PDA

View Full Version : It's Official



Rimage
10-25-2007, 03:17 PM
I have lost my cool.

The fact that we haven't acquired a pg is....baffling to say the least. We didn't make any trades for an all-star pg, we didn't make any trades for a decent pg, we didn't sign any FA pgs, we didn't even bring any legit pgs to camp.

I was more than willing to give Ferry all summer to make something happen concerning the glaringly, blaringly, painfully obvious need we have for a verifiable pg, but we are now rolling up on the season and we have nothing. We are yet again going into the year with Eric Snow as the only real pg we have.

The fact that we made no attempt to sign another big doesn't bother me, the fact that AV and Pavlovic are holding out doesn't really bother me either to be honest, but the realization that, despite the need, this wiill be the 3rd year we will be going into the season without even a decent pg....that bothers me.

I have supported Ferry so far, but...dammit, get your head out of your ass and gets us a pg, get us decent pg, get us some pg prospects, scout some pgs you KNOW you will not sign....JUST DO ANYTHING THAT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR A PG FOR THIS TEAM!!!!

What the hell, honestly?

Glen Infante
10-25-2007, 03:43 PM
:mad: Co-sign.

Kent State U
10-25-2007, 03:46 PM
I would not even hire Danny Ferry to build a deck in my backyard!


:stick:

KI4MVP
10-25-2007, 04:16 PM
how many teams with these abundant PGs we haven't brought in made the NBA finals? WHo was the free agent PG you would have brought in that we overlooked? Which PG has been traded this off-season that we missed out on? We nearly closed the deal on Bibby in a 3 team trade involving the Spurs, Sacramento backed out. Had that deal actually gone through, though, just what shape would our front court be in with no Drew and Andy holding out? Instead we end up with a prospect who I believe hasn't played an NBA game.

And somehow the Bulls and Lakers won 9 championships without a PG.

Cleveland56
10-25-2007, 04:37 PM
Who out there would you want that Ferry could get?

Ben
10-25-2007, 04:40 PM
The point guard problem has gone unresolved since the Cavaliers drafted Lebron James and dredging up other teams with completely different offensive styles and players doesn't justify why it hasn't been corrected.

Maximus
10-25-2007, 04:40 PM
Andy and Sasha need to be signed first, until then nothing else significant should be done. Maybe pick up someone off the waiver wire...but that's it. There was no FA point guard worth signing this summer. There is no way to make a trade until the Andy/Sasha situation is resolved. Ferry is doing the right thing. Get them signed, see how we do, if we are struggling at the trade deadine, THEN you make a move. We will have some tradable pieces and we finally have draft picks.

It is 4 MONTHS until the trade deadine and 6 months until the postseason. Quit panicking...

The George
10-25-2007, 04:46 PM
I am not panicking yet...

But I am sooo sold on this being the year that LeBron can EXPLODE!!! I really think he is ready to dominate and I think we have taken a step back team wise thus far...even if we just got Andy and Sasha back I will be pumped for the season because I think we can make a nother run if we have all of our guys...sans a full roster I find it difficult to believe we can do it

maybe or maybe not but I want Av and Sasha back on the team

Kypus
10-25-2007, 04:52 PM
It is a while until the trade deadline, but it's frustrating when both Seattle and Houston have 3 quality starting PGs: Ridnour/Earl Watson/Delonte West and Steve Francis/Alston/Mike James. :banghead: Any one of those 6 would be an improvement to Snow or Devin Brown.

Kent State U
10-25-2007, 04:56 PM
Andy and Sasha need to be signed first, until then nothing else significant should be done. Maybe pick up someone off the waiver wire...but that's it. There was no FA point guard worth signing this summer. There is no way to make a trade until the Andy/Sasha situation is resolved. Ferry is doing the right thing. Get them signed, see how we do, if we are struggling at the trade deadine, THEN you make a move. We will have some tradable pieces and we finally have draft picks.

It is 4 MONTHS until the trade deadine and 6 months until the postseason. Quit panicking...



Are you saying in the last three years there was not ONE average point guard available in the entire NBA to help this team?

:confused:

Douglar
10-25-2007, 05:02 PM
Are you saying in the last three years there was not ONE average point guard available in the entire NBA to help this team?:confused:

Larry Hughes can play the 1 spot as an average PG. Damon Jones is also an averge PG. Not sure adding another average PG helps the team.

Kypus
10-25-2007, 05:05 PM
Larry Hughes can play the 1 spot as an average PG. Damon Jones is also an averge PG. Not sure adding another average PG helps the team.
:uhh:

Erbium
10-25-2007, 05:07 PM
He needs to grab Jared Jordan and give him a chance. Avery Johnson was undrafted as well, if you remember. I can see the no trade/ signings, as nothing possible or beneficial presented itself. But if Ferry is not looking for a diamond in the rough to fill this position, I do have some questions. We don't have a single creator besides Lebron. This guy has a talent we need for cheap. If it doesn't work out, at least Ferry tried......

Kent State U
10-25-2007, 05:11 PM
Larry Hughes can play the 1 spot as an average PG. Damon Jones is also an averge PG. Not sure adding another average PG helps the team.


:huh:

Jon
10-25-2007, 05:36 PM
ok, so I guess this has it's own thread now?

I guess it's obligatory that LJ4MVP bring up the Bulls and the Lakers, hence I suppose it's obligatory that I mention that the Bulls and Lakers ran the triangle offense and had a pair of top-50 all-time players WITH some PGs who could adequately dish and shoot - at least compared to what we have.

