What are the Cavs going to do at C?

[The Human Q-Tip]

In addition, most teams starters end up finishing games as well. Then even if a guy is going be a sixth man type who will end up finishing games it will just as often be an offensive big as a defensive big....This is why IMO it is critical that TT can develop a midrange consistent jumper (talking Haslem or Boozer quality).

And at the least, he just has to get his FT% up, because you can't have a guy out there in crunch time who is that bad at the line unless he is pretty much a superstar otherwise.

 

[pl4tinum]

Hollinger's Euro stat translator showed a different picture with Jonas clearly in the lead-- The stats do just translate as "average NBA player", but that's not bad for a low usage 18 year old.

Translated NBA PER from Euroleague games--
Jonas Valanciunas - 14.70
Giorgi Shermadini - 14.63
Nikola Mirotic - 13.66
Jan Vesely - 10.72
Bojan Bogdanovic - 10.40
Enes Kanter - Mystery Meat

And Tristan was 16.21, right? No brainer, if you believe the stats.

 

[Jon]

It can work, and nobody is claiming TT doesn't have skills than can contribute. The argument is that you can't start a defensive C and defensive PF at the same time, so your starting lineup requires the the 4 or 5 to either 1) require a double team in the post, or 2) have a decent jumpshot. That means that TT isn't starter material unless we can get one of those highly elusive scoring big C's who can also defend the low post.

I wonder if there isn't another way to crack that nut, though?

The mid-range jumper as pointed out is not a very productive shots when even the best shooting bigs average below 50% eFG.

Combine that with typical hot & cold streaks that jump shooters go through and even with a decent mid-range shooter like Z, often the D would choose to stay back anyway as the expected damage of Z shooting a jumper was far less than the expected damage if James was permitted a lane to the hoop.

Interestingly, the dynamic changes when you don't have a James like player on your team. Most defenses tends to relax back in to a a balanced man to man defense where an offensive system designed to get shots at the hoop can actually work.

Now, I'm not trying to say we should avoid drafting or developing a rim rattling superstar, but another plan of attack would be nice.

I enjoyed watching Ben Wallace play during his time here because his intelligence and experience shined. He knew what to do when a defender ignored him, and knew his job wasn't to free himself up for a jumper, but to screen out someone else's defender to free them up for a jumper. Ben's defender was either oblivious or too far in to the paint and had no chance to switch out and defend the shot.

That's what I want out of our offense. I don't want to see us settling for the pick & pop because the defense is crowding the paint, I want to see us finding a way to get our best shooters and best finishers the best looks.

After all, how do you stop Ben from setting a crushing screen that frees up Gibson for a corner 3pt shot? You go out and defend him far enough so you can get to the 3pt line and contest Gibson ... hence, unlike the Z scenario ... the floor is actually stretched. Oh, and if they do switch on that play ... well ... then Ben (ok let's call him Tristan) is rolling to the hoop with only a small guard and whoever is left in the paint to try to stop him. If the big comes over to contest, then our other big is set free ... pass ... dunk.

What does it take to get there? To have bigs with good hands, good finishing, good vision, good passing, good screen setting, good anticipation, etc, etc?

That's where I'd rather be, and it would be a lot of fun to watch.

Icing on the cake would be to have some tough guys on the floor (let's call him Samardo) who could anticipate the way the best defenses send help flying across the floor to contest shots and flatten them with a secondary or intermediate screen.

/dream

 

[Rist77]

It can work, and nobody is claiming TT doesn't have skills than can contribute. The argument is that you can't start a defensive C and defensive PF at the same time, so your starting lineup requires the the 4 or 5 to either 1) require a double team in the post, or 2) have a decent jumpshot. That means that TT isn't starter material unless we can get one of those highly elusive scoring big C's who can also defend the low post.

Which means the argument boils down to whether taking a guy No. 4 overall who reasonably projects as a defensive backup is a worthwhile use of that pick. And the opinion of some is that if you want a PF with no offense but who can defend, you don't need to use that high a draft pick to get him.

Just because somebody comes off the bench doesn’t mean they’re not starter material. Not saying you said this, just saying. I’d be more than happy if we had 3 big men worth starting but had to bring one off the bench to help space the floor, regardless of where we picked him in the draft.

Personally I couldn’t care less if TT was drafted 4, and neither should the Cavs. Once a guy is drafted, he has to prove himself regardless. In a weak draft with seemingly not very many good options to pick from at 4 (I know it sounds crazy, but kind of true), I’d be perfectly fine if TT was starter quality but forced to come off the bench still playing 30+ minutes.

