PDA

View Full Version : Waiters versus Irving



g-money
11-19-2013, 02:21 AM
Didn't see this posted elsewhere, and thought fellow Duke fans would be interested:

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9997640/dion-waiters-cleveland-cavaliers-denies-involvement-players-meeting-fight?ex_cid=espnapi_public

How much time is left on Kyrie's free agency clock? Sorry to say it Cavs fans, but your organization is a train wreck.

kAzE
11-19-2013, 03:49 AM
As a Cavs fan, I'm totally fine with this. Our owner is trying to win now, but it's plain to anyone with eyes that we aren't going to contend for the Eastern Finals this year. So, if we're going to be bad, there's no sense in trying to go all out to be a middling team. I'm gonna pull a Bill Simmons and just say screw it, I'm gonna root for us to be terrible and get in on the best draft in forever. Obviously, Kyrie is our franchise guy, so if this becomes a problem, there's no doubt Waiters will be the one who gets moved. I went on record saying we should have taken Oladipo with our #1 pick this year, because Waiters is a 3rd guard, not someone who can share the backcourt with Kyrie.

Bennett has been disappointing, but I'm okay with it. He can't possibly be THIS bad, he'll eventually get in shape and become a nice rotation player, if not a pretty good offensive weapon who can really rebound. Seriously, if we're going to be bad again, there's no better year than this year to land in the lottery. I'm rooting for Kyrie+Jabari in Cleveland! (Wiggins and Randle might actually be even better fits, so if we get a top 3, it's all good) Plus, with all of our cap space this summer, we could probably grab a decent free agent to play with Kyrie, Tristan Thompson, and whoever we draft. Tank it up, Cavs.

CPDUKEGUY24
11-19-2013, 05:05 AM
Maybe this has more to do with a mask, broken nose and black eye?

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/assets/3566345/kyriesmash_medium.gif

I can't make out how much control Brewer had of that arm...

BlueDevilBrowns
11-19-2013, 07:29 AM
Didn't see this posted elsewhere, and thought fellow Duke fans would be interested:

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9997640/dion-waiters-cleveland-cavaliers-denies-involvement-players-meeting-fight?ex_cid=espnapi_public

How much time is left on Kyrie's free agency clock? Sorry to say it Cavs fans, but your organization is a train wreck.

I'm curious, what makes you say the cavs organization is a train wreck? we have an owner that cares(maybe too much) about winning and good, young talent in KI and Thompson. The GM has made some curious draft choices but I think he's done a solid job, overall.

To Kaze's point, next years's draft is legendary so if you're going to be bad, this is the year to do it. It's not like anyone's beating the Heat this year anyway.

The season is still young, and a little conflict down may bond these guys together to make a run to the playoffs. It's just too early to tell.

El_Diablo
11-19-2013, 08:56 AM
Maybe this has more to do with a mask, broken nose and black eye?

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/assets/3566345/kyriesmash_medium.gif

I can't make out how much control Brewer had of that arm...

Geez, ESPN is absolutely awful. They run this story that heavily insinuates that Waiters is the reason Irving is wearing a mask...just days after running the following story explaining that Irving is wearing a mask because he took a hard elbow to the face from Corey Brewer and left the game for x-rays:

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9982061/kyrie-irving-cleveland-cavaliers-nasal-fracture-ok-play?ex_cid=espnapi_public

gwlaw99
11-19-2013, 10:15 AM
Geez, ESPN is absolutely awful. They run this story that heavily insinuates that Waiters is the reason Irving is wearing a mask...just days after running the following story explaining that Irving is wearing a mask because he took a hard elbow to the face from Corey Brewer and left the game for x-rays:

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9982061/kyrie-irving-cleveland-cavaliers-nasal-fracture-ok-play?ex_cid=espnapi_public

"Irving, who has been playing with a mask to protect a nasal fracture, scored 41 points in the win over Washington."

GGLC
11-19-2013, 10:21 AM
I'm curious, what makes you say the cavs organization is a train wreck? we have an owner that cares(maybe too much) about winning and good, young talent in KI and Thompson. The GM has made some curious draft choices but I think he's done a solid job, overall.

To Kaze's point, next years's draft is legendary so if you're going to be bad, this is the year to do it. It's not like anyone's beating the Heat this year anyway.

The season is still young, and a little conflict down may bond these guys together to make a run to the playoffs. It's just too early to tell.

