if our scouts and front office loved jonas that much, then why didnt they pick him?
the way i think about it is that jonas is a player basically based on finesse. hes not a banger, and i just cant see him becoming a defensive anchor.
Pros: pick n pop with kyrie would be pretty awesome, he can hit free throws, and hes more of an overall threat (at least it seems like -- remember hes played 0 games in the nba, and he dominated the most against inferior competition in the u19 tourny), floor spacing.
cons: i just dont see him becoming a defensive anchor, whereas tristan has the potential to be, tristan played against (imo) better competition in college ball, according to advanced statistics (hollinger draft rater had him as the third best prospect -- the second best big man behind williams... maybe cavs utilize some form of advanced stats in their analysis?), and hes a hard working 100% hustle player who goes hard all the time.
as for euro big men, the stereotypes are a very real thing imo. how many championships have scola, barg, etc won. how many times have they made a deep playoff run? you could point at gasol and nowitzki, but remember that tyson chandler anchored the defense for the mavs last year (and they had to contain joel anthony at the center position), and remember that gasol played with bynum, who is an imposing banger center. fact is defense wins championships.
do i regret not taking jonas? no, not really. i dont know how jonas will play. i do know that tristan has shown massive potential (more on the defensive end, of course). i do know that at times tristan put up 27 and 12, and a couple other double doubles. i know that he has played like a man (maybe if not at all times, he takes way too long to gather a lot of the time, but this can be fixed) and that he has the potential to be a shot-blocked and shot-alterer in the nba. and i do know that if the cavs took valanciunas, they would have picked two players who have a combined 11 college basketball games. 2 players in the top 5, nonetheless.
i do know that with the first overall pick, basically betting the perception of the franchise, the cleveland cavaliers selected kyrie irving, who not much was known about since he played 11 games in college. they took a relative risk because they had not seen him as much as other prospects (even though he was viewed as the best prospect by most, there was still a ton of uncertainty, what if he would turn out like oden? etc.). at pick number four, the cavs had to take the relatively sure thing in thompson. they had seen him go against good college competition, and it wouldve been a huge risk because what if jonas wouldnt come to the cavs? what if he flopped? i think they said to themselves, 'tristans floor is a very good defensive player and first big off the bench'. his potential is very very high as well. im enjoying watching his hustle, and i think he can be a very good player in this league. all star? dont know, kind of doubt it. but theres a lot more known about tristan than jonas, and with the relative risk taken with the first pick, they needed the sure thing.