By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - The NBA discussion thread

Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:

T


That's the point though, LeBron would have stayed in Cleveland but nobody wanted to go there and they didn't exactly have the most enticing supporting cast anyway. The Cavs were so intent on giving LeBron players that were only good on paper or past their prime rather than make a decent trade to get him a good enough supporting cast. 

I don't think the league is all of a sudden going to turn into a make your own super team marathon. There are young, good teams and there are stacked teams already, Miami have just added through free agency like most good teams do. They added a superstar, which admittedly is a very rare feat to accomplish in free agency but I can't remember many MVP's playing with such an awful roster and sticking around for more than seven years.

See Kevin Garnett?   The Twolves were way worse then the Cavs.  (I'd argue Iverson as well.)

Cavs are tied for first in the east.  As great as Lebron James is... his cast in Cleveland is severly underrated.

The only realy issue was that Mo Williams sucks in the clutch.  The Cavs had some of the deepest and most talented role players in the NBA.  Their issue was they had no second dog... (Outside of mo, who sucked under pressure).

Their problem was they didn't trade any depth for a real second option.

Garnett has mentioned on more than a few occasions that he felt he should have left the Twolves earlier than he did, and he agreed with Lebron's decision to go. But I see the point you're making.

The Cavaliers have some good players, but it certainly says something when A) You can't manage to secure a decent free agent signing, even with the best player in the league on your team and B) Players like Jamison who started last year are now on the bench. 

Cleveland's two best supporting players, Mo and Varajeo (who I love), both shrunk into nothing in the playoffs and I really don't think Lebron had it in him to carry them yet again. On paper the Cavaliers had enough but those deep and talented role players simply came up short when it mattered, Shaq was signed for a series that never came and Hickson wasn't trusted to help Lebron. 

The Cavs were still leaps and bounds better than when LeBron arrived, obviously, don't get me wrong. I mean, the team he took to the finals consisted of Sasha Pavlovic, Daniel Gibson, a young and still too raw Varajeo and an oft-injured Big Z. That team wouldn't get to 20 wins without him really. 

They couldn't sign a free agent BECAUSE of Lebron and his contract which suggested he might leave.

Had he signed a regular contract, they would of eaisly signed free agents.

 

Well that and the fact that they kept Mo Brown around (because Lebron wanted them to.)

Mo Brown was horrible.  He's play someone 20-30 minutes, they'd have a big game, then sit them down for like 5 minutes the next game.

Where did you read that? I was under the impression Lebron wasn't happy with Brown's decisions, especially in the playoffs. They had more than enough opportunities to give Lebron decent help before this offseason, and it was made pretty clear by a fair few free agents around the league (like Bosh and Wade) that they simply didn't want to come to Cleveland. The Cavs missed out on a number of players that LeBron wanted, especially Jason Kidd, i think not signing him really pissed LBJ off. 

This season.

All the previous seasons he was a big supporter of Mike Brown... and where did I read it?   Everywhere?

As for Jason Kid... there really was no way for them to really get Jason Kid.

The big issue... (again lebron related) is Lebron REALLY liked Hickson and wanted to keep him around.

Hickson was going to be needed for any big trade.  Even the Jamison deal was supposed to hinge on Hickson till the wiz got desperate.


Whenever there was big trade talk, it was basically to see if the Cavs could get someone without Hickson, because Lebron wanted to keep Hickson... Hickson pretty much was always the deal breaker.

That and Mo Williams huge contract when he turned out to be a lot worse then everyone expected.



Around the Network

All in all though, it was pretty aparent after the offseason went down this was all planned since Team USA days.

Short of getting Kevin Druant and Chris Paul I don't think there was any Free agent signing that would of kept him in cleveland.

Including if they would of won a championship or two.

 

Bosh and Wade having documentries about their free agency signings?   By the SAME company?



Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:

T

 

 

Garnett has mentioned on more than a few occasions that he felt he should have left the Twolves earlier than he did, and he agreed with Lebron's decision to go. But I see the point you're making.

The Cavaliers have some good players, but it certainly says something when A) You can't manage to secure a decent free agent signing, even with the best player in the league on your team and B) Players like Jamison who started last year are now on the bench. 

Cleveland's two best supporting players, Mo and Varajeo (who I love), both shrunk into nothing in the playoffs and I really don't think Lebron had it in him to carry them yet again. On paper the Cavaliers had enough but those deep and talented role players simply came up short when it mattered, Shaq was signed for a series that never came and Hickson wasn't trusted to help Lebron. 

