Ot: the love/wiggins deal

[DoctorBombay]

I am a Patriots fan would you rather have the Giants or Steelers last 9 years or the Patriots last 9 years.

Patriots 2005-2013 9 years
8 playoff appearances(the year they missed playoffs Brady tore his ACL and the team went 11-5 and missed the playoffs)
0 Super Bowl wins
2 Super Bowl losses
3 AFC title losses
2 AFC Divisional losses
1 Wild Card loss

Giants 2005-2013 9 years
5 playoff appearances
2 Super Bowl wins
0 Super Bowl losses
0 NFC title losses
1 NFC divisional loss
2 Wild Card losses

Steelers 2005-2013 9 years
5 playoff appearances
2 Super Bowl wins
1 Super Bowl loss
0 AFC title losses
0 AFC divisional losses
2 Wild Card losses


The point is the Patriots have gone with the long term method they don't go all-in to win every year(2007 exception and they didn't waste their cap to go all-in that year because Moss took a cheap deal) and that is why they are always good. They don't get into the salary cap hell the Giants/Steelers have gotten themselves into, but those teams have 2 SB titles to look back on so their fanbases while not exactly happy are more forgiving for 2 consecutive mediocre seasons. If the Cavs want to be good for the next decade fine keep Wiggins, but you aren't winning a title in the near future as the East is still competitive, the West Champ would be better as well. Lebron isn't a spring chicken, but unless you really think Wiggins is the guy in 5 years you trade for Kevin Love and have a chance to win now and get that title. If Cleveland wins a title then the Wiggins trade would be justified. A title can never be taken away.

This^^^
(you're on fiiyah!!)couchburn

 

[BuffOrange]

I said this in the other thread but if you have the 29 year old greatest player in the world on a two year contract you are by default in "win now" mode.

Ya this is pretty much the trump card for me. Timing is everything. There's something to be said for always siding with youth/value/draft picks & trying to stay competitive for as long as possible, & hoping to get lucky in the playoffs one year. Actually that's the way to go in all of the other three major sports imo. Not in the NBA. The Cavs' window is exactly as long as LBJ's prime, which is ~4ish years (assuming he doesn't leave after 2). Got to go for the 'ship now.

 

[LennX6]

McCray was long gone by the time the Rockets won those titles.

Makes sense because I remember the name McCray but didn't remember him on those champion Rocket teams.

He did get a title with the Bulls, but the McCray of the mid 80's was a solid contributor, not flashy. He did his part. Thats what you need.

 

[Fireball Jr.]

Another country heard from: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/coach-k-explains-why-cavaliers-125957605.html

 

[HOFCeluck]

I think coach k nailed it. The idea of burning years of LeBron prime hoping Wiggins becomes a star doesn't sit well

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I think coach k nailed it. The idea of burning years of LeBron prime hoping Wiggins becomes a star doesn't sit well

I get K's perspective having coached Love, but there's just such a false dichotomy at play in the Wiggins/Love thing. People are talking like if Wiggins isn't a star now they need Love now, because he is a star.

My question is - why do they need another star right now? They have good talent, depth, financial flexibility, and the ability to improve their current and future roster via draft picks or trades involving picks. Love costs them something from all of those things. The East is still the East - even the teams we think will be pretty good have big question marks. I also think that as Lebron ages he doesn't just need players that compliment skills, he needs players that duplicate his skills so that he isn't required to carry as much burden. I believe that the cost of adding Love actually adds to Lebron's burden more than Love adds to that team.

So many of the assumptions about why Love is the right move are questionable. I'm not saying the assumptions behind keeping Wiggins are any less questionable, just that nobody's talking about the downsides of adding Love. There's a whole lot of group think and platitudes about "needing stars" and stuff.

 

[Knicks411]

I get K's perspective having coached Love, but there's just such a false dichotomy at play in the Wiggins/Love thing. People are talking like if Wiggins isn't a star now they need Love now, because he is a star.

