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

2020 NBA Draft

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
The Human Q-Tip said:
I'm not so sure we sucked deliberately either. A true tank job would have begun with letting Love walk.
Click to expand...

The magic of Dan Gilbert's ownership. He has one of the biggest checking accounts in the NBA and makes calls on his own team using that checking account. Man wants a yacht, he is going to buy a yacht no matter who is GM. By the way, I applauded the move then and I applaud it now. His defense is an issue but he is clearly a better "leader" for a young roster than most of the board gave him credit for. No argument from me on DG's call to retain Love.

The early preseason injury to Love put us on a path of suckitude that the FO didn't anticipate. With Windler down also, the outside shooting of this team took a big kick in the nuts. "Can't miss" Garland became "can't hit" Garland, and that completed the unanticipated shooting kick in the nuts trifecta. And add to that mess that even Sexton's 3 point shot was missing for the first couple months of the season, and then of course the JR circus. Then Beilein -- a hiring that was widely applauded here -- completely blew up in their faces. I think they really believed Beilein could get the most out of this roster. Instead, he got the least.
Click to expand...

My statements about tanking mostly relate to 2019, not the start of 2020. That year they made four trades, all of them for future assets. This season, they did it again moving Clarkson for future assets and the hope that Sexland will develop better with abundant playing time. They never made an attempt to get wing players or guards who are ready for big minutes, they have rookies and second year players to develop with no players in their prime challenging their unlimited playing time.

So you can call that something other than tanking... maybe call the Cavs a minor league team masquerading as an NBA team... but it isn't a move to win. It's a move to develop, similarly to many other young teams who fans identify as "tanking."

In fairness, the Cavs neither planned nor expected any of that, and I think they planned/hoped to be significantly better than they were. In addition to not expecting all the above to go wrong, I think they expected/hoped for more growth from Cedi. I truly believe they thought this team would be at least 10 games better than it was -- probably more.
Click to expand...

Examining what happened to Cedi is very worthwhile. He was the first of Altman's model - eliminate players in their prime to hopefully accelerate development of the young players. Our trades gave him a wide open opportunity, but it didn't change his ceiling as a player. Some might argue his defense got worse with all the losses piling up.

I don't think the Drummond acquisition reflected a change in approach as much as it was just circumstances -- Detroit was giving it one last shot with Drummond, and weren't willing to trade him as just a dump until it actually happened. To put it differently, I think the Cavs would have made that trade in a heartbeat before the season had the Pistons been willing.

Probably also worth nothing that we had no idea the season would end 17 games early, and if we'd kept playing at the level we did after JB took over and we got Drummond, we very likely would have been out of the Top 5 altogether. And that also cuts against the "deliberate tank" theory.
Click to expand...

I agree that the Covid-19 shutdown was a disaster to the Altman plan. It makes sense that the Cavs pushed harder than most teams to have a development bubble for the eight rejected teams. I do believe Gilbert's impatience, so often criticized for good reason, might be an asset now that the team is stuck in limbo. I'd like to see the team take more shots at players in their prime like Drummond. That's all.
 
NMCav said:
Ball isn't good. So he should fall to 5 and even further then that. It's 2020 dude has a broken shot and is trigger happy. Everyone sees he scored 17-7-7 in Australia and talk about how impressive it is. While they ignore 37 percent from the field and 25 percent from 3. When your hoisting up 7 3s a game and shooting 25 percent you got issues. Dude is like his brother all hype no substance.
Click to expand...
Hopefully in that scenario the Knicks would want to come up for Ball at 5 and maybe we could get the Dallas first in 2021 (unlikely) or the Clippers first they have this year to let them move from 8 to 5....I'd have to be sure I would be content with the group left after Ball is picked at 5 before I make the move.
 
If the Bulls really took Deni that would be excellent. Would almost guarantee one of Ball or Okoro be there at 5
 
Randolphkeys said:
My statements about tanking mostly relate to 2019, not the start of 2020. That year they made four trades, all of them for future assets. This season, they did it again moving Clarkson for future assets and the hope that Sexland will develop better with abundant playing time. They never made an attempt to get wing players or guards who are ready for big minutes, they have rookies and second year players to develop with no players in their prime challenging their unlimited playing time.

So you can call that something other than tanking... maybe call the Cavs a minor league team masquerading as an NBA team... but it isn't a move to win. It's a move to develop, similarly to many other young teams who fans identify as "tanking."
Click to expand...

My only quibble is that that I think they really did expect to win, and only pulled the plug on Clarkson when it was apparent that the team wasn't going anywhere anyway. At the time we traded Clarkson, we were 8-21. If we were going to lose -- which wasn't the intent but it was the reality after all the disasters of the first half-- we might as well help the younger guys develop at the same time. The first game without Clarkson, KPJ had 15pts and 9 boards in 23 minutes.

