Free Agency Safari 2021 Edition

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

inliner311

All-Star
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
10,053
Reaction score
9,858
Points
113
I think that makes sense. Of course, I also think it will be very difficult to maximize potential for both Allen and Mobley if on the same team.

For how cheap we got Allen, it makes sense to shop him if we can get good return back. The replacement cost probably isn't high.

I think if we draft Mobley we should have the flexibility to allow him to figure out what position works best for him and the team. I don't want to shoehorn him to being a PF because we signed Allen to a large contract. Even if Mobley is a PF, I would want the Cavs to figure out what kind of center works best next to him. I would rather find some cheap options with different skill sets then upgrade later.

I think we have enough different types of PFs already to figure out which works best with Mobley if he is a center.
 

bs80

Situational Stopper
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
371
Reaction score
414
Points
63
After we received pick #3 in the lottery, and assuming that the draft goes Cade, Green as expected, I have had a hard time seeing how Mobley helps us win more next year.

We already have centers Allen and Hartenstein (if we pay them), and PF's Love, Nance, Wade and Kabengele (who had some good moments at the end of the season.) We have skill and depth with our big men already (admittedly they need to be healthy.)

Now, I am not saying Mobley isn't the best talent. I just can't see Altman drafting him if his job depends on 35 wins next year. It is possible he may have some trades lined up to trade Nance and/or Love if we draft Mobley but I think Suggs is the most NBA ready to contribute on day 1, unless Cade falls to us.

So if it is Suggs or Mobley and Altman wants Suggs, a trade with Toronto makes sense.
Just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, are you saying that YOU are concerned that Mobley might not help us win more next year because we (might) already have Allen on the roster, or are you saying that Koby is the one that might be concerned that Mobley might not help us win more next year?

One of the more dangerous figures in sports is a GM making short-term decisions for fear of losing his job. I really hope that Koby isn't going to make decisions that hamper our long-term prospects for the sake of looking good enough in the short-term to save his job.
 

daddywags

All-Star
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
4,878
Reaction score
6,341
Points
113
I know Koby needs to win more games next season but I can't see him basing pick 3 on that. Any one of the top guys will help us win games. I think it will affect his approach to trades though, which is one reason I can't see him trading Sexton for draft picks or trading down for more picks.
 

bs80

Situational Stopper
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
371
Reaction score
414
Points
63
For how cheap we got Allen, it makes sense to shop him if we can get good return back. The replacement cost probably isn't high.

I think if we draft Mobley we should have the flexibility to allow him to figure out what position works best for him and the team. I don't want to shoehorn him to being a PF because we signed Allen to a large contract. Even if Mobley is a PF, I would want the Cavs to figure out what kind of center works best next to him. I would rather find some cheap options with different skill sets then upgrade later.

I think we have enough different types of PFs already to figure out which works best with Mobley if he is a center.
I'm curious as to what makes you think that the price we paid to acquire him affects whether or not we shop him right now.

And I agree completely that I really hope that Allen's contract does not have any bearing on how we develop Mobley. I could only wish that I had the same amount of confidence in this FO as I do in the Browns' and Indians' FOs.
 

BodegaBayCav

In the Rotation
Joined
Aug 7, 2006
Messages
398
Reaction score
720
Points
93
Just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, are you saying that YOU are concerned that Mobley might not help us win more next year because we (might) already have Allen on the roster, or are you saying that Koby is the one that might be concerned that Mobley might not help us win more next year?

One of the more dangerous figures in sports is a GM making short-term decisions for fear of losing his job. I really hope that Koby isn't going to make decisions that hamper our long-term prospects for the sake of looking good enough in the short-term to save his job.
To me the strength in our roster as it stands now is our Big Men. Adding Mobley doesn't make sense if you think that the top 4 draftees are about the same. Mobley will not have the impact on our roster as it stands, that a wing (Cade)or a guard Green or Suggs would have assuming all of the top four are about equal. As the roster currently stands we have depth and skill at C and PF and are extremely week at Guards and Wings.

As to the GM, he is answerable to the owners. If the owners want to make a run at the playoffs next year that is what the GM's goal should be. If the owners want to have the best team possible in a year or two that is what the GM's goal should be. Plus, saving his job means achieving ownership's goals.
 

The Human Q-Tip

Alright you primitive screwheads, listen up!
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
29,080
Reaction score
48,151
Points
148
To me the strength in our roster as it stands now is our Big Men. Adding Mobley doesn't make sense if you think that the top 4 draftees are about the same. Mobley will not have the impact on our roster as it stands, that a wing (Cade)or a guard Green or Suggs would have assuming all of the top four are about equal. As the roster currently stands we have depth and skill at C and PF and are extremely week at Guards and Wings.

I don't see it that way. We do have Allen at C, but he's a complementary piece rather than a star. At PF, Love is basically washed,. and Nance is unreliable because of health and also a complementary player. I see us as strongest at guard. So maybe 3/4 is our biggest need.
 

bs80

Situational Stopper
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
371
Reaction score
414
Points
63
To me the strength in our roster as it stands now is our Big Men. Adding Mobley doesn't make sense if you think that the top 4 draftees are about the same. Mobley will not have the impact on our roster as it stands, that a wing (Cade)or a guard Green or Suggs would have assuming all of the top four are about equal. As the roster currently stands we have depth and skill at C and PF and are extremely week at Guards and Wings.
Ah ok appreciate the response. I don't agree 100% but I think I see where you're coming from. The main reason I don't agree comes from knowing how much longer the FO plans to keep LNJ. And we all know that Love is not part of our future.

