2019-2020 Official Regular Season Thread

[dtgold88]

No reason to enter into a multi post debate.
I say his value has diminished, and the multiple years left on his contract is no asset to any team getting him.
Let's see what they can get for him, unless you think they really aren't trying to move him.
If you think that, I'd like to know the reason(s) why.

But the part you forget is without the multi year deal he might not even still be a Cavalier. Or what if he had just 1 year left and not 3? Then the team acquiring him could lose him.

I'm guessing calls going both ways, but makes more sense for them to see who calls them....and they should listen to any offer. He's no Herro and untouchable.

I kid....I kid.

 

[trojanfan12]

Last line might be true, but we don't know what other teams want or think they need.

True, but we can watch the games and see where the needs are and who might fit.

That allows us to look at who's available and what the cost might be to get someone to fill that need.

Example, I can watch the Lakers and see that, while their 3 point shooting is better than it has been in years, they still don't have anyone that teams fear from that range...they would fear Love. So I know he's someone they would/should try to get. I also know that it's highly unlikely because they don't have the assets unless the Cavs want to help the Lakers out by accepting a lot less than he's worth and Lebron can convince KCP to give up a shot at a ring so he can win a 4th one. lol

Denver has wanted him for a while and supposedly had a deal in place to get him a few years ago. Not sure if they have the same FO though (and, yeah, Love a few years older).

The Lakers have been rumored to want him since before he went to Cleveland. Things change. The Nuggets are now a young team that is a step or 2 away. I believe they are one contender/fringe contender that actually has the assets to get him.

The question is, do they want to go into "win now mode" which is essentially what they'd be doing? Or, do they want to develop their young guys for another season or 2 and/or maybe make a move for someone younger and less expensive?

 

[dtgold88]

Either were the Cavs. They started off around .500 before it fell apart, and it didn't help that love got injured. I think they thought the younger draft picks would develop faster or be better and with love they would possibly make the playoffs.

I'm not sure they could have kept him if they offered him less, so how it plays out is still yet to be seen. I personally don't think Love makes a team better if he is your A or B star. He can't really be the 1 or 2 player on a team. He is more like a luxury to have when you have 2 other alphas, sorta like having a green...You wouldn't want to count on the guy to win you games on his own

Mostly agree, but don't really think they thought they'd be in the playoffs by year 1 or 2 of rebuild.

 

[trojanfan12]

all true....but suppose they dealt for him with only 1 year left, they didn't win it this season and he decided he does not want the LeDrama again and left?

Never mind, of course, without the extension the team dealing him to you might not even be the Cavs.

1 year left makes a big difference. Now it becomes an expiring contract that opens cap space to try to get someone else if he leaves or isn't effective.

 

[dtgold88]

Yeah, I tend to agree. Love is a very good #2 and a potentially devastating #3. That's why I wish there were a way for the Lakers to get him. He would provide a 3 point shooter that teams actually have to fear, rather than guys who are "streaky".[/QUOTE]

The money shouldn't be an issue if you want to win, although we aren't cutting the checks lol

Actually Love would def put the Lakers way over the top imo. That is why i think even with his large contract, a smart team should still want to pick him up badly (Which is why i think he will still get traded). If any team is in win now, they should go all out for him and worry about the money later. All the teams that have won recently spent way into the luxury tax to win.[/QUOTE]
GUessing not the money, but just don't have the players or more importantly picks we'd want (at least no picks anytime soon)

 

[DJ Fieri]

 

[dtgold88]

True, but we can watch the games and see where the needs are and who might fit.

That allows us to look at who's available and what the cost might be to get someone to fill that need.

Example, I can watch the Lakers and see that, while their 3 point shooting is better than it has been in years, they still don't have anyone that teams fear from that range...they would fear Love. So I know he's someone they would/should try to get. I also know that it's highly unlikely because they don't have the assets unless the Cavs want to help the Lakers out by accepting a lot less than he's worth and Lebron can convince KCP to give up a shot at a ring so he can win a 4th one. lol



The Lakers have been rumored to want him since before he went to Cleveland. Things change. The Nuggets are now a young team that is a step or 2 away. I believe they are one contender/fringe contender that actually has the assets to get him.

The question is, do they want to go into "win now mode" which is essentially what they'd be doing? Or, do they want to develop their young guys for another season or 2 and/or maybe make a move for someone younger and less expensive?

and it could be either of those options for Denver. Both makes sense.

 

[dtgold88]

1 year left makes a big difference. Now it becomes an expiring contract that opens cap space to try to get someone else if he leaves or isn't effective.

True, but you are ignoring at this point there was really no way he'd be playing on an expiring deal THIS season. If you believe someone would have traded for him last year if only he was on an expiring deal that's a possibility. But we don't know.

And then there's the "what if he plays well and chooses to walk" aspect if he were on the expirig deal now?

 

[msgkings322]

I look at the A.S. game the same way I look at game 7 of the Finals.

Totally devoid of Cavaliers players?

 

[Gman]

Then you've fallen in love with your own players. GMs can't have that luxury.

You obviously watch them more than me and agree would not move Smart for him, but Heyward? Have to at least consider as then you can put Tatum back at SF and get a big that you could use as a rebounder and to spread the floor on O.

Or are you thinking maybe they'd move Heyward and get something better than Love (serious Q...not saying that's not possible)?

Hayward is having a very good year. 17 ppg on 53% shooting.

Just to have that said. It's not obvious that Love is even an upgrade over him.

The only rationale that could lead one to such a conclusion is that the C's need a pure 4 man like Love more than they could use "another" wing. Frankly, I think that reasoning is a little antiquated. Not necessarily... not in today's NBA.