With all the busts in the lottery each year, to get a guy that plays big minutes contributing to a winning style of basketball would be a huge success. It seems as if some were hoping to strike gold with both picks and got caught in the mystery of the 7 ft Lithuanian. Why not take a chance of this guy, he seems promising, seems interesting (I was kind of feeling the same way on draft night.) Then when the boring 6’9 TT was selected, a lot hated the pick without thinking about the rationale behind the pick. Comparing their games and what each could bring, the TT selection makes a lot of sense.

Jonas is very foul prone and has trouble staying on the court against Euroleague players. He also will not “wow” you with his scoring. Rebounding, yes. Hustle, yes. It’s possible the Cavs front office came to the conclusion that it’s too risky and maybe Jonas will never learn how to defend NBA players and stay on the court if he’s struggling so much with Euroleague players.

TT was the safer pick, plain and simple. Some may not like that, but sometimes safe works out well and sometimes it could also lead you to be thinking down the road “what if..” Personally I think the pick will work out well but hope there’s not that huge “what if “ hanging over it down the road.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Combine that with typical hot & cold streaks that jump shooters go through and even with a decent mid-range shooter like Z, often the D would choose to stay back anyway as the expected damage of Z shooting a jumper was far less than the expected damage if James was permitted a lane to the hoop.

That's true, but the defense couldn't afford to ignore Z completely either. Anyway, our frontcourt 4/5's did have some significant problems because of our inability to generate offense. It's why we were all looking for the mystical "stretch 4", or hoping JJ would get a more reliable shot. Because we realized that we needed a reliable offensive threat from either the 4 or 5, and Z was long past his offensive prime. We didn't have it, and it hurt.

I enjoyed watching Ben Wallace play during his time here because his intelligence and experience shined. He knew what to do when a defender ignored him, and knew his job wasn't to free himself up for a jumper, but to screen out someone else's defender to free them up for a jumper. Ben's defender was either oblivious or too far in to the paint and had no chance to switch out and defend the shot.

Ben was a blast to watch, but didn't we have issues integrating Ben Wallace with Andy, precisely because they basically had a similar offensive game of garbage buckets? Ben Wallace really shined when paired with an offensive 4/5 like Sheed, and I think the issue is that finding guys like Sheed who can also defend the post against centers is tough. Yet, we've arguably boxed ourselves into that position by limiting ourselves with a defensive 4 at the outset of our rebuilding program, when retaining flexibility to integrate different skill sets of future players should be a major consideration.

After all, how do you stop Ben from setting a crushing screen that frees up Gibson for a corner 3pt shot? You go out and defend him far enough so you can get to the 3pt line and contest Gibson ... hence, unlike the Z scenario ... the floor is actually stretched. Oh, and if they do switch on that play ... well ... then Ben (ok let's call him Tristan) is rolling to the hoop with only a small guard and whoever is left in the paint to try to stop him. If the big comes over to contest, then our other big is set free ... pass ... dunk.

If it was that easy, Andy and Ben should have been able to work that to perfection. They couldn't.

 

[Jon]

Safe is fine, as long safe also comes with upside and Tristan does have upside.

 

[Jon]

If it was that easy, Andy and Ben should have been able to work that to perfection. They couldn't.

Oh, I never meant to imply it would be easy. Just putting a couple of players like Andy and Ben on the floor together is asking for trouble without designing an offense around having them on the floor together. For instance, you'd really want the other guys on the court to be shooters, and that was a fail with James on the floor.

 

[Douglar]

And Tristan was 16.21, right? No brainer, if you believe the stats.

I don't think you want to compare the expected "college front court player predictor" to the "euro league stat converter" apples to apples like that.

The euro-league stat converter is looking at last year in Europe to next year in the NBA while the college predictor is looking three years out in the NBA.

Also they have a different set of pitfall traits that they don't factor in.

 

[narbar32]

I wonder if there isn't another way to crack that nut, though?

The mid-range jumper as pointed out is not a very productive shots when even the best shooting bigs average below 50% eFG.

Combine that with typical hot & cold streaks that jump shooters go through and even with a decent mid-range shooter like Z, often the D would choose to stay back anyway as the expected damage of Z shooting a jumper was far less than the expected damage if James was permitted a lane to the hoop.

Interestingly, the dynamic changes when you don't have a James like player on your team. Most defenses tends to relax back in to a a balanced man to man defense where an offensive system designed to get shots at the hoop can actually work.

Now, I'm not trying to say we should avoid drafting or developing a rim rattling superstar, but another plan of attack would be nice.

