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

Evan Mobley: 2023 All Defensive 1st Team

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Is Evan Mobley the Greatest Player of All Time?

  • Yes

    Votes: 48 39.0%
  • Yes

    Votes: 21 17.1%
  • Yes

    Votes: 7 5.7%
  • YAAASSS!!!

    Votes: 36 29.3%
  • Jim Chones

    Votes: 25 20.3%

  • Total voters
    123
Chill, I see an improvement in his ball handling.

The TOs tonight were absolutely shocking by everyone, but the dribble looks tighter. It's gonna come together.

I don't however like the guard centric offense that doesn't even generate enough 3pt shots to a team that has a top 3 shooting backcourt. I want more touches from everyone and better screening to allow that.

I would say Evan's screens are still awful and lazy. He will get better, but how does he not see it when he watches film?
 
Evan's best offensive skill is his passing. He's not selfish and he can make a range of passes. Keep putting him in the short roll and good things happen.
 
I would say Evan's screens are still awful and lazy. He will get better, but how does he not see it when he watches film?
So is every other player on our team. As far as the film goes, it looks consistent
 
I'll take the generic "the answer lies somewhere in the middle" approach - I'm OK with him making mistakes and trying new things as long as it doesn't cost us too many games. At the same time I think he would benefit from further developing his go-to moves to increase his confidence - and having his teammates get him in the right spots where he can execute those go-to moves.

Ultimately I think the right approach just depends on the individual. Some might get discouraged at repeated failure and hide in their shell. Don't want that happening to Mobley. So I don't think "be more aggressive!!!!!" is always appropriate blanket advice.

That being said, the team knows Mobley more than I do and everything points to them encouraging him to be more aggressive, impose himself etc etc. So they must think he can handle it.
this is the kind of levelheaded approach I can reconcile with.
 
One last point of emphasis...So this notion that " hey we aren't winning a ring anyways this year so let Mobley make mistakes" is cool but...I am beginning to realize that windows for rings open and close erratically...there is a multitude of reasons this happens ( internal issues, free agency, bigger markets, the list goes on). I think this idea that we have this huge window is a very dangerous approach with the current climate of the nba. Spida could leave after his tenure, garland could tear his ACL, Mobley could also endure a similar fate. Point is- we need to be fighting for a ring in the next 2 years. I dont think a small market like us can forfeit wins at the expense of player development. Again, I could be wrong and we end up a 6-8 year dynasty.
 
Do you know what opponents are shooting against Mobley in ISO? Pretty jaw dropping. I dunno, watching him stay with guards better than smaller wings pops for me.

My Cavs memory doesn't go back into the 90's too much. I wasn't a sophisticated fan back then, but Mobley is clearly #2 behind Lebron for me as far as how good a guy was as a rook
Austin Carr was a 20 ppg rookie, so he was ahead on offense, but the only player we've ever had as good as he is now was Larry Nance, who was an All-Star when we got him. He was a 6 10 jumping jack, but I'd still prefer Mobley over him. Better lateral quickness.

I've been a Cavs fan from the beginning, in 1970, when I was 14.
 
Austin Carr was a 20 ppg rookie, so he was ahead on offense, but the only player we've ever had as good as he is now was Larry Nance, who was an All-Star when we got him. He was a 6 10 jumping jack, but I'd still prefer Mobley over him. Better lateral quickness.

I've been a Cavs fan from the beginning, in 1970, when I was 14.
It is a honor to meet a 1970 Cavs fan. One question- What is the biggest difference between nba basketball from 1970 to today? Anything stand out?
 
