay/Hamilton/Fariad or anyone not named Brooks or Jimmer.
#15 ( and some change ) for Hickson is the very definition of a "low risk / high reward" move.
Last edited by CableKC; 06-17-2011 at 09:32 PM.
Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.
This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.
I don't know a ton about JJ but I would not mind the Pacers trading for him. He is young and still on his rookie contract. He would provide some much needed athleticism to the frontcourt. He put up decent numbers as a starter last season (14 pts, 9 rebs, 29 MPG).
JJ won't be a difference maker like a Josh Smith or Paul Millsap would be. That doesn't mean he wouldn't be a good addition though if the price is right.
Personally JJ won't be that much better than tyler to justify trading away 2 fringe starters (Rush/Klay) for a starting pf on a bad team.
Dwill i can kind of understand but dont really. But Knight wtf? that guy is a project at the pg he still needs a lot of work his handles are sloppy and he is a project IMO at the pg i think he would do fine at sg.
Kyrie is going #1 and for very good reason IMO