David Griffin's Task Not An Easy one

[gourimoko]

I see a pretty good debate (isn't that why we're all here? It is ok to disagree with people) going on regarding grades, etc with no personal attacks or ridiculous hyperbole, so I'm not sure where all this extra stuff is coming from (I'll go through again & make sure there was no trolling or personal attacks)

Just because someone likes the moves, doesn't mean they're "homers" or think the Cavs are perfect, just like those who don't like the moves aren't "hating" or think they never do anything right.

I'm about to delete some posts, now ignore all the extra crap and debate/post like we all know this forum is capable of.

This.

 

[Cassity14]

Griffin didn't have to "pitch" to Love in the offseason, but to say he gets no credit for the signing is silly.

Love attributed the team's success to being a reason he came back. Griffin put the team in position to attain said success at the deadline.

If those moves aren't made, and the Cavs lose in round 2, Love doesn't sign a 5 year contract, and that's if he comes back at all, IMO.

I don't like grading set amounts of time like a draft, FA, etc.

Let's grade the entire roster that Griffin has assembled to enter next season.

I grade it at an A assuming JR, Jones, and TT are resigned.

I don't put any team in the NBA at an A+. San Antonio is probably an A, and Golden State is an A- or an A. I put Houston at A- with a good Lawson, and the Clippers at a B+ or an A-.

Miami is a B. Chicago a B+

I've driven for 13 hours today, so there's not a ton of thought into that (sans Cavs and Spurs) but it's my first reaction.

I don't think Spurs fans were saying, "But the Cavs got LeBron" a year ago." This Cavs team didn't win, but that's the closest comparison between teams now and a year ago.

 

[BA_CavsFan]

If I go to school take a test, get an average score, but since I'm set for life already then it didn't matter right? So give me a B+ so I can get on with winning at life, right?

Guys... saying Griffin did an average job as GM this offseason doesn't speak one way or the other about the Cavaliers chances at winning a title. We were stack going into the offseason and we're stacked coming out. That doesn't mean Griffin doesn't have a job to do.

You keep saying Griffin hasn't done his job, but nobody's given any suggestions of what he could have done so significantly better. Chris Parker gave some suggestions of what he could have done differently, but none of those options would have necessarily made any real impact on the team. Yes, he hasn't made a deal with the BHC/TPE yet, but as Chris has said multiple times the options for that were limited to begin with. So Griffin should get criticized for not making a miracle out of something that probably wasn't worth much anyway?

And this "Griffin should have traded TT" idea you keep referring to makes no sense to me. When exactly did you want Griffin to trade him, and what did you expect in return? I get that TT isn't worth $80 million, but that doesn't mean getting rid of him is addition by subtraction. And any team that considered trading for him would either A) realize his game is only useful when surrounded by multiple offensive threats or B) somehow get the same production out of him that we got this postseason and then be stuck in the same situation we're in now. So his trade value by my estimation is about 0.

I realize that your opinions aren't conveying that Griffin should be fired or that the Cavs aren't contenders, but your assessment of his offseason is still based on unfair expectations. The problem with saying that Griffin had an "average" offseason means that you believe a great offseason was possible - this was simply not the case.

 

[gourimoko]

The problem with saying that Griffin had an "average" offseason means that you believe a great offseason was possible - this was simply not the case.

And thats where the disconnect lies. And yes, I will explain in detail (again) later.

 

[malus]

You keep saying Griffin hasn't done his job, but nobody's given any suggestions of what he could have done so significantly better.

Do people need to be better than Griffin at his job to criticize him? I just go by the results. It's unfair, but I don't know what deals are getting offered and what players are truly available, so it's what I can do. I might criticize the coach based on how the team is doing without having any suggestions on what he should do differently. I'm not a coach whaddya expect.

 

[Paul]

You keep saying Griffin hasn't done his job, but nobody's given any suggestions of what he could have done so significantly better. Chris Parker gave some suggestions of what he could have done differently, but none of those options would have necessarily made any real impact on the team. Yes, he hasn't made a deal with the BHC/TPE yet, but as Chris has said multiple times the options for that were limited to begin with. So Griffin should get criticized for not making a miracle out of something that probably wasn't worth much anyway?

And this "Griffin should have traded TT" idea you keep referring to makes no sense to me. When exactly did you want Griffin to trade him, and what did you expect in return? I get that TT isn't worth $80 million, but that doesn't mean getting rid of him is addition by subtraction. And any team that considered trading for him would either A) realize his game is only useful when surrounded by multiple offensive threats or B) somehow get the same production out of him that we got this postseason and then be stuck in the same situation we're in now. So his trade value by my estimation is about 0.

