Everything 2017 Off-Season

[S.R.]

I mean the main problem with Kyrie is he wants to be a 1A franchise player and he has too many holes for that role. He actually needs to be in the kind of role he has now, and he doesn't want it. I wouldn't want to be the team trying to use him as a 1A franchise cornerstone.

[Ebonhawke]

Axel Toupane has agreed to a deal with Zalgiris Kaunas in Lithuania.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

Yes. The Cavs had a +9 net rating with LBJ+Irving on the court this year, +5 with just LBJ, and -8 with just Irving.

In the playoffs, those went to +12 with both, +18 with just LBJ, and -18 with just Kyrie.



How does trading for a player who can opt out in two years and bolt a year before Lowry does position us better long term? Especially a player who has proven to be a scorer who can't actually help his team win at all, and will be paid a maximum salary for providing essentially what DeRozan does - while DeRozan's salary now is only really worth it because of his pairing with Lowry.

Trading for Irving lowers the ceiling, it doesn't raise it. It's one of those moves that looks good on paper and is easy to sell, and ultimately hurts the team.

If we're in a 2-3 year window right now anyway and Kyrie leaves after 2 years (which for whatever reason you're acting like is guaranteed), how is that any worse? And that's presuming he would, which I doubt, and if we can't convince him to stay here where he'd be the biggest star on the team (maybe not in Canada but certainly to the USA he would), then all the supposed cache we've built up by retaining Kyle, DeMar, Ibaka, etc is just talk then.

This is a trade you take and run if Cleveland offers it. We're not in a position to win the title anyway. I'd rather get the star with a nearly decade long shelf life than a guy who is already on the back-end of his career. It gives us way more time to figure out other ways to improve the team. Plus Kyrie, even re-signed after 2 years, would have a ton more trade value than Lowry has even right now.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

I actually think Irving is one the most overrated players in the league.

#1 draft pick after a whopping 8 game college career. Did shit all before LeBron arrived. Did shit all while LeBron sat. He only plays on one side of the court, but he hit a big shot over Curry in June 2016, so now he's a god.

Give me Paul, Wall, Conley over Kyrie.

I'd take Paul and Wall before Lowry too though. And maybe Conley too actually.

I agree with the premise, but the conclusion is pretty mediocre.

[DanH]

If we're in a 2-3 year window right now anyway and Kyrie leaves after 2 years (which for whatever reason you're acting like is guaranteed), how is that any worse? And that's presuming he would, which I doubt, and if we can't convince him to stay here where he'd be the biggest star on the team (maybe not in Canada but certainly to the USA he would), then all the supposed cache we've built up by retaining Kyle, DeMar, Ibaka, etc is just talk then.

This is a trade you take and run if Cleveland offers it. We're not in a position to win the title anyway. I'd rather get the star with a nearly decade long shelf life than a guy who is already on the back-end of his career. It gives us way more time to figure out other ways to improve the team. Plus Kyrie, even re-signed after 2 years, would have a ton more trade value than Lowry has even right now.

How is it worse? It's worse because the team is worse for the next few years. I thought that was obvious?

It might be hard to convince him to stay when the team is barely making the playoffs every year. And even if you manage that pitch, now you are spending the max on a guy who doesn't remotely deserve it?

Like, I'm all for planning for the future, but you don't do that by undercutting the current window of competition and betting on a guy who a) probably bolts before the window is even closed, b) is definitely worse than and probably will never be as good as the guy you are trading for him and c) if he stays is not the sort of player you'd want on a max contract anyway. If you're making moves for the future, you don't do that by grabbing guys who can bolt in free agency before a rebuild even gets underway.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

How is it worse? It's worse because the team is worse for the next few years. I thought that was obvious?

It might be hard to convince him to stay when the team is barely making the playoffs every year. And even if you manage that pitch, now you are spending the max on a guy who doesn't remotely deserve it?

Like, I'm all for planning for the future, but you don't do that by undercutting the current window of competition and betting on a guy who a) probably bolts before the window is even closed, b) is definitely worse than and probably will never be as good as the guy you are trading for him and c) if he stays is not the sort of player you'd want on a max contract anyway. If you're making moves for the future, you don't do that by grabbing guys who can bolt in free agency before a rebuild even gets underway.

You've got to be kidding me. If Kyrie/DeMar/Powell/Ibaka/JV is "barely making the playoffs" in a weak-ass eastern conference then this team needs to be torpedoed right now.

I think we both know that is complete bullshit. That team would easily make the playoffs and likely still be one of the top 4 seeds. the team was still wasting weaker opposition even when Lowry wasn't even playing last year.

We went 15-7 in the 22 games he missed, yet somehow with Kyrie instead of CoJo in there we'd be what? Teetering around .500 on the season?

[planetmars]

Interesting debate.. If it was Kyrie for DeMar I'd say yes.. they play similar roles (essentially scorers, but Kyrie is more proven in the playoffs). if its Kyrie for Kyle I'd say no too.

Kyle is older yeah but Kyrie has flaws and Kyle fits with DD more than Kyrie would. Kyrie could bolt but I think $$$ is more important than winning, or else he wouldn't leave LBJ. So a max contract for a guy that can't lead his own team is a big risk.. not something I think is something I'd do. I also think in the short-term he would make the team worse..

Kyrie is also injury prone. Sure he can improve but he can also fall apart. Not sure he's reliable enough for a max deal and the keys to the team.

Ultimately this is all moot. Cleveland won't wait for Dec 15 to trade Kyrie.. and if they did Minnesota would be able to get rid of Teague by then and would be his preferred destination. Seems like Kyrie had Minny on his wish list so he can play with Butler (a close friend). He has no ties to Toronto.