Waiters was both an overdraft (nobody had him projected to go that high) AND a terrible fit with Kyrie. That pick alone significantly hurt Cleveland's chances of putting together a cohesive, competitive team in the near future. And to pair it with the Bennett selection, when Bennett is an undersized and overweight power forward who plays the same position as both Thompson and Varejao... I don't think train wreck is an overstatement, and I hate to see Kyrie languishing there.

_Gary
11-19-2013, 10:31 AM
Waiters was both an overdraft (nobody had him projected to go that high) AND a terrible fit with Kyrie. That pick alone significantly hurt Cleveland's chances of putting together a cohesive, competitive team in the near future. And to pair it with the Bennett selection, when Bennett is an undersized and overweight power forward who plays the same position as both Thompson and Varejao... I don't think train wreck is an overstatement, and I hate to see Kyrie languishing there.

I agree on all counts, especially the last one. There's nothing worse than seeing a truly great Duke player languishing on a bad team. I've seen that one too many times over the last 20 years.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-19-2013, 11:04 AM
Waiters was both an overdraft (nobody had him projected to go that high) AND a terrible fit with Kyrie. That pick alone significantly hurt Cleveland's chances of putting together a cohesive, competitive team in the near future. And to pair it with the Bennett selection, when Bennett is an undersized and overweight power forward who plays the same position as both Thompson and Varejao... I don't think train wreck is an overstatement, and I hate to see Kyrie languishing there.

Let's give Cleveland credit for drafting KI in the first place, right? Alot of experts were saying Williams should be the #1 pick over Irving. So the Cavs were smart enough to pick KI. Also, everyone was bashing Cleveland for taking T. Thompson 4th. Tristan struggled his 1st year but how does that look now?

Now, who would you have drafted instead of Waiters? MKG and Beal(who the Cavs wanted) were both gone by the time they picked 4th. Maybe Barnes(the jury's still out on him) or Lillard but hindsight's 20/20. nbadraft.net had Waiters drafted 7th in their final mock draft, not that big of a reach seeing as he went 4th. I think it's too early to call Waiters a bust yet.

Bennett does seem to be an odd fit at the moment. But don't be surprised if Cleveland trades Varejao(as he's older and injury-prone) making Bennett a better fit. Bennett's played a dozen games, let's hold off on calling him a bust just yet, too. He's been injured so it's going to be a while before he's back in shape.

While the Cavs have had higher draft picks, the last few drafts have been pretty weak to say the least. They've done about as good as anyone has drafting lately.

Let's revisit at the All-Star break. Things may look different for the Cavs by then.

And as far as Kyrie leaving Cleveland - It aint gonna happen. No way Kyrie walks away from his 1st max contract with all of the injuries he's had so far.

cato
11-19-2013, 12:37 PM
And as far as Kyrie leaving Cleveland - It aint gonna happen. No way Kyrie walks away from his 1st max contract with all of the injuries he's had so far.

Hmm. Interesting. I don't follow the NBA contract system -- how long would Kyrie have to wait to get equivalent dollars elsewhere?

I ask because, after getting his first contract, Kyrie may be willing to wait a bit/risk another injury, IF he thought that going to another team would put him in a better position to win.

At any rate, my dream is that Lebron ends up back in Cleveland, playing with Kyrie, after his contract with Miami runs out. I'm not letting go of that one just yet.

g-money
11-19-2013, 12:56 PM
Maybe this has more to do with a mask, broken nose and black eye?

http://cdn0.sbnation.com/assets/3566345/kyriesmash_medium.gif

I can't make out how much control Brewer had of that arm...

OK, I hadn't seen that video. My bad for transmitting questionable information from the Worldwide Leader.

Re: the Cavs organization, I just think they have badly bungled the last few drafts. When they drafted Waiters, all my friends who are NBA fans said, "isn't he a just less talented version Kyrie?" And while the jury might still be out on the Bennett pick, it won't be out much longer. Things could change, but at this rate he's headed for Sam Bowie territory.

What's tough for Cleveland is that it is not exactly a dream destination for free agents. That means they need to build through the draft. Their GM ought to stop trying to be a savant (or fire whatever quants are telling him to draft these guys) and...well... replace himself with a new GM? I don't know. I just think they're over-thinking it.

Having Parker team up with Kyrie would be awesome, but I don't know if Kyrie can psychologically handle another year of tanking.