The Cavs were still leaps and bounds better than when LeBron arrived, obviously, don't get me wrong. I mean, the team he took to the finals consisted of Sasha Pavlovic, Daniel Gibson, a young and still too raw Varajeo and an oft-injured Big Z. That team wouldn't get to 20 wins without him really. 

They couldn't sign a free agent BECAUSE of Lebron and his contract which suggested he might leave.

Had he signed a regular contract, they would of eaisly signed free agents.

 

Well that and the fact that they kept Mo Brown around (because Lebron wanted them to.)

Mo Brown was horrible.  He's play someone 20-30 minutes, they'd have a big game, then sit them down for like 5 minutes the next game.

Where did you read that? I was under the impression Lebron wasn't happy with Brown's decisions, especially in the playoffs. They had more than enough opportunities to give Lebron decent help before this offseason, and it was made pretty clear by a fair few free agents around the league (like Bosh and Wade) that they simply didn't want to come to Cleveland. The Cavs missed out on a number of players that LeBron wanted, especially Jason Kidd, i think not signing him really pissed LBJ off. 

This season.

All the previous seasons he was a big supporter of Mike Brown... and where did I read it?   Everywhere?

As for Jason Kid... there really was no way for them to really get Jason Kid.

The big issue... (again lebron related) is Lebron REALLY liked Hickson and wanted to keep him around.

Hickson was going to be needed for any big trade.  Even the Jamison deal was supposed to hinge on Hickson till the wiz got desperate.


Whenever there was big trade talk, it was basically to see if the Cavs could get someone without Hickson, because Lebron wanted to keep Hickson... Hickson pretty much was always the deal breaker.

That and Mo Williams huge contract when he turned out to be a lot worse then everyone expected.

Keeping Hickson was never a bad thing though; many critics considered him to be the most talented player, offensively, that LeBron had played with in Cleveland (which says everything really). On paper the Jamison deal looked great, he was more flexible and dynamic than Amar'e and cost the Cavs next to nothing, but again it was another one of those deals that didn't pan out. Just the Mo Williams deal, just like the Ben Wallace deal, like pretty much every deal Mike Brown and Ferry made.

Mike Brown wasn't a great coach by any stretch, but no way the Cavs could justify firing a guy who won coach of the year and took them to two 60 win seasons. Oh sure, everyone accepted it was pretty much LeBron doing all the leading on and off the court, but you can't go ahead and fire a guy when your playoff run went like this:

2007 Finals

2008 Celtics in 7, an amazing series and lost mainly due to Paul Pierce going insanse

2009 Magic, a series that was much closer than people accept and really, Rashard Lewis turned into a clutch machine with his three points

It was only until 2010 when there was no plausible explanation other than bad players, a subpar Lebron performance and bad coaching decisions that there was much to complain about. 



Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for Sega. - Jason Lee, Mallrats.

http://theaveragejoe.sportsblognet.com/ - Mainly American Football, snippets of Basketball, European Football and Hockey. 

Not that I particularly blame him for leaving.

A lot of people are saying "He's from Cleveland, how could he do this!"

Which he isn't... he's from Akron.


It's a completley different city... which has the typical "Big thing small thing rivalry".

Where Akron thinks they have a big rivalry with Cleveland, and most people in cleveland don't even think about Akron on a monthly basis.


I mean, guys favorite teams were the Yankees and the Cowboys... I'd gurantee his favorite basketbal team before he started playing in the NBA was the Bulls.



Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:

T

 

 

Garnett has mentioned on more than a few occasions that he felt he should have left the Twolves earlier than he did, and he agreed with Lebron's decision to go. But I see the point you're making.

The Cavaliers have some good players, but it certainly says something when A) You can't manage to secure a decent free agent signing, even with the best player in the league on your team and B) Players like Jamison who started last year are now on the bench. 

Cleveland's two best supporting players, Mo and Varajeo (who I love), both shrunk into nothing in the playoffs and I really don't think Lebron had it in him to carry them yet again. On paper the Cavaliers had enough but those deep and talented role players simply came up short when it mattered, Shaq was signed for a series that never came and Hickson wasn't trusted to help Lebron. 

The Cavs were still leaps and bounds better than when LeBron arrived, obviously, don't get me wrong. I mean, the team he took to the finals consisted of Sasha Pavlovic, Daniel Gibson, a young and still too raw Varajeo and an oft-injured Big Z. That team wouldn't get to 20 wins without him really. 

They couldn't sign a free agent BECAUSE of Lebron and his contract which suggested he might leave.

Had he signed a regular contract, they would of eaisly signed free agents.

 

Well that and the fact that they kept Mo Brown around (because Lebron wanted them to.)

