Cavs: the Blog - Cleveland Cavaliers TrueHoop Blog

Omri Casspi reportedly wants out of Cleveland. This makes enough sense. Casspi came into the league as its first Israeli player, and put together a solid rookie campaign, averaging 10.3 points per game with 52 TS% in 25 minutes per game. His numbers dipped in his sophomore year in the league—8.6 points per game with 51.7 TS%—and he was dealt over the summer to the Cavaliers, where he put up his worst season as a professional: 7.1 points per game with 49.9 TS%. Most disoncertingly, his touch from beyond the three-point line left him, and he shot just 31.5% on threes after converting 37.1% of his attempts from deep over his first two seasons.

Casspi was acquired during one of the darker hours in Cavaliers history, and perhaps he was permeated by its sour milk stench. He came into the organization in a swap for J.J. Hickson—whose tantalizing potential had burned up in the smoldering wasteland that LeBron left behind—and I remember thinking that the acquisition of Casspi and a heavily protected draft pick in return for the young power forward was a rather dour comment on what a failure the Hickson project had been. (Nevermind that he seems to be realizing some of his potential playing the role of a rebounding center, of all things, in Portland.)

The numbers above indicate that the season following his move to Cleveland was the worst of Casspi’s career by a wide margin, but they don’t illustrate just how inept he looked, especially during the first half of the year. His three-point touch left him, but so did everything else: he blew lay-ups, bobbled passes, and generally looked like he was being controlled by a drunk poltergeist. He began the season as the team’s starting small forward but by midseason was logging 12-to-15 minutes per game, in which he tried hard on defense and stood around on offense, occasionally launching prayerless threes and making facial expressions like someone who has just leaped off a tall building to their death but is also remembering they left the stove on in their apartment.

It’s riveting and horrifying to watch someone who has been great at something their entire lives—in Casspi’s case, basketball—fail at it so repeatedly that you can see them start to think, “Y’know, maybe this just isn’t for me. Maybe I can still go to law school.” You could see Casspi’s confidence circling the drain, and he looked disoriented, at once home and in a foreign land. Of course Casspi, who left Israel to play in the NBA, knows that feeling in a more literal sense. As he struggled, it began to look like his other home, a basketball court, didn’t belong to him anymore either.

Omri Casspi seems to be putting the nightmare of last year behind him. In limited minutes this season, he has looked like an NBA rotation player again. He’s more at home than ever behind the three-point line, shooting 40.8% on 49 attempts, and he has improved on the defensive end—this is faint praise, but he is the best defender on one of the league’s worst benches. But if Casspi is trying to prove that last year was a slight aberration and that he can contribute to an NBA team—I would argue that he has been successful at doing so—then his efforts are being hampered by a coaching staff that won’t play him. He’s racking up DNPs while Luke Walton—whose birth, I believe, is chronicled in some of Milton’s poetry—plays double-digit minutes and Byron Scott experiments with three-guard lineups that function like a one-winged bird.

One refrain sports fans lean on is that, on a bad team, the young talent should get as much playing time as possible. Why bother with Luke Walton—the inspiration for several of Buster Keaton’s more memorable characters—when he’s definitely not going to be part of the team’s future? It’s not an uncompelling argument, but one of the problems with it is guaranteeing playing time to anyone under the age of 26. A lot of coaches believe that playing time—especially on a bad team—needs to be doled out according to merit because it’s one of the most powerful motivational tools coaches have at their disposal. PT can act as a developmental carrot, more or less. As a player works hard and continually raises his level of play, the logic goes, he will play in games more frequently and for longer stretches. Coaches pull players from games for bad shots or lackadaisical defense, and put in someone else with the either explicit or implicit directive, “Don’t screw up like the dude I just sat down did.” Regulating playing time is one of the few ways a coach can exercise control over his players. It establishes a decorum of the court, so to speak—a player understands that he must play a certain way if he wants to keep playing.

The paternalism inherent in all this—coach as parent, player as child—is gross in the way that a lot of things about sports are necessarily gross. We talk about the need to “control” someone like DeMarcus Cousins or J.R. Smith, and using a word like that feels improper and disrespectful, but it’s also true to an extent: players need to fall in line and adhere to, at least, a loose set of principles in order for this whole team sport thing to work.

But the Casspi situation is where we get to a word that I can’t say on this Disney-owned property—it involves male cattle and food and the end product of that food. I don’t know what Casspi said or did to Byron Scott other than look terrible for long stretches last year, but if he has not been, in limited minutes, one of the eight best Cavaliers—this is not a high bar to clear; Casspi doesn’t compare favorably with your average eighth man—then I know nothing about the sport I’ve been watching religiously since I was eleven. Maybe Casspi just spends practices farting and making racist jokes, but if he doesn’t, then he should be getting his 15-to-18 minutes per game off the bench. He works hard on defense and helps space the floor on offense. He has earned his minutes, and I know Scott probably wants to give the other young players some burn and let them exhibit what they can do in an NBA game, but he should take that playing time from someone else. Jerking around the floor-time of a guy who is coming off a year where I imagine he was flat-out terrified of falling out of the league probably isn’t good for his confidence, which is important because confidence is what shooters like Casspi need most. He needs to know that if he clanks a few threes, he’s not going to get shelved for two weeks.

I don’t usually come down hard on coaching decisions because a.) my opinion doesn’t hold any sway, so there’s no use getting worked up about it, and b.) I literally do not know what I’m talking about because I’m not in the locker room. Maybe there is a really good reason that Scott has been so liberal in messing with Casspi’s minutes this season, but I’m more apt to believe that it’s out of neglect or ineptitude or some overly rigid philosophy that, when applied to this particular situation, does not work. Clearly, Omri Casspi doesn’t understand what forces are at work because he has asked to be traded. Free Casspi, Byron Scott, or he will, as he should, free himself.

Anderson Varejao is out for the next six-to-eight weeks with a tear in his quadricep. I just tilt my head slightly to the side and make a sound like a dog being miserably awakened from its nap. The Cavaliers’ season has been punishing to watch in a way that’s not entirely straightforward. The source of punishment isn’t that the team is bad—though they are; Luke Walton plays significant minutes some nights—but that it’s difficult to conceive of them not being bad. It’s hard to discern a path toward greatness or pretty good-dom for the Cavaliers.

Perhaps this has to do with the fact that, if and when the Cavs are great or pretty good, half the players on this team won’t be around anymore. We will have forgotten about C.J. Miles’s early offense step-back jumpers and Jon Leuer will be playing in Europe and Luke Walton will have passed away. They will be replaced by more competent players, and those more competent players will not be asked to carry the offense for long stretches because the team will have a couple of options outside of Kyrie Irving—who will have moved into a full beard phase about which we will be ambivalent—capable of creating scoring chances.

But another reason the way forward is tough to visualize is because the team has a nasty habit of looking like a tire fire that decided to show up at an NBA arena. The ball doesn’t move on offense, the defense can be split open by just about any halfway decent guard, and fourth quarters resemble a scene from Story of the Eye more than they do a team that knows what it’s doing. Byron Scott is aloof to the point of inscrutability, and I would criticize his rotations more harshly, but he’s trying to build a second unit out of wet paper and bobby pins. The ineptitude on the court—which isn’t a surprise, really; we knew this team would be bad—is so severe and the parts are so disparate (and perhaps disposable) as to obfuscate the future. I know the Cavs are going to be better next year because young players can only improve and because I think the front office is going to spend a little money to reinforce the bench, but I don’t know how the team is going be better. It’s comforting to see the beginnings of developmental curve because you can extrapolate from it, but I can’t yet make out lines that mean anything to me. I just see bad basketball with interstitial moments of raw talent—a Tristan Thompson put-back dunk, a layup from Dion Waiters where it looks like he’s skating on air—and can’t locate a signal in the noise. I’m uneasy and hopeful.

If watching the actual games makes me anxious, the unknowableness of this team that allows me to dream exhilarates me. The prospect of trading Anderson Varejao and, in return, getting some young talent and/or a high draft pick, whether it was realistic or not, was exciting in the way that blank space is exciting. Dread and optimism intermingling. The unknown can always be better than the known. And when the known is a messy, occasionally unwatchable team without a clear identity, the unknown becomes even more appealing. The Clips would need to be overwhelmed by an offer in order to trade Blake Griffin, but the Lakers would ship out Pau Gasol in a heartbeat if they got something resembling equal value. Desperation and unhappiness make one more willing to change.

With Varejao out, the Cavs have lost their ability to change in a significant way. They might, say, deal Luke Walton’s expiring contract to a team in need of cap relief for a C-minus asset, but their ability to pull off a trade that can remarkably alter the present and future of the franchise is almost nil. They’ll have a high pick—maybe the highest pick—in this year’s upcoming draft and a bunch of cap space with which to build their 2013-14 team. I’m convinced Varejao, whose trade value is now probably permanently diminished after three straight injury-marred seasons, should stay with the team until the end of his contract. I was a proponent of dealing him, perhaps for slightly less than he is worth to the Cavaliers, for the sake of getting younger and covering a few more spaces on the roulette wheel with chips, but it’s hard to imagine the Cavs getting a lottery pick or a talented player in his early-to-mid 20s for a 30-year-old center with an increasingly long injury history. Better to keep him in Cleveland, where he fits in quite well, and hope he can stay healthy.

The hoping he can stay healthy is where my concerns lie. There’s a problem unique to depending on an oft-injured player that the Cavs are going to have to compensate for if Varejao is going to remain an important component of their team over the next few years. When you’re constructing a team on paper—which is where teams are built—you look at what each player gives you. When I’m trying to figure out before a season how good I think a team is going to be, I pull up their depth chart and go through each position, noting when a team has a thin front line or when their point guard situation is a disaster. I also try to see how each player fits into the team and what his role/roles is/are going to be. So, if a team has a lousy defensive power forward, is their center capable of guarding the 4 or is the team just going to get torched when Kevin Love comes to town? Who’s the distributor on this team? Who can score off the bench? You get the idea.