It is a honor to meet a 1970 Cavs fan. One question- What is the biggest difference between nba basketball from 1970 to today? Anything stand out?
Oh my, it's the rule changes.
1) Offensive fouls - if the offensive player initiates the contact, it's an offensive foul. That takes away many of Trae Young's, Lebron's, and Harden's free throws. This is the biggest change I'd want to undo.
2) traveling/carrying the ball. In the 60's your hand had to stay on top of the ball. Bob Cousy started getting away with steering it and then Earl Monroe instituted the spin dribble. He was called for a carry a lot of times, until the NBA gave up. These changes helped the offensive players.
3) zone defense/hand-checking defensive rules. You could touch your opponent from one end to another, just don't push. Very hard to call subtle pushes, so they canceled all hand-checking. No zone defense at all, while now it's allowed. That change promotes outside shooting.
4) Changing from two referees to three. With two a LOT of fouls went uncalled. They just weren't seen. The net effect was a lot rougher game. It was common for every team to have an enforcer who'd go out and belt a hot shooter to cool him off.

The overall effect of all of these changes was to help the offense and hurt the defense. These changes are some of the reasons true shooting efficiency of the league has gone up.

I'll tell you a story about the offensive foul change I experienced. I was playing one on one with a University of Kentucky guard. I was taller and he was quicker. He'd drive into me with his shoulder in my stomach. I outweighed him by twenty pounds and he'd just bounce off. He'd call "Blocking!" and I'd say, "Hey, you initiated the contact." He got so ticked off, he wouldn't play with me anymore. This was around the late 70s or early 80s.

I was never coached at any level of basketball. Everything I learned was from the playground from 18 when I began to teach myself basketball.
 
Oh my, it's the rule changes.
1) Offensive fouls - if the offensive player initiates the contact, it's an offensive foul. That takes away many of Trae Young's, Lebron's, and Harden's free throws. This is the biggest change I'd want to undo.
2) traveling/carrying the ball. In the 60's your hand had to stay on top of the ball. Bob Cousy started getting away with steering it and then Earl Monroe instituted the spin dribble. He was called for a carry a lot of times, until the NBA gave up. These changes helped the offensive players.
3) zone defense/hand-checking defensive rules. You could touch your opponent from one end to another, just don't push. Very hard to call subtle pushes, so they canceled all hand-checking. No zone defense at all, while now it's allowed. That change promotes outside shooting.
4) Changing from two referees to three. With two a LOT of fouls went uncalled. They just weren't seen. The net effect was a lot rougher game. It was common for every team to have an enforcer who'd go out and belt a hot shooter to cool him off.

The overall effect of all of these changes was to help the offense and hurt the defense. These changes are some of the reasons true shooting efficiency of the league has gone up.

I'll tell you a story about the offensive foul change I experienced. I was playing one on one with a University of Kentucky guard. I was taller and he was quicker. He'd drive into me with his shoulder in my stomach. I outweighed him by twenty pounds and he'd just bounce off. He'd call "Blocking!" and I'd say, "Hey, you initiated the contact." He got so ticked off, he wouldn't play with me anymore. This was around the late 70s or early 80s.

I was never coached at any level of basketball. Everything I learned was from the playground from 18 when I began to teach myself basketball.
First off - Thanks for sharing that in depth. So..from what I read..basketball was far more physical in the past and the rules of the founding fathers was enforced. So here is what I want to know- is Oscar Robertson superior to Westbrook? Would his stats translate? What do you think is the best method in judging talent from the past versus today?
 
One last point of emphasis...So this notion that " hey we aren't winning a ring anyways this year so let Mobley make mistakes" is cool but...I am beginning to realize that windows for rings open and close erratically...there is a multitude of reasons this happens ( internal issues, free agency, bigger markets, the list goes on). I think this idea that we have this huge window is a very dangerous approach with the current climate of the nba. Spida could leave after his tenure, garland could tear his ACL, Mobley could also endure a similar fate. Point is- we need to be fighting for a ring in the next 2 years. I dont think a small market like us can forfeit wins at the expense of player development. Again, I could be wrong and we end up a 6-8 year dynasty.

Right now, this team has enough talent to reach the semis or squeak into the ECF (I don't think we could get past a healthy Boston or Milwaukee in a series without some good fortune), but not the finals. Mobley's development is what gives this team an NBA finals ceiling. If you're not going to let him develop, then that window is already closed.
 
