Let it all out. The Cavaliers Rant Thread

[Rich]

I don't think the Cavs are as far off as people think.

However, there's only a few teams I'd take the Cavs over for the next 3-5 years, so I know that kinda contradicts my point. (Toronto, Detroit, and potentially Chicago).

But the actual young talent on the team isn't that bad. But when you look at say OKC, or Houston, or Orlando, the reason that I and everyone else would take their positions over ours is because of draft picks owed to them.

Which goes back to the Kyrie trade. We simply didn't get enough comparatively. Everyone else seemingly got more for the stars they traded. Westbrook, Harden, George, Vucevic. They all seemingly got back more.


Now, all of that can change once the picks are made. Perhaps some of those teams whiff entirely and the Cavs make a really good pick this year.

But as of today, that is what the difference is.



BUT...it's also not far to compare the Cavs to the Wolves or Kings or some of these other teams that have been permanently rebuilding for decades. Yes, the Wolves have more young talent but my god, they should. How many cracks at the lottery have they had? Same with the Kings.

 

[Rich]

You have to feel like the issue with Koby (not unlike the issue of many GMs now in the rearview) is timing and misfortune. Koby has drafted reasonably well, given the draft capital and moronic new ping-pong system we've been subjected to.

Unfortunately, though, this has meant that we're going to have to start looking to "rebuild the rebuild," relative to our lottery position in the upcoming draft. If we luck into a top 3 pick, we're likely taking one of Cunningham, Suggs, or Green, effectively forcing Sexton or Garland or one of these top picks to the bench.

The only other attractive option at the top is Mobley, and with Jarrett Allen on board, we can forget that. We may be able to grab a Kuminga somewhere around 4-6, but what does that then mean for Okoro?

The issue is that we have absolutely no pillars. Post-LeBron 1.0 was brutal, but we had Kyrie. We knew he was the bonafide PG of the future. The Cavs have had 4 decent opportunities to draft (factoring in the KPJ pick), but have been forced to pick from a "good," not a "great" crop of talent.

It bothers me that this "version" of the Cavs may be nothing more than a blimp in history, until we're forced to tear it down and start again with very little gain.

I'd like to say Jarrett Allen is not on board and if the Cavs feel Evan Mobely is absolutely the best pick bar none, then Jarrett Allen should most definitely not stop them from making that pick. The Cavs didn't give up a ton to get Allen. They haven't given him an extension yet (and won't before the draft). So they absolutely should not let Allen decide their pick.

 

[inliner311]

Ya know, I actually wonder if it isn't the other way around. Lots of 2nd round picks are just a swing and a miss; players who stick around are needles in the haystack. Maybe it's just confirmation bias though because an undrafted player sticking around is a better story than a 2nd rounder sticking around...

Some of the hit rate for 2nd round picks would be skewed by players from overseas that NBA teams just draft for the small chance that they might decide to come play in the NBA one day. So many of those guys never decide to attempt to play in the NBA.

Undrafted players rarely make the roster after training camp so we tend to forget about them quickly. 2nd round picks tend to at least get their chance to fail on the 15 man roster so it might feel like they bust out at a higher rate.

I just wonder if Koby doesn't take 2nd round picks because he relies on his contacts at USA basketball for insight. Guys who make it to USA basketball are usually the top 10-15 type players of their year so they rarely fall to the 2nd round.

 

[Ozone]

more like it is only the guards and centers that panned out. kpj, windler and cedi were all disasters, who would have thought we go 0 out of 3 on those prospects? even the veterans nance and prince were lost to injuries. of the 6 players who can play wing, only okoro was healthy enough (and still with the team) to complete a season.

KPJ is only gone because of his own doing, But yeah Koby maybe could have done more to help. Windler is still a potential asset and a good rotation player if he can stay on the court in the future. Cedi has been trying to get traded all season

 

[Sebastian]

Which goes back to the Kyrie trade. We simply didn't get enough comparatively. Everyone else seemingly got more for the stars they traded. Westbrook, Harden, George, Vucevic. They all seemingly got back more.

Now, all of that can change once the picks are made. Perhaps some of those teams whiff entirely and the Cavs make a really good pick this year.

But as of today, that is what the difference is.

BUT...it's also not far to compare the Cavs to the Wolves or Kings or some of these other teams that have been permanently rebuilding for decades. Yes, the Wolves have more young talent but my god, they should. How many cracks at the lottery have they had? Same with the Kings.

You're 100% correct, it does go all the way back. And not to re-litigate things, but holy fuck, as time goes on, it becomes more and more idiotic. The Kyrie trade was an impulsive mistake. It completely closed the Championship window and didn't move the needle for a rebuild either. It was catastrophic.

