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

Kevin Love - Miami Ground Machine

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Is Kevin Love a Hero for Saving a Dog?

  • Yes

    Votes: 28 48.3%
  • Too Right!

    Votes: 2 3.4%
  • Hotter than Jimmy G

    Votes: 15 25.9%
  • Jim Chones

    Votes: 13 22.4%

  • Total voters
    58
Rebuilds happen in a couple different ways.

Gilbert will likely wish to play the FA market after next season, with two lotto picks already drafted in the Top 10, before trading an All-Star that could aid in recruiting another All-Star peer. The shortest route to the playoffs.

You’re right about rebuilds happening several different ways. Small market teams often times don’t have a lot of success building through free agency and that’s why they will usually build through the draft. Teams don’t usually let All Stars get away. Draft & develop your own All Stars is the easiest route to success. Even though he’s 31 & injury prone, Love can hopefully bring us an asset(s), which would be more useful in a rebuild than helping us compete at a time when development is, clearly, the priority, not winning.
 
Even though he’s 31 & injury prone, Love can hopefully bring us an asset(s), which would be more useful in a rebuild than helping us compete at a time when development is, clearly, the priority, not winning.

That bolded language is right where the tension lies. You've set it up as if "helping us compete" and "development" are completely separate, and I don't believe they are. It is difficult for younger players to develop correctly if playing for a team that isn't competitive. Without a functioning offense, you get things like Clarkson playing hero ball, and Sexton having blinders on. When Love returned last season, and added that outside shot and low post threat, the rest of the guys seemed to fall into their proper roles much more readily. At least on the offensive end. Defensively, we were still a nightmare, and nobody progressed on that end.

In my view, we kind of need to thread the needle a bit. Put a team on the court that plays "the right way" so that the younger guys can learn how to do that, but without winning more than 30 or so games. That's...tricky. Be competitive, but not too competitive.

Love's outside shot really helped remake our offense because he's great off the ball. I'd say that if we add someone in this draft who can hit a 3 with some degree of reliability, and play at least average defense, Love becomes more expendable in a developmental sense.
 
The last 3 seasons the team with the 11th pick has had 36 wins during the regular season. The Cavs had 19 wins this past season and I have to think, with a healthy Kevin Love, Tristan Thompson, & John Henson, they can push towards or surpass 36 wins.

Additionally, the new draft lottery also levels the playing field and makes it easier for teams to claim a top 4 pick, as the Lakers did from 11th spot recently. It’s not far-fetched at all to think the Cavs could lose that pick to Atlanta.
I prefer to have our team "play to win." I do think there is some chance of losing the pick if we don't trade Love. If ownership and management are determined to keep Love, I would consider something that would be very unpopular - trade 5 to Atlanta for 8 and full control of our pick next year (and maybe keep one of the second round picks we would owe Atlanta). Guaranteeing a pick in a stronger draft would be worth moving down. Also, I don't see much difference in the players who will go 4-10 this year. We may get the exact same player at 8 that we wanted at 5. Again, it wouldn't be popular, but it might be the right move.
 
That bolded language is right where the tension lies. You've set it up as if "helping us compete" and "development" are completely separate, and I don't believe they are. It is difficult for younger players to develop correctly if playing for a team that isn't competitive. Without a functioning offense, you get things like Clarkson playing hero ball, and Sexton having blinders on. When Love returned last season, and added that outside shot and low post threat, the rest of the guys seemed to fall into their proper roles much more readily. At least on the offensive end. Defensively, we were still a nightmare, and nobody progressed on that end.

In my view, we kind of need to thread the needle a bit. Put a team on the court that plays "the right way" so that the younger guys can learn how to do that, but without winning more than 30 or so games. That's...tricky. Be competitive, but not too competitive.

Love's outside shot really helped remake our offense because he's great off the ball. I'd say that if we add someone in this draft who can hit a 3 with some degree of reliability, and play at least average defense, Love becomes more expendable in a developmental sense.

The dichotomy is how do you place the emphasis on competing when doing so very well may cost you your first round pick? Last year, the Cavs held out veterans to help their chances in the lottery. Clearly, that’s not ‘competing.’ With our 2020 first round pick, once again top 10 protected, things may not be much different this year, at least if the Cavs wish to hold onto their pick.

I believe teaching this team how to ‘play the right way’ falls on the coaching staff, not the players. Use Philadelphia as an example. Ben Simmons & Joel Embiid have learned how to play from Brett Brown, not JJ Reddick.

