Ramon Sessions to Lakers
2012-03-15
Ramon Sessions is headed to the Lakers. Details are shady right now (I’ll fill in the details as they become available), but Windhorst says the Cavs are getting a “future draft pick.”
UPDATE: Okay, here are the details: Sessions & Eyenga to the Lakers for Luke Walton and their 2012 first rounder (top 14 protected). The Lakers also have the right to swap their 2013 first-rounder with the Cavs’ Heat selection. I liked this trade a lot better when it didn’t involve the words “Luke Walton.”
UPDATE #2: Jason Kapono has also been included in the Sessions deal.
UPDATE #3: The Plain Dealer is reporting the Cavs are done for the day.
UPDATE #4: Windhorst has corrected himself. The Cavs will have the ability to switch picks with the Lakers in the 2013 draft. So that Miami pick that’s probably going to be in the late 20s? They can swap it with the Lakers, who will probably be picking closer to early 20s/high teens.
Jimbo – we saved the Lakers a lot of money. The value of what we took on should be weighed in the draft because it was worth a lot to them. If we now tried to trade what we got in the draft for any asset, I doubt we’d see much in return. When that’s the case, it means you did a pretty crappy job on a trade. Sorry, but that’s how I see it.
“But, as long as we use the pick for something decent, I’ll be happy. If we don’t, however….” If we don’t turn the pick into something useful, then we are in the exact some spot we would have been in when we watched session leave for nothing… Plus we would have had to overspend more in Free agency without knowing who our young core is, which is the real purpose Luke Walton would serves, protecting cap space for another year. Theres a Cap floor now you know. Could we have signed someone better than walton to a 1 year $6mil… Read more »
@Ross-I don’t want to get a Browns debate started here, just pointing out another Cleveland sports move that some have been breathlessly panning but really isn’t that bad.
I am pissed that the Browns didnt trade for the #2 pick
Hoopsdogg, PER pretty much is worthless as a defensive measure even according to hollinger himself. Defense is something Sessions by all accounts was terrible at. So he may have been an above average offensive player, not an above average player.
@Mallory- You’re still treating Luke Walton like he makes max money. $6 mil is a lot for a guy who may not play next year, but who are the Cavs going to spend that money on this summer? Chandler? Fields? It would have been a little better for the Cavs to get that Mavs pick, but its likely not much higher than they one they have now. Again, all you’re being accused of here is hyperbole. Was it a great deal, no. Does it give the Cavs another shot for the future, yes. No need to treat it like its… Read more »
Supposedly we got Kapono too. THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING!
Jimbo –
Yes, the talent pool is shallow, but Ramon was maybe a C+ to B- trade chip – he’s starter caliber who does a couple of things very well. If you can buy a late 1st pick for 4 mil, how is giving up a guy who is above average, plus taking on a LOT of money, worth it?
I just refuse to believe we couldn’t have been a little more patient, waited until the end, and swung this for one more surer thing.
Mallory, If we don’t draft a good player we are in the exact same position we’ll be in when sessions would have walked out on us in Free agency. I don’t get what it is you think we are risking here. He’s a free agent, if we really need him that bad, WE CAN STILL GET HIM BACK!
@Mallory, you said you “HATED” it. There’s a difference. Don’t get bent out of shape when people are pointing out your hyperbole.
In the second half of my comment that got eaten by the monster, we’re essentially spending 7 million next year for a a late first round pick. If he pans out, great, we’ve got a bargain in years 2, 3, and 4. But if he doesn’t would we have been better off spending 7 million on a free agent?
@Mallory-Depends on what you mean by “much, much.” It’s not going to be a lottery pick. Yes, it sucks that the Cavs couldn’t get that last deal, but there’s still no reason to get bent out of shape over this. The Cavs were never going to be major trade players. Beyond Kyrie, Andy, and Antawn, the talent pool was very shallow.
Mallory, If we don’t use the pick on someone useful, then we are going to be in the EXACT same position we would have been anyways, except with Luke Walton on the books holding up cap space for our 2013 free agency.