As for the rest of history, everyone else has won their championships using a PG. And in case anyone has forgotten already, it was Tony Parker who won the finals MVP last year. Steve Nash has a pair of league MVPs, which is unprecedented. Thanks to zone defenses and rule changes, you can't just chuck the ball in to a big and watch him do his thing. You can't just give the ball to your SG and watch him score 1v1. You need to be able to break down a defense and setup your players and that's what a PG does.

Maybe the Cavs will buck the trend and Mike Brown will spend the next 30 yrs spreading the one-superstar offense across the league, or we could just try a PG and see what happens?

Rick Astley
10-25-2007, 05:59 PM
I would not even hire Danny Ferry to build a deck in my backyard!


:stick:

I wouldn't even hire Danny Ferry for having a boat-related name.

Brandname
10-25-2007, 07:35 PM
For some reason, I still have the feeling that Ferry might look into doing a trade involving Bibby and Gooden. Of course that can't happen until AV is re-signed, so we wouldn't know until then. But our PG issues seem to remain mysteriously unaddressed. I would hope that Ferry has some idea of how he wants the team to head forward and has a plan to start achieving that. I do not feel comfortable with the Larry Hughes PG experiment, regardless of our record with it last year.

Karma
10-25-2007, 07:43 PM
Now there's a thought......trade for Bibby.

Should we start a thread on this?

crazedcav333
10-25-2007, 08:08 PM
As for the rest of history, everyone else has won their championships using a PG. And in case anyone has forgotten already, it was Tony Parker who won the finals MVP last year. Steve Nash has a pair of league MVPs, which is unprecedented.

And how would you go about bringing those two in? Both of them are probably future hall-of-famers.

We all have the right to be frustrated, but the right deal - or any deal - may have just never come up for us. If AV himself is demanding 11 million, I really wish we would have traded him for Bibby, but we got screwed on that. If the Nets were looking to get Kidd we could have gotten him, but the right guy never came up for us. He can't force anything.

Ferry really failed this off-season though. Bring in no one + can't even sign the two guys who we wanted to resign...sad.

Brandname
10-25-2007, 10:11 PM
Now there's a thought......trade for Bibby.

Should we start a thread on this?

I think we could squeeze another 200+ pages out of the topic. ;)

Rimage
10-25-2007, 10:32 PM
This topic has been dragged back for the past 2 years...that doesn't make me feel silly for talking about it again, it makes me wonder why we don't even have pg project. It gets talked about a lot because it is the single most obvious problem this team has and it is the single most obvious way that we can improve this team. Last guy we had that was a decent pg was McInnis...he was mediocre and if he wasn't such a douche I would welcome him back right now. I don't think this team needs a Bibby or a Paul, I think it just needs an actual pg.

I am not looking for groundshaking, I am looking for anything. I was so sure Ferry was going to get us something at the one, I didn't know what it would be, but I couldn't fathom going into this season without something new at the point, which is why I didn't bash Ferry or talk about all the options available. But we didn't even have a pg at training camp.

I guess I am just lost. The trade deadline is still there, but I was kind of hoping for something to start the year off...not a last minute addition. I still believe Ferry is good GM (for now) but that belief is starting to become mostly faith-based recently. I am still holding out for something (anything really) to happen concerning this.

Rimage
10-25-2007, 10:39 PM
Who out there would you want that Ferry could get?

Like I said....anything. I am starting to develope this fear that the front office's stance is: "We have confidence in the players we have now to get the job done."

I am not looking for another combo guard or sg with decent passing skills. I am looking for TRUE pgs. Guys who want to run the offense. There a cheap, unproven ones all over the place. What does it hurt to give any of them a chance. I haven't even heard of the Cavs scouting any pgs, like they aren't looking because they don't think it is a problem.

I am getting worried...not worried that we aren't going to get Mike Bibby or Jason Kidd...worried that we aren't going get anything.

aaronr
10-25-2007, 10:51 PM
It is 4 MONTHS until the trade deadine and 6 months until the postseason. Quit panicking...

Earlier the refrain from the defenders of the Cavs status quo (read Max) was wait until lthe summer was over before judging Danny; then it was wait until the end of preseason. Now the refrain is, don't panic, wait four more months until the trade deadline, and if that isn't enough time to reach a judgement on Danny, wait six months until the postseason. So please, let's not be negative nabobs and say anything critical about the Cavs. Everything will be ok in due course.

Karma
10-26-2007, 12:12 AM
Everything will be ok in due course.

I 100% agree :thumbup:

KI4MVP
10-26-2007, 01:50 AM
ok, so I guess this has it's own thread now?

I guess it's obligatory that LJ4MVP bring up the Bulls and the Lakers, hence I suppose it's obligatory that I mention that the Bulls and Lakers ran the triangle offense and had a pair of top-50 all-time players WITH some PGs who could adequately dish and shoot - at least compared to what we have.

As for the rest of history, everyone else has won their championships using a PG. And in case anyone has forgotten already, it was Tony Parker who won the finals MVP last year. Steve Nash has a pair of league MVPs, which is unprecedented. Thanks to zone defenses and rule changes, you can't just chuck the ball in to a big and watch him do his thing. You can't just give the ball to your SG and watch him score 1v1. You need to be able to break down a defense and setup your players and that's what a PG does.