Then you get into the whole just what are we paying Kevin Love $30 million per year for?! Being a positive locker room guy and influence on the young guys?? Sorry, but I’m certain that we can find a respected veteran who can provide that and at a fraction of the cost. Channing Frye is a guy that comes to mind as a veteran that hardly played, but who had the respect of his teammates and helped influence the young guys.
 
Last edited:
I prefer to have our team "play to win." I do think there is some chance of losing the pick if we don't trade Love. If ownership and management are determined to keep Love, I would consider something that would be very unpopular - trade 5 to Atlanta for 8 and full control of our pick next year (and maybe keep one of the second round picks we would owe Atlanta). Guaranteeing a pick in a stronger draft would be worth moving down. Also, I don't see much difference in the players who will go 4-10 this year. We may get the exact same player at 8 that we wanted at 5. Again, it wouldn't be popular, but it might be the right move.

I’d honestly have no problem sliding back from 5 to 8, as I don’t think there’s much difference in the player that we could get there plus getting the rights back to our pick is worth a lot, at least in my book.
 
The dichotomy is how do you place the emphasis on competing when doing so very well may cost you your first round pick? Last year, the Cavs held out veterans to help their chances in the lottery. Clearly, that’s not ‘competing.’ With our first tour pick, once again top 10 protected, things may not be much different, at least if the Cavs wish to hold onto their first round pick.

I believe teaching this team how to ‘play the right way’ falls on the coaching staff, not the players. Use Philadelphia as an example. Ben Simmons & Joel Embiid have learned how to play from Brett Brown, not JJ Reddick.

Then you get into the whole just what are we paying Kevin Love $30 million per year for?! Being a positive locker room guy and influence on the young guys?? Sorry, but I’m certain that we can find a respected veteran who can provide that and at a fraction of the cost. Channing Frye is a guy that comes to mind as a veteran that hardly played, but who had the respect of his teammates and helped influence the young guys.

When I say "playing the right way", I'm talking about having the personnel to run a decently functioning offense, not just proper coaching. Just to make the point, imagine trying to run an NBA offense with three of the guys on the floor being clones of TT. No matter who the coach is...you just can't.

Part of our problem last year was a lack of outside shooting, and no real offensive threat to provide some gravity to pull the defense off balance. It meant we couldn't spread the floor, and couldn't create any mismatches or even force double-teams. Coaches need to have at least some of those tools in their drawers, because that's part of how you scheme to move the ball and get guys open. When Kevin popped up in the lineup, defenses had to respond, the ball started moving, and other guys actually had a role to play.

I'm not saying it has to be someone as good as Kevin Love. But if we trade him, we have to have a roster left behind that has enough of the right skills at the right positions to run an offense.
 
When I say "playing the right way", I'm talking about having the personnel to run a decently functioning offense, not just proper coaching. Just to make the point, imagine trying to run an NBA offense with three of the guys on the floor being clones of TT. No matter who the coach is...you just can't.

Part of our problem last year was a lack of outside shooting, and no real offensive threat to provide some gravity to pull the defense off balance. It meant we couldn't spread the floor, and couldn't create any mismatches or even force double-teams. Coaches need to have at least some of those tools in their drawers, because that's part of how you scheme to move the ball and get guys open. When Kevin popped up in the lineup, defenses had to respond, the ball started moving, and other guys actually had a role to play.

I'm not saying it has to be someone as good as Kevin Love. But if we trade him, we have to have a roster left behind that has enough of the right skills at the right positions to run an offense.

I agree with what you’re saying. However, you can always sign the Ersan Ilyasova’s or Ryan Anderson’s of the world, who can provide outside shooting, at a fraction of the cost of what the Cavaliers are paying Kevin Love. Larry Nance also started to show more as an outside shooter and I’d like to see if that continues.
 
Last edited:
I agree with what you’re saying. However, you can always sign the Ersan Ilyasova’s or Ryan Anderson’s of the world, who can provide outside shooting, at a fraction of the cost of what the Cavaliers are paying Kevin Love. Larry Nance also started to show more as an outside shooter and I’d like to see if that continues.

If and when Nance shoots like Love we will have a party and toast our good fortune.

Then yes, I agree, Kevin can go.
 
If and when Nance shoots like Love we will have a party and toast our good fortune.

Then yes, I agree, Kevin can go.

If you think a rebuilding team needs a $30 million per year, 31 year old stretch-4, when you can get a younger one for a fraction of the price, then you and I have a significant & fundamental disagreement of how best to utilize both older assets and cap space.
 

...and you think that makes sense to pay a guy that much money not to play, all the while allowing one of our more valuable assets to depreciate?! Alrighty then. Thank God you aren’t GM of the Cavaliers!
 