Mallory, If we don’t use the pick on someone useful, then we are going to be in the EXACT same position we would have been anyways, except with Luke Walton on the books holding up cap space for our 2013 free agency. Personally, I’ve already stated that I would rather wait to see what we have with our young assets before splurging in FA, so this is more of a win than a loss to me.
HoopsDogg kind of said it – it was the Cavs pulling the trigger simply because they were scared if they didn’t, all hell would break loose.
Like I said WAY long ago, I have to believe we could’ve gotten more. Maybe a young prospect out of this? Something?!?!?
We took on a lot of money, got rid of a decent young guy, for a pick. Like I said, I don’t love it…
Mallory, If I knew ramon was staying for ~$5 mil, I definately would not have made the trade. No. However, it makes absolutely no sense for sessions to do so. And if he really likes Cleveland that much, we can always sign him again this offseason. Thats the point, he was going to be a free agent anyways and he was relatively useless to us this year (not making the playoffs, just hurting draft position). Now he’s simply going to be a free agent and its just about as likely today that we resign him as it was yesterday, but… Read more »
That last laker trade pretty much says it all…Dallas’ pick should be much, much lower than LA’s
In essence, we’ll probably be paying about 7 million in salary to Luke Walton and the pick, and then 3 more years at a million dollars per for the pick. I’m not sure it wouldn’t have been better to just spend next year’s 7 million on a free agent. I thought we should have held out for a lower salary player, and make the Lakers use part of their trade exception. Also, Andrew Guodelock might have been a nice get. From a pure basketball standpoint, it is a big win for the Lakers. From a salary standpoint, it’s a HUGE… Read more »
Mallory, If I knew ramon was staying for ~$5 mil, I definately would not have made the trade. No. However, it makes absolutely no sense for sessions to do so. And if he really likes Cleveland that much, we can always sign him again this offseason. Thats the point, he was going to be a free agent anyways and he was useless to us this year (not making the playoffs, just hurting draft position). Today after this trade he’s simply going to be a free agent and its just about as likely that we resign him as it was yesterday,… Read more »
In essence, we’ll probably be paying about 7 million in salary to Luke Walton and the pick, and then 3 more years at a million dollars per for the pick. I’m not sure it wouldn’t have been better to just spend next year’s 7 million on a free agent. I thought we should have held out for a lower salary player, and make the Lakers use part of their trade exception. Also, Andrew Goudelock might have been a nice get. From a pure basketball standpoint, it is a big win for the Lakers. From a salary standpoint, it’s a HUGE… Read more »
Sessions is not an average player. He is a slightly above average player with a PER of 16.44. Average is around 15. Also, sessions has traditionally been much better as a starter than as a bench player. Furthermore, now that he’s been able to extend his range out past the three point line, teams can’t just pack the paint on him. He is definitely an upgrade for the Lakers, and as long as Kobe lets him do his job, he’ll be fine. I expect him to play a lot with the second unit as the primary ballhandler. Good trade for… Read more »
Oops, I meant “higher.” All sorts of commenting fails today.
Alex – I’m not sure we’ll have a ton of assets next year, unless we trade a pick. We wont have any expiring role players and, unless we want to trade Andy, TT, or whoever we sign this year (which I doubt) we probably wont be huge trade players – the idea is to create continuity around a core, right? Unless they’re out the door already, it makes almost no sense to trade someone. Matt- I’m at peace, don’t worry – just stating that I personally don’t love the trade. But, as long as we use the pick for something… Read more »
@Matt
“the chance sessions was coming back to Cleveland was much lower than the chances we add a good rotation player with the Lakers pick”
Very well said!
I will say this- I would rather the Cavs gotten the deal that the Rockets just did. That Mavs pick will probably be lower than the Lakers’ and Derek Fisher has a lower salary.
tom reed just wrote that sessions was “likely” to opt out. mallory is being disingenuous, at best, to keep pretending that there has been ANY report that sessions would opt in and stay to be a BACK-UP to irving. get that weak stuff outta here, mallory…
Mallory, it’s pretty clear that Grant & co. believed Ramon would opt out this summer. I’m not sure why you’re so convinced that a chance that Ramon would resign is better than a 1st round pick. They obviously have a better feel for what Ramon was planning than any of us do. Or maybe you had been having discussions with Ramon and his agent as well?