[MixxAOR]

Axel Toupane has agreed to a deal with Zalgiris Kaunas in Lithuania.

We're talking about Kyrie man damn just kidding though Good for Toupane

[planetmars]

Axel Toupane has agreed to a deal with Zalgiris Kaunas in Lithuania.

That's too bad.. he was great for the 905'ers last year.

Isn't Zalgriris Kaunas the same team that Sonny Weems played on?

[DanH]

You've got to be kidding me. If Kyrie/DeMar/Powell/Ibaka/JV is "barely making the playoffs" in a weak-ass eastern conference then this team needs to be torpedoed right now.

I think we both know that is complete bullshit. That team would easily make the playoffs and likely still be one of the top 4 seeds. the team was still wasting weaker opposition even when Lowry wasn't even playing last year.

We went 15-7 in the 22 games he missed, yet somehow with Kyrie instead of CoJo in there we'd be what? Teetering around .500 on the season?

The pitch would probably not include JV/Ibaka though, would it? It would be Kyrie and DeMar and a bunch of young guys as the long term vision (with DeMar as a pending FA). I agree that the team would probably be in the 4-6 range in the East, mostly because the East is just freaking terrible right now. Whereas this year's team should be a candidate for 1st seed if things break right, and a shoe in for home court even if they don't. Longer term without Ibaka and JV I think yeah, a team headlined by DeMar and Kyrie probably floats around .500.

And we went 15-7 mostly built on defence, and a huge part of that was Cory. Irving has shown no sign of being able to actually improve his team's offence, even with all his individual scoring ability, and his defence is horrendous, so I'd say that success would be hard to repeat with him (heck, it would be hard to repeat with Cory, they played over their heads for that stretch for sure).

[Shaolin Fantastic]

Interesting debate.. If it was Kyrie for DeMar I'd say yes.. they play similar roles (essentially scorers, but Kyrie is more proven in the playoffs). if its Kyrie for Kyle I'd say no too.

Kyle is older yeah but Kyrie has flaws and Kyle fits with DD more than Kyrie would. Kyrie could bolt but I think $$$ is more important than winning, or else he wouldn't leave LBJ. So a max contract for a guy that can't lead his own team is a big risk.. not something I think is something I'd do. I also think in the short-term he would make the team worse..

Kyrie is also injury prone. Sure he can improve but he can also fall apart. Not sure he's reliable enough for a max deal and the keys to the team.

Ultimately this is all moot. Cleveland won't wait for Dec 15 to trade Kyrie.. and if they did Minnesota would be able to get rid of Teague by then and would be his preferred destination. Seems like Kyrie had Minny on his wish list so he can play with Butler (a close friend). He has no ties to Toronto.

Oh it's definitely "moot". There's no way this deal happens.

My thinking on it is simply based on the fact that Kyle does not make us a championship caliber team. Yes, we would drop off a bit with Kyrie although it would likely be to like 4th or 5th in the east which is not that far from where we are now. While the on-off numbers are amazing for Lowry, we saw from last season that the team is perfectly capable of winning (15-7) without him. This isn't a LeBron situation that we have here.

To have our ceiling not change much (in fact there's a possibility it could get higher because Kyrie has shown a tendency to raise his level of play in the playoffs, rather than letting it drop off like Kyle does) and get a much younger player seems like a no-brainer to me. Kyrie timeline-wise fits in way better with DeMar, Powell, JV, etc than Kyle does.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

The pitch would probably not include JV/Ibaka though, would it? It would be Kyrie and DeMar and a bunch of young guys as the long term vision (with DeMar as a pending FA). I agree that the team would probably be in the 4-6 range in the East, mostly because the East is just freaking terrible right now. Whereas this year's team should be a candidate for 1st seed if things break right, and a shoe in for home court even if they don't. Longer term without Ibaka and JV I think yeah, a team headlined by DeMar and Kyrie probably floats around .500.

And we went 15-7 mostly built on defence, and a huge part of that was Cory. Irving has shown no sign of being able to actually improve his team's offence, even with all his individual scoring ability, and his defence is horrendous, so I'd say that success would be hard to repeat with him (heck, it would be hard to repeat with Cory, they played over their heads for that stretch for sure).

I didn't say 4 to 6. I said one of the top 4 seeds.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

DanH do you think John Wall is better than Lowry? And what about Beal vs. DeMar?

[DanH]

DanH do you think John Wall is better than Lowry? And what about Beal vs. DeMar?

Wall/Lowry is interesting. Wall is definitely on that level of borderline-superstar tier along with Lowry. I'd trade Lowry for him no questions asked - he's younger, and arguably just as good if not possibly better than Lowry already, and is locked in for ages. Obviously Washington would not do any such trade - you don't trade a young superstar who is locked in to a contract. Ever.

DeRozan and Beal are also an interesting case. Beal is locked in for longer than DeMar, and has a similar volume-offence no-defence game, but obviously has more room to improve with him being only 23, not into his peak yet. I'd say for the team as constructed, with Lowry, it's hard to say whether DD-Beal is a move I would make. I think I would. But there's definitely some risk there if Beal can't operate as a primary option as well as DeRozan can. Stylistically I like that Beal is a shooter, so I think I'd make the move. Again, though, WAS wouldn't look to move him.

For simple player comparisons though, you landed on two very similar comparisons in both cases. Like, if you need a guy for one game, I think both examples are pretty close to a toss-up right now.

I do think Irivng is more in the tier of Beal/DeRozan rather than Lowry/Wall. Which is kind of the point I've been making.

[DanH]

I didn't say 4 to 6. I said one of the top 4 seeds.

Oh, then I disagree. The Raptors would fall below Boston and Washington right quick, and would be in a dog fight with teams like MIA and MIL.