Maybe the Cavs will buck the trend and Mike Brown will spend the next 30 yrs spreading the one-superstar offense across the league, or we could just try a PG and see what happens?

The triangle is irrelevant. The reason those teams are relevant to our situation is that another player or players on the team (Kobe, Jordan, Pippen) were better at being the playmaker than not only the team's starting PGs, but also better than most PGs in the league.

You could add Bird and Wade to the list of players who weren't PGs that won championships being the primary playmaker on the team. Sure, they had better PGs than the Bulls/Lakers or Cavs, but the PG wasn't the primary playmaker on either team. And Wade may have won it the year before with Damon Jones as starting PG if not for injuries.

You can also add the Rockets in their 2nd title to the list.

The fact is there aren't that many great PGs in the league these days and the great ones both aren't available and most have never led a team to a title. If there's a clear PG available who doesn't make our team worse in other areas, I'm all for bringing them in.

imahustla
10-26-2007, 02:36 AM
Who out there would you want that Ferry could get?
Two words:

Mike Bibby.

Jon
10-26-2007, 04:40 AM
Sure, they had better PGs than the Bulls/Lakers or Cavs, but the PG wasn't the primary playmaker on either team. And Wade may have won it the year before with Damon Jones as starting PG if not for injuries.

Oh, believe you me.

I could live with a PG who averaged 7.8 APG like Dennis Johnson did in Larry Bird's shadow (oops Bird only had 6.1 APG that year, Ainge had 6.2!).

A John Paxon who dished out 5.7 APG to Jordan's 4.6 before Pippen arrived would do.

BJ Armstrong even dished out 4 APG one year, Boobie would have to quadruple his production before we can starting calling him the next BJ.

Admittedly Derek Fisher wasn't very impressive, but the Bulls still had 4 players not named Kobe all dishing out around 3 APG. In addition to Fisher they got consistent playmaking from guys like Shaq, Horry, Shaw, and even Rick Fox and Ron Harper. Larry's 3 APG and Gibson's 1 APG doesn't quite add up...

And to answer another question that was brought up... where do we get our own Steve Nash, Chauncey Billups, or Tony Paker? Hmm... You know. Where did Phoenix, Detroit, and San Antonio find them? Nash was no-longer wanted at his going price in Dallas. He always ran a high-powered offense, but his defense was suspect. Sound like Bibby? Billups was a reclamation project picked off the scrap heap. Plenty to pick from in this category. Parker was an international player taken in the 2nd round who exceeded all expectations. You know? It's not so hard. Unexpected gems show up often. But the first step is you have to actually try to grab someone.

Brownie77
10-26-2007, 07:40 AM
Hey guys...

New here, but you can obviously see that from the number of posts.

I think all of us can understand that Ferry's being prudent wanting to position himself for next year's FA class, not wanting to tinker too much with the chemistry of a young team, needing to get AV and Sasha signed before making any major trades.

BUT, you're right, he has done very little to address the lack of leadership on offense.

He'll most likely need to bring in a vet PG that will be able to handle LBJ and his acceleratingly enormous ego. Too often LBJ is the reason the offense stalls. Now, while we might have to wait for that vet PG, why not take a chance on the kid that just got cut from the Knicks? He won't play much but can develop along with Boobie and is better than what we have at the PG position which is... nothing.

Oh, and the other mystery is how he could let Mike Brown jerk off with a limp offense. Get an assistant offensive guru if he can't handle it.

Rimage
10-26-2007, 07:44 AM
Unexpected gems show up often. But the first step is you have to actually try to grab someone.

Yep.

KI4MVP
10-26-2007, 10:36 AM
Oh, believe you me.

I could live with a PG who averaged 7.8 APG like Dennis Johnson did in Larry Bird's shadow (oops Bird only had 6.1 APG that year, Ainge had 6.2!).


Bird won more than one title, check the others



A John Paxon who dished out 5.7 APG to Jordan's 4.6 before Pippen arrived would do.


yet jordan couldn't even win one playoff series playing that way.



BJ Armstrong even dished out 4 APG one year, Boobie would have to quadruple his production before we can starting calling him the next BJ.


Even Damon has done better than that, as has Snow, as has Larry, and as does LeBron.



And to answer another question that was brought up... where do we get our own Steve Nash, Chauncey Billups, or Tony Paker? Hmm... You know. Where did Phoenix, Detroit, and San Antonio find them?


Nash was given a near max (or was it a max) deal as a free agent. We can't get a guy anything close to him that way, we have to give up players that hurt our team in other areas.

Billups was detroit taking a guy like Larry, moving him to PG and allowing him YEARS to learn how to play the position. People don't want to give Larry 3 months despite the stellar record. Look at Billups PG production in Detroit. 3.9, 5.7, 5.8, 8.6, 7.2.

As you said, Parker was a draft pick. We didn't have any picks this year and our 2nd round pick last year seems to be doing pretty well and is considered an unexpected gem. The first step isn't to grab someone else, it's to have a pick. Thank Paxson for that. Who did we miss when we took Gibson who would have clearly been a better PG pick?

Maximus
10-26-2007, 11:54 AM
Earlier the refrain from the defenders of the Cavs status quo (read Max) was wait until lthe summer was over before judging Danny; then it was wait until the end of preseason. Now the refrain is, don't panic, wait four more months until the trade deadline, and if that isn't enough time to reach a judgement on Danny, wait six months until the postseason. So please, let's not be negative nabobs and say anything critical about the Cavs. Everything will be ok in due course.