Des Esseintes
11-19-2013, 12:57 PM
Waiters was both an overdraft (nobody had him projected to go that high) AND a terrible fit with Kyrie. That pick alone significantly hurt Cleveland's chances of putting together a cohesive, competitive team in the near future. And to pair it with the Bennett selection, when Bennett is an undersized and overweight power forward who plays the same position as both Thompson and Varejao... I don't think train wreck is an overstatement, and I hate to see Kyrie languishing there.

I would add the completely imagination-free rehiring of Mike Brown to that list as well.

roywhite
11-19-2013, 12:59 PM
OK, I hadn't seen that video. My bad for transmitting questionable information from the Worldwide Leader.

Re: the Cavs organization, I just think they have badly bungled the last few drafts. When they drafted Waiters, all my friends who are NBA fans said, "isn't he a just less talented version Kyrie?" And while the jury might still be out on the Bennett pick, it won't be out much longer. Things could change, but at this rate he's headed for Sam Bowie territory.

What's tough for Cleveland is that it is not exactly a dream destination for free agents. That means they need to build through the draft. Their GM ought to stop trying to be a savant (or fire whatever quants are telling him to draft these guys) and...well... replace himself with a new GM? I don't know. I just think they're over-thinking it.

Having Parker team up with Kyrie would be awesome, but I don't know if Kyrie can psychologically handle another year of tanking.

Didn't the Cavs also choose almost-a-Dukie Carrick Felix in this last draft?
Is he on the roster or a D-League guy?

BlueDevilBrowns
11-19-2013, 12:59 PM
Hmm. Interesting. I don't follow the NBA contract system -- how long would Kyrie have to wait to get equivalent dollars elsewhere?

I ask because, after getting his first contract, Kyrie may be willing to wait a bit/risk another injury, IF he thought that going to another team would put him in a better position to win.

At any rate, my dream is that Lebron ends up back in Cleveland, playing with Kyrie, after his contract with Miami runs out. I'm not letting go of that one just yet.

Here's a couple of links regarding Irving and his max contract possibilities:

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/31/paul-george-kyrie-irving-excited-for-john-wall-and-his-new-80-million-contract/

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/04/ridiculous-rumors-no-kyries-not-going-to-new-york-in-two-years-kevin-martin-not-mad-at-okc/

BlueDevilBrowns
11-19-2013, 01:12 PM
I would add the completely imagination-free rehiring of Mike Brown to that list as well.

I think Mike Brown was the best at the time. Phil Jackson wasn't coming out of retirement and no one else more qualified was available. The Cavs were a pretty good offensive team last year but absolutely terrible on defense. I mean horrible. So bringing back Brown made sense, as defense is his specialty.

The problem is Brown needs a strong offensive asst coach to balance out his obsession with defense, and he doesn't have one at the moment. The good news is Dan Gilbert, the owner, will get him one eventually.

I can assure you Gilbert is absolutely committed to winning and his pockets are unlimited. Cleveland will be a winner again.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-19-2013, 01:18 PM
Didn't the Cavs also choose almost-a-Dukie Carrick Felix in this last draft?
Is he on the roster or a D-League guy?

He was drafted by Cleveland in the 2nd round. He's still on the roster. He's been out with an injury since the preseason so he hasn't played yet but is beginning to practice.

This is a nice write-up on him from the Cleveland Plain Dealer during the preseason:

http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2013/10/its_not_up_for_debate_carrick.html

GGLC
11-19-2013, 01:20 PM
Now, who would you have drafted instead of Waiters? MKG and Beal(who the Cavs wanted) were both gone by the time they picked 4th. Maybe Barnes(the jury's still out on him) or Lillard but hindsight's 20/20. nbadraft.net had Waiters drafted 7th in their final mock draft, not that big of a reach seeing as he went 4th. I think it's too early to call Waiters a bust yet.

I would have drafted someone who doesn't require the ball in their hands to be effective. As for who they should have picked up instead, Barnes or Drummond were both good options...or they could have tried to trade up to grab Beal or down to get additional assets. What they should not have done was draft someone like Waiters. I mean, obviously the 2012 draft was fairly weak overall, but Kyrie and Waiters are not synergistic.