The problem with an injury-prone player is that he both fills and does not fill a role. In the case of Varejao, the Cavs have a player who is a great defender and rebounder and who runs the pick-and-roll about as well as any big man in the league. He’s an excellent starting center. Except for the significant amount of time he is not any of those things and is sitting on the bench in a suit. So what do you do if you’re Chris Grant? Do you hope he stays healthy and fill other needs? Do you account for his propensity to get hurt and sign a free agent center who can start in a pinch? Does this create a logjam at the 4 and 5 when Varejao is healthy? You see the problem here. The injury-prone player is a flickering hologram; his existence is halfway. How much do you count on him? Having a crucial part of the team miss half the season each year makes team-building even more difficult than it already is.

Of course, even players with no injury history get hurt. If Kevin Durant’s hand gets crushed in a car door in the middle of May, Oklahoma City’s title hopes would be similarly crushed. You don’t win games on paper and everyone turns an ankle or strains a hamstring here and there. That’s the nature of sports, but it’s hard to compete for anything significant if a player you rely on the way the Cavs rely on Varejao is sitting on the sidelines. It’s a problem I’m not entirely sure how one would solve, but it’s one that the Cavaliers front office has to account for if they’re going to move forward with Anderson Varejao in tow.

Happy New Year!!  Five Cavs questions for the writers – all in one place.

Question 1: Of Pargo, Casspi, and Leuer – to whom should CG extend a qualifying offer?  Should CG pick up the Cavs’ team option for C.J. Miles?

[http://hoopshype.com/salaries/cleveland.htm]

Kevin: Other than those players, the Cavs have six players under contract for next season.  Miles’s player option for $2.2 million is a no-brainer.  The team probably has to offer Casspi his $3.3 million qualifying offer; he is 6′ – 9″, plays some defense, and makes 36% of his career threes. I don’t think any other team exceeds the offer; if he accepts, the team is only up to eight players; if he declines and goes to Europe, then I think making the offer keeps him as a restricted free agent if he ever returns.  Leuer fell into the doghouse, but in six games with the Charge, he averaged 20 points, 12 boards and 59% true shooting.  If Luke Harangody warranted the third year $1.06 million qualifying offer; Leuer certainly does.  I would let Pargo test unrestricted free agency rather than offer the $3.3 million.

Dani: C.J. Miles certainly deserves to be picked up. He’s streaky, but he’s also occasionally explosive, and has proven that he can be a real threat off the bench. In a league where shooting threes is only getting more important, a guy like Miles can be a real asset- assuming, of course, that his play (his three-point shooting, specifically) recently hasn’t been a mirage.  On another note: Byron Scott has been unfair with Casspi, and hasn’t really given him a shot to earn a contract. Unleash the Hummus!

Mallory: This is definitely a tough one, but it’s absolutely between Casspi and Miles.  I think Casspi hasn’t been given a fair chance this season – he’s a long SF who is decent defender and rebounds.  He’s had some trouble finding his shot, and lapses, but you figure at some point he’ll put it together.  If we end up actually becoming a contender, some winning might do him well.  Miles is streaky as heck (duh) but when he catches fire, he’s virtually unstoppable.  It’s OK to have a guy like that on your bench as a playoff bound team.

Nate: Miles will probably have his option picked up if he continues to be able to score in bunches.  I like Casspi a lot, but it seems as if Scott does not.  There’s no point in picking up a player who doesn’t get to play.

Tom: It’d be nice to actually understand why Omri Casspi never plays and J.J. Hickson continues his domination in Portlandia.  Casspi just needs more burn.  I think 3.3 million isn’t too rich for a young athletic 3 and D small forward.  Of course, that’s 3.3 million wasted dollars if he never gets off the pine.  So I would “consult” Byron Scott first if I was Chris Grant.  I’ll say the same for Leuer.  I don’t think Kevin Hetrick knows this but after reading all his glorious Leuer posts I actually purchased myself a Jonny FatHead.  My wife told me I can’t leave it up while he’s in the D-League.  The Cavs need a full roster, so Leuer seems fine to me at barely above 1 mil, although I still can’t believe the Cavs didn’t look at Derrick Brown.  Maybe next year.  Pargo’s 3.3 mil qualifying offer seems steep.  I’d keep him for around 1.5 mil, but my guess is if they let him enter unrestricted FA he will bolt.  C.J. Miles?  Who’s that?  I sorta remember some chucker posting a NEGATIVE 5 PER for about a month.  Not sure what happened to him.  This new guy that they got in December that averages 15 points in 24 minutes on 47/48/90 shooting?  How much is the team option?  2.25 million?!  PAY HEEEM.

Question 2: If you are pro “cavs aggressively target DMC” give a recent player example to support your argument.  If against – do the same.

Kevin: No example, but Cleveland already has one potentially petulant 21-year-old in Dion Waiters.  Their focus for now needs to be building an offense using Kyrie and Dion together, but also individually, teamed with TT and / or Zeller.  Adding Cousins to a new, young, struggling team sounds like trouble for him and the development of the remaining youngsters.  Maybe Philadelphia should role the dice on Cousins; a couple of weeks ago, I mentioned them as a team that may desire to shake things up.

Dani: I am by all means in favor of the Cavs aggressively pursuing Demarcus Cousins. He’s an immensely talented two-way center in the prime of his youth, potentially available on the cheap due to behavioral concerns. Are you kidding me? These are the risks that win teams championships. As for player examples, I’ll do you one better and give you a full team. The 2004 Pistons. Championship winners and chock-full of jerks.

Mallory: I’m definitely pro Boogie.  Trying as hard as possible, on the spot, to think of a guy who fits his profile (and talent level) going to another team and putting it all together, but I can’t think of someone as troubled, but also amazing, doing it.  But plenty of players have needed a change of scenery to find their groove.  Cousins is absurdly young; I have complete faith that, with the right guidance, he can mature into a great NBA center.  And lets be honest, it’s not like the Kings are a model franchise.

Nate: My DMC comparison?  Allen Iverson: Career knucklehead who was at times capable of brilliant play, but burned through coaches like they were kindling.  If Grant values his job, there’s no way he’s touching DMC.  AI made a finals appearance, but his character, combined with his inability to adapt his game made him very difficult to play with and coach.  Runner up comparison: Michael Beasley, who is currently educating Phoenix in buyer’s remorse.

Tom: I’m on the fence.  But here’s two examples from the same team.  The Pistons took a flyer on Rasheed Wallace and he won them a championship.  Darius Miles – a younger, more talented player(scored 47 once) that had major character issues and had a run-in with his coach – he never amounted to anything.  DMC is crazy good, but I get the feeling he is always a few seconds away from detonating.  A key component is the rest of the locker room and the coaching staff.  Say what you want about Flip Saunders, he somehow channeled all the negative energy of those Pistons teams and they won games.  One thing that pushes me off the Cousins bandwagon is that the Cavs are so young and trying to find themselves.  They aren’t “falling in line” right now behind a player or a coach.  I certainly wouldn’t want Cousins coming in and creating a bunch of locker room dysfunction.  I’m gonna go with NO to pursuing DMC – final answer. (Fun Fact – that JailBlazers team I referenced also sported: Zach Randolph)

Question 3: Who is your favorite NBA player?

Kevin: (I thought this had to be a non-Cav) I’m probably not a ‘favorite player’ type of guy, so let’s say, David West.  I live in Indianapolis, and the toughness and veteran-ness that he brings to the Pacers has been a ‘culture-changer’.   When Danny Granger returns and Roy Hibbert starts shooting better than 40%, I think Indiana is still the third-best team in the East.  When I look at this year’s crop of free-agents, I do not see a player that makes an equivalent impact on the Cavaliers, but hope that such an acquisition emerges.

Dani: I’d say Kyrie Irving…but I’ll try and pick a non-Cavs player. It’s gotta be Carmelo Anthony for me. He’s one of the smoothest scorers in the game, and he does it with such effortless grace. He’ll never match Durant or Lebron efficiency-wise, but aesthetically he’s leap years ahead of anyone else. Now that he can shoot the three as well, Knicks games have become must-watch TV for me, even if just to delight in Melo dropping the quietest 35 in the league.

Mallory: Other than Kyrie?  And not counting vintage Brandon Roy?  The player I’m most consistently mesmerized by is Rajon Rondo.  Sometimes he’s a train wreck, and sometimes he’s awe-inspiring, but either way he’s unbelievable to watch.  We pretend like there are things he seriously cannot do, but when the man puts his mind to it, he’s virtually unstoppable.  I’ve seen him have games where he shoots nothing but bricks, and others where he can drain it from anywhere on the floor.  Beyond fun to watch.

Nate: Anderson Varejao is my favorite NBA player, but as for a non-Cav?  Oy.  That’s hard.  I’m a bigtime Cavs fan.  Since Shane Battier (my favorite college player) is excepted because he’s currently allied with the Axis of Ego, I’ll take Kosta Kufos because I got to play a pickup game or two with him when he was younger.  It was all pullup threes, working on his handle, and having the snot fouled out of him by sub six footers every time he went inside.  He grew up in my neck of the woods, and Kufos had a lot of talent then as well as now.  He seemed like a nice, focused, no nonsense guy.  I’d love to see him wend his way back to the Cavs some day.  Steph Curry (my 2nd favorite college player) is up there too.

Tom: I have three favorite players: Manu Ginobili, Anderson Varejao, and Paul Millsap.  Ginobili at his best is the most entertaining player I’ve ever watched.  He is, in my opinion, the biggest reason the 7 -seconds or less Suns never got over the hump.  He just OWNED those teams on both ends.  Anytime Suns/Spurs battles started to hang in the balance – Ginobili would just take over.  Anderson Varejao is the player that I would most want to play with regardless of the sport.  I’d want him in my golf scramble – on my Canasta team – doesn’t matter.  Paul Millsap is a very high character guy that is so incredibly skilled for his position.  I believe I just named the 3 most underrated players in the NBA.  Honorable mention is Rajon Rondo – I can’t stand him but he is an incredible basketball specimen and always captures my attention.

Question 4: Name a rule change you would implement as commissioner.

Kevin: Towards the end of last year, I discussed dissatisfaction with the lottery system.  I could still stand to see that changed.  What irritates me this year is the “pump fake and then lean in” move to pick up a foul.  Faking a shot, drawing the defender in the air, then making a completely unnatural basketball move, to force what would not have been a foul if the player had made a natural basketball move, should be as ill-regarded as flopping.