Mo Brown was horrible.  He's play someone 20-30 minutes, they'd have a big game, then sit them down for like 5 minutes the next game.

Where did you read that? I was under the impression Lebron wasn't happy with Brown's decisions, especially in the playoffs. They had more than enough opportunities to give Lebron decent help before this offseason, and it was made pretty clear by a fair few free agents around the league (like Bosh and Wade) that they simply didn't want to come to Cleveland. The Cavs missed out on a number of players that LeBron wanted, especially Jason Kidd, i think not signing him really pissed LBJ off. 

This season.

All the previous seasons he was a big supporter of Mike Brown... and where did I read it?   Everywhere?

As for Jason Kid... there really was no way for them to really get Jason Kid.

The big issue... (again lebron related) is Lebron REALLY liked Hickson and wanted to keep him around.

Hickson was going to be needed for any big trade.  Even the Jamison deal was supposed to hinge on Hickson till the wiz got desperate.


Whenever there was big trade talk, it was basically to see if the Cavs could get someone without Hickson, because Lebron wanted to keep Hickson... Hickson pretty much was always the deal breaker.

That and Mo Williams huge contract when he turned out to be a lot worse then everyone expected.

Keeping Hickson was never a bad thing though; many critics considered him to be the most talented player, offensively, that LeBron had played with in Cleveland (which says everything really). On paper the Jamison deal looked great, he was more flexible and dynamic than Amar'e and cost the Cavs next to nothing, but again it was another one of those deals that didn't pan out. Just the Mo Williams deal, just like the Ben Wallace deal, like pretty much every deal Mike Brown and Ferry made.

Mike Brown wasn't a great coach by any stretch, but no way the Cavs could justify firing a guy who won coach of the year and took them to two 60 win seasons. Oh sure, everyone accepted it was pretty much LeBron doing all the leading on and off the court, but you can't go ahead and fire a guy when your playoff run went like this:

2007 Finals

2008 Celtics in 7, an amazing series and lost mainly due to Paul Pierce going insanse

2009 Magic, a series that was much closer than people accept and really, Rashard Lewis turned into a clutch machine with his three points

It was only until 2010 when there was no plausible explanation other than bad players, a subpar Lebron performance and bad coaching decisions that there was much to complain about. 

Except, you are suggesting LeBron was mad becuase they didn't get any of those big trades.

Which you know, would of required Hickson.  Who he wanted to keep.

So how are both of those things possible?

 

As for firing Mike Brown.  I disagree... it's happened before with big performances.  2009 was the perfect chance to fire him because he did not adjust his gameplans and had the same dumb subsitution issues.



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:


Keeping Hickson was never a bad thing though; many critics considered him to be the most talented player, offensively, that LeBron had played with in Cleveland (which says everything really). On paper the Jamison deal looked great, he was more flexible and dynamic than Amar'e and cost the Cavs next to nothing, but again it was another one of those deals that didn't pan out. Just the Mo Williams deal, just like the Ben Wallace deal, like pretty much every deal Mike Brown and Ferry made.

Mike Brown wasn't a great coach by any stretch, but no way the Cavs could justify firing a guy who won coach of the year and took them to two 60 win seasons. Oh sure, everyone accepted it was pretty much LeBron doing all the leading on and off the court, but you can't go ahead and fire a guy when your playoff run went like this:

2007 Finals

2008 Celtics in 7, an amazing series and lost mainly due to Paul Pierce going insanse

2009 Magic, a series that was much closer than people accept and really, Rashard Lewis turned into a clutch machine with his three points

It was only until 2010 when there was no plausible explanation other than bad players, a subpar Lebron performance and bad coaching decisions that there was much to complain about. 

Except, you are suggesting LeBron was mad becuase they didn't get any of those big trades.

Which you know, would of required Hickson.  Who he wanted to keep.

So how are both of those things possible?

 

As for firing Mike Brown.  I disagree... it's happened before with big performances.  2009 was the perfect chance to fire him because he did not adjust his gameplans and had the same dumb subsitution issues.

Hickson was drafted in 2008...they had 4 years of missed opportunities and bad trades before then which Hickson wasn't a part of. Players like Gooden, Szczerbiak, Wallace; a laundry list of average, average players. 



Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for Sega. - Jason Lee, Mallrats.

http://theaveragejoe.sportsblognet.com/ - Mainly American Football, snippets of Basketball, European Football and Hockey. 

Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:


Keeping Hickson was never a bad thing though; many critics considered him to be the most talented player, offensively, that LeBron had played with in Cleveland (which says everything really). On paper the Jamison deal looked great, he was more flexible and dynamic than Amar'e and cost the Cavs next to nothing, but again it was another one of those deals that didn't pan out. Just the Mo Williams deal, just like the Ben Wallace deal, like pretty much every deal Mike Brown and Ferry made.