You beat the drum all last year that Sasha was a wasted pick and they should just give up on him, only to be silenced. You complained incessently when Brown made Larry our starting PG last year down the stretch...how'd that work out. All last year you complained that we were worse than the 05-06 team...yet we made it to the finals. I remember you saying Ferry's first offseason move should be to fire Mike Brown...AND THAT WAS SAID RIGHT AS THE PLAYOFFS WERE GETTING READY TO START! You said you didn't think we'd beat the nets. You said the Pistons were the better team. You basically complained all the way to the finals. I'm starting to think that if you hadn't travelled to Korea during the finals that the Cavs might have actually won it all. You are a great contrarian indicator.

It may be frustrating and painful short term, but I think Ferry is doing the right thing for the future of this team by waiting them out. He wants to know whether they are going to be with us long term or short term, AND AT WHAT COST before making other moves. I think this is the smart play...you don't. Time will tell who's right.

I don't mind critics, but perpetual negativity is lame.

Jon
10-26-2007, 12:06 PM
"Bird won more than one title, check the others"

What's your point? Dennis Johnson was still dishing out a ton of assists. His assists actually went UP once he started playing for Boston. Damon? Snow? Hughes? Their assist totals are all down.

"yet jordan couldn't even win one playoff series playing that way."

Yeah, sure. That was before Pippen, Grant, Cartwright, AND Armstrong. You know. The rest of the Bulls. Paxson and Armstrong split time at the point and combined for over 6 APG while winning championships.


"Even Damon has done better than that, as has Snow, as has Larry, and as does LeBron."

Yeah, Damon, Snow, and Larry *have* ... before they got to Cleveland. To be anything like the Bulls we would need 5+ APG from Hughes AND 4+ APG from Gibson and another 2+ APG from his backup. How close are we to that?

"Nash was given a near max (or was it a max) deal as a free agent. We can't get a guy anything close to him that way, we have to give up players that hurt our team in other areas."

In reality, Bibby currently earns $2M more than Nash. Nash did not get a max contract. Yet we could have easily landed him in a sign & trade by just saying "yes" to Petrie. Was whatever he was asking "too much talent"? Hmm. That all depends what Bibby can still do. Phoenix lost Joe Johnson and Amare Stoudemire in the same season and still won 54-games thanks to Nash.

"Billups was detroit taking a guy like Larry, moving him to PG and allowing him YEARS to learn how to play the position. People don't want to give Larry 3 months despite the stellar record. Look at Billups PG production in Detroit. 3.9, 5.7, 5.8, 8.6, 7.2."

Not really. Billups wasn't paid $13M to play SG. Maybe you're right. Maybe Larry could improve at PG if we showed patience, but $13M is a bit much to spend on a reclamation project and why wait and hope for Hughes/Gibson to start doing things they've never done in their careers when we could just sign someone?

"As you said, Parker was a draft pick. We didn't have any picks this year and our 2nd round pick last year seems to be doing pretty well and is considered an unexpected gem."

We could've bought one, and a cut pick could still fall in our lap ... if we had roster space. We did have picks the year before and decided our most pressing need was a backup at SG. Plus there are numerous international players available outside the draft.

"The first step isn't to grab someone else, it's to have a pick. Thank Paxson for that. Who did we miss when we took Gibson who would have clearly been a better PG pick?"

Dunno. I was expecting Ferry to buy a pick or trade up in the first round to try to get Williams, Lowrey, or Rondo - or to have taken Farmar, Rodriguez, etc, with our pick. I'm not a scout, but seems to me there was opportunity to pursue a fairly talented PG and instead we went after combo guards.

KI4MVP
10-26-2007, 12:47 PM
With Bird, my point is simply you don't have to have a traditional PG leading the when you have a top playmaking SF. Bird showed you could win either way.

No, we couldn't buy a pick. We can't force a team to sell picks to us and we tried to buy the available picks being sold. In each case, the team that bought them had larger trade exceptions to include than we did.

And the year before, when we took Gibson, who did we pass up that you think we should have taken? Is there a guy we passed up you'd trade Gibson straight up for?

As for how close are we with what we have? We went to the NBA finals with what we have. That's pretty close. And the back court of Larry/Sasha worked out pretty well for us last year.

KI4MVP
10-26-2007, 12:53 PM
btw: In the draft, Ferry picked Brown as "a better flip murray" and gibson as "a BJ Armstrong type". Those were the top 2 guys they wanted in the first round and Gibson dropped to the second round for us. Unfortunately Brown got hurt and he's still pressing a bit too hard, lets give him some time to work through the pressing issue and see what he can really do - he clearly has talent and is a heck of an athlete.

Jon
10-26-2007, 02:13 PM
With Bird, my point is simply you don't have to have a traditional PG leading the when you have a top playmaking SF. Bird showed you could win either way.

Look. I don't care what you want to call Dennis Johnson, but I'll gladly take one. Shutdown defender, constant all-nba defense, multiple all-star, durable, athletic, scorer, converted PG and a potential hall of fame player.

Larry used to be athletic. He used to be a scorer. He's a good defender, but only made the all-nba once and is not considered a shutdown defender. He's never approached the number of assists that Johnson regularly dished out and noone would call him durable. But hey, with some luck he might become a poor man's DJ.

But if we're willing to risk the future of the team on a gamble that Larry/Gibson/Shannon become something they are currently not... what's exactly the risk of bringing in someone who already knows how to run a team and seeing what they could do?