Dani: I would put a shorter time limit on free throws. If there is a time limit now, either referees are ignoring it or it isn’t short enough. Regardless, we shouldn’t have to watch Reggie Evans mime shooting a free throw five times before actually sending the ball towards the hoop. It slows down the game and saps excitement. A shorter time limit could also increase missed free throws at the end of games, which would provide more drama. Take notes, Mr. Stern.

Mallory: The flopping rule is a step in the right direction, though it needs some time to work out the kinks.  I’m actually in the camp that thinks too much is considered a foul now adays – I’d probably try to slowly move the league away from the superstar-gets-to-the-line-because-driving-is-hard-to-stop mindset and let things get a little more physical.  After all, more fouls = a slower paced game = longer/more exhausting to watch.

Nate: It’s more of a way the rule is interpreted.  I REALLY hate the current way a lot of refs don’t let players leave their feet on defense, even if they go straight up.  This happened to TT the other night.  His man pump faked, Canadian Dynamite jump straight up, and then the offensive player jumped into him, and TT was whistled for a foul. When the defender breaks the plane of the offensive player and commits a foul, that’s fine.  I’m even mostly ok when the defender is flying by and the shooter jumps sideways into him, but defenders should always be allowed to go straight up.  This should never be a foul in the NBA, but it seems as if stars get this call all the time.  It’s ugly, it slows down the game, and it’s a cheap.

Tom: First, the low-hanging fruit –  the NBA has got to change the way it calls charges.  The incentives are such that the defensive player has only 1 goal – to jump in front of player about to be captured on a poster and stand like a statue cupping their man-parts – only to blow over in the wind.  It’s the most unnatural thing ever.  Try it sometime.  Try jumping in front of something aggressive and then standing upright so that you are top heavy and have no balance.  At the apex of excitement in the NBA – a possession goes the other way because a player was crafty enough to stand upright faster than another player could jump 8 feet through the air.  Instead, allow defensive players to contest any and all rim-rocking attempts.  If they contest the shot and absorb the contact in the air – SWALLOW THE WHISTLE!  The only time being anchored in the ground motionless should draw a charge is when the offensive player is not jumping – but just streaking unabashedly and uncontrollably forward.  But all this restricted area, take away that man’s highlight finish, crap has to end.  OK, for the more complicated rule change.  The NBA’s biggest in-game problem is how slowly and anti-climatically close games often end.  With teams literally doing unnatural clock stopping endeavors for the entire final minute.  I have some ideas.  Imagine if, in the final minute of games, every inbounds was from half-court.  This would eliminate the NEED to call timeout simply to advance the ball.  Now imagine that all fouls in the final minute (since they are almost always intentional) grant the fouled team the following options.  A.) 1 and 1, B.) 1 shot and the ball, with 5 seconds on the shot clock.  If there are less than 5 seconds in the game, only a 1 and 1.  Something needs to be done to speed up play at the end of games and end the drudgery of 20 minute foul shooting sessions and 6 timeouts in 24 NBA seconds.

Question 5: Predict the NBA’s final four this season?

Kevin: I will go ‘chalk’ here.  The East looks like a two-team race with Miami and New York, but I could envision Indiana giving the Knicks trouble in the second-round.  The West is stacked, but I think the Thunder represent in the Finals again this season.  And how can anyone pick against the Clippers in the midst of a sixteen game win streak?

Dani: Clippers-Lakers, Knicks-Heat. A pair of conference finals for the ages.

Mallory: MIA, OKC, SA, NYK.  But I still think Boston, Chicago, Both LAs, and Memphis get sneaky close too.  Really, beyond Miami and Oklahoma City are there any 100% certainties this season?  This might be the most exciting playoffs in quite some time.

Nate: New York Knicks/Miami Heat, Tacoma City Plunder/Memphis Grizzlies.  This assumes Clips get upset by the Grizz in the second round.  The Lakers also lose in the first round, and Kobe Bryant actually rips Devin Ebanks head off and eats it.

Tom: In the West this is going to be about match-ups.  But I think the teams left standing will be the San Antonio Spurs and the Oklahoma City Thunder and in the East no one will beat Miami in a 7-game series.  They will face whoever was able to avoid them up to that point.  I’ll go with the 2-seed which I anticipate to be either Indiana or New York.  NY has a 4 game lead right now so I’ll go with them.

Commentariat, how would you answer these?

The never-ending quest to be right about sports has always been boring and ineffectual. I suppose the helplessness of fandom drives some of us to importunate, blustery denial—practiced by the types who hop on a sports talk radio call-in show and lecture an athlete who almost certainly isn’t listening about how if he doesn’t pick up the defensive intensity, he’s going to be run out of town, as if the bloviating caller had the power to make such decisions. If you’re reading this blog, you’re likely enough of a basketball obsessive to have frequented or at least perused some forums where a loud simpleton insists two games into the season—misspelling words all over the place, natch—that the coach has to be fired because he has lost the locker room or the new offense that he has installed will never work. You get it: needlessly angry irrationality is pervasive in sports. If you don’t, imagine a mustachioed, slightly overweight security guard shouting at some skateboarding children or that same mustachioed, slightly overweight security guard incensed that Hardee’s has discontinued the Sludgeburger®. Replace his words about skateboards and deep-fried whale liver with sports words like “hustle” and “the will to win.”

We would all like to fancy ourselves better than my pudgy security guard straw man, but some of us are not, and some of us are on TV shows and have sports columns in major markets, and unfortunately, we can sketch a venn diagram in which we discover that people who possess my pudgy security guard straw man’s impotent rage and people who possess a forum that reaches millions of sports fans are—*defeated guffaw*—sometimes the same people. Skip Bayless is their sunbaked king, but there are others—writers and pundits who disingenuously or otherwise tell it like it is because they are not afraid to make bold declarations and speak truth to, I dunno, power? As if there were truth in sports, as if there were power.

I blame this major media reductive content machine—time-killing Sportscenter debates about “Who’s better? Player X v. Player Y;” Bleacher Report listicles; overrated/underrated discussions; power polls; conversations about “clutch;” Skip Bayless, et al.—for running rigid debate topics into the ground for so long that the analytics community got pissed off enough to say, “Y0! Here’s a statistical breakdown of Kobe’s late-game performance. It’s not great. Please be quiet.” The mistake the analytics men and women made was in thinking they could end facile debates or that the mainstream would listen to them. Incorrigible sportswriters and talking heads stage these debates because they rile up reader- and viewership and because they’re easy to argue—you don’t have to do much work to get a reaction out of people if you say that Russell Westbrook is the reason the Thunder will never win a title; the topic is already charged and all you have to do is make the assertion and say some vaguely insulting stuff about how Westbrook doesn’t “have what it takes” or whatever. I doubt many sports columnists and talking heads are excited to argue about Extremely Tired Debate Topic X or even if they particularly care. They just don’t want to think too hard. It’s how you end up with Rob Parker calling Robert Griffin III a “cornball brother.” Race is a pre-charged topic; it just happens to be one that matters enough in the real world to get Parker suspended for saying something stupid about it.

Analytics-driven writers—unlike a lot of the pundits you see and hear on major networks—are generally thoughtful people who try to help their reader- and viewership better understand the game. I learned a lot of what I know about how NBA offenses work through Sebastian Pruiti’s now-defunct NBA Playbook, and John Hollinger’s PER Diem column helped me understand how various advanced stats function and what they tell us about what we’re seeing on the floor. Kirk Goldsberry’s maps over at Grantland are informative and pretty. Hell, this blog exists on a network that swarms the Sloan Conference each year and possesses a lot of writers who use advanced stats and analytics in their articles. I actually feel a bit out of place as a writer who compares crossovers to butterflies for a network that’s often so analytics-obsessed, but I see the value in the movement.

I think because the analytics community usually writes smarter and more engaging articles than your average sports talk radio bully or snide newspaper dinosaur, we tend to think of the two groups as occupying different spheres, but they overlap more than you would expect. This is in part because the mainstream sports conversation is so inane that it provides an easy target for the analytics community. In the same way T.J. Simers writes some trollgarbage essay about Pau Gasol being “soft” because it’s easy, it’s similarly easy for an analytics person to take apart that assertion with a few handy YouTube clips and some snark. Writers are just content farmers sometimes; we can’t always mine the universe’s profundities. Sometimes we just bang out mildly entertaining or informative content for the sake of filling space while we try to figure out how to say something more interesting the next time we publish.

But righteousness and clowning troglodytes is addictive, and this ostensibly symbiotic relationship between mainstream sports writers’ and pundits’ idiocy and analytics-driven writing has had a poisonous effect on the latter. Or maybe it’s just that people—even or maybe especially smart ones—like to feel superior about things. At any rate, I feel like a lot of analytics-based writing has lapsed into the same sort of “let me tell you the truth about sports, dummy” tone common to an imperious talking head. You can see it in every second-guessing article about what a team should have done at the end of a close game and every derisive comment about hero ball. More and more, the exuberant “let’s learn about basketball together” tone is being replaced by one that sounds paternalistic and patronizing.

The tone shift is understandable. When you’re armed with knowledge, you feel empowered and can easily come off a whit hubristic. We’ve all been overexcited about something we’ve learned at one point or another and relayed that information to a friend like we were Prometheus bringing fire to humankind. But as I wrote at the beginning of this season, we’re all hacks to some degree. We’re all looking at this game through prisms, and analytics is one prism. If you’re working for an NBA front office, then having the best predictive models and being right about things more often than not is is important; it gives you a competitive advantage. But outside of that context, you’re a carnival weight-guesser or a weatherman. Yet still, some analytics writers carry themselves like they hold a secret truth in their back pocket that they occasionally deign to share portions of with the public. They’re the Gnostics of the NBA landscape.

I like the analytics community and because I like them, I suggest this: stop worrying about and comparing yourself to idiots. Will Leitch wrote this past summer that perhaps, if we stop acknowledging Skip Bayless, he’ll go away. I don’t know if that’s true, but I know those of Bayless’s ilk are not worth our time; loud, angry message boarders are not worth our time; trying to prove to the world how smart we are is not worth our time. All writers should write like their audience is intelligent and thoughtful and be respectful of that assumed intelligence and thoughtfulness. No one is an arbiter of truth here.

All of this isn’t to tell you what to argue about or whether to argue at all. The inspiration for this piece was actually a fraught discussion with fellow C:TB staffer Tom Pestak about Tristan Thompson, the Cavalier bench, and Byron Scott. We were both blowing off steam—Tom about his problems with Scott’s aloofness, and me about my anxiety over the team’s future. If any of it were particularly enlightening, I would reprint it here. Let the lack of quotation marks speak volumes.