Mike Brown wasn't a great coach by any stretch, but no way the Cavs could justify firing a guy who won coach of the year and took them to two 60 win seasons. Oh sure, everyone accepted it was pretty much LeBron doing all the leading on and off the court, but you can't go ahead and fire a guy when your playoff run went like this:

2007 Finals

2008 Celtics in 7, an amazing series and lost mainly due to Paul Pierce going insanse

2009 Magic, a series that was much closer than people accept and really, Rashard Lewis turned into a clutch machine with his three points

It was only until 2010 when there was no plausible explanation other than bad players, a subpar Lebron performance and bad coaching decisions that there was much to complain about. 

Except, you are suggesting LeBron was mad becuase they didn't get any of those big trades.

Which you know, would of required Hickson.  Who he wanted to keep.

So how are both of those things possible?

 

As for firing Mike Brown.  I disagree... it's happened before with big performances.  2009 was the perfect chance to fire him because he did not adjust his gameplans and had the same dumb subsitution issues.

Hickson was drafted in 2008...they had 4 years of missed opportunities and bad trades before then which Hickson wasn't a part of. Players like Gooden, Szczerbiak, Wallace; a laundry list of average, average players. 

Vs what other options?

They should of traded Szczerbiak's contract earlier, but that was pretty much the only mistake they made up till then.

Though actually i'm pretty sure the Szczerbiak contract wasn't worth much until like 2009.



Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:


Keeping Hickson was never a bad thing though; many critics considered him to be the most talented player, offensively, that LeBron had played with in Cleveland (which says everything really). On paper the Jamison deal looked great, he was more flexible and dynamic than Amar'e and cost the Cavs next to nothing, but again it was another one of those deals that didn't pan out. Just the Mo Williams deal, just like the Ben Wallace deal, like pretty much every deal Mike Brown and Ferry made.

Mike Brown wasn't a great coach by any stretch, but no way the Cavs could justify firing a guy who won coach of the year and took them to two 60 win seasons. Oh sure, everyone accepted it was pretty much LeBron doing all the leading on and off the court, but you can't go ahead and fire a guy when your playoff run went like this:

2007 Finals

2008 Celtics in 7, an amazing series and lost mainly due to Paul Pierce going insanse

2009 Magic, a series that was much closer than people accept and really, Rashard Lewis turned into a clutch machine with his three points

It was only until 2010 when there was no plausible explanation other than bad players, a subpar Lebron performance and bad coaching decisions that there was much to complain about. 

Except, you are suggesting LeBron was mad becuase they didn't get any of those big trades.

Which you know, would of required Hickson.  Who he wanted to keep.

So how are both of those things possible?

 

As for firing Mike Brown.  I disagree... it's happened before with big performances.  2009 was the perfect chance to fire him because he did not adjust his gameplans and had the same dumb subsitution issues.

Hickson was drafted in 2008...they had 4 years of missed opportunities and bad trades before then which Hickson wasn't a part of. Players like Gooden, Szczerbiak, Wallace; a laundry list of average, average players. 

Vs what other options?

The fact is the Cavs gave up draft picks left right and centre to acquire subpar players and didn't expect it to come back and bite them. Are you telling me other teams didn't make big moves during those seasons? Ray Allen (and glen davis) went to the Celtics for Szczerbiak, West and Jeff Greene! I think we remember where two of those players have played, Pau Gasol was traded for what amounted to a snickers and about $12 in change.

I even forgot about Larry Hughes; the Cavs had nothing to trade with because they took awful, AWFUL contracts and were so strapped for cash even with Lebron earning 5 million a year in 2006. 



Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for Sega. - Jason Lee, Mallrats.

http://theaveragejoe.sportsblognet.com/ - Mainly American Football, snippets of Basketball, European Football and Hockey. 

Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:
Kasz216 said:


Keeping Hickson was never a bad thing though; many critics considered him to be the most talented player, offensively, that LeBron had played with in Cleveland (which says everything really). On paper the Jamison deal looked great, he was more flexible and dynamic than Amar'e and cost the Cavs next to nothing, but again it was another one of those deals that didn't pan out. Just the Mo Williams deal, just like the Ben Wallace deal, like pretty much every deal Mike Brown and Ferry made.

