2017 NBA offseason thread

nighthob · Jul 21, 2017

RedOctober3829 said:
To make the money work Horford has to go.

They could do it without Horford, but it would require some creativity and patience since they couldn't do it today. They would need to package Crowder and Guerschon (in a month or so when it's legal to move him) for someone making around $12 million.

By the time it's legal to bundle that player in a multi-player trade, Baynes is also eligible to be moved. So you would have around $17 million in ballast, allowing you to send out Thomas and Tatum as the talent portion of the deal.

This, of course, would be contingent on LBJ waiving his no-trade clause, and Boston would likely demand that James pick up his 2019 option (as CP3 did to facilitate the deal to Houston). Boston would still have some depth with Smart, Rozier, Brown, Ojeleye, Zizic, Theis, Larkin (although they would likely be starting Smart and Rozier in the backcourt).

I think the Hayward/Horford/James front court would give the Warriors some real fits. And defensively Smart, Rozier, and Brown would give Steph and KT troubles. Add in two possible top five picks and I think that LBJ might be content to finish out his career carrying that squad to titles.

Big John · Jul 21, 2017

Manna from heaven. Hopefully the Cavs trade Kyrie to Phoenix for Bledsoe and picks. But anywhere West would suit me fine, even Golden State, because the Warriors would have to relinquish real assets to match salaries.

RedOctober3829 · Jul 21, 2017

nighthob said:
They could do it without Horford, but it would require some creativity and patience since they couldn't do it today. They would need to package Crowder and Guerschon (in a month or so when it's legal to move him) for someone making around $12 million.

By the time it's legal to bundle that player in a multi-player trade, Baynes is also eligible to be moved. So you would have around $17 million in ballast, allowing you to send out Thomas and Tatum as the talent portion of the deal.

This, of course, would be contingent on LBJ waiving his no-trade clause, and Boston would likely demand that James pick up his 2019 option (as CP3 did to facilitate the deal to Houston). Boston would still have some depth with Smart, Rozier, Brown, Ojeleye, Zizic, Theis, Larkin (although they would likely be starting Smart and Rozier in the backcourt).

I think the Hayward/Horford/James front court would give the Warriors some real fits. And defensively Smart, Rozier, and Brown would give Steph and KT troubles. Add in two possible top five picks and I think that LBJ might be content to finish out his career carrying that squad to titles.

Why would you do this if you could just put Horford in the deal and keep the rest of the roster intact?

nighthob · Jul 21, 2017

Because Horford is a legitimate all star and will have a lot more impact on games than the likes of Baynes, Crowder, and Guerschon? Depth may help you win a few extra games in the regular season, but it's not terribly useful when the games really matter.

Thomas and Tatum hurts, but honestly if you have LBJ and Hayward, Tatum's extraneous. And between LBJ, Hayward, Horford, Smart, and Rozier, you have more than enough ball handling to offset losing Thomas. And with the 2018 draft Boston can more than replenish their depth with future all stars.

DeJesus Built My Hotrod · Jul 21, 2017

Big John said:
Manna from heaven. Hopefully the Cavs trade Kyrie to Phoenix for Bledsoe and picks. But anywhere West would suit me fine, even Golden State, because the Warriors would have to relinquish real assets to match salaries.

The Warriors are not going to downgrade at PG from Curry and Irving could not play along side him for a variety of reasons related to sharing the ball and defense.

I think you were just throwing their name out there but it illustrates the larger point that a guard with Irving's skill set - great handles, offensively elite but shoot first PG who plays subpar D - is likely more limited than we might guess. The league dregs can't really use him, there are a bunch if top tier teams who don't really have a fit or the assets. So it's left to teams who are somewhat competitive, have assets to trade and see Irving as a clear upgrade.

RedOctober3829 · Jul 21, 2017

nighthob said:
Because Horford is a legitimate all star and will have a lot more impact on games than the likes of Baynes, Crowder, and Guerschon? Depth may help you win a few extra games in the regular season, but it's not terribly useful when the games really matter.

Thomas and Tatum hurts, but honestly if you have LBJ and Hayward, Tatum's extraneous. And between LBJ, Hayward, Horford, Smart, and Rozier, you have more than enough ball handling to offset losing Thomas. And with the 2018 draft Boston can more than replenish their depth with future all stars.

You wouldn't have at least 1 of the '18 picks in any LeBron trade. I'd rather just give up Horford and keep IT. LBJ/IT/Hayward is a legit big 3. Then you have real good depth behind it. I imagine losing Tatum or Brown in a deal but the depth is still good.