I know that I’m more self-hating about my tendency to lapse into stereotypical bar room arguments than other fans, and I know plenty of reasonable people who like sports because it’s an opportunity to have good-natured arguments about a topic in which they are invested. But I’m bored with some of it. I’m sick of listening to and reading myself and others trying to figure out if the Kyrie Era Cavaliers can be good because it’s a pointless endeavor. If the young players develop and the front office makes a few choice moves over the next couple of years, the team will be good. If some of those things don’t happen, the team will be less good. And the tenor of the conversations about the prospect of this good-/less-goodness leaves me cold—people virulently professing that the team definitely is or definitely is not headed in the right direction. Does your ill-gotten certainty comfort you? I’m confused.

Anyway, pay attention to statistics and video analysis; pay attention to draft prospects; pay attention to Kyrie Irving’s defense; pay attention to Byron Scott’s substitution patterns; pay attention to anything that interests you. Just keep in mind that each of us follow sports because they provide us with some sort of ineffable sensation we cannot experience outside of sports. We follow sports because they are important to us but they are not important in any objective sense. That we can care so deeply about something that’s not actually important is amazing and freeing. I think constantly about death and failure and addiction and things that can actually ruin me; to vex over Tristan Thompson’s development for 1500 words is therapeutic.

Rap crit luminary Andrew Nosnitsky tweeted out a month ago, in response to a deluge of attacks from Kendrick Lamar fans about the “classicness” (ugh) of his new album, in fittingly exasperated all caps that “NOT EVERYTHING YOU READ IS AN ARGUMENT SOME PEOPLE JUST LIKE TO THINK ABOUT STUFF BECAUSE THINKING CAN BE FUN TOO.” This is all we’re ever really doing about art and about sports (which is not unlike art): thinking about stuff and kicking around ideas. Statistical breakdowns, think pieces, video analysis, etc.: it’s all just talk and sometimes that talk is convincing or beautiful or insightful or whatever. But it’s all about what you want to talk about and how you want to talk about it. We can treat sports as this weird, prismatic, humbling thing that’s a cross between a detective novel, a Rothko painting, and a gladiatorial competition, or we traffic in polemics. It’s a decision we make when we write an article or comment on a blog post or record a podcast, and it’s ultimately an arbitrary decision, but I find one outlook a great deal more interesting than the other.

Five Cavs questions for the writers – all in one place.

What these young bloods have to understand, that this game has always been....and will always be....about STAYING HEALTHY.

Question 1: Have you noticed any silver linings for the Cavs with both Kyrie Irving and Dion Waiters injured?

Tom: The silver lining is that the Cavs may get another top-5 draft pick and not necessarily deserve it.  Before the season started I thought there was a very low probability the Cavs could make the playoffs – so many things had to go right on a team with so little experience and depth.  Injuries have already piled up and they’ve lost a lot of close games.  If you’re not going to make the playoffs, ideally, you want to get as many ping pong balls as possible and still have a decent roster.  That’s an entirely possible outcome of this season and probably more ideal in the long run.  I’m not suggesting they punt on the season – plenty of losing is happening organically.

Dani: I’ve been very pleased with Jeremy Pargo’s play. He’s a much better point guard then Donald Sloan, and actually capable of the penetration that this Cleveland offense needs. He’s definitely won the backup PG minutes, and here’s to hoping he can be as successful off the bench. Also: while it saddens me to say this, Pargo was the first starting point guard to try on defense this year.

Kevin: The biggest ‘silver lining’ is the uptick in Tyler Zeller’s production.  In November, he averaged 6 points, 4.6 rebounds and 0.4 blocks on 45% true shooting.  In December, those have risen to 10 points, 7.2 rebounds, 1.2 blocks and 49% in similar minutes.  He is acclimating to the NBA well, and this is despite shattering his face during the season’s first week and wearing a mask ever since.  He receives warranted grief for his man-defense, but I think he shows relatively nuanced rotations for a rookie, and his rebounding is improving.  Through December 3rd games, only two centers drew more charges (as per hoopdata).  The Cavs defensive rebounding rate sits at exactly 74.3% when T-Zell is on and off-court, and their defensive rating worsens by less than 1 point per 100 possessions when he plays.  At the least, Cleveland is just a miserable defensive team, and it’s not all Tyler’s fault.

Nate: The silver linings for the Cavs with both Kyrie and Dion?  Um… No.  Maybe there’s one in that Gee can be more aggressive, and that we’re seeing that we obviously need to develop a deeper bench, but these are revelations of long confirmed suspicions, not silver linings.  I am tempted to say that we might be gaining the knowledge that Scott isn’t a great coach before it could really hurt us, but he does seem to get guys to play hard.

Mallory: Two obvious ones: Pargo might actually be an NBA player.  He seems to have SOME game; the question is whether or not he can keep it going consistently from the bench.  Also, Casspi has come alive.  We always knew he could play D, drive to the rim, and shoot the three – it’s just that, for the first time since he joined this team, he’s doing all of that at the same time.  As we’ve all said a million times, he just needed some more consistent playing time.

Question 2: Which Cavalier role player has exceeded expectations the most?

Tom: Jeremy Pargo.  I never would have guessed this output. His college stats projected him to be a 9 to 5er like the rest of us, or at best an export to the trapezoid leagues.  He’s 26 and played poorly last year in his rookie season.  Honestly I’m amazed the Cavs gave him a tryout – even if he displayed some goods in workouts, I would think a younger or bigger guy would get the nod for the upside stuff.  Pargo seemed to have zero upside, and yet, there have been times this season where he’s stood out among all-stars.   He’s working hard at both ends and the crazy thing is that he can’t really shoot at all so defenses are clogging the lanes and he’s still making plays.  He might be the biggest reason the Cavs have 2 wins since Kyrie injured himself.  I’ll wait till after the all-star break to declare him the “backup pg of the future!” but you gotta give the guy credit for taking advantage of this opportunity.  He’s fun to watch too.

Dani: I didn’t expect much out of Omri Casspi this year, given his horrendous play the previous season. But he’s performed fairly well as a 3-and-D guy so far, and seems to be returning to the form of his rookie season.

Kevin: Considering his worse performance across-the-board compared to last year; Alonzo Gee may be a surprising answer.  Fifteen months ago, I did not think he was an NBA player.  Two months ago, after last season’s crazy, condensed schedule, where Gee spent the first two-thirds of the season playing well, and the last-third completely derailing, I was still on the fence about Gee.  After the first twenty games of this season, I am content that AG serves as a completely fine rotation player at a reasonable cost.

Nate: Tyler Zeller.  With a very smart offensive game, he seems to pass well, finish well with both hands around the basket and flash a jumper that’s rounding into form.  I think he’ll be a fine offensive player.  Now he does need to add about 20 pounds as he gets abused in the post, as has often been said here.  But what’s also been said is that he takes charges, rebounds well in spurts, and will block the occasional shot.  I think he can grow as a player and is professional enough to see the areas he needs to improve and do the work needed to realize those improvements.

Mallory: See above.  Really, expectations were so low for Casspi this year that he’s far exceeding what we all expected from him this year.  His D has been VERY good at times, showing physicality and using his size.  Also, dude can seriously rebound.

Question 3:  During the upcoming off-season, should the Cavaliers sign a household name with a max or near-max offer or take a flier on someone for around the mid-level amount?

Tom: I’ll have a better answer after reading Nate’s next piece, but my suspicion is that this FA class is toxic.  There are a whole bunch of guys that are about to get max or near max deals that would not be the 6th best player in a Heat/Thunder series.  The fact that we seem willing to explore Tyreke Evans kinda sums everything up for me.  I’m envious Danny Ferry nabbed Sweet Lou Williams for such an affordable deal.  I’d like to see Chris Grant get that kind of value.  If they do offer a ton of money to someone I hope it’s Millsap.  Of course if they get Millsap then [Swings hammer at fingers so as not to mention baffling choice of Tr...fk0p[ajds;]

Dani: It depends on whether or not we trade Anderson Varejao. If we keep him, then we have to go after a max contract type of guy; in that scenario, we’re gunning for a decent seed in the playoffs. If we trade him, then our team is much further removed from the playoffs, and I would say we just use the mid-level.

Kevin: This is a loaded question, as Cleveland needs to bring on-board about $20 million of salary next season, and that must constitute a near-max player.  There are enough role players and draft picks around to keep those cupboards full.  The non-Howard / Paul / Bynum, near-max free agents are Al Jefferson, Paul Millsap and Josh Smith.  For four years and $45 million, Millsap looks appealing.  Of course, he plays the same position as Tristan Thompson.   Ultimately, I really hope that Luke Walton’s expiring contract and maybe a draft pick or two can help facilitate a three team trade and bring Cleveland a strong new piece for 2013 – 2014.  If Utah falls out of playoff contention, maybe a trade for Millsap can be arranged. The second-best bet to spend those dollars may be something like when the Pacers added David West for 2 years and $20 million in 2011.

Nate: See Monday’s article.  With 20 million in cap room, the Cavs should be looking at one max guy, one or two mid tier guys and a vet minimum free agent that can help provide some leadership.  With their cap situation, I’m hoping they can front load the contracts to lessen the impact when Kyrie is due for an extension.

Mallory: Both.  We need to get deeper and older.  More consistency from a guy who has 3-4 good years on his resume is a necessity.  We also need spot-up shooters.  A lot of them.  At this point the Cavs have more than enough cap room to pay someone.  The thing is, we don’t need a home run hitter, just someone who can do their thing at an exceptional level (a great defender, a shooter, etc. etc.)  I haven’t even spent a ton of time looking at the FA list (it’s too early for that) but I know we HAVE to be active, no matter what.

Question 4: Is there another NBA team besides the Cavaliers that you enjoy following?

Tom: [using voice recognition] Who’s playing the Heat tonight?  That team.  Also, with the exception of a few years (mainly 2007) I have always loved the Spurs.  I grew up a David Robinson fan and Manu Ginobili is my favorite player to watch today.  The only thing I love more than Greg Popovich interviews are the way the Spurs play offense.  If it weren’t for the Thunder channeling magic – as in, the 2009-Orlando-variety, the Spurs would have embarrassed the Heatles in the Finals and the ‘LeBron chokes’ narrative would be stronger than ever!  ARGGHHH.

