Love/Wiggins Trade Revisited

[Ohio]

This trade can be summed up with three letters: TBD

With that said, I'm happy with where we are right now. I think we made the right move. I think Minnesota did as well.

 

[gourimoko]

You're just saying pointless things. Love is the one on our team - not Wiggins. Obviously we're more likely to post good things about Love because, again, he's the one on our team. I don't see why a post like that expressing positivity regarding Kevin would upset you.

Maybe you haven't noticed how this thread, the Wiggins thread, and the Love thread have devolved into nothing more than a "told you so" after each game?

With regards to the bolded, that is the entire point of this thread.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Maybe you haven't noticed how this thread, the Wiggins thread, and the Love thread have devolved into nothing more than a "told you so" after each game?

Which is most assuredly a terrible way of looking at it. Even if Wiggins ends up being a better or slightly better player than Love (highly unlikely), it is still the right move IMO.

Our roster balance and floor spacing would be awful with Wiggins. We'd have TT playing twice as many minutes at PF and we all saw how terribly that went against Chicago. The lane was clogged, we had no room to drive and TT couldn't do anything when the ball ended up in his hands.

Love provided us with an upgrade at a position of need, while maintaining our overall youth. I could see the agnst if Love was 30+ but he's only 26. He has a ton of good basketball left.

For it to ultimately be deemed a mistake, Wiggins would have to turn in to one of the best wings of all time. Does anyone really buy that? Today? As a possibility? Our team is bigger, stronger and tougher inside with Love. Generally trading small for big is a no brainer, especially when you have the best wing in the league.

Wiggins is a nice young player with a TON of talent. He's nowhere near an All-Star and nowhere near a viable third option on a championship team. Until one of those two things happen, I don't see the point in revisiting this. I like AW but he's a really raw, really young player. His impact (today) would be very minimal and nowhere near Love's IMO, even with his slower start.

 

[All4One1ForAll]

Which is most assuredly a terrible way of looking at it. Even if Wiggins ends up being a better or slightly better player than Love (highly unlikely), it is still the right move IMO.

Our roster balance and floor spacing would be awful with Wiggins. We'd have TT playing twice as many minutes at PF and we all saw how terribly that went against Chicago. The lane was clogged, we had no room to drive and TT couldn't do anything when the ball ended up in his hands.

Love provided us with an upgrade at a position of need, while maintaining our overall youth. I could see the agnst if Love was 30+ but he's only 26. He has a ton of good basketball left.

For it to ultimately be deemed a mistake, Wiggins would have to turn in to one of the best wings of all time. Does anyone really buy that? Today? As a possibility? Our team is bigger, stronger and tougher inside with Love. Generally trading small for big is a no brainer, especially when you have the best wing in the league.

Wiggins is a nice young player with a TON of talent. He's nowhere near an All-Star and nowhere near a viable third option on a championship team. Until one of those two things happen, I don't see the point in revisiting this. I like AW but he's a really raw, really young player. His impact (today) would be very minimal and nowhere near Love's IMO, even with his slower start.

Well said. I don't think this thread really brings any positive discussions.

 

[gourimoko]

Well said. I don't think this thread really brings any positive discussions.

Why can't it...?

If it weren't filled with comments like this, and people left emotion, subjective homerism, and the most morbid Cleveland-esque pessimism out of the equation, we could have a thought provoking discussion.

The problem is that people feel the need to blurt out the first thing they feel and press "Post Reply" in literally every fucking thread on the board.

Don't take this the wrong way, but if you think there can be no positive discussion in the thread, why do you continue to post in it?

 

[gourimoko]

Which is most assuredly a terrible way of looking at it. Even if Wiggins ends up being a better or slightly better player than Love (highly unlikely),

Disagree with the bolded.

it is still the right move IMO.

I completely disagree with this assertion. If Wiggins becomes even an equivalent player to Love in the next 3 years, then I would say no, this wasn't a good move. If he doesn't then sure, you'd be right.

Others disagree, and base the trade on our ability to win only a single championship; while yet others state they'd prefer to compete long-term rather than maximizing any short window of opportunity.

It's simply not clear cut, and I'm willing to let it rest on this divide which really boils down to personal preference.

The only way this trade is a bust is if Kevin Love is either hurt, declines, or simply leaves Cleveland in the next few seasons.

Then there is the separate question of cost... which is another debate entirely.

Our roster balance and floor spacing would be awful with Wiggins.

"Roster balance?" I gotta disagree here, completely, for a multitude of reasons.

We'd have TT playing twice as many minutes at PF

Just as we made moves this year with Love, we would almost assuredly have made moves with Wiggins.... This way of looking at things so narrowly is more or less a strawman argument.

Love provided us with an upgrade at a position of need, while maintaining our overall youth. I could see the agnst if Love was 30+ but he's only 26. He has a ton of good basketball left.

We'll see...

For it to ultimately be deemed a mistake, Wiggins would have to turn in to one of the best wings of all time.