The bottom line is that they've had the #1 pick twice and the #4 pick twice in the last three years, and they've come away with one superstar and overdrafted on three other guys, none of whom look like their career ceiling is anywhere close to All-Star level at this point. (And I say that despite being a fan of Thompson generally.)

flyingdutchdevil
11-19-2013, 01:58 PM
I would have drafted someone who doesn't require the ball in their hands to be effective. As for who they should have picked up instead, Barnes or Drummond were both good options...or they could have tried to trade up to grab Beal or down to get additional assets. What they should not have done was draft someone like Waiters. I mean, obviously the 2012 draft was fairly weak overall, but Kyrie and Waiters are not synergistic.

The bottom line is that they've had the #1 pick twice and the #4 pick twice in the last three years, and they've come away with one superstar and overdrafted on three other guys, none of whom look like their career ceiling is anywhere close to All-Star level at this point. (And I say that despite being a fan of Thompson generally.)

Hate to say it, but this would have been an incredible pick up. There was a lot of speculation surrounding Barnes. Why the Cavs didn't pick him up I'll never understand.

Waiters and then Bennett? Watch them get the second pick this year and spend it on Aaron Gordon...

GGLC
11-19-2013, 02:39 PM
Barnes could have helped a ton with spacing.

Des Esseintes
11-19-2013, 03:42 PM
I think Mike Brown was the best at the time. Phil Jackson wasn't coming out of retirement and no one else more qualified was available. The Cavs were a pretty good offensive team last year but absolutely terrible on defense. I mean horrible. So bringing back Brown made sense, as defense is his specialty.

The problem is Brown needs a strong offensive asst coach to balance out his obsession with defense, and he doesn't have one at the moment. The good news is Dan Gilbert, the owner, will get him one eventually.

I can assure you Gilbert is absolutely committed to winning and his pockets are unlimited. Cleveland will be a winner again.
Look, Mike Brown isn't a disastrous choice. But as others have noted about the Cavs' drafts, there were in fact better options. Stan Van Gundy eminently fits the "more qualified" and "available" requirements. George Karl does, too. That doesn't even include the field of assistants who have yet to be head coaches but who offer a higher upside than a retread such as Brown.

cato
11-19-2013, 04:08 PM
Here's a couple of links regarding Irving and his max contract possibilities:

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/31/paul-george-kyrie-irving-excited-for-john-wall-and-his-new-80-million-contract/

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/04/ridiculous-rumors-no-kyries-not-going-to-new-york-in-two-years-kevin-martin-not-mad-at-okc/

Neither of those links answer the question: how long would Kyrie have to wait to get an offer from someone else that is in the same league? One year? More?

Des Esseintes
11-19-2013, 04:15 PM
Neither of those links answer the question: how long would Kyrie have to wait to get an offer from someone else that is in the same league? One year? More?

The Cavs can offer Irving a five-year deal, while everyone else would be limited to four-year deals. The Cavs can also escalate the contract at a greater percentage each season than anyone else can. Furthermore, if Irving reaches restricted free agency, the Cavs can match any offer sheet he signs with another team. If he truly wanted to switch teams, he would have two options. He could sign a one-year qualifying offer, at the conclusion of which he would be an unrestricted free agent. People have spoken of this option in regard to numerous reportedly disgruntled young stars, but to date no one has used it. The other possibility is to demand a trade. Some, such as Chris Paul and D12, pursued this strategy, though only after they had signed extensions, meaning not on their rookie deals.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-19-2013, 04:16 PM
Look, Mike Brown isn't a disastrous choice. But as others have noted about the Cavs' drafts, there were in fact better options. Stan Van Gundy eminently fits the "more qualified" and "available" requirements. George Karl does, too. That doesn't even include the field of assistants who have yet to be head coaches but who offer a higher upside than a retread such as Brown.

Mike Brown has a career winning percentage of .647% in the regular season. He has a career winning percentage of .566% in the post-season.

Stan Van Gundy has a career winning percentage of .641% in the regular season. He has a career winning percentage of .552% in the post-season.

George Karl has a career winning percentage of .599% in the regular season. He has a career winning percentage of .432% in the post-season.

To be fair, Karl does have 1,131 career wins BUT out of his last 10 teams to make the playoffs, 9 of them lost in the 1st round.

Further, SVG is 59, Karl is 62, and Brown is 43. With a roster full of young talent, the younger coach(by far) would seem to be able to better connect with his players.