Mike Brown wasn't a great coach by any stretch, but no way the Cavs could justify firing a guy who won coach of the year and took them to two 60 win seasons. Oh sure, everyone accepted it was pretty much LeBron doing all the leading on and off the court, but you can't go ahead and fire a guy when your playoff run went like this:

2007 Finals

2008 Celtics in 7, an amazing series and lost mainly due to Paul Pierce going insanse

2009 Magic, a series that was much closer than people accept and really, Rashard Lewis turned into a clutch machine with his three points

It was only until 2010 when there was no plausible explanation other than bad players, a subpar Lebron performance and bad coaching decisions that there was much to complain about. 

Except, you are suggesting LeBron was mad becuase they didn't get any of those big trades.

Which you know, would of required Hickson.  Who he wanted to keep.

So how are both of those things possible?

 

As for firing Mike Brown.  I disagree... it's happened before with big performances.  2009 was the perfect chance to fire him because he did not adjust his gameplans and had the same dumb subsitution issues.

Hickson was drafted in 2008...they had 4 years of missed opportunities and bad trades before then which Hickson wasn't a part of. Players like Gooden, Szczerbiak, Wallace; a laundry list of average, average players. 

Vs what other options?

The fact is the Cavs gave up draft picks left right and centre to acquire subpar players and didn't expect it to come back and bite them. Are you telling me other teams didn't make big moves during those seasons? Ray Allen (and glen davis) went to the Celtics for Szczerbiak, West and Jeff Greene! I think we remember where two of those players have played, Pau Gasol was traded for what amounted to a snickers and about $12 in change.

I even forgot about Larry Hughes; the Cavs had nothing to trade with because they took awful, AWFUL contracts and were so strapped for cash even with Lebron earning 5 million a year in 2006. 

Except... they didn't give up draft picks left right and center? 

Larry Hughes they signed as a free agent.

They got Wallace and Sczerbiak in a trade that involved NO draftpicks.

They got Gooden in a deal that netted Varejao AND 2 draft picks.

They traded away a total of 3 picks in 7 years... but also traded for a pick.

So, they traded a way a total of 2 draft picks.


Getting good players in steals has little to do with "wanting" them and more with having the right number of expiring contracts at the right year.  Which by the way the Celtics had when they got ray allen.

You may be a fan of the game, but it's pretty clear you don't know much about the salary cap/trade portion of it.



Kasz216 said:
Bladeneo said:

 

Except, you are suggesting LeBron was mad becuase they didn't get any of those big trades.

Which you know, would of required Hickson.  Who he wanted to keep.

So how are both of those things possible?

 

As for firing Mike Brown.  I disagree... it's happened before with big performances.  2009 was the perfect chance to fire him because he did not adjust his gameplans and had the same dumb subsitution issues.

Hickson was drafted in 2008...they had 4 years of missed opportunities and bad trades before then which Hickson wasn't a part of. Players like Gooden, Szczerbiak, Wallace; a laundry list of average, average players. 

Vs what other options?

The fact is the Cavs gave up draft picks left right and centre to acquire subpar players and didn't expect it to come back and bite them. Are you telling me other teams didn't make big moves during those seasons? Ray Allen (and glen davis) went to the Celtics for Szczerbiak, West and Jeff Greene! I think we remember where two of those players have played, Pau Gasol was traded for what amounted to a snickers and about $12 in change.

I even forgot about Larry Hughes; the Cavs had nothing to trade with because they took awful, AWFUL contracts and were so strapped for cash even with Lebron earning 5 million a year in 2006. 

Except... they didn't give up draft picks left right and center? 

Larry Hughes they signed as a free agent.

They got Wallace and Sczerbiak in a trade that involved NO draftpicks.

They got Gooden in a deal that netted Varejao AND 2 draft picks.

They traded away a total of 3 picks in 7 years... but also traded for a pick.

So, they traded a way a total of 2 draft picks.


Getting good players in steals has little to do with "wanting" them and more with having the right number of expiring contracts at the right year.  Which by the way the Celtics had when they got ray allen.

You may be a fan of the game, but it's pretty clear you don't know much about the salary cap/trade portion of it.

I'd call not having a first round pick in 2005 or 2007, and trading away Shannon Brown who was drafted in 2008, pretty disappointing draft policy. 

It's irrelevant what you think I know about the salary cap or trading, that has absolutely nothing to do with me being able to recognize trading away Gooden, Hughes and Shannon Brown (now a key piece off the Lakers bench) for an aging, ineffective Ben Wallace  was a bad choice. I can't disagree with the Szczerbiak trade that much because Delonte West was worth Donyell Marshall and Ira Newble. But whatever, you can just go back to insulting my intelligence I guess. 



Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for Sega. - Jason Lee, Mallrats.

http://theaveragejoe.sportsblognet.com/ - Mainly American Football, snippets of Basketball, European Football and Hockey.