As to the GM, he is answerable to the owners. If the owners want to make a run at the playoffs next year that is what the GM's goal should be. If the owners want to have the best team possible in a year or two that is what the GM's goal should be. Plus, saving his job means achieving ownership's goals.
Yeah, you're right. Unfortunately, I don't think that represents what is good for the future of the franchise.
 

BodegaBayCav

In the Rotation
Joined
Aug 7, 2006
Messages
398
Reaction score
720
Points
93
I don't see it that way. We do have Allen at C, but he's a complementary piece rather than a star. At PF, Love is basically washed,. and Nance is unreliable because of health and also a complementary player. I see us as strongest at guard. So maybe 3/4 is our biggest need.
I am surprised that you see us strong at guard. Garland and Okoro and Sexton all show promise but none of them are close to complete players. I do think that both Garland and Okoro will someday make an all star team, but those three are not close to playoff caliber, yet.

Whereas, given health our bigs are right there at playoff level IMO. And I think you will see Love and/or Nance being a major contributors to a playoff team if either is moved. We agree as do all Cavs Fans, I imagine, that we are extremely weak at wings/sf.
 

Blazie

Open source
Joined
Dec 20, 2006
Messages
270
Reaction score
423
Points
63
Not taking Mobley is silly for multiple reasons, but from Altman's perspective, taking Mobley makes sense even if he gets fired at the end of the season. What owner would sign him as their next GM - or even as a scout - if he passed on Mobley to take a second tier prospect?
 

bs80

Situational Stopper
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
371
Reaction score
414
Points
63
I am surprised that you see us strong at guard. Garland and Okoro and Sexton all show promise but none of them are close to complete players. I do think that both Garland and Okoro will someday make an all star team, but those three are not close to playoff caliber, yet.
I guess this helps explain how some of us could see this in different ways. I personally put way more weight on our young guns since they are the ones, if any, that will be around for our next real window of opportunity.

Whereas, given health our bigs are right there at playoff level IMO. And I think you will see Love and/or Nance being a major contributors to a playoff team if either is moved.
Again, I can see how a bunch of us will evaluate health differently. At this point, I don't think that Love deserves any benefit of the doubt when it comes to health, and any evaluation of his future productivity that does not take his injury history into account is disingenuous. That, combined with the fact that Love is not in our future plans, leads me to believe that Mobley, in addition to being the likely BPA when we're on the clock, is a better fit than any backcourt prospect.

We agree as do all Cavs Fans, I imagine, that we are extremely weak at wings/sf.
100%. No argument from me here...
 

bs80

Situational Stopper
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
371
Reaction score
414
Points
63
Not taking Mobley is silly for multiple reasons, but from Altman's perspective, taking Mobley makes sense even if he gets fired at the end of the season. What owner would sign him as their next GM - or even as a scout - if he passed on Mobley to take a second tier prospect?
Hey man, I bet that there are enough egotistical schmuck owners out there to create a demand for yes-man GMs that will do whatever the fuck the owner wants and still fall on the sword if it doesn't pan out. Fucking Koby out there playing 4D chess?
 

adam81king

Sixth Man
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
2,482
Points
113
Mobley is the kind of prospect you take, regardless of who is on your roster. You figure it out and make it work.

Kevin Love might have (hopefully) played his last game as a Cavalier and has already said he thinks he's a 20mpg player now anyway. As much as I love Larry Nance (mostly because of his dad and his love of NEO), he's best as the first frontcourt player off the bench. Despite what his Jr high school coach says, Dean Wade is *not* a future League MVP. Kabengele is a lottery ticket. Hartenstein is (will be) an unrestricted free agent. Jarrett Allen plays a different type of game than Mobley.

Take. Evan. Mobley.

Even if I had Giannis *and* Jokic, I'd still likely take Mobley at #3.

Take.

Evan.

Mobley.
 

Bob_The_Cat

All-Star
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
5,967
Reaction score
7,346
Points
113
I would also keep an eye on Sacramento as a potential S&T destination for Allen. Holmes is unrestricted so they certainly could lose him to a team like Dallas or Charlotte. If Sacramento offered Barnes for Allen, I don't think the Cavs would be turning that down (obviously if Allen wanted to go to SAC).

I'd consider Hield as well, but Barnes fills a huge need at SF, and if we wound up keeping Sexton we could run a small ball lineup with Garland, Sexton, Okoro, Barnes, and Mobley which would have the potential to pretty damn tough to deal with. Then the Kings could use #9 to find a wing replacement for Barnes. Kispert or Wagner would be a great fit in that lineup.
 
Last edited:

Mcreek

Towel Waver
Joined
Apr 11, 2021
Messages
149
Reaction score
171
Points
43
I don’t know if this belongs here but a decision on Hartenstein is forthcoming . Hartenstein will blossom somewhere whether here or elsewhere . His sample size is as good or better than Jarrett Allen. Speculation is that if we draft Mobley Hartenstein is expendable. No way I let him go even if we take Mobley. Quality big men with Hartensteins skill set is still valuable even in today’s game.

 

bs80

Situational Stopper
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
371
Reaction score
414
Points
63
I don’t know if this belongs here but a decision on Hartenstein is forthcoming . Hartenstein will blossom somewhere whether here or elsewhere . His sample size is as good or better than Jarrett Allen. Speculation is that if we draft Mobley Hartenstein is expendable. No way I let him go even if we take Mobley. Quality big men with Hartensteins skill set is still valuable even in today’s game.

Extending the QO seems like a no-brainer to me. Worst case, he can't find an offer sheet from another team, he sucks this year, and we're on the hook for $2.2 mil in a year where we wouldn't have cap space to spend anything more than our exceptions anyway.
 
Top