As we've repeated over and over, it's not a case of Nash or bust. Get *someone* competent.

As for the draft, yes we got outbid when we wanted to buy draft picks. But by how much? Maybe we should've bid more? If Phoenix and San Antonio wanted trade exceptions, maybe we should have traded for one?

But who cares? The draft is only one way to get a pg.

Get on the phone and grab Jared Jordan. Get John Lucas III. Get lil Earl. Talk to Memphis about Stoudemire. Maybe Arroyo needs a new lease on life? Does Brevin Knight have anything left in the tank? Go get Udrih. Does LeBron still like Telfair? There are 4939292 moves that *could* be made. I'm only asking that Ferry make one of them.

Douglar
10-26-2007, 02:50 PM
There are 4939292 moves that *could* be made.

Only problem is most of those 4939292 moves are bad moves.

As it is, odds are picking a randon move out of the list of 4939292 possible moves probably hurts the team. That's why teams that succeed have plans and strategies and don't try things at random just because it's different. They don't force moves if the deal isn't there either.

If a team could undo a contract or trade , I'd say, "hey, give it a shot".

As it is, GM's are writing in stone. Winning GM's don't just do things on a whim.

Rimage
10-26-2007, 03:01 PM
Only problem is most of those 4939292 moves are bad moves.

As it is, odds are picking a randon move out of the list of 4939292 possible moves probably hurts the team. That's why teams that succeed have plans and strategies and don't try things at random just because it's different. They don't force moves if the deal isn't there either.

If a team could undo a contract or trade , I'd say, "hey, give it a shot".

As it is, GM's are writing in stone. Winning GM's don't just do things on a whim.

Again, I am really not upset that we didn't land Bibby or Kidd or another big name (big contract) player. There are lots of little, low risk, high reward things that could be done. I haven't seen anything. Could it be going on behind the scene? Yes, but I don't see it. Nobody else who is better informed has seen it.

I understand the front office has to be allowed to do there job, but if they don't even give us any indication that they are doing things, obviously fans are going to feel the need to let their concerns be known.

I have concerns. I think very simply opportunities have been missed and are being missed in relation to the nothing I see going on.

aaronr
10-26-2007, 03:42 PM
[QUOTE=Maximus;182436]Time will tell who's right.

My prediction is that we'll get off to a bad start, partly because we're a lesser team compared to last year and partly because some other teams were not content to sit on their hands and actually improved their personnel; Danny will eventually get the two holdouts signed, thereby busting the precious cap later rather than sooner; our overall record won't be very good compared to last year, but with all of our players back we might be pretty tough heading into the playoffs. Sorry if my "negativity" bothers you, Max. Don't take it so personally. I don't get upset with your allegiance to the status quo. As you say, time will tell who's got it right--Danny's critics or Danny's defenders.

PIP
10-26-2007, 06:22 PM
LJ4MVP is constantly comparing us to dynasties..

Why ? :shifty:

KI4MVP
10-26-2007, 06:33 PM
LJ4MVP is constantly comparing us to dynasties..

Why ? :shifty:

I'm comparing the way you build around LeBron to the way you build around other superstars who are strong playmakers. Danny Ferry has made teh same comparison - he specifically said he views Gibson as a BJ Armstrong type. His approach took us from missing the playoffs to the NBA finals in just two years.

What I don't understand is why there are so many doubters when the results to date have been so outstanding.

PIP
10-26-2007, 06:52 PM
I'm comparing the way you build around LeBron to the way you build around other superstars who are strong playmakers. Danny Ferry has made teh same comparison - he specifically said he views Gibson as a BJ Armstrong type. His approach took us from missing the playoffs to the NBA finals in just two years.

What I don't understand is why there are so many doubters when the results to date have been so outstanding.I think that's due to the fact that the fans believe the results are more of a fluke than anything else..

Furthermore, why would you compare the way they built their franchises to the way we build ours... First of all, LeBron is not a Jordanesque player the way Bryant is..

Secondly, the Bulls got lucky and traded their first round pick for the 5th pick in the draft, and got one of the greatest all time players in that deal..

The Lakers had arguably a top 3 center of all time...

Okay, so they didn't have a PG... But, both teams had two players each that were destined to be all time greats....And both of those teams had players who IMO are better than LeBron... Jordan/Kobe

You can put all the fringe/role players you want around these guys, but unless you have that other big piece, it's all moot...

We don't win the championship last year even with any combination of the following in their prime roles: Harper, Armstrong, Grant, Fox, Horry, Kerr etc...

KI4MVP
10-26-2007, 07:42 PM
That's where we really disagree.

First of all, it's debatable if Kobe is better than LeBron now, and he sure wasn't better than LeBron when the Lakers win their first title.

Secondly, I think we had a solid chance of winning the title last year with a healthy Larry Hughes. The player who hurt us the most (and the series MVP) is the player he was supposed to guard.

KI4MVP
10-26-2007, 10:03 PM
btw: Bibby is now out 8-10 weeks with a torn ligament in his hand.

PIP
10-26-2007, 10:18 PM
btw: Bibby is now out 8-10 weeks with a torn ligament in his hand.And Hughes is still alive.....Not to mention Drew is getting a little smarter by the decade...:yay:

Ha... Joke's on you, Suckramento....

Rick Astley
10-26-2007, 10:52 PM
And Hughes is still alive.....Not to mention Drew is getting a little smarter by the decade...:yay:

Ha... Jokes on you, Suckramento....

