Cavaliers need to emulate OKC & how they were built

[Chris]

We agree on the "model" fallacy that is the premise of this thread, but this post is revisionist history at it's finest. The difference between what the Thunder are doing and what the Cavs did with Lebron, and only time will tell if there is any at all as far as results are concerned, stems entirely from the moves made at or around the time the superstar was obtained. The Thunder's next draft yielded Westbrook and diamond in the rough Ibaka, and the draft after got them Harden, who finally started to look like a player last season. The Cavs lost their diamond in the rough Boozer after lebron's first season, took "the most ready to compete now" SF the next draft in Jackson (because Lebron had just moved from PG to SG in their minds at that point), proceeded to trade 1sts like they was candy trying to find a light skinned SG when they finally had the "revelation" that Lebron was a SF, then Ferry in his first off-season wanted to save his pants' pockets from getting burned through entirely and threw money at 2 flashes in the pan and an old glue (bodied) PF.

Boy, after that tirade, I can't wait to see your defense of the LeBron era FO. LOL.

When you go on to say "for years" in reference to the Cavs FO, though, you're way off base. Ferry found his stride quickly and proceeded to put together a team to fit lebron's game exclusively and without fear of spending too much of daddy warbucks' green. With perpetually low picks and bad assets, Ferry assembled a defensively sound team for his defensive minded coach, along with very good spot shooters to spread the floor for his star. Every problem that arose each year was addressed the next, through smart trades and lots of spending. Mo and West looked great in the backcourt together, Shaq was brought in solely to get us past the Magic, and Jamison seemed like the floor-spacer we needed to win before lebron revealed his long-since hatched plan to suck dick for a living.

Okay, problem is none of those moves really worked out. I'd argue Mo Williams was the best acquisition. :chuckles: I agree with your disdain for James, and don't want to make excuses for him, though, so I'll leave it at that.

Dirk's cast is clearly better?? Are you sure?? He gave them more time to figure it out and didn't hint at abandoning them every other day like a high school girlfriend wanting to see her poor boyfriend squirm. And this championship cast was composed almost exclusively of the EXACT type of players the Cavs assembled before shithead left; pre-championship Terry was basically current Mo Williams, give or take, Kidd was a past-his-prime afterthought when he first got there, Marion was the same, only he was absolutely given away as a guy who only made his money playing alongside Nash for Mike D, the "missing piece" Chandler was a guy that would have been traded by his previous team earlier for peanuts, but for his failed physical, and who else? JJ Barea? Was he the piece that kept Dirk around? Beaubois? Stevenson, Haywood, and Butler, those three perpetual winners that Dirk needed to get to the promised land? Or maybe Peja is the guy that pushed their roster over the top when compared to Lebron's Cavs.

Only problem is those players the Mavs had? Yeah, they um, actually showed up during the playoffs. :chuckles: Again, though, not in the mood to make excuses for James so I'll leave it at that.

Please. Saying that that star-studded team kept Dirk around, using it as an example of the right way of building a team around a star, specifically in comparison to what the cavs did with lbj, is so ironic that I need a word that means ironic more than the actual word "ironic" does. You know the real difference between the Dirk Mavs and the LBJ Cavs?

Dirk > Lebron

Never said it was a star studded team, never said that team around him kept Dirk around. The Mavs got lucky. And we all agree, you need some luck to win, right? Dirk stuck around and the pieces finally worked and they got a title, probably the only one they will get with the current team they have. *shrug* Good for them, though.

As far as all the other stars I listed, and the teams that drafted them, I'm pretty spot on. I agree James was a bit of a special case, but really at the end of the day it is about results. You don't produce a winning team? Don't expect these guys to waste their careers rotting on your team. I am of the firm belief that James parting ways with the Cavaliers was best for both parties in the long run. The way the team was built was never going to win a title, and to fix it would take years. Call me crazy, but it's just what I think.

 

[Gimme Some Mo]

U all stupid. Draft 2 superstars. Dominate. That easy.

 

[CommD]

Never said it was a star studded team, never said that team around him kept Dirk around. The Mavs got lucky. And we all agree, you need some luck to win, right? Dirk stuck around and the pieces finally worked and they got a title, probably the only one they will get with the current team they have. *shrug* Good for them, though.

Best piece of luck for Dallas?

Facing a James-led team in the NBA finals.

 

[narbar32]

Boy, after that tirade, I can't wait to see your defense of the LeBron era FO. LOL.



Okay, problem is none of those moves really worked out. I'd argue Mo Williams was the best acquisition. :chuckles: I agree with your disdain for James, and don't want to make excuses for him, though, so I'll leave it at that.



Only problem is those players the Mavs had? Yeah, they um, actually showed up during the playoffs. :chuckles: Again, though, not in the mood to make excuses for James so I'll leave it at that.



Never said it was a star studded team, never said that team around him kept Dirk around. The Mavs got lucky. And we all agree, you need some luck to win, right? Dirk stuck around and the pieces finally worked and they got a title, probably the only one they will get with the current team they have. *shrug* Good for them, though.

