Let it all out. The Cavaliers Rant Thread

[Tlyons]

Why do we keep rehashing the Mitchell deal? It was the right move and you do it 10/10.

Because people are stubborn.

You always go with All-NBA talent when it's available. Always. ESPECIALLY IF YOU'RE CLEVELAND.

Look at Minny now that Goberts back is right. Had KAT not gotten hurt they looked like the best team in the west.

Now the coach, yea we fucked that one up royally.

 

[Kouki]

At least we're not debating if Mitchell is a worthwhile upgrade over Sexton anymore and have gone onto rehashing the trade for the 1,986,976th time..

Progress!

Here, I'll start a new one to shake things up!

We should have traded DG instead of Sexton.




No I don't actually believe this

 

[Cassity14]

Donovan Mitchell has been a top 10 player in the league by production the last two seasons.

It was a great move to get that at the price paid. Ochai looks like the new Tony Snell and Sexton isn’t an impact player. Lauri is nice but he’s not a foundational piece.

Koby hasn’t put the proper roster and coaching staff together around since, but starting with Donovan has been a great addition.

Altman is one of my lowest concerns, but that’s because I suspect we’ll see some big changes this offseason if this ending happens as expected.

 

[Rich]

It's hard to look at these moves and then imagine what could have been otherwise.

Like we all look at Garland and Mobley, right now, and say "boy, w/o Mitchell we'd be lost. Great trade!"

But there IS a side of me, a big side, that absolutely wonders if the addition has stunted their growth, and they could have/would have looked like better players, right now, if MItchell was never brought in.

 

[The Oi]

It's hard to look at these moves and then imagine what could have been otherwise.

Like we all look at Garland and Mobley, right now, and say "boy, w/o Mitchell we'd be lost. Great trade!"

But there IS a side of me, a big side, that absolutely wonders if the addition has stunted their growth, and they could have/would have looked like better players, right now, if MItchell was never brought in.

Look how they look without him. It’s not like they’re world beaters when he’s off the court. I don’t think he has.

 

[Kouki]

It's hard to look at these moves and then imagine what could have been otherwise.

Like we all look at Garland and Mobley, right now, and say "boy, w/o Mitchell we'd be lost. Great trade!"

But there IS a side of me, a big side, that absolutely wonders if the addition has stunted their growth, and they could have/would have looked like better players, right now, if MItchell was never brought in.

There's probably some truth to this...

...but then how much of that blame do you put on Mobley and Garland themselves, and JBB?

 

[inliner311]

There's probably some truth to this...

...but then how much of that blame do you put on Mobley and Garland themselves, and JBB?

For me, part of the problem is JBB but Mitchell being on the team took away touches for Mobley to build out his offensive game. Also the expectations of the team with Mitchell paired with JBB not being good about managing touches contributed to Mobley's lack of development.

I just compare the development of Kyrie with Byron Scott to how JBB has developed players. Byron Scott would draw up individual plays to get the players to do exactly what he wanted guys them to do so it became second nature with those read when it became an overall system and style of play. We really never saw a good overall system from Byron Scott but a lot of those plays because how Kyrie ran an offense and were incorporated into the offense with Lebron.

 

[JMoneyYourHoney]

Ochai looks like the new Tony Snell

This is a leaky premise, since we never should have drafted Ochai anyways.

Look at how differently OKC has managed their rebuild; they didn't go out and blow all their assets the moment they thought they struck gold. They stayed patient, trusted the process and drafted smartly, and are now in a position to pounce when the right player becomes available to put them over the top.

 

[buzzdog]

It's hard to look at these moves and then imagine what could have been otherwise.

Like we all look at Garland and Mobley, right now, and say "boy, w/o Mitchell we'd be lost. Great trade!"

But there IS a side of me, a big side, that absolutely wonders if the addition has stunted their growth, and they could have/would have looked like better players, right now, if MItchell was never brought in.