Personally I don’t think what players say to the media means a damn. What sessions and Grant said behind closed doors probably means a lot more, and if grant thought sessions would stay for reasonable backup PG money he wouldn’t have shipped out a decent player for a ~40% chance at a decent player. It makes a lot of sense for a 26 year old player who is putting up stats and who would start on numerous teams to not want to sit behind the star of a franchise. If given an even contract offer and a chance to start,… Read more »
@WC: Ah, yes, thanks for correcting me. Basically he can be filler for any trade we decide to make next year.
At the very least he will “help” us get a better draft pick the next two years.
Sessions is not an average player. He is a slightly above average player with a PER of 16.44. Average is around 15. Also, sessions has traditionally been much better as a starter than as a bench player. Furthermore, now that he’s been able to extend his range out past the three point line, teams can’t just pack the paint on him. He is definitely an upgrade for the Lakers, and as long as Kobe lets him do his job, he’ll be fine. I expect him to play a lot with the second unit as the primary ballhandler. Good trade for… Read more »
OOps, I added an “if” where it didn’t belong, my bad.
@Mallory- Your rhetorical question only works if you personally knew that Sessions was staying. We don’t know if what information Chris Grant had with regards to Sessions.
@Mallory – It has been suggested that expiring contracts aren’t particularly valuable THIS season and to a lesser extent next season because most of the bad contracts that would need to be dumped via trade were already “amnesthized” (to quote bill simmons.) This also explains why this year’s deadline might be more quiet than usual.
Just because someone wasn’t willing to make a deal for Jamison’s monster of an expiring deal this year doesn’t mean that expiring deals have lost all of their value in future seasons.
If Sessions was staying, then you don’t trade him. Having a serviceable backup PG is a great thing. I think we still may have that in Gibson though…if he stays healthy.
Pete – he evaluated the trade in terms of monetary worth – “For the privilege, they get a first-round pick from L.A. that will likely be in the 20s. The interesting part here is that when teams have done cash-for-late-first-rounder deals, they’ve typically valued the pick in the $3-4 million range. At best, the Cavs slightly overpaid on this part of the equation. ” And added that he likes sessions. Matt – I don’t have any idea what others trades were thrown around, but, like I’ve said, I think taking a chance on a guy who can create his own… Read more »
I think “trade ballast” rather than “trade bait” is a better description for Walton next year.
Mallory, what should we have done with sessions, I dont have insider.
that 35 million is our 2012-13 contract commitments, not cap space. That would put our cap close to 20millionish, more than enough to sign the Free agents that would have a chance of coming here next year.
Of course Hollinger would hate this trade. We’re shipping out win shares and value added and taking a 1st round pick and scrubs back. Hollinger looks at the stats, and the stats say we’re going to lose more, and the Lakers will win more…which makes it a bad trade for THIS season.
It may look a lot better next year if Sessions was leaving anyway…
Please read Hollinger’s report on the trade if you want an opinion that comes pretty close to where I’m coming from.
Yes Mallory, please tell us the amazing young player x we could have gotten for sessions. I want to know. We still have cap space, despite you complaining we dont (35mil before whatever is held against us for Davis Amnesty and assuming we don’t offload gibson’s 5 mil) We have guaranteed ourselves some cap flexibility for 2013, and we turned a player who was walking away from us without having a sliver of chance at making us contenders this year for a ~40% chance at a solid rotation player with 100% chance of being cheap and under our control for… Read more »
@James A.-I love Hollinger, but Sessions isn’t a “major upgrade” over their current point guard situation. He’s a slight upgrade at best. So many people overvaluing Sessions.
