What are the Cavs going to do at C?

you know 50% of a teams shots are usually at the rim=29.8% and three point line (22%). jumps on average are 16-23=25%, 3-9=14.1% then 10-15= 9%. teamson average out of 80.8 shots.

Averages for jump shots 3-23 feet is 39% . 3 points efg% is 53.8% at the rim 64.1%

3-15 feet are mostly created(forced) shots whera as at the rim and 16+ are higher quality shots that rely on assist.

Clevaland was 27th in Fg% at the rim. This is the pivotal stat Cleveland needs to improve offensively.

JJ shot 61% from the rim as did Varejao and Samuels. Hollins was 72% . Even though its a small sample the most effect guy the cavs had from 16-23 feet was Varejao at 47%. Hickson meanwhile was 33% thats as effective as Samuels whow as a rookie and never was asked tot ake that shot in college.

now whats really funny is last year the best guys for the almighty 3-9 foot jump shot everyone loves was Jawad willims, joey graham, anthony parker. mo williams antawn jamison and jamario moon.

considering only small portion of that list will be back next year its clear not a shot the cavs put much reliance on .

but moving out to 10-15 feet. once again anderson varejao was the most effective on the team.

so the cavs have a Center whether anyone wants to acknowledge him as a center or not who can be effective outside. 37% percent jump shots is a good clip for a center to draw out his man.

Cavs are in good shape right now. they have team pieces that fit within the scheme and some of them need some time to develop. Cavs will probably signa 2 or a 5 when the lockout ends but the roster is pretty much set. if the nba has a mid season they will probably make a move or two but outside of trading ramon sessions cutting manny harris and possibly resigning parker I think their done til next season.

wuck said:

Totally agree with that. I think Grant can be faulted for placing Tristan above Jonas on the draft board (or for having different priorities), but I can't imagine the Cavs would have picked Tristan at #4 if they had Jonas rated higher (just hoping he would fall to them later). There's no evidence (yet) that they tried to get fancy and somehow forgot to take Jonas when they really wanted him "more". They chose Tristan because they wanted him -- I don't think that part is too tricky.

My question is: what does the Princeton offense typically ask for of PF/C? We never really saw it run last year, and I'm wondering if PF/C have different responsibilities, and if Tristan's other skills will fit in.

Click to expand...

NO with Paul basically ran the a lot of the same version of the same play. Pick and Roll with either West who would either dive or setup for a jumpshot. If not West, pick and roll with Chandler who would dive essentially every time. If you were looking for an ideal big man in this draft for the Princeton offense as Myoung has pointed out it would have been Derrick Williams: i.e. a guy who could shoot or attack the rim off the pick and roll. Frankly watching NO play with Paul/West wasn't all that different from what Utah used to do with Malone/Stockton although as Stockton got older they used to iso Malone more.

Tristan has the hops and athletic ability to play the Chandler role in the NO style system well. For what it's worth Malone was a lousy FT shooter his first year and the league but eventually he was able to become a decent FT shooter as well being very effective off the pick and roll shooting the mid range jumper. If Tristan can show similar improvement in his jumper and FT shooting, no reason he won't be very effective in the Princeton type of offense that Scott played in NO.

Smooth said:

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

Click to expand...

Tell that to Jordan.

wuck said:

Totally agree with that. I think Grant can be faulted for placing Tristan above Jonas on the draft board (or for having different priorities), but I can't imagine the Cavs would have picked Tristan at #4 if they had Jonas rated higher (just hoping he would fall to them later). There's no evidence (yet) that they tried to get fancy and somehow forgot to take Jonas when they really wanted him "more". They chose Tristan because they wanted him -- I don't think that part is too tricky.

Click to expand...

I don't think he should be faulted until we actually see them play.

My question is: what does the Princeton offense typically ask for of PF/C? We never really saw it run last year, and I'm wondering if PF/C have different responsibilities, and if Tristan's other skills will fit in.

Click to expand...

JonFromVa touched up on this earlier I believe. I can't seem to find it though.

JonFromVA said:

Kenyon was a 4 year player at Cincy. When he was a freshman, he averaged 3 & 3. By the time he was a senior he was putting up nearly 19 & 10, but he's averaged just 13 & 7 as a pro. Of course the knee problems didn't help, but I don't think he was going to live up to his hype.

Click to expand...

To put that in perspective, Martin was playing behind Danny Fortson as a freshman. Also, one and done was still rare, as opposed to the norm for top recruits - as I recall coaches still expected you to play four years when they recruited you, though obviously times were-a-changing. Thompson would probably have been benched in 1997 too.

Again, it's not a bad comparison (nice ceiling as jigo points out). Kenyon was known as just a dunker and defender until his senior year. However, Martin was feared on both ends of the court for years, stats don't do justice to what kind of force he was in college.

wuck said:

My question is: what does the Princeton offense typically ask for of PF/C? We never really saw it run last year, and I'm wondering if PF/C have different responsibilities, and if Tristan's other skills will fit in.