My question is - why do they need another star right now? They have good talent, depth, financial flexibility, and the ability to improve their current and future roster via draft picks or trades involving picks. Love costs them something from all of those things. The East is still the East - even the teams we think will be pretty good have big question marks. I also think that as Lebron ages he doesn't just need players that compliment skills, he needs players that duplicate his skills so that he isn't required to carry as much burden. I believe that the cost of adding Love actually adds to Lebron's burden more than Love adds to that team.

So many of the assumptions about why Love is the right move are questionable. I'm not saying the assumptions behind keeping Wiggins are any less questionable, just that nobody's talking about the downsides of adding Love. There's a whole lot of group think and platitudes about "needing stars" and stuff.

I definitely think there is a downside to adding Love. The defense is going to be very meh.

Do they NEED another star now? No, certainly not technically. But I just would have a hard time passing up a guaranteed very good player for the potential of Wiggins. (I'm assuming we're talking something like Wiggins/Bennett for Love). It definitely does cost them flexibility, but you have less (not no, but less) of a need for flexibility when you add another player like Love.

I'm also not sure Wiggins duplicates the skills of Lebron a lot mroe than Love; yes they play the same position. But I don't think Wiggins is anywhere close to being a #1 option for a team. The plus side is you hope within a year or two he can take on the tough defensive assignments. Obviously Love isn't going to do that.

The biggesu issue is the flexibility/cap space. Irving/Love/Lebron are going to take up a ton of cap space. is Gilbert willing to go into the tax?

 

[Alsacs]

I think coach k nailed it. The idea of burning years of LeBron prime hoping Wiggins becomes a star doesn't sit well

But but Wiggins keeps the Cavs competitive for the next decade and gives them cap space which isn't really true, but is a good talking point.

 

[Fireball Jr.]

Jason Whitlock has an innaresting take on why Love is a better fit than Wiggins: because Wiggins is a Canadian (Leo Rautins gets a little love from Olbermann). http://tinyurl.com/o46l63a

 

[Alsacs]

I get K's perspective having coached Love, but there's just such a false dichotomy at play in the Wiggins/Love thing. People are talking like if Wiggins isn't a star now they need Love now, because he is a star.

My question is - why do they need another star right now? They have good talent, depth, financial flexibility, and the ability to improve their current and future roster via draft picks or trades involving picks. Love costs them something from all of those things. The East is still the East - even the teams we think will be pretty good have big question marks. I also think that as Lebron ages he doesn't just need players that compliment skills, he needs players that duplicate his skills so that he isn't required to carry as much burden. I believe that the cost of adding Love actually adds to Lebron's burden more than Love adds to that team.

So many of the assumptions about why Love is the right move are questionable. I'm not saying the assumptions behind keeping Wiggins are any less questionable, just that nobody's talking about the downsides of adding Love. There's a whole lot of group think and platitudes about "needing stars" and stuff.

What financial flexibility does Wiggins give you? The Cavs are already over the cap so they aren't going to have cap space either way. Wiggins and Bennett will combine for 9 million that isn't exactly cheap. How do having them on the team give the Cavs more financial flexibility?

 

[Full_Rebar]

I'd counter with this...what teams in the West would you think the current Cleveland roster is prepared to beat in the Finals? I don't think I would put them ahead of SA, OKC, Clippers, or Memphis. Love puts them much closer to the Spurs/OKC level, so you trade some financial flexibility and depth to try and win a title.

Love isn't a one-dimensional player. He can allow Lebron to drop his minutes, to not have to carry the offense on back to back nights. Love's going to make any team markedly better and is worth what Minnesota is reportedly asking for (the same applies to GS who won't trade Klay for him). I'd also argue that people forget that Kyrie is leaps and bounds better than any PG Lebron has played with so far and that means Lebron won't have to run the offense all the time (like when he got to Miami)

The Cavs aren't coming off a run of titles so they can't afford to wait for guys to develop in 3 years when a legit All-Star is there for them to pair with Lebron. If they keep Love long-term, Lebron's evolution to a 3rd option in 3-4 years would still be able to happen. There is no guarantee that Wiggins will ever become the 1st or 2nd best player on a championship team.