Last edited:
If Kevin Love is overpaid and nobody else would have given him that contract -- BEFORE he missed much of last season -- then why would he be worth anything in the trade market?

And if he isn't worth anything in the trade market -- why move him? It's not like we need salary cap space after this upcoming season -- we have more expirings than a hospice facility.

I think the whole "trade Kevin Love" idea is just ridiculous. If and when we get an offer of some assets for him, made a trade. But to move him just for the sake of moving him makes no sense to me. It's not like we have a roster full of talent that he's taking playing time from.

I also don't agree that we have to dump Kevin just to ensure we keep next year's pick. That's a pretty extreme way of securing that pick when we may well keep it even if we keep Love.
 
If Kevin Love is overpaid and nobody else would have given him that contract -- BEFORE he missed much of last season -- then why would he be worth anything in the trade market?

And if he isn't worth anything in the trade market -- why move him? It's not like we need salary cap space after this upcoming season -- we have more expirings than a hospice facility.

I think the whole "trade Kevin Love" idea is just ridiculous. If and when we get an offer of some assets for him, made a trade. But to move him just for the sake of moving him makes no sense to me. It's not like we have a roster full of talent that he's taking playing time from.

I also don't agree that we have to dump Kevin just to ensure we keep next year's pick. That's a pretty extreme way of securing that pick when we may well keep it even if we keep Love.

I don’t think anyone is proposing ‘dumping’ Kevin Love. We are saying the following:

1) Love is one of our more valuable assets.
2) Love turns 31 prior to the start of the 2019-‘20 season and his value is only going to go down from here.
3) The Cavs clearly held him out of games last year, which may have helped the team’s odds in the draft lottery, but it hurt his stock.
4) with the Cavs owning another top 10 protected pick on 2020, we are likely to see more of the same this season, which means paying Love $30 million to sit & watch.
5) with the Cavs in the midst of a rebuild, Love holds more value to the team as a possible trade asset, which can help accelerate said rebuild, than as a player. Additionally, by the time the team is ready to compete again, Love will be well last his prime and on his last legs.

There are some select contending teams (Portland, OKC, Clippers, Celtics, Hornets) that MAY be willing to take a chance on his big contract and gamble that he can stay healthy, in exchange for some assets. Granted, the Cavs will almost certainly have to take back at least one bad contract in return, to get some assets. However, waiting is not likely to help his value any.

My goodness, people need to get over their sentimental feelings towards Love. If Mark Price could be traded then Love certainly can and he hasn’t had half the career Price did as a Cav. Clevelanders sure get attached to their successful white athletes...Price, Z, Delly, & now Love.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think anyone is proposing ‘dumping’ Kevin Love. We are saying the following:

1) Love is one of our more valuable assets.
2) Love turns 31 prior to the start of the 2019-‘20 season and his value is only going to go down from here.
3) The Cavs clearly held him out of games last year, which may have helped the team’s odds in the draft lottery, but it hurt his stock.
4) with the Cavs owning another top 10 protected pick on 2020, we are likely to see more of the same this season, which means paying Love $30 million to sit & watch.
5) with the Cavs in the midst of a rebuild, Love holds more value to the team as a possible trade asset, which can help accelerate said rebuild, than as a player. Additionally, by the time the team is ready to compete again, Love will be well last his prime and on his last legs.

There are some select contending teams (Portland, OKC, Clippers, Celtics, Hornets) that MAY be willing to take a chance on his big contract and gamble that he can stay healthy, in exchange for some assets. Granted, the Cavs will almost certainly have to take back at least one bad contract in return, to get some assets. However, waiting is not likely to help his value any.

My goodness, people need to get over their sentimental feelings towards Love. If Mark Price could be traded then Love certainly can and he hasn’t had half the career Price did as a Cav.
Not sentimental but aside from still being effective his professionalism is very important on a team of very young players. I fo not feel we will get overwhelmed in a trade for him If we do great but no reason to move him just to move him
Plus with the way the draft lottery is now tanking isnt as effective
 
There are some select contending teams (Portland, OKC, Clippers, Celtics, Hornets) that MAY be willing to take a chance on his big contract and gamble that he can stay healthy, in exchange for some assets. Granted, the Cavs will almost certainly have to take back at least one bad contract in return, to get some assets. However, waiting is not likely to help his value any.

What kind of asset do you think someone will be willing to give up if we trade them Love for a pick and a bad contract? Because all the arguments about being overpaid are going to apply equally to whatever overpaid stiff we'd be taking back in return for Love. So, we'd be giving up an overpaid but useful player for an overpaid but useless (or at least, much less useful) player.

So what's a sample deal you think would be reasonable?
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top