Oh my.....:(

Pioneer10
10-27-2007, 01:09 AM
The Kobe of the threepeat Lakers wasn't nearly as good as this James. I personally don't think Kobe's a better player then Lebron from a team perspective but I don't really have a problem with people who think Kobe is better. But the present day Kobe is a much better player then the version which was with the Lakers when they were winning titles. In any case Shaq was definitely the best player on those Laker teams and by a fair measure as well.

The biggest problem with the Cavs is we have no second or even third tier player right now. Hell just look at the team we lost to in the Finals. Parker would immediately be our second best player. Ginobili would immediately be our second best player. This is similar to other teams: Amare would immediately be our second best player just as Marion would be our second best player. Hell Raja Bell might be our second best player if he was on the Cavs.

Maybe if Hughes gets his mojo back it wouldn't be that bad or my prayers come true and Gibson pans out but that's a lot of if's there. For right now, we have the "role players" to get it done (i.e. with AV a very solid frontcourt) but not enough big guns to really take pressure off our star. I think Ferry realizes this and is keeping those expiring contracts ready to really upgrade the talent next year. We aren't going to be winning a title with adding bit players like Boykins, etc.

Jon
10-27-2007, 11:45 AM
Only problem is most of those 4939292 moves are bad moves.

That's why they have talent evaluators. Listening to W&G before the draft it was obvious the Cavs were very high on a number of players, but apparently not so high that they could put together a deal to grab one.

If Ferry took it for granted that he could just go in to the draft, wait for the player he wanted to become available, and then write a check and buy the pick ... he was sadly mistaken.

At some point he's going to have to stop waiting for all the cards to fall exactly the way he wants and take a risk. Go out and secure a pick before the draft and hope that the player he wants falls. Get creative. Overspend if it means getting the piece he wants.

The problem with trading away a future first round pick to grab Jiri Welsch, wasn't making the trade. The problem was with whoever thought Jiri could turn things around and start contributing. If we still don't trust our talent evaluators, maybe we should hire some we can trust?

aaronr
10-27-2007, 12:01 PM
Absolutely right. I think Danny's a bit gunshy after getting burned on his big free-agent spending spree in 2005.

KI4MVP
10-27-2007, 12:31 PM
That's why they have talent evaluators. Listening to W&G before the draft it was obvious the Cavs were very high on a number of players, but apparently not so high that they could put together a deal to grab one.

If Ferry took it for granted that he could just go in to the draft, wait for the player he wanted to become available, and then write a check and buy the pick ... he was sadly mistaken.

At some point he's going to have to stop waiting for all the cards to fall exactly the way he wants and take a risk. Go out and secure a pick before the draft and hope that the player he wants falls. Get creative. Overspend if it means getting the piece he wants.

The problem with trading away a future first round pick to grab Jiri Welsch, wasn't making the trade. The problem was with whoever thought Jiri could turn things around and start contributing. If we still don't trust our talent evaluators, maybe we should hire some we can trust?

Overspend how? There is a cap on what you can pay for a pick - $3 million. Beyond that you can add in a trade exception. There were two picks being sold and two other teams had bigger trade exceptions and paid the full $3 million.

And we fired the people who made the Jiri Welsch decision and paid the bucks to take him off our hands, so why even bring him up when talking about Ferry. It's Paxson's fault we made that move, it's Paxson's fault we didn't have any picks this year.

Ferry came to a team that hadn't made the playoffs in years, and who had no first round picks in 2 of the first 3 seasons he'd be here. He had money to spend in the first offseason he was here (All 4 guys he signed were contributers to our finals run), but hasn't really had any since (and we couldn't really save that money either). He has barely even had any expiring contracts to work with.

The first year here he traded a player who never played to bring in Flip Murray, who helped us win 50 games and made another move that brought in a draft pick that he turned into Daniel Gibson, a 5th contributer to our finals run.

Jon
10-27-2007, 12:48 PM
There's a cap on what you can SPEND to acquire a pick, not what you can trade for a pick. We can give up future picks. We can trade for a trade exception and pass that along. As I keep repeating I'm not an NBA GM. It's not my job to find creative ways to build my team. It's Danny's job.

I brought up Jiri because one way to get what you want is to offer future draft picks, but Ferry seems very gunshy after how Paxson crippled the team. So I thought it was worth pointing out that what crippled the team wasn't trading the pick, but what we accepted in return.


Yes, he did a good job snagging Murray, but he got outright lucky that Gibson continued to fall to us well in to the 2nd round. He took a big risk there, and tried to mitigate it. He thought he could trade-up and secure Gibson, but he couldn't get that done either.

Ferry has made some good low-risk moves. The question is, is he willing to pull the trigger on a higher risk move?

KI4MVP
10-27-2007, 01:09 PM
It's easy to criticize when you don't want to offer viable options.

What player were we going to trade for a first round draft pick? We aren't trading LeBron or Z. we can't trade our unsigned players. Larry, Snow, Damon, and Marshall aren't going to bring back equal talent because of their salary. Drew is our most tradable player, but if we trade him while Andy holds out, our front court is in real trouble. Our other tradable player is Gibson - do you want to trade him for a prospect?

Ira's contract is expiring, so maybe he brings back something, but he sure isn't bringing back a first round draft pick. And why are you ignoring the move we did make? Wesley for Simmons - a first round pick from a year ago. he's been hurt, let's wait and see what he can do, but we effectively have two first round pick caliber players this year - Shannon Brown and Simmons. Each had injury issues last year that slowed their development, so both are like having 2 first round picks.