Click to expand...

It's difficult to answer this using Scott's offense as the scheme, because it just doesn't resemble a princeton very often. It's been heavily modified. The strangest part for me last season really trying to dig into it, is the Princeton is typically used in a slow-paced game, walk the ball down, set up in half court, lots of passes, use the whole shot clock to get the best look. This is opposition to the transition heavy approach that the Cavs were supposed to have in place last year. I don't know if the idea was that the whole team could fly down the court to get in position for a set or what, but it obviously didn't (and never has AFAIK) work out that way.

In general, a post player's main responsibility in the Princeton is to free the wings for backdoor cuts. Defenses quickly take this way (particularly in the NBA, where shrink the floor is a defensive staple), so ideally any of your players can step out and space the floor. I'm sure you saw the articles last year about the "hub" philosophy as well - if your big man is a good cutter, then you hope he's also an accurate and willing passer, again to keep the defense honest. So position by position you'd want something like this:

Guard Strengths:

1. Passing
2. Shooting
3. Dribble

Wing Strengths:

1. Cutting
2. Shooting
3. Passiing

Post strengths:
1. Screening
2. Cutting
3. Shooting
4. Passing


So TTs not really a perfect fit (based on what he showed at UT).

The more frustrating part about teaching the Princeton is that it's a read-and-react system. There's no pattern to run, no finding your spot and setting up, it's constantly reading the defenders around you and moving them (through your motion) to open up looks for yourself and teammates. So this might be where Thompson fits in, you have to THINK hard to learn it and you have to be very alert to make it work. The FO might be targeting players that have high bball IQ and calling it "character". This might also be the deciding factor that pushed Thompson to his draft board position over our other fan favs.

Just a note on those pussy advanced statisics:

Let's say you are in the market for a TV and you go to best buy to get a better look. You fall into 1 of 2 categories:

1. The first category is the type of person who takes his time walking aimlesly up and down the isles, realizing holy fuck, they all look the same. From there, you can either ask the best buy sales douche for some advanced information or you do it on your own via consumer reports (or both). The advanced information could be anything from HDMI inputs, BLU ray capabilities, brand, 3D, pixels dimensions to life of the TV, will it even fit in my fucking car, how will it loook in my house.

2. The second category is the type of person who walks into best buy, looks at all the TV's, fingers one because it's huge, has nice colors, and yells to best buy douche "GIVE ME THAT TV BEFORE I CUM IN YOUR FUCKING FACE YOU CUNT!!!"

Now, you may very well end up with a sick TV if you fall into category two, but you can still cum in best buy guys face AND look up advanced measurements at the same time.

Just because a TV passes the eye test, it doesn't mean I can hook up my xbox, blu ray, surround sound, wireless dongle and 1,000 HDMI cables.
/awesomeanalogy

Just a reminder of this tweet from Chad Ford a couple weeks before the draft:

chadfordinsider Chad Ford
Informal GM poll: Who's the best int'l player in the draft? Vesley 5 votes; Kanter 4 votes; Valanciunas 3 votes. All said it's very close

Click to expand...

And people are still pissed after the Cavs passed up arguably the third best Euro prospect in a weak draft.

Damage said:

Just a note on those pussy advanced statisics:

Let's say you are in the market for a TV and you go to best buy to get a better look. You fall into 1 of 2 categories:

1. The first category is the type of person who takes his time walking aimlesly up and down the isles, realizing holy fuck, they all look the same. From there, you can either ask the best buy sales douche for some advanced information or you do it on your own via consumer reports (or both). The advanced information could be anything from HDMI inputs, BLU ray capabilities, brand, 3D, pixels dimensions to life of the TV, will it even fit in my fucking car, how will it loook in my house.

2. The second category is the type of person who walks into best buy, looks at all the TV's, fingers one because it's huge, has nice colors, and yells to best buy douche "GIVE ME THAT TV BEFORE I CUM IN YOUR FUCKING FACE YOU CUNT!!!"

Now, you may very well end up with a sick TV if you fall into category two, but you can still cum in best buy guys face AND look up advanced measurements at the same time.

Just because a TV passes the eye test, it doesn't mean I can hook up my xbox, blu ray, surround sound, wireless dongle and 1,000 HDMI cables.
/awesomeanalogy

Click to expand...

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

JimmyJazz said:

Its very possible the trade portion of this could have been JJ to another team, for a pick that resulted in Jonas. Forgot the Kings traded from 7 to 10. Anyways Jonas should have been the pick. The great thing is that without basketball, we can argue back and forth over an over and over and over because there is no basketball to talk about. I am not hating TT, I think he could be a solid pro, I do think he will be a limited offensive player.

Click to expand...