I realize that your opinions aren't conveying that Griffin should be fired or that the Cavs aren't contenders, but your assessment of his offseason is still based on unfair expectations. The problem with saying that Griffin had an "average" offseason means that you believe a great offseason was possible - this was simply not the case.

One suggestion I would have (and have made) would be reducing the number of "mentors" on the roster. This could be accomplished by either not retaining James Jones or buying out Miller's contract, or both. Creating that extra space on the roster allows you more freedom to develop young talent or take free agency risks on a guy like a Dorell Wright or a Gerald Green or a Wesley Johnson or a Luc Mbah a Moute or Jimmer Fredette or whoever. I'm basically just throwing out names that pop into my head, but basically guys in that 24 to 30 range who maybe could emerge as valuable rotation pieces for the Cavs. If we had some extra wiggle room we could prospect for these younger guys and maybe one would work out. They would be as cheap or cheaper than the mentors and would have the potential to be multiple year contributors due to being younger.

To me LeBron and Jefferson and Mo Williams would be plenty in terms of mentoring. To me at least Jones or Miller would be expendable.

 

[BA_CavsFan]

One suggestion I would have (and have made) would be reducing the number of "mentors" on the roster. This could be accomplished by either not retaining James Jones or buying out Miller's contract, or both. Creating that extra space on the roster allows you more freedom to develop young talent or take free agency risks on a guy like a Dorell Wright or a Gerald Green or a Wesley Johnson or a Luc Mbah a Moute or Jimmer Fredette or whoever. I'm basically just throwing out names that pop into my head, but basically guys in that 24 to 30 range who maybe could emerge as valuable rotation pieces for the Cavs. If we had some extra wiggle room we could prospect for these younger guys and maybe one would work out. They would be as cheap or cheaper than the mentors and would have the potential to be multiple year contributors due to being younger.

To me LeBron and Jefferson and Mo Williams would be plenty in terms of mentoring. To me at least Jones or Miller would be expendable.

Calling those guys you mentioned "risks" implies that there is some potential payoff for signing them. I just don't see it. Not of those players is better than Iman Shumpert or JR Smith, and it's questionable whether they'd even better than 35-year old RJ. So if the issue is that we need to be prepared in case one of our core players goes down, I seriously doubt that any of those guys would be better than what we worked with during the Finals. The only players that really could have made a difference are borderline All Stars like Rudy Gay and DeMar Derozan, or even players of the same caliber as Shump or JR, but none of those guys were available given the assets we had. I guess you can point to Jamal Crawford and Joe Johnson, but I think these discussion have been rehashed enough times.

Furthermore, you said the allure of younger players is partially that they would be able to contribute for several years. I think if by some miracle a Jimmer Freddette or Mbah a Moute turned into a valuable rotation piece this year, there would be no shot of keeping them going forward. There are certainly concerns with old players' games falling off a cliff, but none of the players in our price range had much game to begin with - that's the problem.

You also mentioned maybe cutting Mike Miller or James Jones. I think others have already explained why Mike Miller is valuable off-the-court. Jones and RJ are certainly redundant, but at the very least RJ is a much better fit for this roster than Marion.

What it comes down to for me is Griffin came into this offseason with basically no wiggle room, and as such he made minimal upgrades. We shouldn't judge him thinking there was some magical solution to our depth problems that he failed to take advantage of.

 

[BA_CavsFan]

Do people need to be better than Griffin at his job to criticize him? I just go by the results. It's unfair, but I don't know what deals are getting offered and what players are truly available, so it's what I can do. I might criticize the coach based on how the team is doing without having any suggestions on what he should do differently. I'm not a coach whaddya expect.

No but the kind of criticism Griffin is getting is either for things completely out of control (e.g. find a backup SF that would be our Iguodala) or for potential lateral moves at best (Dorell Wright vs RJ). I agree we should go by the results, but my argument is that nothing Griffin could have done this offseason would manifest into significantly different results than just re-signing everyone. Maybe we needed a backup PG, and we got that. What more could Griffin have done?

 

[Paul]

Calling those guys you mentioned "risks" implies that there is some potential payoff for signing them. I just don't see it. Not of those players is better than Iman Shumpert or JR Smith, and it's questionable whether they'd even better than 35-year old RJ. So if the issue is that we need to be prepared in case one of our core players goes down, I seriously doubt that any of those guys would be better than what we worked with during the Finals. The only players that really could have made a difference are borderline All Stars like Rudy Gay and DeMar Derozan, or even players of the same caliber as Shump or JR, but none of those guys were available given the assets we had. I guess you can point to Jamal Crawford and Joe Johnson, but I think these discussion have been rehashed enough times.