Dani: I love watching the Knicks play basketball, and I have since Carmelo Anthony was traded there. While he’s taken a lot of heat for his play the last year or so, his clock-eating offense has always seemed sort of beautiful to me. The silky midrange jumper, the elegant finishes around the rim…I’ve been quite the ‘Melo apologist over the last 12-15 months, so his role in reviving the Knicks franchise has held my attention- I think I’ve watched 12 out of 19 Knicks games, or something like that.

Kevin: Not a team; I try to watch one NBA game every day.  I tape a game and fast-forward through free-throws, dead-balls, timeouts, etc.  I like knowing what is going on around the league.

Nate: I enjoy all the other teams when they’re on.  Most of them have something compelling to offer.  I generally stick to the contenders in the East.  But really, it’s anyone playing the Heat: so I enjoy the Knicks, Celtics, Bulls, etc. when they’ve got the axis of ego on the docket.  There’s nothing I enjoy more than LeBron James’ loser face.  Ticked off Kobe comes a close second.  Yep.  Yep.  I’m a H8er 4 Ever.

Mallory: I’ve loved the Blazers for a while – dates back to the early Brandon Roy years.  But they’re still fun to watch.  It’s fun watching the Lakers just to see the circus.  Who doesn’t love watching the Knicks?  They’re unavoidable, especially in NYC.  I’m SURE I’m forgetting teams (Houston, OKC, etc etc) but who has time for that?

Question 5: Has the poor start made you more supportive of keeping or trading Varejao?

Tom: Keeping.  When healthy, the Cavs backcourt isn’t bad, and with Pargo in tow, depth is less of an issue.  The frontcourt is a nightmare.  The Cavs are undersized, have no above-the-rim finishers, paint protectors, or post players.  If Varejao is traded, now you lose the league’s best rebounder (the Cavs only strength as a team right now), the only player on the team that has a prayer against the big bruisers of the league, and one of the game’s best pick and roll bigs.  The Cavs would be an unmitigated disaster.  Anderson Varejao plugs so many holes – and is the main reason the Cavs have been competitive in a lot of these games – he wins possessions.  He should stay unless someone offers the Cavs something they can’t refuse, and if that something isn’t an all-star big, it should probably be refused.

Dani: I’ve taken a lot of flak for this already, and made my position clear in a rather elaborate manner, so I’ll keep it short. The Cavs are nowhere near playoff contention. Anderson Varejao is playing amazingly well, but he can’t keep it up forever. By the time the Cavs should be hitting 3-4 seed territory, he will be 33. Trade him now, and reap the benefits. Especially if those benefits are Kawhi Leonard and Tiago Splitter.

Kevin: For the right deal, anyone is tradeable, but…Keeping, because of Varejao’s strong start.  At the beginning of the season, I ran through his place on Cavalier “All-Time” lists.  Since the season started, he has passed Jim Brewer to move to 7^th for defensive rebounds and Terrell Brandon to climb to 7^th in Win Shares.  He eclipsed two players to ascend to 9^th in blocks, and this past weekend moved to 10^th for career steals.  I hope Varejao plays fifteen seasons for the Cavs, makes the playoffs again, and gets his jersey retired (also, next playoff appearance moves him into sole possession of first place all-time for that category).

Nate: The poor start has not changed my stance on Andy.  In fact it’s reinforced the simple fact for me that this team has 2 very good players (Andy and Kyrie), 2 young players with upside (Waiters and Gee), and 3 players who can be good, but who we may have to wait for a while to develop (Zeller, Casspi, and TT).  The rest of the players are end of the bench guys or strictly role players on a good team.  When Kyrie and Waiters went down, the lack of guard play killed the team, and it’s been killing it since.  But I’m confident the depth issues will be fixed next year (though not necessarily the defense).  With my plan for the Cavs to be competitive next year and the colossal number of draft picks we have coming in the next few years, I’m not trading Andy unless we get a proven commodity in return, and I doubt there’s any player in the league with more value than Andy as a proven commodity.

Mallory: Like I said above, we do NOT need youth.  How many draft picks can you use?  Drafting players high up keeps you in perpetual rebuild.  By this time next year we’ll have five guys from the top 20 on this team and potentially four taken in the top 5.  That should be enough to build a young “core.”  Andy is a leader and an all star caliber player.  Getting rid of him, in my mind, would set us back years.  For more on that check the debate that Dani, Nate, and I had.

4-1 looks like I'm staying where I belong. Vote me for All-Star Please.

Posted in Opinion | 33 Comments »

Cavs: The Duel #2: Keep Andy?

Friday, December 7th, 2012

The question is simple: should Anderson Varejao be traded? Mallory and Nate tagged teamed against me (Dani). Mallory was first into the square circle.

Note: All pictures correspond to argument previous.

Mallory: The argument for today, folks, is whether or not we should trade Andy.  Quite frankly, I think this is an absurd question.  Lets put it this way — what happens during that Detroit/Cleveland game on Monday without Andy? For the short term, trading Andy would be a disaster.  We’d win MAYBE 10 more games all season.  He’s one of two guys on this team who performs above average on offense, and gives two stinkies about defense.  Losing him would mean chaos for this year.  For the long term…You think next year is the year we kick it into full gear?  Without Andy, forget about it.  We’d have next to no front court presence.  (If you think TT qualifies you’re crazy.  He’s still a work in progress.)  We’d also be scrambling to find someone above the age of 25.  While that might not seem like an issue when thinking into the future, it is.  You need some steady leadership on a young team.  Don’t believe me?  Look at SAC for the last few years.

Trust me, guys. Andy has to stay.

Dani: I’ll start with the Detroit/Cleveland game. What happens, is we lose big. By 20. 25, maybe. 30? The point is, we lost anyways. A loss is a loss. The rest of the season would be a disaster, no question. But is that a bad thing? The Cavs weren’t looking so hot with Kyrie and Andy playing together, if you recall. Sure, it was a hell of a lot more fun. But we were still losing, and losing a lot. I think we’re a lottery team either way- the difference is between getting the 8th pick or the 2nd. That’s an immense difference in value. Yes the team would become slightly uglier chaos. But for the long term, that’s a price I’m willing to pay. First of all, I DON’T think we kick it into gear next year. Kyrie’s defense needs some serious work before the Cavs are an eight-seed, let alone a contender. And don’t tell me you think Dion is a star already- if he’s on a James Harden trajectory, which is something I personally believe, he’s three years away at least. If the Cavs could pick up Toronto’s pick and a later first-rounder for Andy, we could be looking at Rudy Gobert (7’1″, 7’9″ wingspan) and Shabazz Muhammad, along with Mason Plumlee or Kyle Anderson and the end of the first. Give ‘em a year to gel, and that’s a serious squad you’re looking at- combined with Chris Grant’s one big expenditure and/or trade in free agency and whatever veteran filler is needed. And, of course, the picks we have for the next year. Long-term, my biggest concern with trading Andy is its possible negative effect on Kyrie. But I think he’ll be able to deal with it when he’s running down the floor to a fourth seed in three years with his fellow blue-chipper Kentucky players and whatever $45 million dollar PF we get in free agency/trade. (Paul Millsap?)

Look, I love Wild Thing as much as the next guy. And I wouldn’t trade him for just anything. But the big offers will come. And when it’s the time to pull the trigger, I hope Chris Grant has the testicular fortitude (shout out to Bill Simmons) to do it.

Also, this one off the record- me and Dan Gilbert would be totally fine with enabling the Thunder to beat the Heat.

Mallory: Dani, you make some great points, but they all come with caveats:

First, it’s not like Andy suddenly turns into a pumpkin after next season.  He’s sat out a lot due to fluke-y injuries, so his legs are fresher than your average all-star (Garnett, anyone?) and his game isn’t exactly predicated on athleticism as much as it is on smarts.  Tom said this during a podcast and it has continued to resonate with me – Andy doesn’t waste an OUNCE of energy on the floor – it’s all really smartly allocated for necessary moments.  That’s not going to fade with age. Now, the argument of Andy’s value on the trade market – Andy has unquestionably been the most valuable player on our team, and it’s not even close.  Currently Anderson Varejao ranks FOURTH, at 4.2, in Estimated Wins Added. (http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/sort/VORPe)  Something about that number should jump out at you…at this time of this writing, we’ve only won four games!  Getting that value on the market is impossible, obviously, but getting anything CLOSE to that, especially given Andy’s cap number, is a long shot.  Lets say we get Toronto’s #1, a late first rounder, and suck this year.  We end up with the #3 and #5 picks in this year’s draft (that’s a long shot too, by the way) and draft two guys.  One is a bust, the other is a good, not great player (the two likeliest scenarios for ANY draft pick) and they both make us wait 3 years to be certain of that.  You think that, as the likeliest best case scenario, is worth trading a beloved member of this team, a leader, a likely all star, and a guy who can probably produce at near all star levels for the next 4 years, right as we’re supposed to pick up our win totals?  And during all this time, we have to convince Kyrie to re-sign? Look, at some point we have to start winning.  Trading our current best player for unknown entities is basically waving a white flag at another year – 2 years.  We don’t need to get younger – we have PLENTY of youthful projects.  We need to get older, more mature, and more consistent.  Guess who fits that description beautifully? Also, you really think we should trade away a guy making $9 million a year only to overpay someone barely younger who has played MORE minutes than Andy and at a lower level of competitiveness?  You’re nuts!

Nate, am I forgetting anything?

P.S: I did forget something!  That Toronto pick is protected.  Unless it’s #4 or lower, we get ZILCH.  Ouch.