Disagree with this assertion. I think it's outlandish, frankly.

Does anyone really buy that? Today? As a possibility?

No, obviously not. Again, false dichotomy.

Our team is bigger, stronger and tougher inside with Love.

None of this is true.

Generally trading small for big is a no brainer, especially when you have the best wing in the league.

This really doesn't mean much though. You wouldn't trade Kyrie for Andre Drummond. It's just not that simple.

There's too much being left out of your argument, I think.

Wiggins is a nice young player with a TON of talent. He's nowhere near an All-Star and nowhere near a viable third option on a championship team.

He's a rookie. It's not about what he is today, but where he'll be in 2-3 years time. No one, I think, is saying that Wiggins is better than Love today.

Until one of those two things happen, I don't see the point in revisiting this.

You realize there are many people who do see the point in revisiting the issue and will do exactly that at for the next several years.

I like AW but he's a really raw, really young player. His impact (today) would be very minimal and nowhere near Love's IMO, even with his slower start.

Again, I don't think anyone has said Wiggins is better than Love today... It isn't about today, but about building for the long-term.

Long-term, I feel we would be stronger with a core of Wiggins, LeBron, and Kyrie than with Love for a multitude of reasons I stated earlier mostly revolving around risk.

Yes, Love is young and it could work out exactly as you've stated here, but that certainly isn't assured.

 

[RonG]

With one championship this talk goes away for most people. The fact is LeBron is on the down side the window realistically is 3-5 years. There is a solid argument that it wasn't worth the time to wait on Wiggins to develop. Honestly I never thought the Cavs would win this year and I am still fairly confident they won't. ( that's not saying I don't want them to) Chemistry and being battle tested in the play-offs means a lot.

 

[Cassity14]

@gourimoko Most of your assertions in the Wiggins/Love talk have been built on the idea of Love having the ability to walk. I'm not asking you to re-hash the things you've said in this thread and others, but I have one question.

If Love finishes his career as a Cavalier and doesn't suddenly dimish (I have no idea why he would out side of injuries), does your opinion change at all? I understand your assessment of the risk, but is that the only qualm?

 

[gourimoko]

@gourimoko Most of your assertions in the Wiggins/Love talk have been built on the idea of Love having the ability to walk. I'm not asking you to re-hash the things you've said in this thread and others, but I have one question.

If Love finishes his career as a Cavalier and doesn't suddenly dimish (I have no idea why he would out side of injuries), does your opinion change at all? I understand your assessment of the risk, but is that the only qualm?

My opinion would not change; the equation is still the same. I think you're instead asking, would I view the trade as having been successful?

Gour's Trade Flowchart:

(1) If Love continues to play as he has this year ("doesn't suddenly diminish") and Wiggins reaches his potential; then the answer is no, the trade was a failure.

(2) If Love returns to form (last year) maintains that level of play for the average period of time with league average amount of injury and downtime, and Wiggins reaches his potential, the trade was an overpay at worst; but definitely not what I would call a failure.

(3) Take the criteria from #2 and assume Wiggins reaches his potential but Kevin Love simply plays slightly above league average defense. The trade was a success.

(4) Take the criteria from #2, and assume Wiggins maxes out as Demar Derozan, then no, the trade was a success by all accounts.

I've avoided "winning a championship" because I think both players could contribute to that in their own way.

So you're question is insightful because it forces us to really evaluate under what conditions would we accept the trade as being a success and also under what conditions it could be considered a mistake.

I think there are a fair amount of possibilities, given your preconditions, in which the trade will be good to great for the Cavaliers. My only concern is that I'm a bit more risk adverse than some others might be.

 

[All4One1ForAll]

@gourimoko Gouri I'm just kind of confused why you wouldn't be in support of this trade considering you said in another thread that you don't even think Lebron will be in the NBA even five years from now and that you see it as a downward slope for him (regarding how good he is) from here on out, so if it takes Wiggins 3+ years to become a really great player like you said (All Star maybe?), then our chances of winning a championship would decrease drastically by the time Wiggins is good enough to be a 2nd/3rd option on a championship team due to the fact that from what you've said, Lebron will have exited his prime.

So then wouldn't it make sense to have a player who can help you win now like Kevin Love while Lebron is still at the top of the game instead of waiting for Wiggins to develop and risking Lebron's downfall (because as you said, longetivity will be more of a problem for him since he relies so much on his athleticism)?

 

[caf]

This trade can be summed up with three letters: TBD

With that said, I'm happy with where we are right now. I think we made the right move. I think Minnesota did as well.

Completely agree. As much as individual talent can impact a game, team basketball consistently wins basketball. I really don't care how good Wiggins turns out to be. This team didn't need a small forward.

The Cavs ended up with the power 5 and stretch four this board has been clamoring for for years. So what if Kevin Love is a rich man's Hero Turkolu. That's a good thing. Plus he has decent post up moves as well.

