• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Cavaliers Offseason Thread

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Status
Not open for further replies.
NasstyNate said:
This criticism applies on a play by play basis and I agree with it in that regard.

However, when a player consistently rates at a certain level when plays are looked at cumulatively league-wide, a pattern emerges, no matter the minor quibble on how the stat is compiled.
Click to expand...

That addresses the consistency of how the standard is applied, but it doesn't address the standard itself.

To argue against his placement is to state that there is either a conspiracy against TT or that there is something unique to only his game that is not captured by the statistician. I doubt you believe either.
Click to expand...

But that's not true. You're assuming that the standard they're using is perfectly fair/accurate for everyone else, and then saying that I'm just picking on how they treat TT in particular. But I'm not saying that. I'm saying that whatever standard they're using may not accurately reflect how good (or bad) lots of guys are as rebounders. A stat can be biased for or against certain styles of plays or situations, and depending upon a guy's role, that can impact him. It's not just TT that would be affected. For example, the NBA credits a "rebound" to the player who gains control after a missed shot. If a player tips the ball -- which TT does a lot -- he gets no credit. That's something you need to see with an eyeball test.

Additionally, the particular stat I think you're looking at is "percentage of rebounds per chance", right?

http://stats.nba.com/tracking/#!/player/rebounding/?CF=REB_CHANCE*G*10&Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular Season&sort=REB_COL_PCT&dir=1

That stat is defined as:

"Number of rebounds a player recovers compared to the number of rebounding chances"

And "rebounding chances" is defined as: "the number of times a player was within the vicinity (3.5ft) of the rebound."

This stat does not account for deferrals to other players on your team. It is simply a measure of whether or not you are within 3.5 feet of the ball, period.. So, if you have a guy who is blocking out or deferring to another guy on the team, it will still pop up as a missed rebounding chance. I don't think most people think that should be held against a player, but it is here because it lowers his percentage of rebounds per "chance".

There is another stat on that page called "contested rebounding percentage", which is the percentage of contested rebounds collected (opponent within 3.5ft. of ball) as a percentage of total rebounds. In other words, how often is the player battling an opponent for a rebound?

Turns out that TT's percentage of contested rebounds for 2014-15 was 47.5. That is a higher percentage than any player in the top 20 of the "percentage of rebounds per chance" stat except Andre Jordan. In other words, TT is much more likely than most players to go after the rebounds that are hardest to get.

In fact, LMA has the second highest rating on "percentage of rebounds per chance". But LMA grabbed 3.5 contested rebounds in 35.1 mpg. in contrast, TT grabbed 3.8 contested rebounds in just 25.4 mpg.

So who is the "better" rebounder?



 
Does NBA free agency remind anyone of Monopoly? Teams bid high on players (like one would do on property in Monopoly) mainly because they want the player; however, if another team has to ridiculously overpay to get said player it is fine by the original team.
 
MirORich said:
Almost any halfway decent player we sign this offseason from our current roster becomes very tradeable within 1-2 years simply based on how their contracts will look in comparison to the ones that get signed in the following two offseasons in which the cap rises 20+ million two consecutive years.

Every player of our own that we re-sign, becomes an opportunity to either help our team win or to be a tradeable asset for us t bring in new talent/chemistry to the roster.

Each player of our own we let walk for nothing becomes a total waste given our inability to use the FA market beyond the taxpayer MLE.

People arguing that re-signing our own guys and pumping the payroll up to this huge level simply do not understand the CBA, the ramifications of where the salary cap is heading, and the Cavs positioning in that new dynamic. Retaining all own guys gives us more flexibility in the coming years with our roster, not less.

It's harsh to say, but it is true and in almost every thread you see a ton of posters who are operating with logic based on the 2010-2014 NBA climate in which the salary cap only rose 6 million dollars total over 5 years, instead of the salary cap climate we are heading to in which the salary cap jumps 41+ million in just two seasons.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. The one way we completely back ourselves in to a corner this off-season is by being cheap. In that scenario we lose depth and potentially 1-2 young guys, with no way to replace them moving forward. As the deals get done, everyone should be focusing on how our assets breakdown 16-18 months from now, not how they break down this off-season.