It was the worst of both worlds that doesn't even take into account the Cavs knowing full well Thomas was damaged goods. The second Ainge refused to trade Tatum or Brown to go with the Nets pick is the second the Cavs should have told the Celtics to kick rocks.

They had Irving on contract, and there is no reason to think they could not have received a larger haul if they had simply bided their time. Maybe Irving gets surgery, misses the season. Whatever. But at the end of the day he was a young, proven star and he could have been the centerpiece of a trade that either truly kick-started the rebuild with a number of 1st Round picks, or brought back an established star that would have kept LeBron in Cleveland and given them a wide-open shot at the next 3-4 titles.

The move was a stupid, knee-jerk reaction. Short-sighted. An alarmist, panic move following posturing from Irving. It was driven of fear of LeBron leaving that only guaranteed his departure. And it has Gilbert's fingerprints all over it.

 

[ice cream man]

It does go all the way back. And not to re-litigate things, but holy fuck, as time goes on, it becomes more and more idiotic. The Kyrie trade was an impulsive mistake. It completely closed the Championship window and didn't move the needle for a rebuild either. It was catastrophic.

It was the worst of both worlds that doesn't even take into account the Cavs knowing full well Thomas was damaged goods. The second Ainge refused to trade Tatum or Brown to go with the Nets pick is the second the Cavs should have told the Celtics to kick rocks.

They had Irving on contract, and there is no reason to think they could not have received a larger haul if they had simply bided their time. Maybe Irving gets surgery, misses the season. Whatever. But at the end of the day he was a young, proven star and he could have been the centerpiece of a trade that either truly kick-started the rebuild with a number of 1st Round picks, or brought back an established star that would have kept LeBron in Cleveland and given them a wide-open shot at the next 3-4 titles.

The move was a stupid, knee-jerk reaction. Short-sighted. An alarmist, panic move following posturing from Irving. It was driven of fear of LeBron leaving that only guaranteed his departure. And it has Gilbert's fingerprints all over it.

This times a million.

 

[inliner311]

It does go all the way back. And not to re-litigate things, but holy fuck, as time goes on, it becomes more and more idiotic. The Kyrie trade was an impulsive mistake. It completely closed the Championship window and didn't move the needle for a rebuild either. It was catastrophic.

It was the worst of both worlds that doesn't even take into account the Cavs knowing full well Thomas was damaged goods. The second Ainge refused to trade Tatum or Brown to go with the Nets pick is the second the Cavs should have told the Celtics to kick rocks.

They had Irving on contract, and there is no reason to think they could not have received a larger haul if they had simply bided their time. Maybe Irving gets surgery, misses the season. Whatever. But at the end of the day he was a young, proven star and he could have been the centerpiece of a trade that either truly kick-started the rebuild with a number of 1st Round picks, or brought back an established star that would have kept LeBron in Cleveland and given them a wide-open shot at the next 3-4 titles.

The move was a stupid, knee-jerk reaction. Short-sighted. An alarmist, panic move following posturing from Irving. It was driven of fear of LeBron leaving that only guaranteed his departure. And it has Gilbert's fingerprints all over it.

I never understood how they were willing to take IT after the medicals came back on him and how they settled on a extra 2nd round pick as the compensation for the injury. Terry Rozier was bare minimum they should gotten added to the trade especially if they were looking for some future talent.

LeBron and Klutch didn't help to keep that window open. How the hell didn't they get Bledsoe to request a trade when the IT medical stuff came out? Bledsoe decides he wants out of Phoenix only a couple week later.

I feel like Koby and the front office aren't good at trying to get talent from outside the draft. Allen was a good trade but Koby's full list of acquisitions really isn't good at all.

At least we got Sexton from the trade. He has been better than the type of player I expected to get when that pick became the #8 pick.

 

[BigZ94]

You're 100% correct, it does go all the way back. And not to re-litigate things, but holy fuck, as time goes on, it becomes more and more idiotic. The Kyrie trade was an impulsive mistake. It completely closed the Championship window and didn't move the needle for a rebuild either. It was catastrophic.

It was the worst of both worlds that doesn't even take into account the Cavs knowing full well Thomas was damaged goods. The second Ainge refused to trade Tatum or Brown to go with the Nets pick is the second the Cavs should have told the Celtics to kick rocks.

They had Irving on contract, and there is no reason to think they could not have received a larger haul if they had simply bided their time. Maybe Irving gets surgery, misses the season. Whatever. But at the end of the day he was a young, proven star and he could have been the centerpiece of a trade that either truly kick-started the rebuild with a number of 1st Round picks, or brought back an established star that would have kept LeBron in Cleveland and given them a wide-open shot at the next 3-4 titles.

The move was a stupid, knee-jerk reaction. Short-sighted. An alarmist, panic move following posturing from Irving. It was driven of fear of LeBron leaving that only guaranteed his departure. And it has Gilbert's fingerprints all over it.