To say that George Karl and Van Gundy are "eminently" more qualified than Mike Brown would, to me, be inaccurate.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-19-2013, 04:21 PM
Neither of those links answer the question: how long would Kyrie have to wait to get an offer from someone else that is in the same league? One year? More?

The bottom line is, barring a trade or something unprecedented, sometime around 2018 or so.

Duvall
11-19-2013, 04:25 PM
The bottom line is, barring a trade or something unprecedented, sometime around 2018 or so.

Thanks a lot, NBPA.

Des Esseintes
11-19-2013, 04:27 PM
Mike Brown has a career winning percentage of .647% in the regular season. He has a career winning percentage of .566% in the post-season.

Stan Van Gundy has a career winning percentage of .641% in the regular season. He has a career winning percentage of .552% in the post-season.

George Karl has a career winning percentage of .599% in the regular season. He has a career winning percentage of .432% in the post-season.

To be fair, Karl does have 1,131 career wins BUT out of his last 10 teams to make the playoffs, 9 of them lost in the 1st round.

Further, SVG is 59, Karl is 62, and Brown is 43. With a roster full of young talent, the younger coach(by far) would seem to be able to better connect with his players.

To say that George Karl and Van Gundy are "eminently" more qualified than Mike Brown would, to me, be inaccurate.

Looking at career win percentages is a weak way of analyzing coaching ability, to be honest. You will find *very* few informed NBA observers who think Brown is as strong a coach as Stan Van Gundy. SVG is considered brilliant on both sides of the ball, whereas Mike Brown is a solid defensive coach who leaned on the brilliance of LeBron to mask a simplistic offensive system. He won plenty of regular season games, and then had his flaws exposed in the playoffs. Karl has a somewhat pitted postseason resume, too, but you'll never convince me Brown could have taken last season's Nuggets and gotten remotely similar performance from them as Karl got. Brian Shaw is finding out this year what happens when you try to go traditional with that roster. Brown does not innovate. Van Gundy and Karl have made careers making odd pieces mesh, which would be a super-useful skill with this Cavs team.

cato
11-19-2013, 04:29 PM
The Cavs can offer Irving a five-year deal, while everyone else would be limited to four-year deals. The Cavs can also escalate the contract at a greater percentage each season than anyone else can. Furthermore, if Irving reaches restricted free agency, the Cavs can match any offer sheet he signs with another team. If he truly wanted to switch teams, he would have two options. He could sign a one-year qualifying offer, at the conclusion of which he would be an unrestricted free agent. People have spoken of this option in regard to numerous reportedly disgruntled young stars, but to date no one has used it. The other possibility is to demand a trade. Some, such as Chris Paul and D12, pursued this strategy, though only after they had signed extensions, meaning not on their rookie deals.

So, barring the trade demand route, the earliest that Kyrie could sign for a big contract (acknowledging that it's not as big as what Cleveland is allowed to offer, but still big $$$) after the 2015-2016 season? I.e., run our the remainder of his current K, sign a one-year deal (which Cleveland either matches, or doesn't), and then become an unrestricted free agent?

Assuming Cleveland offers a max contract extension this summer, Kyrie would have to wait two years to get a comparable offer from someone else.

cato
11-19-2013, 04:30 PM
The bottom line is, barring a trade or something unprecedented, sometime around 2018 or so.

I don't follow the math. Current K expires at the end of next season. A one year extension would run through the end of 2016.

Des Esseintes
11-19-2013, 04:33 PM
So, barring the trade demand route, the earliest that Kyrie could sign for a big contract (acknowledging that it's not as big as what Cleveland is allowed to offer, but still big $$$) after the 2015-2016 season? I.e., run our the remainder of his current K, sign a one-year deal (which Cleveland either matches, or doesn't), and then become an unrestricted free agent?

Assuming Cleveland offers a max contract extension this summer, Kyrie would have to wait two years to get a comparable offer from someone else.

That's my understanding, yes. But realistically, Irving is not going to sign a one-year offer. BDB is right: 2018 is the likeliest time for him to leave without shooting his way out of town.

cato
11-19-2013, 04:37 PM
That's my understanding, yes. But realistically, Irving is not going to sign a one-year offer. BDB is right: 2018 is the likeliest time for him to leave without shooting his way out of town.

Thanks. I wasn't looking for most likely scenario -- I was trying to understand the decision tree.

