TurnUpTheHeat
Well-Known Member
well it was a move made just to add "stars" with really not much analysis into how they would fit and work together, and what their long term health prognosis were.
It would have been like if the Cavs spent all their assets to go and get Carmelo right now just to add another "star" to compete with the Warriors 4 stars. Fit matters, health history matters. I mean- i realize in retrospect it seems easy to say that Howard and Kobe working was bound to fail- but there were certainly signs that Dwight being immature and Kobe needing to be "the guy" -, and NAsh's health issues- that there would be major problems to the point where Howard took less money to leave Los Angeles.
the CAvs were in a similar position at the end of LeBron's first run- the cupboard was BEYOND bare from years of making "win now" trades for guys like Shaq, Jamison, Szerbiack, Ben Wallace, etc- combined with never getting a decent first round pick because LEBron was too good to ever let you sink beneath a certain level. The difference is- the Cavs did a much better job at adding extra picks early on in there rebuild-- I mean- KYRIE IRVING- is an extra pick they acquired, and did a much better job at keeping flexibility to their payroll.
The difference this time for the Cavs is Kyrie is only 24 years old, Thompson just turned 26, Love is 28, Shumpert is 26. They have a nice mix between old vets like Jefferson, Frye, Korver, Williams, - and guys that are still in their primes or have not even reached their primes yet.
At the time I personally didn't like the move, but understood why they took the shot.
I disagree about Melo analogy.