If their development is stunted because we added a superior player to the mix, it's on them and perhaps the coaches, no-one else. IMO if that's who they are then they would have plateaued and hit much lower ceilings than what anyone has projected for them regardless of them losing some shot attempts because they're forced to share the floor with an alpha dog.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Altman ain't going no where.

This team was amongst the very best, where its talent clicked like gang-busters.

It just so happens it happened when JBB was forced to do the opposite of what he wanted.

To me that is a clear indication that: 1) The Cavs have a nice collection of talent, with a good deep bench, though perhaps too much talent at the top that it doesn't fit, and 2) Their coach sucks so bad the team literally does better when he can't be him.

Altman has also uncovered some nice gems from the scrap heap; proper role players and even starters. He is not the issue.

I agree to some extent, but the roster fit is a pretty big deal. This season has taught us that the Cavs are at their best when DM is the starting point guard, yet the franchise has been using "DG the PG" as a slogan consistently since before Mitchell arrived.

That did/does put the coach in kind of a tough place.

 

[Futuredome]

I agree to some extent, but the roster fit is a pretty big deal. This season has taught us that the Cavs are at their best when DM is the starting point guard, yet the franchise has been using "DG the PG" as a slogan consistently since before Mitchell arrived.

That did/does put the coach in kind of a tough place.

Maybe, teams adjust. I think you need 2 strong creators with different skill sets.

 

[inliner311]

Maybe, teams adjust. I think you need 2 strong creators with different skill sets.

I think you need 2 strong creators with complementary skill sets. I think that's where the problem of Garland lies with a two guards being those creators. Garland's skill set just doesn't make sense for the advantages you want from two guards sharing the floor together. He doesn't like to push the pace and he doesn't attack the rim in the half court.

He just doesn't put his foot down on the gas so they can wear down the opposing team when necessary. Garland is the one who is slowing down the pace so he can catch his breath and collect himself. We are now in year 5 with him and this is just how he plays.

I think Garland is more suited to be paired with a big who can create and score but the team wants to limit possessions and reduce the pace so that big can reduce the toll on their body while still playing longer minutes.

 

[2 For The Brew]

This is a leaky premise, since we never should have drafted Ochai anyways.

Look at how differently OKC has managed their rebuild; they didn't go out and blow all their assets the moment they thought they struck gold. They stayed patient, trusted the process and drafted smartly, and are now in a position to pounce when the right player becomes available to put them over the top.

There’s no guarantee a “better” player than Mitchell would have become available in the future. With Garland, Mobley, Lauri, Sexton, Okoro it would have been difficult to have enough salary cap space to make a move. It has to be via trade and top flight players aren’t easily available via trade especially for markets like CLE and OKC.

Take this upcoming offseason for example. If we had all of our picks and were let’s say the 7th seed and lost in the first round who would we target that’s significantly better than Mitchell and gives us a guy we can win it all with?

 

[ryanf]

I think you need 2 strong creators with complementary skill sets. I think that's where the problem of Garland lies with a two guards being those creators. Garland's skill set just doesn't make sense for the advantages you want from two guards sharing the floor together. He doesn't like to push the pace and he doesn't attack the rim in the half court.

He just doesn't put his foot down on the gas so they can wear down the opposing team when necessary. Garland is the one who is slowing down the pace so he can catch his breath and collect himself. We are now in year 5 with him and this is just how he plays.

I think Garland is more suited to be paired with a big who can create and score but the team wants to limit possessions and reduce the pace so that big can reduce the toll on their body while still playing longer minutes.

This is why i think a trade to the spurs benefit garland

 

[Dr No]

This is why i think a trade to the spurs benefit garland

DG to San Antonio is the dream fit for him. Bigs like Wemby and Sochan would play to his strengths. Would we do a DG for Vassell & Collins? If we believe CPJ can really be a #2 pg it makes some sense. We’d need to move on from one of our now even bigger glut of 6’5” ish guys. Collins would be a great backup big for us. I really don’t know anything about Vassell beyond his stats, but in the surface, it would seem to scratch an itch for both teams.