Ultimately, I think BDB is right: the risk of two one year contracts (i.e., playing out the remainder of his rookie K, plus a one year deal after that) is probably too great considering the $$$ that will be on the table.

Des Esseintes
11-19-2013, 04:42 PM
Thanks. I wasn't looking for most likely scenario -- I was trying to understand the decision tree.

Ultimately, I think BDB is right: the risk of two one year contracts (i.e., playing out the remainder of his rookie K, plus a one year deal after that) is probably too great considering the $$$ that will be on the table.

Which is why I'd be (mostly) fine with him signing an extension and then shooting his way out of town. The optics are bad, but Paul seemed to manage his exit with reputation intact.

BlueDevilBrowns
11-19-2013, 05:34 PM
Looking at career win percentages is a weak way of analyzing coaching ability, to be honest. You will find *very* few informed NBA observers who think Brown is as strong a coach as Stan Van Gundy. SVG is considered brilliant on both sides of the ball, whereas Mike Brown is a solid defensive coach who leaned on the brilliance of LeBron to mask a simplistic offensive system. He won plenty of regular season games, and then had his flaws exposed in the playoffs. Karl has a somewhat pitted postseason resume, too, but you'll never convince me Brown could have taken last season's Nuggets and gotten remotely similar performance from them as Karl got. Brian Shaw is finding out this year what happens when you try to go traditional with that roster. Brown does not innovate. Van Gundy and Karl have made careers making odd pieces mesh, which would be a super-useful skill with this Cavs team.

I don't think career win percentages are weak at all. I think they help provide facts to support opinions. The best measure of a coach is how often he or she wins, right?

If you don't give Mike Brown credit for taking a franchise that hadn't won since the Mark Price days because he had Lebron, then don't give SVG credit because he had Dwight Howard. George Karl had Gary Payton and Carmelo Anthony, among other H-O-F players. You can't win consistently without quality players. Mike Brown hasn't been "exposed" in the playoffs anymore than Van Gundy and Karl have.

I agree that Mike Brown isn't an "innovator" offensively, but his defensive knowledge comes straight from Greg Popovich. Mike Brown is a good defensive coach. And as I said before, the problem with the Cavs last year was not innovation, it was lack of defense. Brown fulfills that role.

I'm not saying Mike Brown is an elite coach. I'm just saying he's not that much different than Stan Van Gundy and George Karl. And for what the Cavaliers needed, Brown was the best fit at the time.

-jk
11-19-2013, 06:31 PM
I'd say win percentages are more than a bit affected by the team you coach (the players your GM gets you), and the competition you play.

Some coaches have different circumstances and expectations. (Just ask any Clipper fan.)

-jk

jimsumner
11-20-2013, 11:03 AM
Whenever I see this thread title, I think Kyrie Irving must be getting a rep as a bad tipper at restaurants.

freshmanjs
11-20-2013, 12:22 PM
I don't think career win percentages are weak at all. I think they help provide facts to support opinions. The best measure of a coach is how often he or she wins, right?

If you don't give Mike Brown credit for taking a franchise that hadn't won since the Mark Price days because he had Lebron, then don't give SVG credit because he had Dwight Howard. George Karl had Gary Payton and Carmelo Anthony, among other H-O-F players. You can't win consistently without quality players. Mike Brown hasn't been "exposed" in the playoffs anymore than Van Gundy and Karl have.

I agree that Mike Brown isn't an "innovator" offensively, but his defensive knowledge comes straight from Greg Popovich. Mike Brown is a good defensive coach. And as I said before, the problem with the Cavs last year was not innovation, it was lack of defense. Brown fulfills that role.

I'm not saying Mike Brown is an elite coach. I'm just saying he's not that much different than Stan Van Gundy and George Karl. And for what the Cavaliers needed, Brown was the best fit at the time.

Do you think Eric Spoelstra is the best coach in the NBA over the last 2-3 years?

BlueDevilBrowns
11-20-2013, 01:00 PM
Do you think Eric Spoelstra is the best coach in the NBA over the last 2-3 years?

In 1993, would you have made the same flippant comment about Phil Jackson? The answer is we don't know yet because Spoelstra's career is still young.

What we do know is that George Karl, in his last 15 years of coaching, made it past the 1st round of the playoffs twice. To his credit, he missed the playoffs only once during that time. So we know he's good enough to get to the playoffs, but that's pretty much his ceiling.