As a contending team, it is imperative to pay young players, especially with an increasing cap. Getting guys like Shump, Delly, TT on long term deals makes them huge trade assets. All 3 are under 25 and all 3 will be on contracts that will take up no more than 15% of the cap when it hits 100 mil (next season).

In the context of a 100 million dollar cap, TT at 14 million is like 10 mil per on a 67 million dollar cap. Shump at 8-9 million is like 5-6 mil per on a 67 million dollar cap. Delly at 4 million is like 2.6 on a 67 million dollar cap. Everyone should keep these numbers in mind when assessing how reasonable these deals actually are. Salaries will WILDY inflate when this new TV money hits.

Those numbers (above) are easy outs for packaging poor contracts (AV) or simply reducing salary by taking back draft picks or emerging guys on smaller deals. We swallow a tax bill this year in exchange for roster flexibility and asset creation moving forward. That's why it is an easy call.
 
TT is our Dennis Rodman and that's pretty obvious if you watched this playoff run. He stepped up on a big stage which is what you worry about with younger players with no playoff experience. He shined and got us who knows how many extra possessions. Just absolutely cannot afford to let him go. What he'll get paid looks insane now but as others have mentioned, we're gearing up for the salary cap increase and in a few seasons, his contract won't seem so bloated.
 
Omar The Horse said:
View: https://twitter.com/MazzESPN/status/615645520950759424


Maybe there is a way for the Cavs to get RHJ
Click to expand...

I'd be interested in that if he could kind of shoot. The problem is that he can't.
Omar The Horse said:
its-happening.gif
Click to expand...

You guys joke all you want, but dude has been resting his body for a full year. He's going to be locked and loaded for this year. Lebron said he didn't expect big things in this first year and that the team would be ready sometime after that...well, resting Miller was all a part of that plan.
 
It wont seem bloated if its less than $14 mil a year flat over 4 years. It will seem bloated at any number over that.
 
Huber. said:
So we could potentially have to fill #14 and #15 with rookies if JR and Shump both leave and we don't trade Haywood for two players?
Click to expand...
Not rookies. Vet min contracts are also acceptable and we still have the mini-MLE (worth about $3.37 million) to give as a tax-paying team.
 
Huber. said:
So we could potentially have to fill #14 and #15 with rookies if JR and Shump both leave and we don't trade Haywood for two players?
Click to expand...

We can offer as many players the vet minimum as we want
 
Just to add a couple more things.

First, I'm sure we've all noticed that TT's approach to rebounding changes depending upon the situation. It's pretty clear to me that there are times when he is told "just get as many rebounds as you can", and other times when he may be told to pay more attention to his man and less to the rebounding, etc.. Which direction he is given will clearly affect his "rebounding chances", and yet, it really has nothing to do with his rebounding ability. What that means is that for a significant part of the game, his rebounding numbers may not reflect his rebounding ability, but rather reflects the instructions given to him by his coach.

Second, I can't overlook how professional NBA coaches and commentators who either coached or played comment on his rebounding ability. Are we supposed to assume that all of those guys are wrong, and really just don't understand what they're seeing? Or is it more reasonable to assume that because they are observing his performance within particular game situations and contexts, that they offer a more accurate assessment of his rebounding abilities than do raw numbers that are devoid of that context?
 
Huber. said:
So we could potentially have to fill #14 and #15 with rookies if JR and Shump both leave and we don't trade Haywood for two players?
Click to expand...
I dont think losing Shump is an option. I think we will match offers for him
 
CardiacCavs said:
View: https://twitter.com/TimBontemps/status/615920947770589184
Click to expand...

This smells like a Haywood trade with the Nets beginning to come to fruition. Jarrett Jack would be a very decent pick up as a back up for Kyrie. He is very good on contending teams. Dude carried the Warriors in the playoffs 3 years back.

Pick up Dunlevey with the mMLE to play SF and that'd be a very very solid offseason for us along with signing everyone back.

Kyrie/Jack/Delly
Shumpert/Smith/Harris
Lebron/Dunlevey/Jones/Miller
Love/Thompson/Christmas
Mozgov/Varejao/Perkins
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top