Paul George has the risk of leaving the team to go to LA as lakers are quietly building their own brand new super team. They already have a ridiculously good coach and some buddinh superstar potential players and will likely collect another top young talent this year. Next year they will be attractive AF for FAs like george who might feel like the time is roght for him to take the franchise to the next level. If you are boston there is no reason for you to take a risk when there are plenty of other fish in the sea. PG is also a laker fanboy so it might be like inviting a snake into your home for Boston since they are rivals and PG leaving to lakers would be like a double slap to their face. AD would be nice but he has also struggled with injuries and you dont even know if NO lets him go as he is their only ticket seller. NO might end up with an even higher pick than BRK so their oick might not be as attractive to that team.
Lebron nd Irving making up would not be better as Cavs already maxxed out their potential. They basically tried everything last year and won only 1 game so barring injuries to gsw the result will be the same every time they meet. Thats why there are rumors of Lebron leaving because staying would just be an exercise in futility, its like chess where both players know who wom but they still go through the motions anyway. This is actually a better result for CLe and increases the chance of Lebron not leaving.
Of course they are better off long term, but we are operating under the assumption that Lebron is leaving, so it's irrelevant. All I'm talking about is this upcoming season. They have ONE year to fit IT in. Other than Durant last year, star transitions like this don't usually go that smoothly in year 1.
Unless they turn that Brooklyn pick into a current star, I don't see it helping them at all, in terms of winning or keeping LeBron. The LeBron-Dan Gilbert relationship may be too fractured anyways.
Isaiah Thomas was better than Kyrie last season, and Jae Crowder is a good 3 & D wing that has one of the most positive on court impacts of any player in the league. As long as Thomas is healthy, the Cavs are a more talented team than last season.
Maybe statistically, but you can't tell me you'd rather have IT than Kyrie. As for Crowder, he'll def make them better on defense, and he shoots a good spot-up 3, but he won't strike fear in anyone's hearts offensively. For all his warts, JR Smith was an x-factor that could rail some crazy shots (see game 5 against the Warriors).
Lebron is a pragmatist, he already got 3 rings so more than sacrificing talent to win now he would want to be on a power team also in the future thats why he wanted Love instead of a win now guy like Horford or another vet. Its also why he left Miami in the first place and why he only signed for 3 years he always looks ahead. How much worse is IT+the sf they got over Irving? I don't see a large drop off and their bench got a big boost. The pick can always be traded for another disgruntled stud like Porzingis, Cousins, Davis even Cp3 (lol). But honestly CLE will still have a stacked team so they can just get an amazing talent for d bench.
Crowder is one of the top 20 guys in the NBA in positive on court impact. He's a better player than JR Smith. Thomas played better than Kyrie last year. He was in MVP conversation for a reason. Now, Kyrie has more natural ability, but the only difference right now between the two is height and age. Unless Kyrie Irving decides to become a passable defender and adapts his style to get his teammates involved, he's among the most overrated NBA players. There's a reason the Cavs were one of the worst teams in basketball anytime LeBron sat and Kyrie ran the show. So, the fact that Cleveland got Thomas, a valuable 3 & D wing in Crowder and what stands a good chance of being a top 5 pick next year for Kyrie is a major win for them.
But its not just kyrie its IT+Crowder lol. They can still keep both JR smith nd crowder I know u hate the cavs but objectively speaking the trade made them better.
The tricky part of these deals is that in the NBA, you can only have 5 players on the floor at once, so the team that gets the best player usually wins. In this case, it's Boston. IF, and it's a big IF, they get another star for the Brooklyn pick, then it will end up being a win for Cleveland. The Cavs don't beat the Warriors in 2016 if you replace Kyrie with IT (and even Crowder). They're not going to beat them this year either, as constructed. Unless they turn that pick into something. Of course. I meant that in terms of if one is on the floor, the other likely is not. Objectively speaking, I really don't think this trade made them better. Me hating the Cavs has nothing to do with my feelings on the trade. I'm not trying to fool myself... I genuinely don't think they got better, and more likely got worse, for next season.
Well first of all the Cavs already won the ring in 2016 so it doesn't matter if the trade now makes them win or not back then. Secondly I generally agree with your "best player" trade but not in this case cuz GSW has 6 stars in the lineup. Even if you have a good starting lineup it will still lose due to the bench because their bench has a star leading them. The new Cavs lineup may or may not beat GSw, we still gotta see how Crowder and IT fit with Lebron however everybody knows there's just a small chance of that happening. However that small chance is still better than the no chance they had previously with just LBJ, Irving and Love, they already tried that, the entire team went up full force and they only won 1 game, the gap is so big it doesn't matter if they fight 100 times GSW will win the series 100 times. Compared to the certainty of losing the unknown of IT+Crowder is better. Add in the future talent of top 5 pick which they can also cash in for someone else and its a slamdunk for the Cavs.
I don't think the gap was as big as people made it out to be, and I obviously have a bias towards GS and against CLE. Cleveland should have won game 3 and had it 2-2 going back to Oakland, and they had a decent lead in Game 5, lost it, then came back to make it a close game again in the 4th before ultimately losing. I'm telling you, the feel around the Bay Area is that the Cavs are much less scary now than they were before.
Last year was also KD's first year on the team, there was a lot of growing pains (in fact they got beat down by 30 pts their first game by the Spurs, a team they swept or almost swept by post season) the team experienced and KD wasn't 100% as he is coming off injury. They are gonna be better this year unless KD or somebody else gets injured again. In contrast to that Lebron and Irving had been playing together for 3 yrs already, they already optimized their play styles so like I said the gap between the two teams will just increase or stay the same. The people on the bay area like Irving more because he is a bigger name, these people don't consider salary implications or subs thats why they think Irving is superior. But Irving only built his reputation when Lebron arrived, before that Cavs were always picking in the top 5 they got Thomas at 4, the bust at 1, some other bust at 3 (forgot their names) and then Wiggins at 1 again before Lebron arrived. Without Lebron Irving was a loser, his team was always amongst the worst and during their tenure on the Cavs when Lebron sits the offense/defense tanks why do you think they gave up the lead in game 5? Lets see what happens but from Cavs viewpoint this is a total slam dunk whether Lebron leaves or not...in fact it is better in case Lebron leaves.
The problem was having to carry way too much of the load for the cavs to be successful. Even being 2-2 by game 7 Lebron would be worn out. He was getting worn out by the 4th Q. Every time he sat the warriors would go on a 10-0 run. Without durant I think cleveland would have beat the warriors, but with Durant it isn't really all that fair. The warriors also have a bunch of fake fans. 4-5 years ago I didn't see the #30 shirts.
Fair enough. Just want to point out that his career average was 17 ppg before last season. I wouldn't discount him using his first two seasons in SAC. Nor would I expect him to have another 29-point season. I think he will likely drop back to the 19-20 ppg range. It will be interesting to see how he performs alongside LeBron. BTW, Kyrie's scoring also spiked up last season, not as drastic as IT, but still interesting. His numbers have been amazingly consistent throughout his career so far, with or without LeBron.
