Of course they do.
It's actually the sensible deal money-wise - it works under the cap and it does free up a bit of future money for us. But for me, that CLE 2018 pick is just not really anything special. Figure it to land around #25 in a draft that to me looks pretty top heavy and may not have the depth of the 2017 draft.
The bottom line for me, is that if we're going to give up Hill, who is probably an "asset" in the sense that we could find another trading partner, AND give up Malachi, who is a young player who is probably not a future superstar but may yet have a role in the league and is cheap for a couple of years, then the receiving team has to give up SOMETHING. Frye is nothing. Shumpert, with his current contract, has no value to us (he might have some value to a contender - and looking at his numbers this year that might be really questionable). And I'll be damned if I'm going to give up two useful things for utter crap. We have to get something back, and a mid-20s pick is not even remotely enough. So, the question is, how desperate is Cleveland to make a splash this year? (Answer: Very. They don't want to lose LeBron in the offseason, or alternately, if they accept that he's gone, this is their LAST CHANCE.)
What I'm saying is: in a deal structured around Hill/Richardson for Shumpert/Frye, I do not even consider it unless the Brooklyn pick is on the table. Otherwise, what the heck are we getting back? Now, I'd be willing to, say, accept the BRK pick with something like top-2 protection. If it's not top-2, it's ours. If it's top-2, then instead we get the CLE 2018 pick plus the CLE 2022 pick unprotected. Now we're getting something of value back. If Cleveland doesn't want to play ball, too bad. They don't get our good players for nothing. End of story.