Where’s the “Winner” button when you need it

 

[ajz20]

You're 100% correct, it does go all the way back. And not to re-litigate things, but holy fuck, as time goes on, it becomes more and more idiotic. The Kyrie trade was an impulsive mistake. It completely closed the Championship window and didn't move the needle for a rebuild either. It was catastrophic.

It was the worst of both worlds that doesn't even take into account the Cavs knowing full well Thomas was damaged goods. The second Ainge refused to trade Tatum or Brown to go with the Nets pick is the second the Cavs should have told the Celtics to kick rocks.

They had Irving on contract, and there is no reason to think they could not have received a larger haul if they had simply bided their time. Maybe Irving gets surgery, misses the season. Whatever. But at the end of the day he was a young, proven star and he could have been the centerpiece of a trade that either truly kick-started the rebuild with a number of 1st Round picks, or brought back an established star that would have kept LeBron in Cleveland and given them a wide-open shot at the next 3-4 titles.

The move was a stupid, knee-jerk reaction. Short-sighted. An alarmist, panic move following posturing from Irving. It was driven of fear of LeBron leaving that only guaranteed his departure. And it has Gilbert's fingerprints all over it.

It was not a good place to put a new gm that was third in the ranks and got the job by default without a real gm search . Gilbert has never really understood the importance of having a strong basketball front office that is free from ownership meddling. Lottery luck and Lebron fooled him into thinking he could do this his way. Now reality is setting in.

 

[Sebastian]

It was not a good place to put a new gm that was third in the ranks and got the job by default without a real gm search . Gilbert has never really understood the importance of having a strong basketball front office that is free from ownership meddling. Lottery luck and Lebron fooled him into thinking he could do this his way. No reality is setting in.

Yeah, I just... there is no way to put it really.

And I am trying to say a little less these days because who knows who is watching, and these days I just don't speak for myself anymore.

But, it really was a turning point. It was bad enough Kyrie wanted out, but we now know that was always coming and Kyrie was always going to flake.

But they could have got far more for him and it was the failure to do so that changed the course of the franchise. Irving was the catalyst, but the trade did the real damage. It was a shatter-point, a divergence. The franchise could have headed in one of three directions and it ended up taking the Cavs down the path to perdition.

 

[Benway]

For casual observers of the Browns (such as myself) it has recently appeared that Haslam, after paying and ignoring a very patient advisor for a few seasons, has finally and truly "bought in" to an efficient and constructive program. He has personally attained a professional discipline, and while nothing is forever, I can only imagine that he has great personal incentive to continue on this path.

As yet, Gilbert does not yet appear to have anything to "buy in" To. Deep yet faint seismic rumblings portend upcoming change, but we've Always had change- just not the rare kind, the Right change, the Leopard-changing-his-spots Haslam change.

Has Dan's instinct for success been permanently disfigured by LeBron? Will he ever have his "Haslam" moment? That Rooney-hiring-Noll moment? I'd have to say that, for tycoon hobbyists, almost No one ever does. They either give up and cash out, or bequeath the whole mess to their strutting, blundering fail-sons.

 

[The Oi]

You're 100% correct, it does go all the way back. And not to re-litigate things, but holy fuck, as time goes on, it becomes more and more idiotic. The Kyrie trade was an impulsive mistake. It completely closed the Championship window and didn't move the needle for a rebuild either. It was catastrophic.

It was the worst of both worlds that doesn't even take into account the Cavs knowing full well Thomas was damaged goods. The second Ainge refused to trade Tatum or Brown to go with the Nets pick is the second the Cavs should have told the Celtics to kick rocks.

They had Irving on contract, and there is no reason to think they could not have received a larger haul if they had simply bided their time. Maybe Irving gets surgery, misses the season. Whatever. But at the end of the day he was a young, proven star and he could have been the centerpiece of a trade that either truly kick-started the rebuild with a number of 1st Round picks, or brought back an established star that would have kept LeBron in Cleveland and given them a wide-open shot at the next 3-4 titles.

The move was a stupid, knee-jerk reaction. Short-sighted. An alarmist, panic move following posturing from Irving. It was driven of fear of LeBron leaving that only guaranteed his departure. And it has Gilbert's fingerprints all over it.

Yep.

On another note, there was a rumor bandied about that Steph and Klay were made available for Kyrie early on in everyone’s careers.

I think the Cavs biggest problem may well have been their ownership, followed by middling front offices.

Almost any owner could have done what Gilbert’s done. The question is whether they should have.

And also, exactly how badly the front offices have performed. I’d think in retrospect it’s been bad to below average.