Our problem right now isn't lack of young players (Gibson, Brown, Simmons, Dwayne Jones, and even count LeBron, who, in prior eras would be a rookie this year), our problem right now is two key payers are holding out.

Let the season start and see how big a problem that really is.

Jon
10-27-2007, 02:38 PM
Why am I ignoring Wesley for Simmons? It should be obvious. He's a PF/C, not a PG.

Offering alternatives is obviously fruitless. I don't think a deal exists that can't be shot down for some reason or another. Plus, it's not my job. It's Ferry's.

How can you watch a game last night and not wonder what it would be like if someone like Rondo was on our side driving and dishing? How are we supposed to convince guys like LeBron and Hughes who have always drived to the hoop in order to score to look to the pass that leads to the pass?

What'd you like better? Rondo's playmaking and defense? Or Damon's 3pt shooting? Oh yeah, but Rondo doesn't have a jump shot. Gee. It sure didn't look like a liability when he can get to the hoop at will ...

KI4MVP
10-27-2007, 03:02 PM
was Rondo on the board when we drafted? You don't win conference champtionships and get lottery players, especially when the prior GM traded away 2/3s of the picks for the next 3 years for marginal players.

I didn't see Rondo lighting up Detroit for 31 points in game 6 of the conference finals, but I did see the guy we took 21 picks later doing just that.

How did the comparison become Rondo and Damon - Rondo wasn't an option when we signed Damon and trading Damon wouldn't have landed us a 21st pick to get Rondo.

You an always look around the league and see guys who we don't have. What purpose does it serve when the players you whine about aren't players we ever had an opportunity to sign, draft or trade for? If you're going to complain about something, at least complain about something that viably could have happened.

And the reason the Simmons trade is relevant is that with Andy holding out, front court depth is more of an issue than upgrading the backcourt. You don't have to look any further than new jersey to see that. They have a top 2 PG, at top 5 SG and a top 5 or so SF, yet they can't get past us because we kill them in the front court. Is it worth bringing in a PG of our starting front court becomes Z and Donyell with only Dwayne Jones off the bench? Even with holding onto Drew and trading for Simmons, we still need to find another big to fill out the roster as long as Andy holds out, preferable an established veteran big who we can count on 15-20 minutes/night.

TyGuy
10-27-2007, 04:04 PM
What always gets me mad is i wanted Josh Smith with the 10th pick. Instead we opted for the more "ready" player in Luke Jackson. Completely pissing away top 10 picks on a regular basis has hurt this team so bad and set us back many years.

Jon
10-27-2007, 05:42 PM
You're so literal LJ.

There's always a Rondo around: a PG with quicks, but a suspect shot. But we wanted that combo-guard who would spread the floor. The more-Rondo like player back when we took Damon would have been Antonio Daniels, except we didn't want to spend the full MLE on anything as insignificant as a PG. We spent it instead on Donyell and our consolation prize which we hoped would be Sarunas but we ended up with Damon.

But yes, even Rondo was essentially available. Boston bought the pick they used to select him from Phoenix as I recall.

Dunno what Brevin Knight has left in the tank, but he's probably available, or did someone sign him?

PIP
10-27-2007, 05:49 PM
B.Knight is with the Clippers

B Mac
10-27-2007, 07:48 PM
Brevin has a good chance of being cut from the Clipps from what Ive read. Very good reason for that as well.

This guy will be on the IR by the 3rd week of the season.

Pioneer10
10-27-2007, 11:59 PM
You're so literal LJ.

There's always a Rondo around: a PG with quicks, but a suspect shot. But we wanted that combo-guard who would spread the floor. The more-Rondo like player back when we took Damon would have been Antonio Daniels, except we didn't want to spend the full MLE on anything as insignificant as a PG. We spent it instead on Donyell and our consolation prize which we hoped would be Sarunas but we ended up with Damon.

But yes, even Rondo was essentially available. Boston bought the pick they used to select him from Phoenix as I recall.

Dunno what Brevin Knight has left in the tank, but he's probably available, or did someone sign him?
I think they were scared of adding another poor jumpshooter in Daniels after already adding Hughes. Of course, both of the jumpshooters we added ended up sucking even at jumpshots so that we ended up playing that three point marksman Snow :eek:.

Jon
10-28-2007, 03:04 AM
Apparently the old adage about drafting for talent rather than drafting for need applies to NBA free-agency as well.

Douglar
10-28-2007, 06:43 PM
The more-Rondo like player back when we took Damon would have been Antonio Daniels, except we didn't want to spend the full MLE on anything as insignificant as a PG.

I'm not sure I'd describe Antonio Daniels as Rondo-like except for the poor outside shot. Watson went at the same price as Daniels and is probably the better player. But neither of those guys were available to the Cavs.

The problem was that at the time it really seemed like the team's biggest needs were 1) get a SG 2) get more front court players, and 3) get outside shooting. There wasn't a lot of noise that getting a PG back then. If the team hadn't filled those needs, that would have been an obvious mistake at the time.

After signing Hughes, Marshall and Z, Sarunas was supposed to sign a three year deal with the team as the floor general. But SJ went to Indiana. Steve Blake might have been the right choice at that point, but Damon Jones has a pretty good history of hitting the long ball.