If we had such a deal in place, why didn't we just pull the trigger? Jonas or no Jonas?

I think as fans we are over-analyzing the heck out of passing on Jonas. To me, it was something as simple as the scouting showing Tristan Thompson as being the better prospect and the prospect they liked more in the long run. This isn't to say Jonas will be worse than Thompson, just that the Cavaliers were more impressed with various aspects of Tristan over Jonas. You've got to hope they were correct or that they've got something in mind down the path. I tend to think we scout players PRETTY well however sometimes we can get locked on players who aren't as worthwhile as the front-office might think.

I am hopeful Erden can become a reliable big for us. He's got nice size and a decent skill set, from what i can tell. It sometimes takes bigs a little longer to develop, so him seeing the floor would be important for next season IF there is a next season.

Noonan said:

Just a reminder of this tweet from Chad Ford a couple weeks before the draft:



And people are still pissed after the Cavs passed up arguably the third best Euro prospect in a weak draft.

Click to expand...

Jonas' level as a prospect has reached near mythical status here, certainly due in part to his potential at a premium position, but also due to the lead-up to the draft where it seemed to be a given that he would end up a cav and the associated talking ourselves into him becoming a cornerstone of the organization for years to come, as well as his dominance of young and inexperienced competition and the fact that we passed on him for a player that most thought we were targeting, if at all, as a candidate for a third lottery pick via trade.

Young skinny centers scare me, as I don't know whether Jonas will actually add the necessary strength and size any more than I know whether Tristan will develop a jumper. Robert Swift never did. Pat O'Bryant never did. There are differences in every player, but I'm just saying it's not a given. And currently, though the Jonas proponents are quick to argue that he will gain weight and strength, he is simply not strong enough to hold his ground in the paint. Maybe the biggest Jonas proponent of them all, Givony, writes in December of 2010:

Inside the paint, Valanciunas is a frequent target for opposing teams to post up due to his narrow frame and lack of experience, especially in the Euroleague, where almost every team has a bulky old school back-to-the-basket pivot who can simply overpower Valanciunas in one-on-one situations.

That's a big reason why Valanciunas has had consistent foul problems over the course of the year -- another reason that his playing time has been limited. In the Euroleague, for example, he commits approximately one foul for every 4 minutes he's on the court.

Click to expand...

From DraftExpress.com http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Jonas-Valanciunas-5622/#ixzz1RuDtaSTb
http://www.draftexpress.com

His dominance in the U19 game does nothing to assuage what I consider to be the biggest concern with Jonas as a prospect. Regardless, we shall see.

And now my arms are tired. Can someone take over for me, as I'm still afraid this horse might still have a little life in it, somewhere.

The Optomist said:

JonFromVa touched up on this earlier I believe. I can't seem to find it though.

Click to expand...

If it was me you were remembering, I think I brought up some of the players featured in the Princeton in the past like Webber, Brad Miller, Antawn, Kenyon, Chandler, West, etc. I don't recall if the discussion reached any conclusions.

I have no doubt we valued intelligence and work ethic very high in making TT our selection. I mean, heck, the offense was designed around getting the most out of a bunch of Princeton University basketball players.

One thing we should wonder is how wedded is Scott to the Princeton? I mean the offense hasn't really awed anyone since Sacramento ran it under Adelman when Scott and Jordan were assistants. The Wizards ran more of a 3-man attack version of the Princeton where they would often just shut their bigs out of the picture (Brenda, Kwame, Jeffries, etc) rather than ask them to take shots or pass. And Scott as we know didn't run as much of a balanced attack given he had Kidd and Paul.

So I don't know that our bigs will be averaging 4 apg like Webber and Vlade used to for the Kings, but at least one of our front court players should probably be up around 2.4 apg like Kenyon Martin used to be. Perhaps Andy or Antawn (averaged 2.3 one season) could get up there; and that should be a goal for Tristan.

Rist77 said:

I'm baffled when I hear that we need this stretch C or scoring C thats hard to find... Can somebody explain why a defensive PF, defensive C, and scoring PF frontcourt wouldn't work?

Click to expand...

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.

Noonan said:

And people are still pissed after the Cavs passed up arguably the third best Euro prospect in a weak draft.

Click to expand...

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

LukeWitte said:

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 one of you big men 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 backup is a worthwhile use of that pick. 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.

Click to expand...

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 has occurred with guys like Odom, Big Baby, Taj Gibson over Noah, Horry, etc. Spacing in modern NBA seems to be very critical as defenses have become very good.

This is why IMO it is critical that TT can develop a midrange consistent jumper (talking Haslem or Boozer quality). We can play him then when getting points is critical and still have his defensive potential out there. My guess is the Cavs loved his work ethic and thought he'd be able to improve this part of the game. I think he'll be a good player regardless but this will be the difference between him being a very good starter versus just a rotation big