I enjoyed watching Ben Wallace play during his time here because his intelligence and experience shined. He knew what to do when a defender ignored him, and knew his job wasn't to free himself up for a jumper, but to screen out someone else's defender to free them up for a jumper. Ben's defender was either oblivious or too far in to the paint and had no chance to switch out and defend the shot.

That's what I want out of our offense. I don't want to see us settling for the pick & pop because the defense is crowding the paint, I want to see us finding a way to get our best shooters and best finishers the best looks.

After all, how do you stop Ben from setting a crushing screen that frees up Gibson for a corner 3pt shot? You go out and defend him far enough so you can get to the 3pt line and contest Gibson ... hence, unlike the Z scenario ... the floor is actually stretched. Oh, and if they do switch on that play ... well ... then Ben (ok let's call him Tristan) is rolling to the hoop with only a small guard and whoever is left in the paint to try to stop him. If the big comes over to contest, then our other big is set free ... pass ... dunk.

What does it take to get there? To have bigs with good hands, good finishing, good vision, good passing, good screen setting, good anticipation, etc, etc?

That's where I'd rather be, and it would be a lot of fun to watch.

Icing on the cake would be to have some tough guys on the floor (let's call him Samardo) who could anticipate the way the best defenses send help flying across the floor to contest shots and flatten them with a secondary or intermediate screen.

/dream

Great post, Jon. Really spot on about the spacing for a rim-rattling superstar. That's exactly what we're used to talking about around here in the Lebron era -- spacing the floor with shooters, including (and especially, in the later years) in the frontcourt to allow Lebron room to operate and isolate. For better or worse, we won't be watching that dynamic for the foreseeable future.

Rather, we're currently building around a projected-to-be-from-what-we've-seen strong outside shooting and efficient young PG who should thrive off of the pick and roll but also happens to be a dynamic playmaker in transition. If all goes as planned, defenders won't be able to cheat and go under picks against Kyrie, given his shooting ability. JJ was a lazy screener, IMO. Maybe the FO sees TT as a potentially tenacious screener which could be invaluable for Kyrie.

Set a nasty pick, defender cheats it or simply can't fight over it: Kyrie with the J. Set a nasty pick, defender succeeds in fighting over, but at the expense of keeping an eye on TT allowing TT to backdoor it either through simple cut, losing his defender, or off a secondary screen.

Then you have the talk of this team emphasizing getting out and running in transition. Granted, I'm still sort of unclear on how this meshes with the Princeton Offense, but nevertheless Byron has made it clear he wants to run. Well TT could end up being a pretty damn good PF in the transition game, given his athleticism but also his offensive rebounding prowess; you can run a lot if you have a trailing big that can sift through the transition confusion on a missed shot and turn it into what amounts to a free transition attempt by getting another possession.

Add in that we traded for Casspi, and though I don't know whether he'll be a staple of this offense for years to come, I DO know tends to leak out IMMEDIATELY on a defensive rebound/steal and has some decent wheels and finishing ability, as well as Eyenga who, for all his flaws, brings the same and was missed on many outlet occasions this past season, and two PGs (Baron and Kyrie) who should thrive on the break, and we have the makings of something.

What exactly that is, I don't know, but there are at least a few things to get excited about other than our missed opportunity in the draft.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Oh, I never meant to imply it would be easy. Just putting a couple of players like Andy and Ben on the floor together is asking for trouble without designing an offense around having them on the floor together. For instance, you'd really want the other guys on the court to be shooters, and that was a fail with James on the floor.

The thing is that I try to look for teams that won an NBA championship with an Andy/Ben type combination, and it's tough. Maybe the Bulls in the last 20+ years? But you're right in that we have to hope for an upside. If TT can be a Martin type of player, it may work if we can find the right pieces/parts to mesh with him.

 

[Jon]

The thing is that I try to look for teams that won an NBA championship with an Andy/Ben type combination, and it's tough. Maybe the Bulls in the last 20+ years? But you're right in that we have to hope for an upside. If TT can be a Martin type of player, it may work if we can find the right pieces/parts to mesh with him.

The league is changing, and a smart team gets ahead of whatever the trend seems to be, rather than trying to reproduce the past. Not only are classic franchise C's rare, they've become more and more marginalized by what's allowed on D.

The bottom line is whether something could work, or whether it would be easily countered - and if it doesn't work - heck, we're going to have some more shots in the lottery to find something that will.

But some of our best success in the past was due to coming out defensive in the early going, but then going spread floor with just Andy to try to cover up on D to close out games. Our primary front court spread the floor guys were Donyell or Wally with the likes of Damon/Boobie/Mo/West in the backcourt - or a veritable scrap heap of talent.

So no matter which we way go, if our coach is flexible, there's no reason our approach can't be.