Mike Brown, in 6 years of coaching, made the playoffs every year and made it past the 1st round every year, as well.

That's a large enough sample size, in my opinion, to make the claim that Brown isn't "eminently" less qualified than George Karl(this was the original take that I disagreed with).

Further, Karl is 62 years old with poor health and a history of rubbing his star players the wrong way. I fail to see how he would have been a good fit for the Cavs this year.

Mike Brown is a solid, not elite, Head Coach who wanted to come to Cleveland again. He was their best option and they signed him. A good decision, IMO.

freshmanjs
11-20-2013, 01:03 PM
In 1993, would you have made the same flippant comment about Phil Jackson? The answer is we don't know yet because Spoelstra's career is still young.

What we do know is that George Karl, in his last 15 years of coaching, made it past the 1st round of the playoffs twice. To his credit, he missed the playoffs only once during that time. So we know he's good enough to get to the playoffs, but that's pretty much his ceiling.

Mike Brown, in 6 years of coaching, made the playoffs every year and made it past the 1st round every year, as well.

That's a large enough sample size, in my opinion, to make the claim that Brown isn't "eminently" less qualified than George Karl(this was the original take that I disagreed with).

Further, Karl is 62 years old with poor health and a history of rubbing his star players the wrong way. I fail to see how he would have been a good fit for the Cavs this year.

Mike Brown is a solid, not elite, Head Coach who wanted to come to Cleveland again. He was their best option and they signed him. A good decision, IMO.

sorry, but i really don't understand your argument. if George Karl's ceiling is first round of the playoffs, are you saying that if he were coaching the miami heat last year, he would not have made it out of the 1st round? and are you saying that if phil jackson were coaching the cavs last year that they would have been a championship team? wouldn't it be the case that spoelstra's ceiling with lebron james is different than it would be without? same for phil with or without mj and kobe/shak?

Des Esseintes
11-20-2013, 01:05 PM
In 1993, would you have made the same flippant comment about Phil Jackson? The answer is we don't know yet because Spoelstra's career is still young.

What we do know is that George Karl, in his last 15 years of coaching, made it past the 1st round of the playoffs twice. To his credit, he missed the playoffs only once during that time. So we know he's good enough to get to the playoffs, but that's pretty much his ceiling.

Mike Brown, in 6 years of coaching, made the playoffs every year and made it past the 1st round every year, as well.

That's a large enough sample size, in my opinion, to make the claim that Brown isn't "eminently" less qualified than George Karl(this was the original take that I disagreed with).

Further, Karl is 62 years old with poor health and a history of rubbing his star players the wrong way. I fail to see how he would have been a good fit for the Cavs this year.

Mike Brown is a solid, not elite, Head Coach who wanted to come to Cleveland again. He was their best option and they signed him. A good decision, IMO.

It's hard not to think of Dr. Pangloss when you say stuff like this. The Cavs drafted the very best they could have under the circumstances? They hired the very best coach they could have under the circumstances? If everything has worked out for the best in the best of all possible worlds, why aren't they better at basketball?

BlueDevilBrowns
11-20-2013, 01:35 PM
sorry, but i really don't understand your argument. if George Karl's ceiling is first round of the playoffs, are you saying that if he were coaching the miami heat last year, he would not have made it out of the 1st round? and are you saying that if phil jackson were coaching the cavs last year that they would have been a championship team? wouldn't it be the case that spoelstra's ceiling with lebron james is different than it would be without? same for phil with or without mj and kobe/shak?

It wouldn't be the 1st time. In 1994, his team became the 1st #1 Seed(and had the NBA's best record by 5 games) to lose to a #8 seed.

I think your argument is that the players make the coach, not the coach making the players, right? It's a valid argument to discuss.

What I'm saying is that, through the use of records and past history, I can't see how Karl would have been a vastly better choice for HC than Mike Brown.

As I said, there's no evidence to prove that Karl even wanted to come to Cleveland. There is evidence that Mike Brown did.

The Cavs saw the opportunity to secure a defensive minded head coach(which is what they needed) with a solid record that the owner already knew personally and felt comfortable with, and then they went out and got him.

How is that a bad move?

BlueDevilBrowns
11-20-2013, 01:55 PM
It's hard not to think of Dr. Pangloss when you say stuff like this. The Cavs drafted the very best they could have under the circumstances?