Cesar Crespo · Jul 21, 2017

Would Denver want Irving at the expense of Murray and contracts like Chandler, Faried?

mcpickl · Jul 21, 2017

RedOctober3829 said:
If he would waive it to Boston,the C's wouldn't have to gut their roster. Horford plus a couple young players and the Nets/Lakers picks would be pretty good value IMO.

If the Cavs were actually going to trade Lebron, I scenario I can't see happening, why would they want Horford?

They'd be rebuilding without Lebron. Horford makes no sense for them.

Even before getting into they'd be a team of all bigs.

RedOctober3829 · Jul 21, 2017

mcpickl said:
If the Cavs were actually going to trade Lebron, I scenario I can't see happening, why would they want Horford?

They'd be rebuilding without Lebron. Horford makes no sense for them.

Kyrie/Tatum/Horford/2 top 5 picks is a nice start.

RedOctober3829 · Jul 21, 2017

bosox79 said:
Would Denver want Irving at the expense of Murray and contracts like Chandler, Faried?

Jed Zeppelin · Jul 21, 2017

Suns would be soooooo good for us.

moly99 · Jul 21, 2017

RedOctober3829 said:
If he would waive it to Boston,the C's wouldn't have to gut their roster. Horford plus a couple young players and the Nets/Lakers picks would be pretty good value IMO.

That's why I said "very few teams" rather than "no teams." But even the Celtics would have to give up a package like Horford + Brown + the Lakers pick + the Nets pick to offer fair value for LeBron. That is a big gamble for a one year rental of any player. Even for the best player of all time.

I don't think there is a "fair value" trade to be made. A trade will only happen if the Cavs feel their hands are forced.

RedOctober3829 · Jul 21, 2017

moly99 said:
That's why I said "very few teams" rather than "no teams." But even the Celtics would have to give up a package like Horford + Brown + the Lakers pick + the Nets pick to offer fair value for LeBron. That is a big gamble for a one year rental of any player. Even for the best player of all time.

I don't think there is a "fair value" trade to be made. A trade will only happen if the Cavs feel their hands are forced.

Any trade would have to include LBJ picking up his 18-19 option to give up that kind of package.

nighthob · Jul 21, 2017

RedOctober3829 said:
You wouldn't have at least 1 of the '18 picks in any LeBron trade. I'd rather just give up Horford and keep IT. LBJ/IT/Hayward is a legit big 3. Then you have real good depth behind it. I imagine losing Tatum or Brown in a deal but the depth is still good.

The giant defensive downgrade from Horford means that they aren't a legit big three and you're unlikely to get LBJ to agree to pick up his 2019 option. At which point Boston doesn't make a deal.

And, no, LBJ's no trade clause means that there isn't going to be an auction. So Boston won't be shipping out their '18 picks, their recent #3, and their defensive anchor for James. Come winter therre'd be a meeting much like the one they had with Hayward where they tried to sell LBJ on coming here, and he'll be the one to make the call, so Cleveland will live with the return. Luckily for them in this case it would be a future primary scorer.

mcpickl · Jul 21, 2017

RedOctober3829 said:
Kyrie/Tatum/Horford/2 top 5 picks is a nice start.

One of those things is not like the others.

25 yr old, 19 yr old, two guys currently in high school....and 31 yr old Al Horford. To go with already having Love and Tristan Thompson.

The only thing less likely than Lebron being traded, is Al Horford being involved in a trade for Lebron.

RedOctober3829 · Jul 21, 2017

nighthob said:
The giant defensive downgrade from Horford means that they aren't a legit big three and you're unlikely to get LBJ to agree to pick up his 2019 option. At which point Boston doesn't make a deal.

How much of a downgrade would LBJ be from Horford? Not much at all. LeBron is a great defender. That small ball team would be legit great defensively.

nighthob · Jul 21, 2017

RedOctober3829 said:
How much of a downgrade would LBJ be from Horford? Not much at all. LeBron is a great defender. That small ball team would be legit great defensively.

The ginormous defensive downgrade is going from one of the NBA's better defensive anchors in Horford to a 30 year old journeyman center and a 20 year old rookie. All in order to maintain the ability to give a 5'9" player, that was the worst defensive player in the NBA last year, a max deal. A Horford/James/Hayward frontline is devastating on both ends of the floor. Replacing Horford with Baynes & Zizic? Not so much.