First off - Thanks for sharing that in depth. So..from what I read..basketball was far more physical in the past and the rules of the founding fathers was enforced. So here is what I want to know- is Oscar Robertson superior to Westbrook? Would his stats translate? What do you think is the best method in judging talent from the past versus today?
I didn't see Oscar play. He got his 170+ triple doubles just by playing. He didn't try to get them; they weren't a thing. He played on a poor Cincinnatti team most of his career. Think of Lebron in his first Cleveland stint. He never had anyone as good as Durant--until he was traded to Milwaukee and helped them get a title with Kareem. 1971, I think.

Oscar was bigger than Westbrook, a more consistent shooter, a better passer, and a better rebounder.

Comparing eras, I'd say basketball is basketball. The players in the 50s and 60s were the best in the world. To compare the eras, consider the stature of Kareem: all time leader in points 5 or 6 rings. Yet in his prime in 1969-1972, he just equaled Chamberlain, who was injured in 1969 and lost some of his athleticism. He retired in 1973 after 14 years. Chamberlain and Russell defined the 60s and while they were dominant, the league was tough enough that there were no automatic wins for anyone.

I think the players today have a lot of physical advantages in training and medical help, but I think the players in the 60s were mentally tougher, less distracted by referees, hard fouls, or anything. Everyone in every era wanted to win.
 
Right now, this team has enough talent to reach the semis or squeak into the ECF (I don't think we could get past a healthy Boston or Milwaukee in a series without some good fortune), but not the finals. Mobley's development is what gives this team an NBA finals ceiling. If you're not going to let him develop, then that window is already closed.
Hey man
I didn't see Oscar play. He got his 170+ triple doubles just by playing. He didn't try to get them; they weren't a thing. He played on a poor Cincinnatti team most of his career. Think of Lebron in his first Cleveland stint. He never had anyone as good as Durant--until he was traded to Milwaukee and helped them get a title with Kareem. 1971, I think.

Oscar was bigger than Westbrook, a more consistent shooter, a better passer, and a better rebounder.

Comparing eras, I'd say basketball is basketball. The players in the 50s and 60s were the best in the world. To compare the eras, consider the stature of Kareem: all time leader in points 5 or 6 rings. Yet in his prime in 1969-1972, he just equaled Chamberlain, who was injured in 1969 and lost some of his athleticism. He retired in 1973 after 14 years. Chamberlain and Russell defined the 60s and while they were dominant, the league was tough enough that there were no automatic wins for anyone.

I think the players today have a lot of physical advantages in training and medical help, but I think the players in the 60s were mentally tougher, less distracted by referees, hard fouls, or anything. Everyone in every era wanted to win.
Thank you. You are right- basketball is basketball across any era. I suppose comparisons across eras are fruitless- but fun nonetheless. That was pretty unbiased as well.

Wish i couldve seen basketball prior to the Fratello Cavs (Kemp, baby Z, Bob Sura). I am 33 so..my memories only stretch so far. I have only 1 certainty as a basketball fan- MJ was the best to ever lace them up. I love King James..but MJ..to me..is the coolest dude to ever do it.
 
I don't want to compare Mobley to anyone. I see him as a new, fresh, break-the-mold type of a player. Just let Evan be Evan, whatever he turns out to be will be good. I see him evolving in his own special ways, unique and unlike anyone else. Player comparisons are ill fitting at best.
 
There was a moment when Evan got fouled and someone from the Hawks, I think it was Collins, was upset at the call. He was letting the refs hear about it while Evan was about to shoot free throws, and from how I understood it, basically saying that Evan wasn’t strong enough to get the foul call he did.

Unexpectedly, Evan looked right at Collins and jawed right to him before taking his shots. It was the first time I saw some real fire out of Ev and I loved it. More aggression and start putting some more fear in the opponents please! If he ever gets that KG physiological edge on the other team, look out.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top