• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Draft Battle: Chris Grant & Danny Ferry .vs. Conventional Board Wisdom

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
yTrac24 said:
Metrics are fantastic but I would hope that CG has some sort of idea of how these pieces are all going to fit. I'm not hating on these picks at all. CG has obviously proven himself competent thus far. All I'm suggesting is that if your going all-in with TT as the PF for years to come then you must play a center who can space the floor if you hope to have any room for Kyrie and Dion to operate. Thus the reason why it's very possible we pass up on a huge upside guy like Noel for an Alex Len.
Click to expand...

Didn't you just complain about Grant drafting for fit two posts up? Then, when I said I didn't think he was drafting for fit (in the lottery at least), you complain that he should be?
 
Jack Brickman said:
It's not about fit next to Thompson or Irving. If it was, Waiters never would have been chosen because his game is similar to Kyrie's.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think that was about fit. If only one guy on your team can create a shot, then the defense's job is clear ... shut that guy down, deny him the ball. The fact that Dion & Kyrie can both shoot jumpers as well as create means IN THEORY either could play off of the other. The trick is getting them to do so.

The other stuff were huge factors as well, but if we weren't concerned with shot creation, we could have taken Barnes.
 
Pick6 said:
What guard were we going to take last year if we didnt take TT?
Click to expand...

We probably could've traded down. 4 for 9 and 19 was what I really wanted.

9- Klay Thompson
19-Kenneth Farried
 
AvonCavsFan said:
We probably could've traded down. 4 for 9 and 19 was what I really wanted.

9- Klay Thompson
19-Kenneth Farried
Click to expand...
Hindsight is always 20/20. Plus, how do you know we didnt attempt to trade down?
 
AvonCavsFan said:
We probably could've traded down. 4 for 9 and 19 was what I really wanted.

9- Klay Thompson
19-Kenneth Farried
Click to expand...

the only thing better than hindsight is the promotion of fictitious trade scenarios that have no basis in reality.
 
AvonCavsFan said:
We probably could've traded down. 4 for 9 and 19 was what I really wanted.

9- Klay Thompson
19-Kenneth Farried
Click to expand...

You wanted the 2 main darkhorse candidates out of the 2011 draft who actually developed? No way. No one wanted both of those guys.

I'm sick of the hindsight draft guys. Maybe we missed on Drummond, but that's it. Every pick of the Cavs has been good so far, there is no reason to complain. The Cavs are most likely getting another top 5 pick this year, and they have assets for a bloackbuster star trade. The team is in great position going forward. I think out of 4 1sts we have taken the 2nd best player available at that spot only once, maybe. We will have to chill and see how Waiters and Drummond develop. THe front office is looking smarter every day, and the hindsight posters are looking dumber because their opinion changes with each new boxscore.
 
Jack Brickman said:
Didn't you just complain about Grant drafting for fit two posts up? Then, when I said I didn't think he was drafting for fit (in the lottery at least), you complain that he should be?
Click to expand...

Huh? I guess you misinterpreted my post. I absolutely do NOT think he should be drafting in the lotto for fit. That's my whole argument. Drafting Len over Noel based on fit could prove to be a huge mistake..but one that Grant may be forced to make if he's all in on TT at the 4 spot. In an offense that runs off 2 guards breaking down defenders and getting into the lane, having TT and Noel on the floor together would be a spacing nightmare.
 
Cavatt said:
You wanted the 2 main darkhorse candidates out of the 2011 draft who actually developed? No way. No one wanted both of those guys.

I'm sick of the hindsight draft guys. Maybe we missed on Drummond, but that's it. Every pick of the Cavs has been good so far, there is no reason to complain. The Cavs are most likely getting another top 5 pick this year, and they have assets for a bloackbuster star trade. The team is in great position going forward. I think out of 4 1sts we have taken the 2nd best player available at that spot only once, maybe. We will have to chill and see how Waiters and Drummond develop. THe front office is looking smarter every day, and the hindsight posters are looking dumber because their opinion changes with each new boxscore.
Click to expand...

The legends are true. He is out there!
tumblr_m4ba39wFYy1r1o78io1_500.jpg
 
I think it is safe to say that both Kyrie and Thompson were hits.

If two of Dion, Zeller, and whoever we take this year also hit good, then Chris Grant is a genius.
 
Re: Draft Battle: Chris Grant & Danny Ferry .vs. Conventional Board Wisdon

RchfldCavRaised said:
I think bad/fearful prospect analysis kept us from taking Drummond.

I think the same had us take TT over JV.

I dont want the trend to continue.
Click to expand...

I could add a ton to this thread because as usual I'm not totally satisfied on how the Cavs draft..
Grant wants the hard working type who loves playing ball but that criteria may mean passing over some potientially good players for others who's ceiling might not be that high but less risk.
It also doesn't explain some of the stuff that happens later in the draft or why he may have passed over another talent who may also be a hard worker, just more of a risk.

Pax was more of a crap drafter as he tried to draft many a player who mirrored his game which was one dimensional ,hence it never worked.
What really tripped me out was to learn that it was Grant making the picks not Ferry..I had a jaw drop on that one a year or two ago when I read that.
 
Re: Draft Battle: Chris Grant & Danny Ferry .vs. Conventional Board Wisdon

Green Lantern said:
What really tripped me out was to learn that it was Grant making the picks not Ferry..I had a jaw drop on that one a year or two ago when I read that.
Click to expand...

Dunno for sure if Grant got the guys he wanted, though, but that's why I included the picks before CG took over as GM.
 
Cavatt said:
You wanted the 2 main darkhorse candidates out of the 2011 draft who actually developed? No way. No one wanted both of those guys.

I'm sick of the hindsight draft guys. Maybe we missed on Drummond, but that's it. Every pick of the Cavs has been good so far, there is no reason to complain. The Cavs are most likely getting another top 5 pick this year, and they have assets for a bloackbuster star trade. The team is in great position going forward. I think out of 4 1sts we have taken the 2nd best player available at that spot only once, maybe. We will have to chill and see how Waiters and Drummond develop. THe front office is looking smarter every day, and the hindsight posters are looking dumber because their opinion changes with each new boxscore.
Click to expand...

Devil's Advocate: You declare Kyrie/TT/Zeller the best player available at each of their spots already, but with Dion who has paled in comparison to Drummond, and possibly more than just Drummond, you say you're undecided.

Kyrie looks like a stud--no doubt. But it's a bit early to call Thompson and Zeller objectively the best players available when we selected them... then in the same breath say we need to wait and see with Waiters
 
I think we didn't take Drummond because of the Drummond and the TT with JV on T Rob.
 
Out of the Rafters at the Q said:
Devil's Advocate: You declare Kyrie/TT/Zeller the best player available at each of their spots already, but with Dion who has paled in comparison to Drummond, and possibly more than just Drummond, you say you're undecided.

Kyrie looks like a stud--no doubt. But it's a bit early to call Thompson and Zeller objectively the best players available when we selected them... then in the same breath say we need to wait and see with Waiters
Click to expand...

Well, I think Waiters is at worst 2nd best choice we could make. I think he turns into something good. Will Drummond be better? Looks like its a real possibility. Do I blame grant for not taking Drummond? Nope. a lot of teams passed for some reason. Really it's too early to say about any of them. There are sometimes late-bloomers and injuries can destroy a career. I agree Drummond looks like a stud as of today. More convinced after last night
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-15: "Cavs Survive and Advance"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:15: Cavs Survive and Advance
Top