RedOctober3829 · Jul 21, 2017

nighthob said:
The ginormous defensive downgrade is going from one of the NBA's better defensive anchors in Horford to a 30 year old journeyman center and a 20 year old rookie. All in order to maintain the ability to give a 5'9" player, that was the worst defensive player in the NBA last year, a max deal. A Horford/James/Hayward frontline is devastating on both ends of the floor. Replacing Horford with Baynes & Zizic? Not so much.

nighthob · Jul 21, 2017

Yeah, Boston's not trading their defensive anchor into a rebuilding situation for the privilege of paying the worst defensive player in the NBA a max contract. That would do some damage to an agent relationship unnecessarily.

RedOctober3829 · Jul 21, 2017

Wall signs his extension. 3 years $170 million with a 4th year option.

Eddie Jurak · Jul 21, 2017

We don't need to trade anything for Lebron, since he will soon be a free agent and will immediately sign with the C's for the vet minimum, because it would give him a chance to play for Brad Stevens.

(Since we are talking about ridiculous things that will never happen, why not go full crazy?)

bigq · Jul 21, 2017

slamminsammya said:
Kyrie is a top 15, maybe top 10 point guard in the NBA. I will be interested to see what he gets if they actually trade him.

I think he is one of the top 10-15 players in the NBA. I don't think there are 10-15 point guards in the league that are better than him.

moly99 · Jul 21, 2017

bigq said:
I think he is one of the top 10-15 players in the NBA. I don't think there are 10-15 point guards in the league that are better than him.

By win shares Irving was the 9th best PG in the league last year. By VORP he was the 11th best PG. By BPM he was 14th. And that is with the 5th highest usage rate among PG's. He is also only marginally better defensively than Isaiah Thomas. (-3.3 DPM vs -2.3 DPM)

Irving is a very good natural scorer, but his skill set is skewed towards hero ball rather than making boring passes to wide open teammates for threes. We already have a defensively poor point guard who can score a ton of points while dominating the ball. There's no need to trade away substantial assets to fill that role.

kazuneko · Jul 22, 2017

mcpickl said:
If the Cavs were actually going to trade Lebron, I scenario I can't see happening, why would they want Horford?

They'd be rebuilding without Lebron. Horford makes no sense for them.

Even before getting into they'd be a team of all bigs.

Not sure they'd really be rebuilding. If they end up with Kyrie, Love and Horford they'd still be the 2nd best team in the East...

sezwho · Jul 22, 2017

Once Kyrie realized Lebron would happily push Love, his 'Big 3' teammate, out and/or abandon the team as soon as they were no longer favorites, there was no reason to stay in Cleveland.

No way Lebron plays the season in Cleveland and I know it's seems crazy but the Celtics make the best destination and have the widest array of assets...

Sprowl · Jul 22, 2017

The Cuyahoga River is on fire again.

DeJesus Built My Hotrod · Jul 22, 2017

moly99 said:
By win shares Irving was the 9th best PG in the league last year. By VORP he was the 11th best PG. By BPM he was 14th. And that is with the 5th highest usage rate among PG's. He is also only marginally better defensively than Isaiah Thomas. (-3.3 DPM vs -2.3 DPM)

Irving is a very good natural scorer, but his skill set is skewed towards hero ball rather than making boring passes to wide open teammates for threes. We already have a defensively poor point guard who can score a ton of points while dominating the ball. There's no need to trade away substantial assets to fill that role.

This.

Once again, the delta between Thomas, who is a more efficient scorer (eFG and TS%) and has averaged more assists than Irving over the past three seasons is small even when taking into account age, height and handles. While Thomas can be ball dominant, he is also comfortable playing off the ball and distributing. Irving is a shoot-first PG who takes plays off on defense routinely and hasn't shown that he can get those around him involved unless their name is LeBron James.

Now perhaps he will improve in this area but the cost of acquiring him will require a team like the Celtics to spend a significant portion of their assets to do so. In the current NBA, smart teams continue to make their biggest outlays on elite wings and stretch bigs. So a Celtics trade for Irving would go counter to their trend over the course of their rebuild. And at the end, its unclear whether the move would make the Celtics better now or in the future. That said, if there is a strong argument for why Boston should pursue Irving, I am open to it.

kazuneko · Jul 22, 2017

moly99 said:
By win shares Irving was the 9th best PG in the league last year. By VORP he was the 11th best PG. By BPM he was 14th. And that is with the 5th highest usage rate among PG's. He is also only marginally better defensively than Isaiah Thomas. (-3.3 DPM vs -2.3 DPM)

Irving is a very good natural scorer, but his skill set is skewed towards hero ball rather than making boring passes to wide open teammates for threes. We already have a defensively poor point guard who can score a ton of points while dominating the ball. There's no need to trade away substantial assets to fill that role.