Dani: Far be it from me to say that Andy isn’t going to produce at a high level for a few more years. If he weren’t going to, then he wouldn’t be so valuable. But I think this whole idea that Andy won’t regress like a normal player is patently absurd. Sure, he’s very smart, and his game certainly isn’t predicated on athleticism. But he still has to run and jump like anyone else- the image you’re painting, of Andy as a wily less-than-seven-footer who gains six offensive boards a game solely on positioning, that he’s a no-jump offensive player, is misleading. Anderson Varejao’s game is, as it always has been, predicated on hustle and smarts. The smarts don’t go away, but the hustle will be significantly reduced in effectiveness with every year he ages. Andy will be able to run after a few less loose balls every year, and offensive rebounding gets harder when you can’t jump as high, unsurprisingly. Do I think his production will fall off a cliff? No. But I do think that he will regress a little each year. (Which includes this year.) And another variable to throw into the equation: this season is an outlier. Varejao has never been this good. Certainly, his game has evolved, and there’s several specific improvements we can point to- his passing, his jumper- but if taking Statistics in high school this year has taught me one thing, it’s to trust the median a hell of a lot more than the outlier.
As for the draft picks, well…you’re sorely mistaken. First of all, the Toronto pick. While I think it’s a little too semantic to argue trade specifics when we have no idea if this trade is available, let’s go for it. The Toronto pick would be ours this year if it turned into a pick from 4-14. Next year, it’s 3-14. The following year, 2-14. And so forth. That pick has great value. If it became the fifth pick for us next year (a legitimate possibility, thanks to Kyle Lowry and the Man Who is Not Tristan Thompson and Never Will be), and our pick is number two, that gives us an unbelievable amount of young talent for the upcoming year. I understand the weariness of “projects” from the draft, but not all players are such. Kyrie panned out pretty quickly. Our frustration with Tristan shouldn’t make us assume that all top-five picks will be long term annoyances. Nerlen Noels, for example, is a player who most analysts say is ready to come into the NBA and immediately impact the game greatly on defense.

Look, I think the Cavs should be trying to contend in three years. Imagine the scenario, if everything goes well: Kyrie Irving is one of the best three point guards in the league. Dion Waiters has become a 20-5-5 guy, and has great chemistry with Kyrie. Shabazz Muhammad has learned to play the three with fantastic efficiency, and Tristan Thompson and Noels have formed one of the most dominant defensive front courts in the NBA. Off the bench, we have Doug McDermott providing sharpshooting, Jamal Crawford in his final year of providing instant offense, Alonzo Gee kicking ass as a perimeter defender, and whoever else Chris Grant nabs in between. The price for this massive group of young talent? Anderson Varejao. A true Cavalier, a player we all love…but when it comes down to it, Andy has tried to leave before. We all love him, but the couple of extra wins a year in the near future aren’t worth it. Not when we’re tying to build a championship core. As for Kyrie? He’s a smart kid. He’ll catch on real quick.

And then there was Nate.

Nate:

TAG!  I’m in like Jimmy Superfly Snuka off the top turnbuckle!  (a reference you two don’t get because you’re millennials) .  You two are so young that you don’t have much of a memory for greatness: Gulf War 1, bombing Libya, The Bad Boys, Lakers/Celtics, grunge, New Coke, shoulder pads, coked up Dylan — ok, it wasn’t all good.  Let’s take a look at some great players who have won their first championship in their 30s:

Dirk Nowitzki
Paul Pierce
Kevin Garnett
David Robinson
Hakeem Olajuwan
Wilt Chamberlain
Ron Harper
Jason Kidd

So what I’m taking from this list is that it IS possible to win a championship after 30 with the team that drafted you.  Nowitzki, Garnett, Olajuwan, and Pierce all did it.  And if you’ll remember, there were some bad bad years for that Boston team before they got Garnett.  I personally thought that Doc Rivers was the worst coach in the history of pro basketball (which is why I’m leaving the jury out on Byron Scott).  What it also proves is that the key to winning a championship is putting the right pieces around a guy.  Patience, luck, and intelligent decision making are  huge keys as well.

So let’s take a look at what you said, Dani.

“Look, I think the Cavs should be trying to contend in three years. Imagine the scenario, if everything goes well: Kyrie Irving is one of the best three point guards… Dion Waiters… 20-5-5 guy… Shabazz Muhammad… Tristan Thompson and Noels… dominant defensive front courts… Doug McDermott… Jamal Crawford…”"

So I assume you mean 2015-2016?  Let’s visit the ghost of Christmas future, and put some specific conjecture on Mallory’s points.  If they are as good as you say they are, Kyrie and Thompson will probably command a combined $35 million.  Waiters and Zeller will make a combined $8 million in the last years of their rookie deal.  Shabazz and Noel will be making a combined $10 million with two years left.  Gee, on a new deal will be making probably about what he’s making now.  Let’s guess $3.5 million.  Then combine this with a front court that probably can’t shoot over 60% from the free throw line (unless Zeller’s starting).  That’s $56.5 million invested on 7 players.  Let’s add Jamal Crawford as you say, for around $3 million.  Taking them to $57.5 on 8 players…  Not too bad.  There’s even room to add a decent mid tier free agents there, with a luxury tax threshold of $72 million.  We’re doing pretty well here.  There’s three huge problems with this though: 1) You’re counting on 6-9 very young players to pan out: Kyrie, Thompson, Waiters, Zeller, Shabazz, and Noel (or whomever we draft), and the other draft picks we have (should be 3 or 4 in there).  2) This hypothetical team can’t win anything.  They’re just too young.  The Thunder were the youngest average aged team in the history of the NBA with an average age of 25.  They are far and away the statistical outlier.  As you say, “trust the median a hell of a lot more than the outlier.”  Unless we signed some very old veterans who played a lot we’d have an average age of around 24 with the team you’re promoting.   The Cavs median age would be around 24.  We’d still be 4 years from competing.  This would put us into problem 3) The next year, we’d be the Thunder’s situation of having to choose which superstars to keep, with no way to afford all the guys we’ve drafted, which would leave us scrambling to make trades to plug in less expensive guys who are effective like this year’s Kevin Martin, and… this year’s Anderson Varejao.  Also, according to your plan, we’re on year 1 of a 6 year plan…  We all know how well that’s worked out for the Browns.  That’s right.  I just grappled you after a wicked shin kick.

Now that I’ve got you in a headlock, I have to take issue with another couple of points you’ve made 1) “Dwight Howard is far and away the best pick and roll center in the NBA.”  (Names may escape me in my old age, but I never forget hyperbole).  Dwight is good, but Anderson is on par with him in almost every area and significantly better in some.  AV has an effective TS% of 56.6 while Dwight Howard’s is 58: basically Andy makes up what he loses at the the rim for what Dwight gives up at the line.  Speaking of the line, Andy kills Howard there, shooting 78% versus 47%, leading to Hack a Dwight.  Howard can’t even make the paltry 53.4% it would take to make Hack-a-Dwight ineffective.  Wild Thing beats Howard on offensive and defensive rebound rate, and total rebound rate, 24.9% versus 17.9.  Read that again.  Anderson Varejao grabs 1/4 of all misses.  Howard is down this year because of injury and probably from playing with Gasol, World Peace, and Kobe, but Andy’s  current rebounding rate beats Howard’s best year at 22%.  Andy really starts to kill Dwight with assists and turnovers.  Andy’s 3.7 assists to 1.8 turnovers destroys Howard’s 2.2 to 3.1.  While these assists don’t all come out of the pick and roll, probably half of them do, and I’d wager Andy’s P&R passes are more spot on than his high post passes.  Last night was an example.  At one point, he dribble hands off to Casspi, picks, rolls, gets the ball and passes back to Casspi who draws a foul: an assist that will never show up in the stat book.  Dwight Howard can’t pass out of the P/R like Andy.  Dwight does beat Andy on usage, 23.4 to 18.2, but it’s not that extreme, and Andy seems to get better with more usage.  On defense Dwight is more effective, and I will say that Andy isn’t as good of a defender as he used to be, though the undisciplined Cavs suck at defense in general, and it’s harder to play better individual defense when the team defense is terrible: you don’t know which way to push your help, or help your teammates.  So lets say that Andy is Dwight’s equal on offense, and Andy is 80% of Dwight on defense.  Basically, Andy is currently a player who is 90% of Dwight Howard.   Andy makes $8.37 million, Dwight makes $19.54, over double Andy’s salary.  That’s right, I just nailed you with an Irish whip into a diving crossbody.

I also don’t want to hear any of this “Andy is a power forward, not a center nonsense.”  First of all, the notions of the difference between centers and power forwards are ridiculously antiquated.  The “positionless“  Heat and the Mavs proved that in the last two years.  There’s basically two kinds of big men in the NBA any more: guys that play around the basket, and “stretch fours.”  Guys who play around the basket are closer to true centers in that they score more points closer to the basket and are the guys that tend to block shots and rebound on defense.  Stretch 4s space the flour on offense, but are expected to rebound but not quite block so many shots, unless they’re Serge Ibaka.  There are very few true “post up” centers any more, and most players points in that spot come out of the pick and roll or the pick and pop.  In the Cavs system the two big man spots are virtually interchangeable.  Andy is quite capable of playing both “positions,” but he’s distinguished himself at the more traditional big man spot, thus increasing his value even more.  He’s quite capable of thriving in the coming “positionless” NBA.

Anywho, my posturing for the crowd aside.  Your main point seems to be that Andy’s season is a statistical outlier, and that his health and his play will regress to the mean.  Tom Pestak covered this in depth, so I won’t rehash it, but I would have you look at Zydrunas Ilgauskus as a player whose production took a couple of big statistical leaps in the 02-03 season at the age of 25, and then 07-08 at the age of 30.  I have a hard time finding examples of players who have made huge statistical leaps like Andy at age 30, but Jermaine O’Neal made two large statistical leaps, one in 01-02, after 5000 NBA minutes, and another in 04-05 (his 8th season) after 11000 career minutes.  He remained an effective NBA player for the next 5 years after that leap, and his free throw percentage continued a general upward trend throughout that time.  Kevin Mchale, similarly plateaued after about 9,000 career minutes.  It’s interesting that you mention outliers, because Malcolm Gladwell’s book “repeatedly mentions the ’10,000-Hour Rule’ claiming that the key to success in any field is, to a large extent, a matter of practicing a specific task for a total of around 10,000 hours.”  It may be that around 10,000 minutes is the number for NBA big men to plateau.  I wouldn’t be surprised if this about corresponded to 10,000 hours of practice.  (This sounds like a good summer project for our resident stat-heads Kevin and Tom).  Due to a weird quirk of freak injuries and early limited playing time, plus not coming into the NBA until 21, Andy is in his 9th season and just peaking, or as I am betting, plateauing.  Boom.  Knee Drop.  You’re going down son.