As far as all the other stars I listed, and the teams that drafted them, I'm pretty spot on. I agree James was a bit of a special case, but really at the end of the day it is about results. You don't produce a winning team? Don't expect these guys to waste their careers rotting on your team. I am of the firm belief that James parting ways with the Cavaliers was best for both parties in the long run. The way the team was built was never going to win a title, and to fix it would take years. Call me crazy, but it's just what I think.

Dude, I think my reply came off as shitty because I just hate when Cleveland is lumped into the group of organizations that didn't do enough to build around their stars when they had them. My bad.

I agree about the other stars you listed, as I just didn't see their teams spending the cash and taking the risks necessary to win it all. But the Cavs FO bent over backwards trying to build around Lebron, constantly hamstrung into the myopic "win now" perspective to get a ring before lebron's contract was up. But lebron ultimately was the biggest offender in the playoffs in his last season as a Cav, actually giving up on the team and city knowing he was going to join his "rival" in miami the following season. He let the franchise and city down and I always found it insane that the team was supposed to win one for him, rather than the other way around.

I think the Cavs could have had a reasonable expectation to win it all had lebron stayed. A lucky year for us, a down year for other teams, or a freak injury to an opposing star in the Finals wouldn't change the fact in my head that we got to see a championship in Cleveland if it were to have happened. The Mavs only won one, and probably won't win another with Dirk, but having never seen a Cleveland championship, I'd take that--just one, for one of our major teams, in my lifetime.

 

[Jon]

Sounds like we're back to talking about "models" or "templates" to win. I'm not going there. Draft great players. Put great role players around them. Stress defense, make savvy trades, draft well. Like I said, good management will get you where you need to be.

I think we're starting to spin in circles, because I don't really think you, I, or rik actually disagree.

It's very hard to win championships, period. Nobody said it was easy. It's something we have to accept. Your stars will stay on your team if you are building the right way. That's proven. So if the Cavs are building the right way, you have nothing to worry about, and if they aren't, you probably won't win anything anyways.

Many will, but there are exceptions, and the NBA makes it hard to build a perfect team because as most great teams mature, the salary demands of their players go up and up, and eventually they can't keep them all. Dallas gave up Nash. Phoenix surrendered Johnson and Amare. Detroit gave up Al Harrington and Mehment Okur, etc. Add some injuries and retirements and what was contending team can plummet fast.

Fact is, Dirk is just wired different. He has no interest in becoming a global icon.

So a few of these guys that you draft who are willing to work hard, learn, play defense together, etc...a few of them will need to be All Stars. Right? There are superstars who follow those guidelines. You just said so yourself. So you're basically arguing that we need to draft guys who work hard, are willing to learn and play defense as a team...I mean, no shit? I don't mean that to be snide. But, no shit?

I'm not saying championships are predicated on having a superstar. You can have multiple All Stars and a great team around them and get it done, too. That's fine with me. There's a ton of ways you can do it. Just get great players who work.

Like I said, I don't think we're disagreeing here. There is not one path to success, but there are common traits among winning teams. The problem here is that an organization that actually does those things is going to be successful and won't be snagging top-5 picks for long. Only the teams that manage to keep shooting themselves in the foot over and over stay in the lottery year in and year out. Unless we get very lucky, we will end up having to complete our rebuild using methods besides scooping up top-5 picks.

One approach doesn't preclude another, and I doubt we disagree about that either.

 

[Gimme Some Mo]

In all seriousness, haven't almost all NBA championships started with drafting a superstar? That is obviously part luck (who is coming out during the drafts you happen to be picking top 5) and part smart decisions (choosing the right guy).

I think the point that some people are trying to make is that it is easier to acquire a superstar if you suck and get 3 straight top 5 picks because MOST superstars are guys that were drafted top 10. The more high picks you have, the better your chances of drafting a superstar are. Simple as that.

That is why the Cavs sucking for the next 2-3 years is their best chance to ever win a title. You just have to hope they draft a superstar, because they sure as hell aren't going to sign one in free agency and I highly doubt they'd be able to trade for him.

 

[foucault87]

I thought the general formula was the same as winning a friendly game of one-on-one. Score more points than the opposition

 

[Chris]

I think we're starting to spin in circles, because I don't really think you, I, or rik actually disagree.



Many will, but there are exceptions, and the NBA makes it hard to build a perfect team because as most great teams mature, the salary demands of their players go up and up, and eventually they can't keep them all. Dallas gave up Nash. Phoenix surrendered Johnson and Amare. Detroit gave up Al Harrington and Mehment Okur, etc. Add some injuries and retirements and what was contending team can plummet fast.

Fact is, Dirk is just wired different. He has no interest in becoming a global icon.



Like I said, I don't think we're disagreeing here. There is not one path to success, but there are common traits among winning teams. The problem here is that an organization that actually does those things is going to be successful and won't be snagging top-5 picks for long. Only the teams that manage to keep shooting themselves in the foot over and over stay in the lottery year in and year out. Unless we get very lucky, we will end up having to complete our rebuild using methods besides scooping up top-5 picks.

One approach doesn't preclude another, and I doubt we disagree about that either.

You're right, we are going in circles, our opinions arent that different. It all got lost in the mumbo jumbo I guess.