I’m not sure where everyone gets their info about Ramon certainly leaving – I don’t think he would’ve gotten a bigger offer than the 4.5 he was getting and he’s said NUMEROUS times he liked his place in Cleveland – that doesn’t sound like a guy on his way out. I’d rather take my chances (whatever they may be) on keeping a guy who has been a great rotation player instead of taking a shot in the dark at a late 1st round pick. As for the Walton trade bait talk – why do you think any team is going… Read more »
Hate to pile on you Mallory, but what could the Cavs have received for Sessions besides a first round pick? He’s an average player at best. Most of the other contenders have their point guard and all other rebuilding teams weren’t going to give up anything of value. This was pretty much an even trade.
If Dan Gilbert is paying attention, he should ask David Stern to void this trade for “basketball reasons.” First, let’s follow the dead money. Walton makes $6.1 million next year with his trade kicker; Eyenga makes $1.1 million; neither or them are likely to play much or do anything of consequence if they do. So Cleveland swallows $5 million in dead 2012-13 salary. For the privilege, they get a first-round pick from L.A. that will likely be in the 20s. The interesting part here is that when teams have done cash-for-late-first-rounder deals, they’ve typically valued the pick in the $3-4… Read more »
Sorry, that link is behind a pay wall. He gave the trade a D.
For the longest time the Lakers were unwilling to give up a first rounder for Sessions. I think in order to get the pick we wanted, we had to compromise with LA and take on some bad money in Walton and Kapono. Fortunately, Kapono’s gone in 20 games and Walton can be used as trade bait next year.
Hollinger hates the trade for us, by the way:
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/TradeGrades-110315/deadline-deals
Mallory,
You DO NOT evaluate trades for picks AFTER the pick occurs. The evaluation occurs WHEN the trade occurs because that is the point in time at which the GM had to make the decision.
Yes, it is unlikely the pick will turn into a great player, but it is 100% likely that Ramon was LEAVING. Everyone is sold on this trade because everyone understands that SOMETHING is better than NOTHING. Pretty complicated stuff….
Mallory, right now the cavs only have about $35 million in contracts signed for next year, plus whatever they owe on the Baron Davis Amnesty. and thats if we do pick up gibson’s team option, which would open up another 5 million. Do we really need $20 millions plus to sign draft picks and free agents this year (Last years cap was $53 mil right?)?
Mallory: You said that you’re “just not sold on this being the best decision.” What would have been a better decision? If there are no guarantees or even a likelihood that Sessions would stay, would the best decision have been to keep him anyway? There’s no indication that any other team was willing to give us a first-rounder for him, so I’m not sure what you think the best decision was.
I’m waiting for us to trade for Beasley…only to be forced to take back Luke Ridenour as well.
Then we can put the Luke tri-fecta out on the court together… :)
HAHA Kapono. Can we get rid of everyone else on the roster and just become the Cleveland Fringe White Guys?
Apparently reports are now showing that Jason Kopono is included in the Sessions deal as well as Walton.
Yes, picks late in the 1st-round are a total non-asset. Just ask Tony Parker, Marshon Brooks, etc etc etc…
And somehow, apparently, under some of your strange logic, a player who was definitely walking away after the season and who, at best, was going to hurt our draft position without actually getting us into the play-offs, is a better asset than a chance to draft a good player, another player with an expiring contract we can flip in a deal next year, etc etc…
Some of your arguments make no sense whatsoever.
Nathan – there is no reason you should feel that we were 5th-8th seed headed. That happens when a team has reached its full potential – most of our future roster isn’t even in place.
