re: Love opts out...

gone

quote:

---

Keeping Love and getting rid of TT is the correct play,

---

This is not a wise move

quote:

---

This is not a wise move

---

because it's harder to find an offensive rebounder than it is to find a power forward who can pass and shoot 3s?

quote:

---

strange comparison.
I see where you are going with that, but they are different players. Wiggins would have helped with his defense alone. (compared to Love)
You wouldnt get the same offense, but seeing how the Cavs didnt use Love the way he was predicted to be used because of his poor defense, it only makes sense how Wiggins would have still been valuable his rookie year to this team.

---

Shumpert is a better defensive player than Wiggins and saying Wiggins is a better defender than Love means nothing since Love plays the 4 and Wiggins plays the 2 or 3 (similar to Shumpert).

Wiggins would have maybe averaged 8\3\2 on this team as a bench player. He would have been a valuable backup but thats it.

And it turns out.. If they lock up Kyrie\LeBron\K Love for long term deals. They will be in contention for the 5+ years as well... but with players that are already proven.

What you're saying is they should lockup wiggins and HOPE he becomes a superstar in the next few years and then win championships. Whenever you have a top 5 player still in his prime you don't waste 3-4 years hoping the new kid on the block will become Kobe. You take the top 15 player who just averaged 26\12


Really was a no brainer at the time.

quote:

---

This is not a wise move

---

You think TT is more valuable than K Love??

TT is nothing special. He is an elite offensive rebounder. THATS IT. He isn't a good defender. Can't pass. Can't shoot. Can't hit free throws.

Is he a guy I would love coming off the BENCH as an energy guy?? Hell yeah. But he's not a max player. You can't build a team around TT

quote:

---

I just think it is lazy to say, "well if they had these guys." We don't know what would have happened.

---

I agree with this, but I also think it's very logical to say CLE woulda had a better chance with Irving and Love playing. But saying they woulda won is definitely overkill.

quote:

---

And with those guys back they play a style that plays directly in to the Warriors hands.

The iso-Lebron stuff worked so well because they were able to limit possessions and kept Golden State out of transition.

Plus the Warriors would have thrown Love in to pick and roll after pick and roll.

I just think it is lazy to say, "well if they had these guys." We don't know what would have happened.

---

I agree it is lazy to say "we definitely would have won with these 2 guys" which isn't what I'm saying

But just from an unbiased perspective. You have a team who lost 2 top 15 players and they still took GS to 6 games. It's not unfathomable to think the series might have been a little bit different with Kyrie and Love.



I'm sure you think the series might have gone a little bit different for your Grizz if Tony Allen and Mike Conley were 100% healthy. Do you not?

You may not 100% think you would win but would you believe your odds would have increased?

quote:

---

The iso-Lebron stuff worked so well because they were able to limit possessions and kept Golden State out of transition.

---

Also this isn't true. With Kevin Love and Kyrie the Cavs still played extremely slow. In fact, they played at the exact same pace as none other than your Memphis Grizzlies.

quote:

---

Except when losing those players led them to play a style that was way more effective against the Warriors then what the Cavs played during the season.

---

There's no way losing Irving/Love helped their chances, none.

Not to mention, that cavs lineup was 33-3 over their last 36 games played together

quote:

---

Except when losing those players led them to play a style that was way more effective against the Warriors then what the Cavs played during the season.

---

The Cavs played at the exact same pace as the Grizz when they had kyrie and Love. Did that pace slow down a little in the finals without them? Sure. but they already played slow.

Cavs and Grizz had the exact same amount of possesions per game and the Cavs were 25th in pace while the Grizz were 26th. During the playoffs the Cavs were 15th while the Grizz were 14th in Pace. Their pace of play didn't change that much baww.

The Cavs weren't some high powered locomotive. They played slow just like the Grizz. This argument holds no water but people (not you) just want to believe the Cavs became a better team without Love and Kyrie which is just asinine

quote:

---

Yes, but because it does not alter how they play. There is a reason Draymond said the Grizzlies were the toughest team they played. The Cavs were forced to play a style the Grizzlies thrive in. The difference is we don't have LeBron to make up for the offensive lull's and the Warriors ancillary players showed up a bit earlier in the series.

---

So the Grizz chances would have increased if their 2 (#3 and #4 options) players were healthy but if the Cavs 2 players (#2 and #3 options) were healthy it wouldn't increase??


Come on meow. Let's be real.