 

[Jordan]

@gourimoko Gouri I'm just kind of confused why you wouldn't be in support of this trade considering you said in another thread that you don't even think Lebron will be in the NBA even five years from now and that you see it as a downward slope for him (regarding how good he is) from here on out, so if it takes Wiggins 3+ years to become a really great player like you said (All Star maybe?), then our chances of winning a championship would decrease drastically by the time Wiggins is good enough to be a 2nd/3rd option on a championship team due to the fact that from what you've said, Lebron will have exited his prime.

So then wouldn't it make sense to have a player who can help you win now like Kevin Love while Lebron is still at the top of the game instead of waiting for Wiggins to develop and risking Lebron's downfall (because as you said, longetivity will be more of a problem for him since he relies so much on his athleticism)?

I think Gour's point, which he and other members persuaded me of this summer, is Wiggin's potential is above "All star Maybe?". For example, that would fit the Demar Derozen criteria. Wiggins has the potential to be a top-5 superstar. So, I don't really find his viewpoints that contradictory. If Kyrie and Wiggins are both superstars, which I think is likely, even if LBJ is a borderline all-star we still can compete for a championship. The overall point, here, is that it is way too early to evaluate the success of this trade.

 

[brownindian]

Wiggins seems to be in the perfect place to learn and improve himself - T'Wolves know they are not playoff bound and hence are concentrating on getting their star player learn and improve himself. That will not be the same situation here. Wiggins will not be able to achieve here what he is experiencing there. At that point we would be wishing we made the trade. Also, ww have enough data on KEvin Love to know that if we get the TWolves version of Kevin Love and add him to our team we would be a force to reckon with. However the Kevin we got seems to have regressed (Form ? Injury? Usage? Coaching?). So now we feel that had we kept Wiggins and he played like that we would be great.

Bottom Line: The grass is always greener on the other side. Unless we have Donnie Darko come from a parallel world to tell us what the Cavs did with Wiggins in the team we will never know.

 

[All4One1ForAll]

I think Gour's point, which he and other members persuaded me of this summer, is Wiggin's potential is above "All star Maybe?". For example, that would fit the Demar Derozen criteria. Wiggins has the potential to be a top-5 superstar. So, I don't really find his viewpoints that contradictory. If Kyrie and Wiggins are both superstars, which I think is likely, even if LBJ is a borderline all-star we still can compete for a championship. The overall point, here, is that it is way too early to evaluate the success of this trade.

I'm not saying he'll only be a possible All Star throughout his career, just to be clear. I'm saying in 3 YEARS, he's an "All Star maybe." Keep in mind, he's in the West, so it'll be harder to make the ASG, but no matter what we'll say in 3 years, he's probably an All Star talent.

From what Gouri has said though, he seems to think Lebron will decline very quickly and he said he highly doubts LBJ will still be in the league in 5 years (meaning he would retire in 4 seasons). So in order to make keeping Wiggins worth it, we would have to win a championship in one of those years, and I just think we have a much better chance at winning championships with Love in his prime this year and these next few years than we would if we had to wait for Wiggins to develop and hope Lebron is still the Lebron we know by the time that happens (which, again, Gouri doesn't seem to think will be the case based on his comments on Lebron).

Another poster said this, which I agree with. It came down to "do we want to try to win a championship with Lebron in his prime or with Wiggins in his prime?" We chose the former, so we traded for Kevin Love, which in my opinion is a much better strategy because I don't think Wiggins is the type that can lead a championship team, but we all know Lebron is able to do so.

 

[Jordan]

I'm not saying he'll only be a possible All Star throughout his career, just to be clear. I'm saying in 3 YEARS, he's an "All Star maybe." Keep in mind, he's in the West, so it'll be harder to make the ASG, but no matter what we'll say in 3 years, he's probably an All Star talent.

From what Gouri has said though, he seems to think Lebron will decline very quickly and he said he highly doubts LBJ will still be in the league in 5 years (meaning he would retire in 4 seasons). So in order to make keeping Wiggins worth it, we would have to win a championship in one of those years, and I just think we have a much better chance at winning championships with Love in his prime this year and these next few years than we would if we had to wait for Wiggins to develop and hope Lebron is still the Lebron we know by the time that happens (which, again, Gouri doesn't seem to think will be the case based on his comments on Lebron).

Another poster said this, which I agree with. It came down to "do we want to try to win a championship with Lebron in his prime or with Wiggins in his prime?" We chose the former, so we traded for Kevin Love, which in my opinion is a much better strategy because I don't think Wiggins is the type that can lead a championship team, but we all know Lebron is able to do so.

The thing, though, is I think you are assuming if we don't make the Love trade no other moves are made. Which is why this dichotomy of winning a championship "with prime-Lebron" or "prime-Wiggins" is a false dichotomy. It's too counterfactual.

With all of that said, I support the Love trade and would do it again in a heartbeat. But, to fully evaluate its impact we will need to wait 3-4 seasons to see what happens in Cleveland and how Wiggins develops.