 

[Deezus]

...we've arguably boxed ourselves into that position by limiting ourselves with a defensive 4 at the outset of our rebuilding program...

The argument is that you can't start a defensive C and defensive PF at the same time, ant a PF with no offense but who can defend, you don't need to use that high a draft pick to get him.

Shooting touch and a jump-shot can only be improved so much when it doesn't come natural to someone..

... Why on earth are we automatically putting Tristan into this mold of a strictly defensive player with no offensive skills? Sure, he shot poorly from the FT line and had a limited game outside 5 or 6 feet from the rim. He also is 20 years old and coming off a one-and-done season in college. This means his entire career, he's been bigger, stronger, faster, and more athletic than 95% of the players he's facing. Why develop your jumpshot when you can just out-jump someone or blow by them for a rebound or dunk? The point is, there is no way in hell we can place these types of limitations on him before we actually give him the time to develop an NBA game. If we trust the F.O.'s stated goal of putting a premium on players with intelligence and work ethic, then it would be unwise to speculate that Tristan won't develop some post moves and a jumper to go with his athleticism. In fact, DraftExpress even marveled at his ability to get to the line despite his current lack of offensive skillset... (link)

No player in this group of big men got to the line at a higher rate than Thompson. More than a quarter (26.3%) of his possessions resulted in a free throw, which is a pretty staggering number. Thompson only scored 0.938 PPP overall (4th last), and there's no question that his skill level has a long way to go, but he has plenty of time to improve and his ability to get his team into the bonus despite being so raw is promising.

As long as Tristan is starting, the Cavs are going to have to get a center with some kind of serviceable jumpshot.

This is assuming that Tristan, the 24 year old, has the exact same skill set that you think Tristan, the 20 year old, will have in his rookie year in the NBA. We need to think long term here.

...why in the world would anyone double up on either of our big men? They are threats in transition, or in cutting to the basket, but neither is a legitimate threat either shooting or in the low post. I have trouble envisioning an effective half-court offense with those two playing the 4/5.

Who cares if teams don't double team our bigs next year? Its not like this team is going to contend next year anyway. This is a rebuilding process that takes years. The only teams that take draft picks based on how they fit in with current personnel are teams that are contending in the playoffs.

NarlCavs said it best!

We can't be overly concerned with how things will play out next season. Everything about the Cavs now is long term. How these players turn out long term and how this team is put together long term. Most of this roster will be long gone 3 years from now. I'm not too concerned with how the current pieces fit together for next season.

 

[mcfly]

My biggest qualm with the Andy/Ben comparison is that Ben Wallace was a shell of himself in Cleveland. He had stretches where he had absolutely no lift, to the point where he bricked wide open dunks. Add to that, Ben was seemingly allergic to the thought of working on his offensive game.... short of taking seated shots from the sidelines during warm ups.

 

[Damage]

I normally agree with most of your post, but I have no idea what you are trying to get across.

Isn't it obvious? It's insane to not do homework and use analytics when evaluating a TV. :chuckles:

Really, same goes for evaluating an NBA player. X pointed out that Michael Sweetney's saber's are off the charts. My point is Sweetney is the exception, not the rule.

My point is sabermetrics are an awesome tool in predicting and judging talent and just because 1 fatso bucks the system, it doesn't mean the system is flawed

 

[RchfldCavRaised]

I think Thompson brings a similar skill set to what Kenyon Martin had to offer as a rookie.

Nice try

I watched Kenyon Martin many times while in college before that last ACL injury. He controlled games in a similar manner to Alonzo Mourning. He controlled a game with his will and attitude while at Cincy. When Huggy would get a big lead, he even allowed the offense to be initiated by Kenyon at the top of the key sometimes, to show off his versatility. Kenyon Martin was MEAN, and he had/has the same nerve condition that Mahmoud Abdoul Rauf has, but he used to use it to his advantage in intimidating opponents. I used to think he was going to just STUMP opposing big men, right there on the court. I used to fear for the rim when watching Kenyon Martin. (dont cite me for not looking up the nerve condition thing, Im at work and typing this fast)

I think Tristan THompson relates much better to Shelden Williams skill set.

They had practically the exact same stats collegiately while playing in the exact same position/body frame/reach advantage. When looking at Shelden Williams Sophomore season, where he got the minutes Tristan got, while at the same age that Tristan was last season, the numbers are so comparable that it is scary.

Shelden
Tristan

Its natural to want to be optimistic about what our team is doing, but I still feel, after watching 10-15 games from Texas last season (thanks Smooth) that Tristan Thompson will be best served as a backup or spot starter in the Paul Millsap role in the best case scenario for his career.

(Kanye Shrug)