My counter to you is not that we need to trade Andy and get younger, it’s that we need to recognize how great it is to have an outlier on our team.  We need to surround him with good players, playing well.  Remember that the Thunder didn’t become contenders till they got some vets that set the tone, most notably Kendrick Perkins.  We need those kinds of players, not more young guys.  Look at Sacramento.  All they have is young draft picks.  That team’s an enormous mess.  Being “good” will happen next year.  If we trade Andy, we don’t want more picks.  As Kevin has noted we already have like 6 picks in the next two years.  Unless it’s in the top (we’ll probably already have 1 there), we don’t need more picks.  We need veterans.  But there’s no veteran that does more and has a more equitable contract than Andy.  PERHAPS we trade Andy if we can get a very good player, and if can you find examples of players who have had atypical “peak” seasons and then had huge falloffs in production to counter my argument that he’s platteauing and not peaking… Maybe Rudy Gay or Josh Smith (who’s not nearly as good as Andy this year).  But that doesn’t make a lot of sense.  Why not just buy a marquee veteran next year, and about 3 quality vets, front load the contracts, and then draft well and try to roll over picks for the latter years.  There’s no player in this draft worth tanking (more) for, or trading Andy for.  Superfly Smash off the top turnbuckle.

P.S: Feel free to come back at me with some MMA references since I don’t get them, cause I’m “old.”

Vince, is that "Nate Smith" music?

Dani: First of all, I’ll address your list of players who won a championship after thirty. Garnett was most certainly not drafted by the Celtics, the team he won a championship with. Jason Kidd won with the Mavericks, the team that drafted him, but he spent the largest portion of his career, and his prime, on the Phoenix Suns and New Jersey Nets- I’m sure you know that, being that you were alive for that period, and I was not. That list, on its own, has literally no bearing on the decision to trade Andy or not. David Robinson didn’t win a championship until he was a greatly reduced role player on a Spurs team built around Tim Duncan. Paul Pierce and KG needed each other and Ray Allen to win a championship, as well as a young phenom named Rajon Rondo. That team’s style of construction and contention was more similar to allowing Kyrie to age to his thirties without layoff success, then snagging Derrick Williams and Anthony Davis to play with him in 2020. I’m not going to bother dismissing the other players on the list as unrelated to the Cavs’ current situation, because the compilation is all over the place. Ron Harper? Hakeem? Wilt? Let’s just move on.

I, at least, would be perfectly fine with being in the Thunder’s shoes three years from now. Two superstars and a fantastic surrounding cast? Sign me up. And I can’t guarantee that will be the Cavs roster three years from now. I’m hoping to all hell that Chris Grant can acquire Nic Batum somewhere along the way. What would you rather have? Andy at 33, ready to be overpaid the instant his contract expires? Let us not forget that he tried to go to the Bobcats at one point, it’s not like he made a blood pledge to stay with the team forever. As for the age issue, I would argue that the new salary cap rules make it significantly more likely that successful teams in the NBA to get younger and younger. While it is hard, and maybe impossible, to prove this, I would venture to say that the Thunder’s young age paint a picture of the future of winning in the NBA. Teams like the ’86 Celtics or the ’67 Sixers (you were the one that brought up Wilt) are simply impossible to build. And I would say that we are in year *two* of a 6 year rebuild. Kyrie Irving will be 26 at that point. Sounds perfect to me.

Okay, Dwight. Despite the fact that Superman hasn’t been quite as destructive on the defensive end as usual, he is a tremendously better defender than Anderson Varejao, and has been throughout his career. And he is better on offense, with a 5% increase in usage rate: a real difference you can’t just write off. We can’t “just say” they are equals on offense. We have about a decade of history that says otherwise. Andy is nearly equal to him, admittedly- through 20 games. Varejao = Howard is an arguable point this year, but it never has been before, and it reeks of small sample-size overreaction to claim it will continue as a reality for any real span of time.

I agree with you that Anderson Varejao is a great player. However, we already are tanking, with him or without him. This draft is one of the strongest in the last several years and is especially strong at two positions: center and small forward. Hmm, that’s exactly what the Cavs need. What marquee veteran are you suggesting we get? Hakeem Olajuwon? I don’t want to trade Wild Thing for just anything. But if we really want to become the Thunder, it may be necessary.

P.S.
Kendrick Perkins didn’t win the WCF for the Thunder. That was Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook.

P.P.S.
I know nothing of any sport outside of the NBA, the NFL and the MLB.

Oh, Nate...

Nate: Well, first of all, that Andy signing with the Bobcats thing?  He was a restricted free agent, he needed leverage.  I’m not putting any stock in it.  And yes, Hakeem is a perfect example.   He desperately wanted out multiple times.  The Rockets were patient, refused to trade him, and put a team around him.  Now, I know — different eras, but that first championship?  Hakeem and a lot of good, not great players: rookie Sam Cassell, Robert Horry, Kenny Smith, Cedric Maxwell, Chucky Brown…  It wasn’t a murderer’s row, and it was a down year in the NBA, but look at the Mavs: same theory: one great year and a down year in the NBA.  It can be done.

Furthermore, there are plenty of good guys that are going to be available next year that can help us at the premiere tier and to fill out our bench: Al Jefferson, Millsap, Josh Smith, Iguodala, Kevin Martin, J.J. Reddick, Tony Allen, Corey Brewer, Karl Landry, Jarrett Jack…  You may say, “Why would they come to Cleveland?”  Well, they’re certainly less likely to if Andy’s not here, and there’s a bunch of youngin’s running around like chickens with their heads cut off.  But the big reason they will come is that the new NBA luxury tax rules start next year.  There is going to be a crunch, and guys are not going to get the mid level exceptions from winning teams that they used to get.  They’re going to have to take less money to go to those places, or go play where the money is.  Additionally, we can swing trades with our cap space next year, especially toward the deadline, when teams are dying to get under the tax threshold.  Trust me.  There will be some fire sales.  Andy’s contract will be even MORE valuable then.  You say we’re in “year *two* of a 6 year rebuild.”  There is no six year window any more, Dani.  NBA free agent contracts are 4 years, or 5 years max.  6 year plans aren’t realistic.  You say teams like the ’86 Celtics and the ’67 Sixers are impossible to build, but that’s exactly what you’re trying to do with your “7 lottery picks in 4 years plan.”  Who says that Kyrie wants to stay when they hit restricted free agency, or even Waiters, especially if we stink the whole time?  Next year is the year to start competing.  One more lottery pick isn’t going to help that, but having one of the top centers in the league on the league’s most reasonable veteran contract will.

Also, In response to your P.S:  Perkins certainly didn’t win the WCF for the Zombie Sonics.  But he helped establish the culture of winning that got them them there in ’10-’11.  Teams need culture changers.  Those people are VERY rarely rookies.

Finally, I’ll just say this.  I don’t know if I can watch the Cavs without Varejao.  It’s going to be hard enough to lose Gibson.  If you’re not rooting for players you love, you’re just rooting for the laundry they’re wearing.

Dani:

I think we’ve come to a head here. I love watching Anderson Varejao play basketball. But I don’t think this team is anywhere near contention, and I think that high lottery picks are the most valuable assets in the NBA, especially when the current draft class matches your team’s needs so well. This team is in between a rock and a hard place with Wild Thing. I don’t know what Chris Grant will do when the Thunder or whoever else comes a-calling, but whatever it is, I hope it works out well. There is nothing I would cherish more than a Cavaliers title. I’m gonna go watch Lebron highlights and cry. TTYL.

________________________________________

What do you think Cavs:the Blog readers?  Should the Cavs keep or trade Anderson Varejao?  Leave your vote in the comments section or tweet @oldseaminer, @MalFII, or @DanSoch.

Tags: anderson varejao, Duel
Posted in Cavs: the Duels, Opinion | 74 Comments »

1 through 5

Wednesday, November 28th, 2012

Five Cavs questions for the writers – all in one place.

1. Explain your game-time experience in full.

Dani: It usually begins with dinner. Once I’ve cooked up whatever cheese-related dish (I’m a vegetarian, so it’ll usually be a noodle-cheese combo of some type) I’ll be eating the night of the game, I sit down to watch the game on Fox Sports Ohio. Oh, and I always have iced green tea with the game. Two and a half hours later, the Cavs are usually down by double-digits in the 4th, my dishes are getting crusty, my nails have been bitten to the point of causing intense pain, and my family is wondering why I’m so angry at people named Byron Scott and Tristan Thompson. And I’m too angry at the Cavs to do any of my homework.

Tom: Varies.  I sort of loathe the idea of tweeting during games but I love doing it.  Fun to watch someone catch fire or throw down a dunk and see how everyone else is reacting.  I keep a box score, usually yahoo’s (a habit I started when I played fantasy bball there years ago) open while I watch.  I send texts to buddies when crazy stuff happens or when the game is tight.  I am more intense than I’m comfortable reflecting on afterwards.  I generally watch by myself since I got married and the Cavs started sucking.  None of my casual-fan friends are much interested in watching with me anymore.  Back in the day I’d have a much more extensive game day ritual/music/clothing/location thing.  Now it’s me in front of a laptop.  Last game was the first time I tried to watch with my newborn and she threw a fit after Tristan’s 4th missed shot, so I was sort of watching peripherally between pat-a-cakes (the advanced +/- lullaby didn’t soothe her).

Kevin: I have two little kids, so typically game-watching doesn’t start until their bed time.  I record the game and watch it.  Most of the time, I catch up by the end.  This works out really well actually, because viewing time gets halved.  Often times, my wife is there and asks questions like, “They play again?”  Is my life as glamorous as everyone imagined it?

Nate: Ideally, I like to Tivo every game and start them about an hour late.  This way I can fast forward through every commercial, but catch up to the game by crunch time.  I can avoid the BS, but don’t have to ignore my phone until after the game is over.  I’m usually on my couch, and ideally have a cup of coffee or a beer in hand while I’m arguing with every call and coaching decision.

Mallory: Step 1 – couch.  Step 2 – Beer, preferably something Ohio made (Fat Head IPA anyone?!) Step 3 – eyes glued to TV and twitter simultaneously.  Step 4 – in the fourth quarter, go on gchat and bitch about immanent loss to Tom, Nate, and/or Colin.  Step 5 – Cry myself to sleep.  Sigh…I’m not negative!