But the primary asset they'd be trading is an older version of Irving who is even worst defensively and expecting a max contract after next season. It Ainge has no intention of giving IT the max he is demanding, why wouldn't he consider trading him for Kyrie?While having Irving over IT next season might not make a huge difference, having Irving instead of nothing (if IT departs) in 2018-19 is a huge difference..

DeJesus Built My Hotrod · Jul 22, 2017

kazuneko said:
But the primary asset they'd be trading is an older version of Irving who is even worst defensively and expecting a max contract after next season. It Ainge has no intention of giving IT the max he is demanding, why wouldn't he consider trading him for Kyrie?While having Irving over IT next season might not make a huge difference, having Irving instead of nothing (if IT departs) in 2018-19 is a huge difference..

So you think trading a bunch of assets, which will almost certainly include one of the firsts the C's have plus Thomas and some other pieces, is the right move because you get one extra year of control with Irving? Because his Brinks truck is going to need to be backed up when he opts out after the '18-19 season. Seems to me the value proposition really isn't there for next season and even beyond.

Sox and Rocks · Jul 22, 2017

bosox79 said:
Would Denver want Irving at the expense of Murray and contracts like Chandler, Faried?

Nuggets fan here. I'd love to have Irving as he seems like the perfect pg to compliment Jokic and the offense.

Is mudiay, Harris or Murray, Faried and pics a fair offer? Seems like it to me, but admittedly I'm a homer. Would rather give up Harris than Murray cause I'm bullish on Murray even though Harris is a more natural 2.

Irving, Murray or Harris, chandler, Milsap and Jokic is a damn good starting 5.

kazuneko · Jul 22, 2017

DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
So you think trading a bunch of assets, which will almost certainly include one of the firsts the C's have plus Thomas and some other pieces, is the right move because you get one extra year of control with Irving? Because his Brinks truck is going to need to be backed up when he opts out after the '18-19 season. Seems to me the value proposition really isn't there for next season and even beyond.

Not sure what you think Irving will be worth in the trade market but it seems like you might be overestimating his value. If you are including IT, that would be the primary asset going to Cleveland. While I could imagine a Celtics pick thrown in, there is no way the Cs would include either of the Nets or Lakers picks. The trade being discussed earlier was IT/Crowder/Smart for Irving, and although that obviously hurts the Cs depth (while giving the Cavaliers a star to replace Irving and much needed depth) the only top asset that is being lost is IT. And yes, the biggest benefit for the Cs in that trade would be the extra year on Irving's deal, which if they aren't planning on giving the max on IT is actually a lot of value (i.e. 2 years of Irving > 1 year of IT + Smart & Crowder).

Papelbon's Poutine · Jul 22, 2017

Are we just pretending that Thomas still has a rather looming injury and that the jury is still out on if he recovers to be the same player?

Which cuts both ways, obviously. His value is down for trade but it also probably brings he and Irving closer to each other in value.

I think it's kind of crazy to think Crowder/IT/Smart gets it done. But if it did, they should probably do it.

kazuneko · Jul 22, 2017

Papelbon's Poutine said:
Are we just pretending that Thomas still has a rather looming injury and that the jury is still out on if he recovers to be the same player?

Which cuts both ways, obviously. His value is down for trade but it also probably brings he and Irving closer to each other in value.

I think it's kind of crazy to think Crowder/IT/Smart gets it done. But if it did, they should probably do it.