And I don't at all follow your reasoning that the C's should worry about what position Jayson Tatum is technically slotted in at. The way the Celtics play, guys like: Brown, Tatum, Hayward and Grant Williams are basically interchangeable.

Maybe if Love was a 5. Maybe. But he's not... not really.

I personally love how the Celtics are currently navigating the traditional 4 spot, though, and I (in all honesty) do not think Love is an upgrade over what we have going.

 

[dtgold88]

Totally devoid of Cavaliers players?

I laughed.

 

[dtgold88]

Hayward is having a very good year. 17 ppg on 53% shooting.

Just to have that said. It's not obvious that Love is even an upgrade over him.

The only rationale that could lead one to such a conclusion is that the C's need a pure 4 man like Love more than they could use "another" wing. Frankly, I think that reasoning is a little antiquated. Not necessarily... not in today's NBA.

And I don't at all follow your reasoning that the C's should worry about what position Jayson Tatum is technically slotted in at. The way the Celtics play, guys like: Brown, Tatum, Hayward and Grant Williams are basically interchangeable.

Maybe if Love was a 5. Maybe. But he's not... not really.

I personally love how the Celtics are currently navigating the traditional 4 spot, though, and I (in all honesty) do not think Love is an upgrade over what we have going.

That's what I'm asking....how much do you think they could use a stretch 4 over a guy that is maybe a lesser version of Tatum. and, yeah, in today's NBA there are teams against whom I think you could use Love at the 5.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

But the part you forget is without the multi year deal he might not even still be a Cavalier. Or what if he had just 1 year left and not 3? Then the team acquiring him could lose him.

I'm guessing calls going both ways, but makes more sense for them to see who calls them....and they should listen to any offer. He's no Herro and untouchable.

I kid....I kid.

If he wasn’t currently a Cav, so what?
And Im serious.
Cavs would have someone or something else.
He will never again be part of a winning Cavs team.
Hes making 30M/year, for 3 more?

@WiggyRuss wrongly claimed Heat couldnt trade Whiteside.
Im not saying Love is un tradable, but I’ll go on the record and say I don’t think they’ll get any top picks or young assets.
It will be expiring contracts and maybe a 2nd round , or something like that.,

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

That's what I'm asking....how much do you think they could use a stretch 4 over a guy that is maybe a lesser version of Tatum. and, yeah, in today's NBA there are teams against whom I think you could use Love at the 5.

Todays NBA needs players who can defend wing players, and that IMO is the biggest problem with Love.

 

[Gman]

That's what I'm asking....how much do you think they could use a stretch 4 over a guy that is maybe a lesser version of Tatum...

The way you're posing the question makes it sound like having a lesser version of Tatum on same team as Tatum is a problem or something.

Again, that's funny thinking. You can never have too many good, versatile wings in today's NBA.

...and, yeah, in today's NBA there are teams against whom I think you could use Love at the 5.

I don't necessarily disagree... but the C's don't need a change to win regular season games... they are doing quite well at that already.

The main problems that confront the Celtics are Milwaukee and/or Philadelphia in the post season. And Love doesn't help us guard either of those teams any better.

 

[tlance]

Either were the Cavs. They started off around .500 before it fell apart, and it didn't help that love got injured. I think they thought the younger draft picks would develop faster or be better and with love they would possibly make the playoffs.

I'm not sure they could have kept him if they offered him less, so how it plays out is still yet to be seen. I personally don't think Love makes a team better if he is your A or B star. He can't really be the 1 or 2 player on a team. He is more like a luxury to have when you have 2 other alphas, sorta like having a green...You wouldn't want to count on the guy to win you games on his own

And therein lies the problem.

They did not think they were rebuilding. They did not accurately assess the talent they had on their roster. And even if they were playing to win last year, what was the best case? 35 wins?

That is NBA purgatory right there.

 

[tlance]

You know, the ironic thing is that I even predicted you'd reference the Pacers in this post...Go figure.

And no, the Pacers were never going to attract an all-star level player in 2019 due to the uncertainty surrounding Oladipo's injury. Really, we were fortunate to land the guys we did.

I'm going to say it right now - If the Pacers somehow land home court in the first round (not likely, but still possible), then Pritchard should win Executive of the Year.

Fully agree on Pritchard. They are a lot better than anybody thought they would be.

 

[tlance]

And some don't seem to get with no extension and Love walking he has zero trade value to the Cavs. But I'll name you.

There are likely teams who had the assets and wanted Love would go after him if he had 1 year left or 3. Curious @trojanfan12 , you said your team would want him but don't have the assets. You "liked" the post to which I replied, though. LA would say thanks but no thanks even though Love has 3 years left if they had the assets to move for him as opposed to only 1 year left (and could walk away with AD if he wanted)?

Oh, they would trade for him for sure.

But they would not be willing to give nearly as much. Again, because the back end of the contract is scary as hell. And in the modern NBA economy teams don’t like commitments like that.

What you don’t get is the “risk” of letting him walk away for nothing is moot. Because right now that is essentially what Love’s trade value is. Nothing.

He will return something of fairly neutral value. Like a bad contract + a pick or future asset of some kind that cancels out the bad contract. Pre extension he would have returned multiple picks and you know this.

 

[tlance]

But the part you forget is without the multi year deal he might not even still be a Cavalier. Or what if he had just 1 year left and not 3? Then the team acquiring him could lose him.

I'm guessing calls going both ways, but makes more sense for them to see who calls them....and they should listen to any offer. He's no Herro and untouchable.

I kid....I kid.

Nope.

nobody has forgotten that.

Only a completely incompetent front office fails to trade a star player on an expiring contract when they are nowhere close to winning.

Are the Cavs incompetent?

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Are the Cavs incompetent?