2. What’s the biggest pleasant surprise of the Cavaliers 2012-2013 season thus far?

Dani: Anderson Varejao turning into an All-Star center. Cavs fans are acting like he’s always been this good, but that’s simply not the case. Andy used to be an eight and eight type of guy. Now he’s averaging fourteen, boards and points alike, and shutting down opposing centers regularly. Basketball writers all around have started to notice this remarkable season Wild Thing’s putting together, and I love it.

Tom: The otherworldly play of Anderson Varejao.  A no-stats all-star is in the top-10 in player efficiency rating.  On most nights he has been the best player on the court and his career arc in general is remarkable.  I love the way he plays the game and he’s taking it to an entirely new level.  I hope he retires a Cavalier.

Kevin: Anderson Varejao peaking at age 30.  It is really amazing.  I mean; 15 points, 15 rebounds, 3 assists, 1.5 steals?  That is complete beast mode, like he has a cheat code.  I don’t think anyone foresaw dominance for Andy this season, but he is a constant factor in all aspects of the game through the early part of the season.

Nate: The biggest surprise of the 2012-2013 season is Omri Casspi.  Tied for 5^th in the league in 3 point percentage, and a 15 PER, he’s also been one of the Cavs better defenders (which isn’t saying much), and passable at putting the ball on the floor.  After starting out slow, he is one of the Cavs best bench players.  I think his and Boobie’s Numbers have been dragged down because of the extended time early on sharing the floor with Sloan and Walton: possibly the two worst players in the NBA.  When Casspi gets consistent minutes he’s been even better. The other surprise?  …Scott’s inability to see this and the fact that he often plays Miles in front of him.

Mallory: It’s gotta be Andy right?  I mean, we knew he was good, but did anyone see this coming?  Dude has a PER of 23.9, is averaging 15 rebounds, 3.5 assists, and 1.5 steals a game, and has his hand in almost any good thing that happens to this team.  Andy has been unstoppable and unbelievable.  God bless this man for playing out of his mind.

3. Do you make anything of all the little Byron Scott / Dion Waiters (non?)stories?

Dani: Not really. There have, admittedly, been a profligacy of stories about Dion and Coach Scott. But I don’t think any of them hold much meaning or previously unknown knowledge about coach or player. The stories pretty much always confirm two things we already knew: Dion Waiters is a rookie, and Byron Scott is a hard-ass.

Tom: I found it interesting that the Coach was willing to go out on a limb and say that Waiters was the guy he wanted after the selection.  He took a lot of pressure off Chris Grant at least among some people when that information was made public.  Since then he seems to hold Waiters to a different standard than Irving, and he seems to be giving him the rookie treatment.  I like how Waiters is responding – I think he is mentally tough and hopefully B Scott will get the most out of him.

Kevin: If anything, I just hope that Coach Scott treats Kyrie similarly about his defense, because Kyrie is definitely a larger liability at that end that Waiters.  No special treatment for superstars was the mantra after Lebron left…

Nate: Not quite sure what the stories/non-stories are supposed to be, but I could definitely see them butting heads. I think that Byron is trying to do some tough love at times, and trying not to let Dion Develop bad habits, especially when it comes to getting on the bad side of refs, and with shot selection. What worries me, and what annoys me is how much of this is because Dion’s “a rookie” and how much of it is because Byron is singling him out.  Kyrie, whose defense is atrocious at times, seems to get a pass from Byron, as does Thompson whose offense is atrocious.  I’m wondering how much teaching is going on and how much scolding is going on.  I don’t mind being tough on players, but I want fairness.

Mallory: Scott was/is a disciplinarian right?  Dion is a young hot shot (at least that’s probably what he thinks) who has some bad habits (jacking threes, lapsing on D once and a while) and a stained past (issues with Boeheim) – that sounds like a recipe for butting heads.  Now, do I think Scott is really that hard on anyone?  I doubt it – have you ever seen him get after a player during a TO or a stupid play?  I haven’t.  (He mostly just stands there with his arms crossed)  I assume this is just largely a media creation.  But we’ll see.

4.  Have we learned anything meaningful, or is all the rejoicing and hand-wringing silly given the small sample size?

Dani: I think we’ve learned that the Cavs’ bench simply is not good enough to make the playoffs, no matter how well Kyrie Irving, Dion Waiters and Anderson Varejao play. No team in the NBA can survive and succeed with a bench that hemorrhages leads like this second unit. They are truly an eyesore.

Tom: I think I’ve learned that individual player analysis for role players can be a fools errand.  I had high expectations for CJ Miles, Jon Leuer, and Omri Casspi last season.  I’ve had high hopes for so many players the Cavs have gone after in the Dan Gilbert era.  So often they look promising and then come to Cleveland.  In a lot of ways I think how a team fits together can make a huge difference.  The ’09 Cavs team won 66 games despite lots of injuries because they just fit so well together.  Many of those players weren’t nearly as effective without [insert any high usage shot creator that draws attention] .  Some guys like Larry Hughes were WORSE with LeBron and just needed an uptempo system to flourish.  Some guys like Lamar Odom need a beach.  I don’t know what Miles needs, maybe a trip to Africa with Dave Chappelle to clear his mind or something.   Unfortunately, we haven’t learned anything new about Kyrie or Tristan.

Kevin: As far as sample size; Cleveland has battled a tough schedule.  Through Tuesday, they were tied for most games played and most road games. The combined winning percentage of their opponent’s is ninth-highest in the league.  They already made one of two west-coast trips for the season. This has not been a fortuitous schedule for the NBA’s fourth-youngest team, who have now played without their starting point guard for one-third of the season. With all that said; Dion is going to be good.  He gets to the rim alot, he’s a good passer, and he takes care of the ball well.  He collects quite a few steals, with minimal fouls.  He turns 21 next month.  Eventually, his shots at the rim will start to fall, the schedule will lighten up, and he will mature, and he and Kyrie will form an awesome backcourt.

Nate: Have we learned anything?  Yes.  The Cavs are not going to be a playoff team.  Their bench is not good enough and they don’t have enough veterans.  The question now, is are they going to improve measurably?  The only Cavs who’ve done that so far are Casspi, Andy, and Gee.  Gee’s numbers on offense aren’t great, but he’s expanded his game, especially from the freethrow line.  The handwringing?  That’s on Tristan Thompson.  I think he needs another offseason to get rid of his bad habits with the ball around the basket.  In addition to stopping his habit of keeping the ball to low and mechanically gathering, he needs to learn to keep his shoulders parallel with the backboard and to shield off defenders.  He also needs to learn how to dunk with one hand.  One of the biggest reasons he has his shot blocked so much is that he opens up to the defender way too much.  This is coachable.

Mallory: Honestly, and I know I’ll be attacked for this, I think we have.  First, Scott is definitely not the guy we thought he was.  Kyrie, in a VERY small sample size, seemed to have modestly regressed (PER, FT%) while not improving his D (his biggest flaw, obviously).  Don’t even get me started on Tristan.  The only player who has improved under Scott is Andy – you really think that’s because of him?  Second, so far at least, I’ve come to believe that Chris Grant either 1. Intentionally built a bench that would be sub-par so he could have us tank or 2. He’s not a great evaluator of known talent.  Either way, that’s a cause for concern.  Other than that?  Jury is still out.

5. What’s the Cavs’ biggest “storyline” going forward?

Dani: What, exactly, is Anderson Varejao worth? I can’t imagine any team will offer the kind of value we would need in return for such a unique, talented player, but what if? What would do it? A top-3 pick? Rudy Gay? Regardless of what Andy’s trade value is, it’ll be fascinating to find out, come trade deadline time.

Tom: If the Cavs are going to win (or even compete for) an NBA championship in the next decade, Dion Waiters and Kyrie Irving are both going to have to become all-stars.  We’ll watch them progress and overanalyze the hell out of them.  In 2 years’ time we’ll know if this core has the potential to get it done. That’s the “biggest” story. The most interesting is going to be the organization’s dedication to patience. I get the sense that Dan Gilbert believes in the formula. I also think he’s an emotional guy that takes losing as hard as we do. This next FA class is not very good or deep, how much patience does the organization really have? Meanwhile, we will be busy debating how much they should have.

Kevin: Easily, the growth of the young guys.  When will Kyrie start showing the necessary effort on defense?  When will he play 50 games in a row?  When do Dion’s shots start falling in the paint?  Where does Tristan peak?  That question has a huge range of possibilities.  Will taking off the mask help Tyler start hitting more than 48% of his freebies and 20% of his jumpers?  Part of his allure was his skilled shooting, but so far it has been a complete liability.  Can he add 10 pounds of muscle and play with some fire?  Also, I guess, “what will the Cavs do with $20 million of cap space?”.  That’s a pretty big storyline, too.

Nate: The Cavs biggest storyline?  Anderson Varejao being one of the best players in the league.  It isn’t just the hustle, the crazy finishes around the basket, and the drawing charges, it’s the overall brilliance of his floor game.  He passes brilliantly, puts the ball on the floor as well as any big man in the league, and is among the greatest pick and roll forwards I’ve ever seen.  His jump shooting and post moves have been a pleasure to watch.  He hit a buzzer beater and had a Hakeem-esque dream shake against Memphis the other night.  Unbelievably, he’s playing the best ball of his career at age 30.  He’s also in the perfect offense for him.  Also amazingly?  The Cavs don’t give him the ball enough.  If Carlos Boozer hadn’t screwed us, I’d say rip up his contract and give him a new one.  He’s so good right now that we owe it to him to put a great team around him to compete as soon as possible — hopefully starting in 2013.  Will it be the spring or the fall?

Mallory: Winning.  Honestly, despite what the pro-tank collective thinks, the Cavaliers organization is at a dangerous point of potentially losing fans long term – that means fewer season tickets sold, fewer jerseys sold, etc. etc. etc.   All that means less money for the Cavs and trouble for the future.  Remember, we’re all hard core fans who wont stop watching just because of a few bad years.  But most people don’t see the game like we do; unless we’re at least competing – and I don’t mean winning a ton, just more than 3/15 games (which by the way means ~16 wins this year) – I think the organization may be in for some trouble.  Of course, we’ve had a hard schedule – if we can at least start to get things back on track, we’ll be fine.  But that’s asking for a lot considering what we’ve seen so far.

Commentariat, how would you answer these?

Posted in Opinion | 52 Comments »

« Older Entries

Newer Entries »

---