It's hard to say what his value is, but the Cavs are in a unique position in that they would be trading a star and yet trying to contend next season. That never happens. Heck, it's only potentially going to happen in this case because apparently Kyrie Irving is an asshole. So rather than the standard return you usually see for stars (i.e. picks and young players), the Cavs top priority in a trade would appear to be securing someone to replace Kyrie (i.e. a star/scorer preferably at the point guard position) so that they can make a run at a championship next season.
Yet the very fact that this is such a unique position to be in will make it hard to find a trade partner. I suppose a Melo for Irving trade could happen, as Kyrie is apparently happy to go to NY and lose just as Melo has become fed up with that very thing. And while this would be a great trade for NY, the Cavs would be left trying to replace a 25 year old star point guard with a declining 33 year old SF. Meanwhile the Cs have the most similar player in the league to Irving who they - quite possibly - are not willing to re-sign next season, and a bunch of depth (which Cleveland could really use) which they could package in an offer to Cleveland for Irving.
This could very much fit with Cleveland's needs in 2017-18 (so much so that Boston might be wary of making the trade) while also securing significant value in 2018-19 for Boston (who - if they aren't planning on maxing IT - would be getting an extra year of a star PG, as Irving has 2 years left on his deal). You could also argue that for Boston, they would be trading a player that they would be unlikely to extend for a player that they would be much more likely to extend (due to Irving being 3 years younger).
Of course, the fact that the two teams are the primary contenders for the Eastern Conference Championship would seemingly make it highly unlikely they would make a trade with each other. And yet if they did, for that very reason, it would make the upcoming season a heck of a lot more interesting..

Devizier · Jul 22, 2017

One thing to keep in mind is that the Cavaliers could actually improve in the short term by trading Irving. Depends on the package of players they get back.

RedOctober3829 · Jul 22, 2017

Devizier said:
One thing to keep in mind is that the Cavaliers could actually improve in the short term by trading Irving. Depends on the package of players they get back.

Kyrie for Boogie Cousins?

mauf · Jul 22, 2017

RedOctober3829 said:
Kyrie for Boogie Cousins?

This really illustrates the conundrum that Cleveland faces.

On an exchange-of-value basis, this makes perfect sense -- Cleveland trades two years of Kyrie for one year of a better player. But the Cavs don't need another big. And it's unlikely that they can strike a mutually acceptable deal for another PG. So unless they're blowing it up, they pretty much have to trade Kyrie for a wing. And since, as @DeJesus Built My Hotrod says, smart teams value wings more highly than ball handlers, the Cavs are likely doomed to receive less than fair value.

BigSoxFan · Jul 22, 2017

This seems like a potential Pat Riley play. Kyrie for Dragic/Winslow? Salaries appear to work. Miami gets a superstar and he gets a team of his own. Cleveland gets a good PG and a 2-way wing that they desperately need.

Jed Zeppelin · Jul 22, 2017

BigSoxFan said:
This seems like a potential Pat Riley play. Kyrie for Dragic/Winslow? Salaries appear to work. Miami gets a superstar and he gets a team of his own. Cleveland gets a good PG and a 2-way wing that they desperately need.

Pitched that exact offer to a coworker. Miami has the right mix of salary, good players, young players, being good but needing more. Dragic a good fit off the ball as needed for the Cavs.

Cesar Crespo · Jul 22, 2017

Sox and Rocks said:
Nuggets fan here. I'd love to have Irving as he seems like the perfect pg to compliment Jokic and the offense.

Is mudiay, Harris or Murray, Faried and pics a fair offer? Seems like it to me, but admittedly I'm a homer. Would rather give up Harris than Murray cause I'm bullish on Murray even though Harris is a more natural 2.

Irving, Murray or Harris, chandler, Milsap and Jokic is a damn good starting 5.

With Irving's defense, I think Harris would be a better fit. I really have no idea what kinda return Irving would get. It'd definitely be one of Murray/Harris, then maybe one of Hernangomez, Mudiay, Lydon etc and contracts.

If trade kickers don't kick in until after the trade, the Nuggets are far enough under the cap where they'd only have to include Faried to make contracts work. They'd probably rather keep Chandler since he's their only SF. Hernangomez and Burton could play the position I suppose. Darrell Arthur and Jameer Nelson work for salary fodder too. They have the flotsam to make a deal work if the Cavs want young players and picks in return, whether the 15% kicker kicks in before or after.

If they were to make a move, they'd be foolish to not trade one of their excess PF for a SF. They'd be in a similar position as the Celtics in that they are ready to compete now but with Jokic, Irving, one of Murray/Harris and the other youngsters, they are prepared to compete in the future as well. I've said it a few times and a few others have too but Crowder to the Nuggets for one of HG, Lyles or Lydon makes a lot of sense. A S&T for Plumlee would have made some since too before the Baynes signing but Denver probably wants to keep him anyway.