Regardless of how we label the Clarkson move, I think it was -- in retrospect -- absolutely the right move both for last season and moving forward. I also think we have to consider it in light of the later move to acquire Drummond. We saved a good chunk of money in the Clarkson deal, and the Drummond deal wouldn't have been possible without it.
 
Last edited:
Los216 said:
This is gonna sound crazy coming from me but I don't want LaMelo Ball I don't think he'll be a good shooter or defender. He has a good floor game but I don't see it ever being elite.
Click to expand...

"If" Lamelo develops into both a good shooter and a good defender, he'd be a great player. But damn, that is a lot to ask or expect.
 
I agree Cleveland may not be the right place for Ball's development. Clearly a screw or two loose. It's crazy though how he just kind of sleepwalked his way to 1st in the league in steals and 5th in defensive rebounds. The natural talent he has is unreal.
 
Los216 said:
And sadly there's no chance that it would happen here.
Click to expand...

Why not?

We’ve seen Nance add a three point shot that should get more comfortable every year.

We’ve seen the improvements in Sextons shot selection and understanding of the efficiency of a good 3P shot.

We saw positive strides from KPJ.

Am I ready to anoint the Cavs of developmental gurus? Of course not.

But I’m not going to punish them for the sins of 2011-2013 or the fact that Ante Zizic isn’t very good and will never amount to much no matter where he goes to next in the NBA
 
MirORich said:
Why not?

We’ve seen Nance add a three point shot that should get more comfortable every year.

We’ve seen the improvements in Sextons shot selection and understanding of the efficiency of a good 3P shot.

We saw positive strides from KPJ.

Am I ready to anoint the Cavs of developmental gurus? Of course not.

But I’m not going to punish them for the sins of 2011-2013 or the fact that Ante Zizic isn’t very good and will never amount to much no matter where he goes to next in the NBA
Click to expand...

We drafted Kyrie and gave him TT when there were better options available as far as fit goes. The next season we drafted Dion Waiters which made no sense from a roster standpoint.

The only roster fitting moves we've been good at is giving LeBron shooters but even then almost every shooter came with a catch. They either played no defense or couldn't do anything else on offense except shoot the ball.

We've been horrible at fitting pieces on a roster for a while now.

Acquiring talent can be very hard for small market teams like The Cavs but fitting players together on your roster is something you have complete control over.

When was the last time The Cavs had a team that wasn't built by acquiring players that a specific player (LeBron) wanted or a specific coach?

Byron Scott pushed hard for Dion Waiters. Playing him with Kyrie was his idea.

JB is the one who runs the two PG system. Mike Brown liked that crappy system too.

We've never truly built a team since 2003. Every Cavs roster since 2003 has always been driven by an agenda of a single person. LeBron, Byron Scott, Mike Brown, John Beilein, and of course Dan Gilbert. It's never been a true in sync method.
 
Los216 said:
We drafted Kyrie and gave him TT when there were better options available as far as fit goes. The next season we drafted Dion Waiters which made no sense from a roster standpoint.

The only roster fitting moves we've been good at is giving LeBron shooters but even then almost every shooter came with a catch. They either played no defense or couldn't do anything else on offense except shoot the ball.

We've been horrible at fitting pieces on a roster for a while now.

Acquiring talent can be very hard for small market teams like The Cavs but fitting players together on your roster is something you have complete control over.

When was the last time The Cavs had a team that wasn't built by acquiring players that a specific player (LeBron) wanted or a specific coach?

Byron Scott pushed hard for Dion Waiters. Playing him with Kyrie was his idea.

JB is the one who runs the two PG system. Mike Brown liked that crappy system too.

We've never truly built a team since 2003. Every Cavs roster since 2003 has always been driven by an agenda of a single person. LeBron, Byron Scott, Mike Brown, John Beilein, and of course Dan Gilbert. It's never been a true in sync method.
Click to expand...

Bro, you’re probably right. But I’m not gonna hold 2003-2014 against the current staff and FO. I like some of the player development I’ve seen in the past 6-15 months. We’ll see if it continues and improves. Also going to see how age and the health problems change or don’t change Dan’s frantic interjection and directives that have hurt us more than they’ve helped us in the past.
 
MirORich said:
Bro, you’re probably right. But I’m not gonna hold 2003-2014 against the current staff and FO. I like some of the player development I’ve seen in the past 6-15 months. We’ll see if it continues and improves. Also going to see how age and the health problems change or don’t change Dan’s frantic interjection and directives that have hurt us more than they’ve helped us in the past.
Click to expand...

You're right and on one hand I want to optimistic about Dan for finally committing to a GM but it's the GM who should've never been the GM in the first place.
 
Randolphkeys said:
LaMelo Ball reminds me of a longer, more punchable Ricky Rubio. He has some flair and he runs an offense. His field goal percentage will be a roller coaster. His perm won't lessen his punchability.
Click to expand...

That's actually a good comparison...if LaMelo played any defense. But otherwise...yeah, it really is kind of Rubio-ish, which suggests to me that he's being very overvalued.
 
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