DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum As the Cavs' World Turns

If their really is only one ball..

Wouldnt you want to maximize the talent that can touch it?

Is 7 players ranging from average to great, better than 5 players ranging from all star to great?

I am almost positive that you have no idea of what I was talking about when I said "there is only one ball." It's an old saying that has proven to be true for generations.

I know you won't believe me because that is just who you are, so Excel or someone, will you help me out here and tell That Guy what I am talking about?

And again...........I am NOT saying it wouldn't work. It's just that GS would have to consider quite a few things, such as that one, before they make a deal like that.

It's definitely just a rumor (Durant currently plays for the Thunder). But when Woj says things they carry weight.

What happened to these two rumors [and no, I am not being sarcastic]

--Durant perhaps wanting to play in Washington?

and

--Westbrook and Durant both playing for the Lakers?

It seems the Washington rumors have died because Durant was booed when he played there.

The Lakers?



I think the most likely scenario is that Durant signs a one year deal and then he and Westbrook enter free agency the same year.

I heard it during a telecast the other night. I am not saying it's going to happen. I am saying that the guys in the studio said something about both going to the Lakers. Not sure why that is so funny?

Because the Lakers are a joke and have struck out on every player they have met with since Dr. Buss died.

If I was GS the only thing I would be thinking about his how to keep my current roster in tact and happy..

I know it seems absurd to say that you would turn down KD, but I wouldn't mess with what they have going on at GS

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. The only reason you'd do it is if something goes wrong in the playoffs and you need to switch things up. But you're talking about taking a team that could lose less than 10 games the whole season and toying with the chemistry. That's REALLY risky even if you're bringing in a Top 5 guy.

Remember the Lakers had won 3 Championships in a row and brought in Karl Malone and Gary Payton to go win a 4th. Things fell apart soon after. Sure, it probably had more to do with Kobe and Shaq not getting along, but if something is working so well that you are breaking records, I'd be really hard pressed to mess with it.

Do the Cavs still have those trade exemptions? If so, what can we possibly get with them?

Gary Payton and Karl Malone went to those Lakers at the end of their careers. Malone was almost 41 when they lost in the Finals that year. That's not a fair comparison.

Durant was the best player in the league a couple years ago. He hasn't quite gotten back to that level since his injury but I believe that was the only major injury he has had in the NBA.

You guys are making it sound like bringing in Durant would screw up the chemistry. He's always been known as a team-first, high-IQ player. He's a very underrated defender as well. He can play off the ball which he usually does in OKC anyway with Westbrook being OKC's primary ball handler. Thomspon, Green and the others aren't ball dominant players either so I'm not sure how much weight the whole, "There's only one ball" argument applies. Is having LeBron and Irving on the floor such a bad thing? Durant and Curry is a better duo than that by far! (And Draymond Green is a top 3 player this year in real plus-minus).

If you can upgrade from Harrison Barnes to Kevin Durant, you do it. Again you can find replacement backups just like every good team does. Iggy and Bogut might not even be in the team's long-term plans anyway.

That team would still have outstanding coaching, a good group of selfless and high-IQ players, a great culture, and first dibs in free agency because there are always good players who will sacrifice in order to win a ring. Barring catastrophic injury, that team could make a run at being one of the great dynasties in NBA history.

That Laker team was a disaster from the start.

No, we are saying it might.. and when you are already the best team in the league, by a fairly wide margin, why do you want to take that risk.

Think about the Spurs. That's a team that won the NBA championship a couple years ago, and most everybody agrees they were the second or third best team in the West last year. They are known for their good chemistry. Think about how crazy it would sound for them to pass on LaMarcus Aldridge for a chance to preserve that. And Aldridge isn't anywhere near as good of a player as Durant is.

That's also a good example of a team being able to sign quality players cheaply because vets want to win a ring. David West declined a $12 million player option from the Pacers and signed for the Spurs for $1.49 million. That's actually an unusually good example. The point is you can sign good role players in free agency. That team has another good example... Boban Marjanovich. Or look at how other teams fill out their rosters. The Cavs have done it through trades, others take a more long-term approach with developing draft picks, etc.

Superstars win championships in the NBA. Go through the list; it's mostly teams with 2-3 stars, usually including one of the best players in the league: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NBA_champions

Slightly different example, Spurs realize they are on their last gasp to win another title with Duncan, Parker, etc... they are trying to make that happen, as well as filling in spots to continue after they are gone with Leonard and Green, etc...

GS is just now reaching it's prime for it's best players...

I see little risk in that move to be honest. I'm having a hard time imagining a scenario where the combination of Durant+two mid-upper tier free agents actually perform worse than Barnes+Iggy+Bogut. Also think long-term-- that would set the Warriors up to be heavy favorites for a very long time. As it stands right now, yes they are the best team in the league, but they are not so far ahead of the Spurs, Cavs, and a couple other teams that they are a foregone conclusion to win the title. You'd take the field over the Warriors right now.

GS's best players are Curry, Green, and Thompson (in that order). You're not messing with that at all. We're talking about dumping a few role players to get Durant and a couple role players.

We have the trade exemption from when we traded Haywood's contract, and I believe we have 1 other very minor exemption.

we have the haywood-10.5mil and Mike Miller-something like 3.3mil

Ok so think about the East the last five years. The Heat represented the East four times in a row and then Cleveland last year. And the biggest reason is really LeBron. And Durant is one of the few players who has been on or at least close to that level (Durant was the rightful MVP a couple years ago).