Irving/Harris/Chandler/Millsap/Jokic with a bench of Crowder, Burton, and Plumlee sounds pretty good. They'd still have some of the players from the group of HG, Mudiay, Lyles, Lydon, Beasley etc with youth and potential to fill out the bench.

I'd love to see it. Denver is probably my favorite team to follow outside of Boston. If it isn't them, it's the Bucks. Jokic is my favorite non Celtics player and Harris is probably my 3rd behind Kris Middleton. If they make a move for Irving, Denver could make a run at the 4 seed alongside Minn/OKC. I'm guessing GSW, Houston and Spurs have the first 3 seeds locked up.

Cesar Crespo · Jul 22, 2017

maufman said:
This really illustrates the conundrum that Cleveland faces.

On an exchange-of-value basis, this makes perfect sense -- Cleveland trades two years of Kyrie for one year of a better player. But the Cavs don't need another big. And it's unlikely that they can strike a mutually acceptable deal for another PG. So unless they're blowing it up, they pretty much have to trade Kyrie for a wing. And since, as @DeJesus Built My Hotrod says, smart teams value wings more highly than ball handlers, the Cavs are likely doomed to receive less than fair value.

Would Kyrie work alongside Jrue Holiday anyway? They signed Rondo too but that signing wouldn't prevent them from making a deal for Kyrie. The Jrue Holiday signing might though. Jrue does have the reputation of a good defender and the length to guard 2s so they may be a good pairing. Davis would also hide some of Irving's shortcomings. I'm sure Cleveland would have an easy enough time to move Kevin Love or Tristan Thompson for a pg/sg. If the Suns are still interested in Kevin Love (they probably aren't), Bledsoe would work. I'm not sure a Cousins/James/Bledsoe trio has any better odds beating GS though.

If they really wanted a wing, I wonder if the Bucks would be interested in a Middleton(+?) for Irving swap.

Kliq · Jul 22, 2017

I'm very confused by Irving's request. I get the idea that he wants to be THE MAN, but that is a stupid idea. No one is really a solo act in the NBA and accomplishes anything significant other than filling up the stat sheet. Ask Paul George how being the man went in Indiana. To be truly successful you have to be on a team with at least one other all-star, preferably two or three. Also, if all he was concerned about was being the top guy, why not just wait until LeBron presumably leaves after next season?

I think the most logical idea is that Kyrie knows that James is a goner and wants to get out ahead of the storm because he doesn't want to be stuck on a losing team. What compromises that idea is the list of teams he doled out; Minnesota, Miami, New York and San Antonio. The first three teams didn't even make the playoffs, and presumably they would have to give up substantial assets to land Irving. If Irving was afraid of being stuck on a losing team, I think the last team I would want to be headed to would be the Knicks.

The word right now is that Irving wants to be the top star and doesn't like playing with LeBron. There are plenty of great players who may not be very fun to play with, but James isn't one of them. Irving gets all the shots he wants and LeBron is happy to differ to him on offense, even when he is on the floor with him. Remember, Irving was the one who took the dagger three that really sealed the championship for Cleveland in Game 7 last year. That is the ultimate trust in a player; Kobe, MJ, Bird, Oscar or many other all-time players would have hated to differed to another player in that situation.

I think what really has motivated Irving here is more of an off-the-court storyline between James and the Cavs. Irving was drafted by Cleveland when they were terrible and put together some promising first few years. LeBron suddenly comes back and commandeers the team and becomes the sole focus of everything. Cleveland is LeBron and LeBron is Cleveland. Every move is made to satisfy LeBron, from giving Tristan Thompson a huge contract and overpaying JR Smith to mortgaging the future to bring in veterans like Korver, Channing Frye and Timofey Mozgov. I personally think Cleveland should try and go all-in on the LeBron years; but if you are Kyrie and the team has basically said they don't care about your prime and now you hear that James is leaving in a year and you have three more years on your deal and the team will have nothing to build around---that would piss anyone off a bit. Through in all the other weird LeBron stuff like getting Blatt fired, the odd subtweets, the shopping of various players, and just the overall cult of personality that swirls around him in Cleveland, and I can understand why Kyrie wants out.

At the end of the day though, Cleveland is just one KD foot injury or Curry sprained ankle from winning another championship. When you are this close I think you just have to suck it up and hold on for another year. If LeBron bolts after this year Kyrie is still a superstar in his prime with two more years on his deal, Cleveland can always trade him and start rebuilding again.

nighthob · Jul 22, 2017

Devizier said:
One thing to keep in mind is that the Cavaliers could actually improve in the short term by trading Irving. Depends on the package of players they get back.