Furthermore, you said the allure of younger players is partially that they would be able to contribute for several years. I think if by some miracle a Jimmer Freddette or Mbah a Moute turned into a valuable rotation piece this year, there would be no shot of keeping them going forward. There are certainly concerns with old players' games falling off a cliff, but none of the players in our price range had much game to begin with - that's the problem.

You also mentioned maybe cutting Mike Miller or James Jones. I think others have already explained why Mike Miller is valuable off-the-court. Jones and RJ are certainly redundant, but at the very least RJ is a much better fit for this roster than Marion.

What it comes down to for me is Griffin came into this offseason with basically no wiggle room, and as such he made minimal upgrades. We shouldn't judge him thinking there was some magical solution to our depth problems that he failed to take advantage of.

Well Griffin himself said that he wanted to bring in younger guys in the 26 to 30 range. All I'm doing is agreeing with the strategy that Griffin laid out for us. I agree that Jefferson seems like he will be an upgrade over Marion but that isn't saying much. I'm hopeful that Jefferson plays well, but that doesn't change the fact that we appear to be heading into the season with 3 35 year old SFs, which seems like overkill to me. Varejao is another guy who I neglected to mention earlier who could play the role of mentor for the team. We really don't need as many as we seem to be carrying.

Keeping Jones, Miller and Jefferson all on the roster may force us to lose a guy like Joe Harris or Sir'Dominic Pointer before we really get a chance to thoroughly evaluate their game. We're also going to be forced to go back into free agency next year and probably find 2 new old dudes to replace the ones we have now, assuming that we stick with the same strategy. I'm not against having some older vet mentors on the roster, I just think that we could try and bring in 1 or 2 free agent 26-30 year olds who might blossom in a new situation.

I mean isn't this basically what the Spurs did by getting Fredette and Ray McCallum? They are a bit younger than the age range Griffin mentioned, but it's basically the Spurs fishing to see if these guys might do better in a new situation. The Clippers did the same thing with Aldrich and Wes Johnson.

 

[BA_CavsFan]

double post

 

[godfather]

I give Griffin a C.

If Tristan comes back at anything higher than $80M, I'd give it a C-. If Tristan gets a max deal, I'd give him a D.

All passing grades, but... you'd like to see more. And people heaping on credit to Griffin for the Kevin Love deal... that's fan-fiction.

The reason I say C this is because no one is saying we had an excellent offseason ("A"); so that leaves B,C,D and F. Giving him an "F" would be overly harsh. I mean, he's not damaging the franchise. That leaves B,C, and D. C is generally considered an average score, and I think he's done about an average job. He hasn't improved the team by much, and I agree with Finnan and Parker's points overall.

Again, if Tristan gets maxed out, plus our inability to convert the Haywood deal into talent, failing to live up to his own stated goals, and not utilizing the draft; then I'd lower that C to a D.

Conversely, if Haywood gets turned into something other than a TPE, I'd consider a C+ or a B- depending upon what that something is.

That's just my two cents.

I agree, and if anything, I don't like how he did that deal all things considered.

It has nothing to do with Wiggins (even though I know you didn't like we included him, where I found it inevitable, and perfectly fair given how lousy Waiters and Bennett are).

But I never understood why we had to include a first round pick (Miami's pick) too.

I thought it was preposterous at the time, and still think it is now.

Maybe, Gilbert butted in (as he's had a history supposedly of getting involved in trades) and insisted we added the pick because he just wanted it 'done', or LB was very eager, and pressuring for us to get the deal done.

I don't know, that's all possible, so maybe that's not exactly Griffin's fault. Either way, giving up that pick was a mistake. Fans at the time were saying "well it's just a first round draft pick, who cares, we're trying to win it all".

We fast forward, you can see why it matters, because its still an asset. We'd likely never use that pick in the draft, but could have in a trade.

I think the mistake lies, that we stripped all our assets too fast. It's not gigantic mistake that I think will cost us dearly, but I think when they traded for Haywood's contract, they traded it with the purpose of attaching it with one of these draft picks. That's where his contract would have had substantial value in a trade.

It was a mistake that was made. That doesn't make Griffin a failure as a GM. After all, he is new to the job, and GM's that are new sometimes do make mistakes.

I hear ya. I don't blame Griffin at all for this off-season personally, given what he has. But, you can't help wondering if previous mistakes inhibited our ability to do more this off-season.