Again guys, I do not – I REPEAT – DO NOT hate the fact that we got something for Sessions – as long as Grant turns it into an asset. I’m just not sold on this being the best decision. I can’t really understand how anyone can be so completely sold, quite frankly. Until you see what we get, this is transitory more than anything…
Good trade, I like it even though we’re stuck with another terrible white guy named Luke. In a deep draft like this one, I could see the Cavs packaging this pick and the 33rd to move up a couple spots to grab the inevitable player who will fall out of the lotto and into the late 1st round. As far as the quality of player that is available in the 20-30 range, let’s take a look at the 07, 08, and 09 drafts. 07: Players we would want: Jared Dudley, Wilson Chandler, Aaron Brooks, Arron Afflalo, Tiago Splitter Maybe want:… Read more »
The odds are always against you in building a championship team, but even a 20% chance at a solid core is tenfold better than guaranteed 5th-8th seed status for the next 5 years
Luke Walton’s contract expires next year!?!?? How is this a concern AT ALL, Mallory??? If anything, that makes him an asset at next year’s trade deadline. The only constraint is we can’t pursue anyone this offseason. But we wouldn’t want to anyway with 4 draft picks coming in.
Great deal. Grant is the man. Gilbert is the man. Cavs are only Cleveland team I trust.
I’m ecstatic with this trade. Chances are it amounts to nothing, but chance are even better that sessions amounted to nothing for our contention either. This trade helps us get as many chances at hitting on players in the draft as possible. You have enough 1st round picks, and you’ll hit on some gems, and at the end of the first round, they have almost no salary cap ramifications (Tiago splitter, Serge Ibaka, Kosta Koufus, Darrel Arthur, Ryan Anderson, George Hill, Wilson Chandler, Rudy Fernandez, Aaron Brooks, Aaron Afflolo were all in the last 10 1st round picks of the… Read more »
I don’t hate the trade. Just thought it was terrible that we got snaked into taking back Walton.
I’m with Mallory, a pick in the late twenties is a non-asset. That’s why teams literally sell them for cash during the draft.
That last statement wasn’t to say I did or didn’t believe in trading Sessions (which we’ve already debated), it’s more just me trying to show that the pick isn’t exactly worth much to most teams. There’s a reason the Lakers used us as their last resort, and a reason DJ Augustin didn’t get moved for the pick.
Mallory, 60% of players drafted in the mid 20s not becoming rotation players may be a majority, but its not a vast majority. The 40% chance the pick in the 20s becomes a rotation player for us after the year 2012 is about 40% better chance than sessions being a rotation player for us beyond this year. No one else was offering anything more, and Luke Walton just ensures that we’ll have a little money in 2013 Free Agency to spend on someone good after we already know a lot more about the young guns on our team. This is… Read more »
People keep regurgitating the “this draft is uncommonly deep” garbage ad nauseum. First, HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT? We don’t even know for sure who is coming out and staying in college. Plus, I think most draft analysts (APPEAL TO AUTHORITY) have backed off that claim quite a bit. Sure, the lottery might be pretty deep this year, but the same junk will be available at 25-30.
The Cavs will have Varejao, Walton, Irving, Thompson, Casspi, Gibson (if they pick up his option) and two first round picks under contract next year. That’s 8 players and $35 million.
Baron Davis’ contract counts towards the “salary floor” but not the “salary cap”. I think the Cavs will have around $25 million that they could spend on free agents this summer to re-sign Gee and anyone else they can get to come on board.
A late first rounder, even in an amazing draft, isn’t really that huge of an asset. Please keep that in mind.
Now, if we come away with a great player, that’s a different story, but odds are not in our favor.
If the Cavs didn’t trade Ramon now and he left after season, people would be furious at Grant for not getting something for him. The trade isn’t perfect. But the Cavs need as many assets as possible.
Mallory and all,
From the looks of it, the Cavs would have Varejao, Walton, Irving, Thompson, and Casspi under contract next year. If Gibson’s option is picked up and there are two first round picks (8ish and 25-ish), the Cavs have 8 players under contract for $35 million.
Baron Davis’ contract counts against the “salary floor”, but not against the “salary cap”. When Jamison expires, the Cavs should be $25 million under the cap to re-sign Gee and pursue pretty much any free agent they want. I think in your $7 – $10 number, you’re including Baron Davis.
People think Sessions is a LOT better than he is. He’s only valuable to the Lakers because Derek Fisher is in a wheelchair, and most other point guards aren’t moveable. He’ll be like the 24th best starting point guard in the league. And, he’s only under contract for half a season without an extension, which we weren’t going to be want to pay for.