They're definitely at a crossroads. They could go whole hog in an attempt to hold on to James by starting his dream team there. A trade with Phoenix where Irving/whatever for Bledsoe/Booker/whatever followed by a deal with the Knicks built around Love for Anthony (but it would likely need a Smith for Lee swap included to help the Cavs out on the defensive end) would allow the Cavs to compete with the Warriors and might convince James to stay.

Clears Cleaver · Jul 22, 2017

Man, lebron is kind of screwed if winning titles are primary goal. He's got maybe three years left of Prime dominance. I'm not sure I see a scenario where he can find a team that can beat GSW. Certainly not in a trade or w Cleveland ex kyrie. Unless he signs for way under value w the LAC?

kazuneko · Jul 22, 2017

Clears Cleaver said:
Man, lebron is kind of screwed if winning titles are primary goal. He's got maybe three years left of Prime dominance. I'm not sure I see a scenario where he can find a team that can beat GSW. Certainly not in a trade or w Cleveland ex kyrie. Unless he signs for way under value w the LAC?

All depends how much he wants to win. If he wants to sign for the mid-level exception, Boston would be a perfect fit..lol

Cellar-Door · Jul 22, 2017

I'll say this....
Lebron's on the floor game is team oriented, and may be fun to play with.
Everything else about being in the same franchise as LeBron sounds awful. Especially with the way his business interests in Klutch sports and leveraging his constant threats to opt out and leave into signings of the guys he wants.
LeBron may be a dream on-court, but overall he's maybe the single most high maintenance, passive aggressive pain in the ass in the entire league. This isn't Tim Duncan we're talking about, it's completely reasonable to be pretty sick of him after a while, especially when it looks like another year of aggravation with a team that got worse from not being good enough to beat GS.

Grin&MartyBarret · Jul 22, 2017

Cellar-Door said:
I'll say this....
Lebron's on the floor game is team oriented, and may be fun to play with.
Everything else about being in the same franchise as LeBron sounds awful. Especially with the way his business interests in Klutch sports and leveraging his constant threats to opt out and leave into signings of the guys he wants.
LeBron may be a dream on-court, but overall he's maybe the single most high maintenance, passive aggressive pain in the ass in the entire league. This isn't Tim Duncan we're talking about, it's completely reasonable to be pretty sick of him after a while, especially when it looks like another year of aggravation with a team that got worse from not being good enough to beat GS.

This seems like somebody bending over backwards to attach a narrative to LeBron that fits an existing bias.

LeBron doesn't owe Dan Gilbert shit. Dan Gilbert, on the other hand, reaped the benefits of having the best player of his generation born 20 miles away. Gilbert hired shitty coaches, fired GMs like it was nothing, and wasted great years of an all-time great's career by pairing him with Larry Hughes and Antawn Jameson. And then LeBron comes back, and you think James is high maintenance and passive aggressive because he used his leverage to ensure his shitty owner put a good team on the floor? You'd have preferred he sign a 5 year deal there? What's in it for him? Gilbert threw away Paul George by firing Griffin out of the blue mid-negotiation. LeBron should put his career in those hands?

ishmael · Jul 22, 2017

BigSoxFan said:
This seems like a potential Pat Riley play. Kyrie for Dragic/Winslow? Salaries appear to work. Miami gets a superstar and he gets a team of his own. Cleveland gets a good PG and a 2-way wing that they desperately need.

Funny enough, Kyrie's two "most similar" players according to the stats?

Goran Dragic and Isaiah Thomas
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/i/irvinky01.html

Cellar-Door · Jul 22, 2017

Grin&MartyBarret said:
This seems like somebody bending over backwards to attach a narrative to LeBron that fits an existing bias.

LeBron doesn't owe Dan Gilbert shit. Dan Gilbert, on the other hand, reaped the benefits of having the best player of his generation born 20 miles away. Gilbert hired shitty coaches, fired GMs like it was nothing, and wasted great years of an all-time great's career by pairing him with Larry Hughes and Antawn Jameson. And then LeBron comes back, and you think James is high maintenance and passive aggressive because he used his leverage to ensure his shitty owner put a good team on the floor? You'd have preferred he sign a 5 year deal there? What's in it for him? Gilbert threw away Paul George by firing Griffin out of the blue mid-negotiation. LeBron should put his career in those hands?