With all due respect to Voltaire, I fail to see how I am being irrationally optimistic. I agree their draft choices are curious, but yes, it could have been a lot worse.

They could have drafted Derrick Williams, Jan Vesely, and Thomas Robinson. Instead, they have perhaps a future HOFer and 2 starters.


They hired the very best coach they could have under the circumstances?

Yes. Brown is young, a known quantity, and coaches defense. All things the Cavs wanted. Most of all, Brown wanted to coach in Cleveland.


If everything has worked out for the best in the best of all possible worlds, why aren't they better at basketball?

We'll see, it's still November. Let's call a truse and revisit after the All-Star Break.

GGLC
11-20-2013, 02:05 PM
With all due respect to Voltaire, I fail to see how I am being irrationally optimistic. I agree their draft choices are curious, but yes, it could have been a lot worse.

They could have drafted Derrick Williams, Jan Vesely, and Thomas Robinson. Instead, they have perhaps a future HOFer and 2 starters.


Imagine this Cavs lineup:

C: Jonas Valanciunas
PF: Anderson Varejao
SF: Harrison Barnes
SG: Victor Oladipo
PG: Kyrie Irving

Length, athleticism, and complementary pieces.

Then again, I'm a Trail Blazers fan, so I understand that second-guessing and what-ifs can be really annoying. :) And obviously it's not possible to draft optimally. But I just want to see Kyrie succeed, and the Cavs are not surrounding him with the pieces that maximize his ability to do that.

flyingdutchdevil
11-21-2013, 10:34 AM
This is usually reserved for a player, but ESPN decided to go for the whole team:


The Cleveland Cavaliers: The Cavs are not hot. Starters not named Kyrie Irving combined to shoot 2-for-15 from the field in a 98-91 loss to the Wizards. When No. 1 pick Anthony Bennett entered the game in the fourth, he shot an air ball on a 3-point attempt. Sigh.

kAzE
11-22-2013, 01:22 AM
This is usually reserved for a player, but ESPN decided to go for the whole team:

I think it's about time to push the panic button on Bennett. What a huge disappointment so far. Everyone knew he wasn't your typical #1 pick, so expectations weren't even THAT high to begin with. Boy, he might be one of those guys who doesn't really make it until his next team.

Des Esseintes
11-27-2013, 07:30 PM
I think it's about time to push the panic button on Bennett. What a huge disappointment so far. Everyone knew he wasn't your typical #1 pick, so expectations weren't even THAT high to begin with. Boy, he might be one of those guys who doesn't really make it until his next team.

No worries, though. Bennett isn't even the top-5 lottery pick with the biggest problems (http://tracking.si.com/2013/11/27/dion-waiters-cavs-shopping/?eref=sihp) in that franchise. That would be Dion Waiters, whom the team is trying to trade a little over a year into his Cleveland tenure. Doesn't get along with Kyrie, doesn't get along with Thompson.

One thing NBA numbers guys like to talk about as a pitfall of building through the draft is that if you get a franchise-level guy, the team will often improve so quickly under him that getting *another* big building block is incredibly tough. The Thunder managed to stay bad enough long enough to follow Durant with Westbrook and Harden--thanks, PJ Carlesimo--but that blueprint has proven extremely difficult for others to follow. The Cavs, though. The Cavs have Kyrie, and they're staying high lottery every year! If only they weren't, you know, utterly completely blowing those picks. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy than predatory loan goon Dan Gilbert either.

WillJ
11-28-2013, 07:36 AM
The Cavs looked pretty bad last night, including Kyrie. The Heat can do that to another team, but it was not pretty.

_Gary
11-28-2013, 07:51 AM
The Cavs looked pretty bad last night, including Kyrie. The Heat can do that to another team, but it was not pretty.

Yeah, and it really is a shame because I'd like Kyrie to be playing for a good team. I don't think anyone expected them to be up there with Miami or Indiana, but I believe most of us thought they'd be contending for a playoff spot. And they certainly still have plenty of time to do that. But right now they are pretty darned bad.

It's obvious to me that the last two Cleveland drafts must now be classified as nothing short of unmitigated disasters. Like others here, I also thought the Waiters pick was a terrible one, and the Bennett pick is quickly moving in that direction too. When you think about having two very high draft picks over the last years, plus high secondary picks, and then look at the current Cavalier team, you have to shake your head.