It's not not just that, it's the surrounding cast and especially other all-star level players. Wade and Bosh were really good players, we all saw how they did not really fit all that well together, the chemistry was not great (I remember them always yelling at Mario Chalmers like he was a little kid) but at the end of the day, they were easily the best team in the East. Everybody here always seemed to think the Pacers would beat them because the Pacers also had good players and they had better chemistry etc. We all know how that turned out.

Or look at Atlanta last year. Lots of good players, Spurs-esque ball movement and fit and yet they got steamrolled by the Cavs (who didn't even have Kevin Love). Do you guys see where I'm going with this? Shaq and Kobe never liked each other when they played together. 3 straight championships. At the end of the day, talent rules.

Yes chemistry can help a lot-- the Warriors and Spurs won the last two titles and both teams have excellent chemistry. It counts. They also have tremendous players and that's what counts the most in this league. And again, Durant is no schmuck, he's a great two way player, a former MVP in his prime, and is universally recognized as a team-first, high IQ player. Beyond that though who cares, it's just a rumor at this point and often times these things have little substance in the first place.

edit: one more point, not only do I think this would this move help the Warriors tremendously, it also would cripple the Thunder. OKC has had some very untimely injury luck the last few years but they still have an outstanding core. They are the third best team in the West.

Not sure how we're not crushing this team...

Charlotte is a quality team with a good coach.

With that said, the Cavs should beat them pretty easily.

Our bench did not show up today

This team is soft, Thompson got destroyed. I've been saying and will say again this team as it is right now might make it out of the east that's not a given but they don't have a snowballs chance in hell of beating GS the way we give up points. Hope griffin is looking to add some toughness

I wish there was some teeth to the kyrie for Paul trade

Both are horrible point guards if you want to play up tempo.

We got destroyed on the boards.

The team reverted back to its old ways.

People on here think I love Blatt, but my issue has been w/the players.

Before the firing occurred, I said that the Cavs should not make any trades nor fire their coach. I said that the players should get together and buy into the ball movement system that Blatt wanted to win. I said that it all starts w/LeBron and him pounding nails, committing careless turnovers, and then walking back on defense was a bad example and it needed to change.

The players didn't take that route. Sure, things are great when you're rolling, but what happens in tough situations?

A few night ago, the Cavs had 9 passes on their last 10 possessions of the 4th quarter. That is an incredible stat. The ball movement was nonexistent in crunch time.

Last night we saw LeBron dribbling on the perimeter and hoisting up ugly bricks from deep. I swear I read MKG's lips telling LeBron to shoot it one time late in the game from the left wing.

Kyrie fell in love w/his own ability to dribble. On one late possession, he dribbled the entire time and then threw an off-target pass to the corner w/6 seconds left. JR had to force an off balance, contested shot as the shot clock was about to expire. Kyrie monopolized the ball for 18 seconds on that possession. The very next possession, he does the same thing. Dribble, dribble, dribble.........and then loses the handle in traffic w/8 seconds on the shot clock.

One other thing............Lue wants to play up-tempo ball, but Kyrie doesn't play any defense. Charlotte's best player was out last night and Lue still destroyed Kyrie. The Cavs have a huge issue because of their lack of perimeter defense and Lue wants to play small. Love is no help on the defensive end, so that puts TT and Moz in terrible situations. Lue really may want to consider playing Andy more and having lineups that have a combination of 2 out of these 3 players on the floor at times: TT, Moz, and Andy. If not, they are going to get punished defensively.

A few bad series of offense throws this entire team off. Plus, our third quarters suck and we come out cold.

Nowhere near the amount of assists compared to many of the recent games.

Plus, TT with four rebounds? Wtf happened last night what an awful showing.

These kinda games happen. Just a dud. There's a reason no team has ever gone undefeated.

Thats crazy talk..CP3 can play uptempo just fine, plus his defense alone would be a huge upgrade, and he isn't a score first PG so that means more ball to go around

his defense is fine until he plays Curry, which will happen when we go to the finals.

have you seen those compilation clips of curry destroying Paul?

it ain't pretty.

you mean when he tripped? not a big deal.. can you imagine what curry would do to Kyrie? Paul is a 5x all nba first team defensive guy. I'll take that over a guy who can't even stay in front of Jeremy Lin

i think kyrie can do better than paul on curry.

i think he did fairly well game 1 last year before he got injured, or for anybody guarding curry can possibly do.

now if we're talking straight floor general, then sure, paul by a long shot, i'm in agreement with you.

Kyrie is a terrible defender, Swish.

I don't want to fight w/you again, but man, he is really terrible at defense. The crazy thing is that Mo is even worse.

yeah, kyrie provides no resistance..Paul is 100x the defender Kyrie is and its not even close. Paul is all nba defender and steals leader yearly..If Paul can't stop curry, noone really can. I don't think curry is all that hard to stop if you be physical with him. Our problem is we have a team of marshmallows and get cleared out by half-assed screens because they left their balls in the locker room

I agree w/most of what you are saying except for Curry being easy to stop. Dude is unconscious! Did you see his first quarter last night? Man.....

yeah my point was more players like Curry are either off or on, but a little guy like him don't like to get roughed up...we let them move too freely. Curry is very good, but most teams don't have anyone that can make him work for his shots..I was just saying if it was between kyrie and CP3, I take CP3 every single day. The thing that made kyries so good in the past was his offense was his defense, you score on him, he'd go back down and get it back..this year he is really off, especially the deep ball, he's shooting a lebronesque 25%

So you're saying there is some risk?

Ok, I didn't see the game last night. When the schedule was announced I was planning on trying to go in Charlotte but ended up not being able to.. glad I didn't.

How in the hell did we collapse against that team last night?