I don't think LeBron owes Gilbert anything. Gilbert is a terrible owner.

I do think that LeBron is at all times looking out for LeBron above all things, and his teammates aren't a priority to him. LeBron doesn't just "use his leverage to get a good team" he uses his leverage to ensure that the players and coaching staff are precisely the players and coaching staff LEBRON wants.

Do we think Kyrie had any say in Tyronn Lue replacing David Blatt?

Do we think Kyrie (or any of LeBron's teammates) were thrilled that he forced the front office into giving Tristan Thompson an above market deal as an RFA that now has tax crippled them just because Tristan was a Klutch Sports client?

How about wasting roster space and money on James Jones instead of a younger player who could actually play?

I applaud LeBron's strategy of keeping owners on their toes by never signing long term deals. I also think that he's probably pretty unbearable to deal with as a teammate.

It's unclear if Kyrie really wants to be "the man" or if what he wants is to be in the room. In Miami, LeBron was "the man" but Wade had substantial pull, Bosh to an extent too, and LeBron included them, they were a group. In Cleveland, whether personality, age difference whatever, LeBron pushes ownership and the front office to do what he wants and Kyrie isn't even consulted. When the team struggles, LeBron starts making passive aggressive comments about his teammates, or coaches. Like most superstars, he's an asshole (MJ, Bird, Kobe, Shaq) and it wears on people.

DeJesus Built My Hotrod · Jul 22, 2017

Grin&MartyBarret said:
This seems like somebody bending over backwards to attach a narrative to LeBron that fits an existing bias.

LeBron doesn't owe Dan Gilbert shit. Dan Gilbert, on the other hand, reaped the benefits of having the best player of his generation born 20 miles away. Gilbert hired shitty coaches, fired GMs like it was nothing, and wasted great years of an all-time great's career by pairing him with Larry Hughes and Antawn Jameson. And then LeBron comes back, and you think James is high maintenance and passive aggressive because he used his leverage to ensure his shitty owner put a good team on the floor? You'd have preferred he sign a 5 year deal there? What's in it for him? Gilbert threw away Paul George by firing Griffin out of the blue mid-negotiation. LeBron should put his career in those hands?

While I think C-D has a point about LeBron being high maintenance - and given his ability and accomplishments, its easy to see why he is that way - I agree with you here. When you have the most talented player in your sport and one of, if not the greatest basketball players of all time on your team, you accommodate him as best you can. Gilbert appears incapable or simply unable to capitalize on having an all-time great fall into his lap and is likely going to lose out on him not once but twice as a result.

sezwho · Jul 22, 2017

Kliq said:
I think what really has motivated Irving here is more of an off-the-court storyline between James and the Cavs. Irving was drafted by Cleveland when they were terrible and put together some promising first few years. LeBron suddenly comes back and commandeers the team and becomes the sole focus of everything. Cleveland is LeBron and LeBron is Cleveland. Every move is made to satisfy LeBron, from giving Tristan Thompson a huge contract and overpaying JR Smith to mortgaging the future to bring in veterans like Korver, Channing Frye and Timofey Mozgov. I personally think Cleveland should try and go all-in on the LeBron years; but if you are Kyrie and the team has basically said they don't care about your prime and now you hear that James is leaving in a year and you have three more years on your deal and the team will have nothing to build around---that would piss anyone off a bit. Through in all the other weird LeBron stuff like getting Blatt fired, the odd subtweets, the shopping of various players, and just the overall cult of personality that swirls around him in Cleveland, and I can understand why Kyrie wants out.

At the end of the day though, Cleveland is just one KD foot injury or Curry sprained ankle from winning another championship. When you are this close I think you just have to suck it up and hold on for another year. If LeBron bolts after this year Kyrie is still a superstar in his prime with two more years on his deal, Cleveland can always trade him and start rebuilding again.

I'm down with all of this, but the bolded in particular.

Clears Cleaver said:
Man, lebron is kind of screwed if winning titles are primary goal. He's got maybe three years left of Prime dominance. I'm not sure I see a scenario where he can find a team that can beat GSW. Certainly not in a trade or w Cleveland ex kyrie. Unless he signs for way under value w the LAC?

I can. The Boston Celtics.

2017 NBA offseason thread

Member

New Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

79

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

canderson-lite

Member

Member

Member

Member

mikey lowell of the sandbox

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

Homeland Security

Member

Member

Member

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers

Member

Member

79

79

Member

Member

Lil' Bill

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member