Jon
10-29-2007, 02:02 AM
Of course a PG wasn't a high priority then, just like it isn't now, Ferry's thinking hasn't changed; but that doesn't mean it shouldn't.

Early in the game we're supposed to use Snow to bring a defensive tone and use he and Larry to relieve LeBron form having to bring the ball up and having to initiate the offense. Later in the game, we turn the keys over to LeBron and let him create.

All and all it works well, except when the defense can force the ball out of LeBron's hands. Then suddenly our fate falls to someone else and Snow was exposed. Yeah sure, Damon can fire 3's but you don't really want to let important games be decided by whether the 3pt shots are falling that day.

Thankfully Gibson stepped up in the ECF and did a lot more than just nail 3's, but by the finals ... we were exposed once more.

Douglar
10-29-2007, 08:18 AM
Thankfully Gibson stepped up in the ECF and did a lot more than just nail 3's, but by the finals ... we were exposed once more.

A good deal of what happened in the finals would have been different if Hughes was healthy. The Cavs would still have been underdogs, but they would have competed.

Jon
10-29-2007, 11:06 AM
Yep, Larry would have helped, but I still don't think anyone would be cheering our offensive execution.

My point here is not that this is an either/or decision. I do think if we want an offense that runs smoothly, gets everyone involved, and uses LeBron more as a finisher than an initiator that we need a competent PG; but running more smoothly does not necessarily mean running more effectively. So I don't presume a new PG is the magic pill, or even that one of our existing guys can't fill that role better, but what concerns me is that we've put all of our eggs in the combo-guard basket and we have noone on the roster who we could send out there just to see.

It just seems to me we've overcomplicated something which should be simple. Toronto's GM wanted to run a new style of offense, so what was the first thing he did? He went out and traded for a PG he felt could run it.

RchfldCavRaised
10-29-2007, 11:53 AM
I tried to rep you for that last response Jon.

I thought my opinion on the whole pg solution differed from yours in the preseason thread but I see now that we are on the same page, I just read the footnotes and you went cover to cover.

We get the same conclusion both ways. No PG is going to come here and automatically steer MBs offense. Because any NBA point I can think of would have a difficult time being effective and maximizing in THIS offense.

I like defense as much as the next guy but to have the most potentially jaw dropping and player whose skill set should make him the most efficient offensive player in the league not playing the 4 or 5, initiating and floating around the arc trying to get his ill fitting teammates in a rhythm is disgusting to watch.

It pisses me off to be watching cavs fast break or whatever they call it nowadays and see Mike Brown constantly talking about DEFENSE!!!
HELLO, D is not what held this team back last year. Basketball is a game of flow and if we are always focused on just stopping the other teams flow and not really taking the time to put a system in place which will have us attacking and maximizing the players we have now (creating our own flow while attempting to stop the other team as well), we will be subject to this ugly basketball for the foreseeable future.

Or maybe if we just hire another defensive coach...

KI4MVP
10-29-2007, 12:15 PM
nobody cheered the Pistons offensive execution when they won their championship.

RchfldCavRaised
10-29-2007, 12:55 PM
Good point but I seem to remember them being offensively competent enough to get the max out of their most potent offensive weapon.

Did Hamilton set those multiple picks for himself?
Did Larry Brown have him pounding the rock at the top of the key while Ben wallace ran pick and rolls with him for potential pull up 20 footers?

I do remember that run and they were horrible in the postseason. Those games between them and Indiana and then the nets were painful to watch. But, yes, I do remember they had an offensive identity.

PIP
10-29-2007, 01:31 PM
nobody cheered the Pistons offensive execution when they won their championship.First off, it doesn't make it right...

Secondly, it was still a better offense than ours...

Wallace is an inside-out threat (Donyell is ours):rolleyes:

They had a PG that turned his game into a top-tier status

They had a player at the 2 guard spot that was constantly moving

They had a bench that consisted of Mike James and Okur

Their coach Brown >>> Our coach Brown

Pioneer10
10-29-2007, 01:58 PM
There bench was Okur, Williamson, James, Elden Campbell, Hunter: that was a much more talented team then we have.

RchfldCavRaised
10-29-2007, 02:37 PM
Its official. I just brought this topic up here in the office and even the high school girl who answers the phones said "this team would be cool if they didnt stand around with the ball so much!"

No joking.

We should have constructed this team to be able to gallop with the best of them. Who on phoenix could guard LBJ in the open court???

ANY OFFENSIVE IDENTITY WOULD BE WELCOMED IF IT IS CONSISTENT AND BROWN WOULD STRESS FOR THE SAME RESULTS THAT HE DEMANDS ON THE OTHER END.

That Shannon Brown thread is another example. Brown is saying Sasha was a scorer only too for some time but he didnt sniff the court until he started playing defense the way MB wanted him too. Its cute and all... hard nose tough coach demands million dollar babies to play the game his way...rah rah, but it sucks if the Coach is only coaching one side of the floor.

LeBron seems about ready to unleash publicly and rip the top men of the organization a new one. From his USA comments about returning to a team without a point guard to his candid summary of where this team is now to where they intend to go, I hope Danny and MB are whispering reassuring sweet nothings to the chosen one.

Karma
10-29-2007, 03:48 PM
It works both ways though. I have seen this team this offseason look good offensively, only to lose focus and go back to their stationary ball. Mike Brown needs to be as hard nosed on offense as he does with the D, but the players have shown they can play Brown's offense, but not stick to it.