 

[Dr. Claw]

The move was a stupid, knee-jerk reaction. Short-sighted. An alarmist, panic move following posturing from Irving. It was driven of fear of LeBron leaving that only guaranteed his departure. And it has Gilbert's fingerprints all over it.

This is one reason why I am glad he is now playing on the Lakers.
That season-to-season angst, accelerated by the Golden Shower Juiceballs blowing up what should have been a stint of league dominance was not fun to watch.
The panic of losing the best player in the league is understandable, but I would have felt better if they took a Spurs approach and called bluffs.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

They had Irving on contract, and there is no reason to think they could not have received a larger haul if they had simply bided their time. Maybe Irving gets surgery, misses the season. Whatever.

I can understand (though I disagree with) the preference to have ignored future draft picks and just gotten the most talent in return for one more championship run, and that some folks oppose the trade on that basis. But the particular argument stated above one I just don't get. There is every reason in the world to believe the Cavs wouldn't have gotten a larger haul if they had waited.

1) Unless you're talking about a player who isn't worth their current contract, the longer a player is under contract, the more valuable he is in trade. The most logical assumption is that Irving was going to bring back less and less in trade the further along the season went. And in particular, if he got surgery and missed the season, his value would have been significantly less because teams clearly would prefer to have had him under contract for two full-seasons instead of just one.

2) Kyrie is a weirdo, and probably always has been. I doubt the Cavs were unaware of that. They likely (and probably rightfully) were worried he was just nuts enough to figure out a way to miss not only one full season by milking an injury (for which he'd have been fully paid....), but perhaps even carry on some kind of hold-out into the next season as well. Had that happened, his value would really have cratered. I think the Cavs rightfully decided that trading him when he still had maximum value on his contract, and before a threatened knee surgery was made public, would likely maximize their return. And of course, if he had that surgery, then the entire argument of keeping Kyrie to maximize one last run at a title would be right out the window as well.

3) Every team in the league knew he was available, and they all had the chance to make their offer. There is no reason to believe that teams wouldn't put their best offers on the table in the summer of 2017 because they had no way of knowing if some other team would outbid them. In other words, they didn't just have to meet the Cavs' price -- they had to beat out every other team that was interested.

 

[Sebastian]

I can understand (though I disagree with) the preference to have ignored future draft picks and just gotten the most talent in return for one more championship run, and that some folks oppose the trade on that basis. But the particular argument stated above one I just don't get. There is every reason in the world to believe the Cavs wouldn't have gotten a larger haul if they had waited.

1) Unless you're talking about a player who isn't worth their current contract, the longer a player is under contract, the more valuable he is in trade. The most logical assumption is that Irving was going to bring back less and less in trade the further along the season went. And in particular, if he got surgery and missed the season, his value would have been significantly less because teams clearly would prefer to have had him under contract for two full-seasons instead of just one.

2) Kyrie is a weirdo, and probably always has been. I doubt the Cavs were unaware of that. They likely (and probably rightfully) were worried he was just nuts enough to figure out a way to miss not only one full season by milking an injury (for which he'd have been fully paid....), but perhaps even carry on some kind of hold-out into the next season as well. Had that happened, his value would really have cratered. I think the Cavs rightfully decided that trading him when he still had maximum value on his contract, and before a threatened knee surgery was made public, would likely maximize their return. And of course, if he had that surgery, then the entire argument of keeping Kyrie to maximize one last run at a title would be right out the window as well.

3) Every team in the league knew he was available, and they all had the chance to make their offer. There is no reason to believe that teams wouldn't put their best offers on the table in the summer of 2017 because they had no way of knowing if some other team would outbid them. In other words, they didn't just have to meet the Cavs' price -- they had to beat out every other team that was interested.

The issue here is that the outcomes of possible trades were determined by intervening factors that were unique when it comes to trading star players: 1) Gilbert wanted a deal done very soon, to potentially keep LeBron happy, and 2) Gilbert was hedging his bets against both LeBron staying AND LeBron leaving which leads to 2a) Gilbert accepted IT as a cornerstone of the deal because of the other two points and finally, 3) Gilbert didn't have a GM in place and was amidst a time of chaotic transition.

These factors greatly shape what they were looking for in terms of a package and the timeframe with which to get them. One can debate that by wanting both outcomes Gilbert got neither, but from a negotiating stand point, only certain teams would have assets that could meet what Gilbert wanted at that time, and it really narrows the field quite a bit. And teams had a good idea that Gilbert wasn't going to bide his time if he didn't get what he wanted from the first batch of offers. Finally, with a rookie GM in place, and given the circumstances of Griffin's departure, there is the thought that teams approached the whole processes differently with a negative view of the Cavs in general and Gilbert in particular.

The Cavs were not necessarily looking for the best deal in a traditional sense, but the best deal under those parameters.