Either way, I am still confident in him, I do like him. Players make mistakes, coaches make mistakes. And GM's make them too.

No fault in pointing them out. No one bats a thousand percent.

 

[BA_CavsFan]

Well Griffin himself said that he wanted to bring in younger guys in the 26 to 30 range. All I'm doing is agreeing with the strategy that Griffin laid out for us. I agree that Jefferson seems like he will be an upgrade over Marion but that isn't saying much. I'm hopeful that Jefferson plays well, but that doesn't change the fact that we appear to be heading into the season with 3 35 year old SFs, which seems like overkill to me. Varejao is another guy who I neglected to mention earlier who could play the role of mentor for the team. We really don't need as many as we seem to be carrying.

Keeping Jones, Miller and Jefferson all on the roster may force us to lose a guy like Joe Harris or Sir'Dominic Pointer before we really get a chance to thoroughly evaluate their game. We're also going to be forced to go back into free agency next year and probably find 2 new old dudes to replace the ones we have now, assuming that we stick with the same strategy. I'm not against having some older vet mentors on the roster, I just think that we could try and bring in 1 or 2 free agent 26-30 year olds who might blossom in a new situation.

He said he wanted 26-30 year old playmakers, but those don't grow on trees. And the 26-30 year olds available at our price range are not the ones Griffin was talking about. Gerald Green and the like can't impact the game in the way that a Draymond Green or Andre Iguodala can. They also don't fit into the roles we need them to any better than Jones or RJ. We shouldn't be acquiring players just because they fit an age range, we should be acquiring players that will make sense within the fit and financial flexibility of this roster.

You're right that there is an inefficiency with Miller, Jones, and RJ all on the roster, but Miller is probably never going to see another non-garbage time minute in his career. Yet we need him to be the locker room glue guy. So really we have 2 old shooter-types that will actually see playing time. I think RJ's value is that he can bring more to the defensive end than JJ while still being a great shooter. JJ's value is he knows the system and Blatt can trust him. If the opportunity cost of keeping them is 2nd round picks that can't even make an impact in summer league, then I'd rather just keep the vets.

 

[BA_CavsFan]

I agree, and if anything, I don't like how he did that deal all things considered.

It has nothing to do with Wiggins (even though I know you didn't like we included him, where I found it inevitable, and perfectly fair given how lousy Waiters and Bennett are).

But I never understand why we had to include a first round pick (Miami's pick) too.

I thought it was preposterous at the time, and still think it is now.

Maybe, Gilbert butted in (as he's had a history supposedly of getting involved in trades) and insisted we added the pick because he just wanted it 'done', or LB was very eager, and pressuring for us to get the deal done.

I don't know, that's all possible, so maybe that's not exactly Griffin's fault. Either way, giving up that pick was a mistake. Fans at the time were saying "well it's just a first round draft pick, who cares, we're trying to win it all".

We fast forward, you can see why it matters, because its still an asset. We'd likely never use that pick in the draft, but could have in a trade.

I think the mistake lies, that we stripped all our assets too fast. It's not gigantic mistake that I think will cost us dearly, but I think when they traded for Haywood's contract, they traded it with the purpose of attaching it with one of these draft picks. That's where his contract would have had substantial value in a trade.

It was mistake that was made. That doesn't make Griffin a failure as a GM. After all, he is new to the job, and GM's that are new sometimes do make mistakes.

I hear ya. I don't blame Griffin at all for this off-season personally, given what he has. But, you can't help wondering if previous mistakes inhibited our ability to do more this off-season.

Either way, I am still confident in him, I do like him. Players make mistakes, coaches make mistakes. And GM's make them too.

No fault in pointing them out. No one bats a thousand percent.

I definitely agree with your point that if you want to criticize Griffin for something, criticize the moves that got us in the situation we had for this offseason. But given that he already made those moves, there was nothing more that could have been done. If people aren't willing to give credit for re-signing players that were acquired in previous moves, then they shouldn't assess blame for those moves either.

 

[Evgeni]

We don't know which players were available, we don't know how much money Griffin could spend or what were the guidelines given by Gilbert. We don't know who gave the winning pitch to Love (maybe it goes to Lebron's credit or someone else).
We should definitely not judge Griffin's performance by how the Cavs did when compared to other teams. The Cavs couldn't have signed Lamarcus Aldridge. They didn't have the cap space or the money for this. So how can you even compare?

The question is whether Griffin did well within the framework set by Gilbert and the constraints within the team and the potential opportunities in the market. Unless there was a home run or a complete disaster, I don't think we have all the information that is needed needed in order to answer this question.