 

[Alsacs]

I definitely think there is a downside to adding Love. The defense is going to be very meh.

Do they NEED another star now? No, certainly not technically. But I just would have a hard time passing up a guaranteed very good player for the potential of Wiggins. (I'm assuming we're talking something like Wiggins/Bennett for Love). It definitely does cost them flexibility, but you have less (not no, but less) of a need for flexibility when you add another player like Love.

I'm also not sure Wiggins duplicates the skills of Lebron a lot mroe than Love; yes they play the same position. But I don't think Wiggins is anywhere close to being a #1 option for a team. The plus side is you hope within a year or two he can take on the tough defensive assignments. Obviously Love isn't going to do that.

The biggesu issue is the flexibility/cap space. Irving/Love/Lebron are going to take up a ton of cap space. is Gilbert willing to go into the tax?

Gilbert owns Quicken Loans and is raking in money he will pay the tax.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I'm also not sure Wiggins duplicates the skills of Lebron a lot mroe than Love; yes they play the same position. But I don't think Wiggins is anywhere close to being a #1 option for a team. The plus side is you hope within a year or two he can take on the tough defensive assignments. Obviously Love isn't going to do that.

The biggesu issue is the flexibility/cap space. Irving/Love/Lebron are going to take up a ton of cap space. is Gilbert willing to go into the tax?

Eh, I don't think Wiggins is ever a #1. I don't think they need that from him actually. I do think Wiggins can be a similar defender to Lebron, at least in terms of versatility defending the perimeter.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I'd counter with this...what teams in the West would you think the current Cleveland roster is prepared to beat in the Finals?

At that point I'm not sure you can do much to build a team particularly equipped to handle any one contender from the West, so having the best overall team matters. With Love I think you get better on offense, with Wiggins you're better on defense.

 

[Knicks411]

Eh, I don't think Wiggins is ever a #1. I don't think they need that from him actually. I do think Wiggins can be a similar defender to Lebron, at least in terms of versatility defending the perimeter.

That would be ideal; I'm just saying, I'm not sure what other skills he would duplicate of Lebron's. Then again, it's Lebron, very few guys duplicate his skills.

To me, a big part of the idea of having the "flexibility" is to be able ot add great players to your team.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

What financial flexibility does Wiggins give you? The Cavs are already over the cap so they aren't going to have cap space either way. Wiggins and Bennett will combine for 9 million that isn't exactly cheap. How do having them on the team give the Cavs more financial flexibility?

My assumptions are that 1) Wiggins will produce beyond the dollar value of his rookie scale contract and 2) any deal where they part with Wiggins will cost them that odd Haywood contract, which I think they could use on its own to get a productive player from a team looking for a little more cap relief.

 

[Knicks411]

My assumptions are that 1) Wiggins will produce beyond the dollar value of his rookie scale contract and 2) any deal where they part with Wiggins will cost them that odd Haywood contract, which I think they could use on its own to get a productive player from a team looking for a little more cap relief.

Not sure about 2. I could be wrong though. But I'm a little sketchy on the Haywood deal, hoopshype says its for only $2 million, which isn't gonna do much, but I also vaguely remember there being some weird nuances to it.

1 seems likely.

 

[OrangeDW]

Somewhere along the line it seems it became acceptable to talk about Wiggins like he's a complete project. "Wasting Lebron's prime", "He might be a star in 3-4 years", etc.

Who says he needs to be a star for Cleveland to win? They have the biggest star in the game, and another potential star. He just needs to play well within his role. It's really difficult to win in year 1 of a team that hasn't gelled yet and where most of the key guys have never played in the playoffs. But who says they can't win a title with Wiggins playing a big role within the next 2-3 years? I don't see the rush. Minnesota wants a lot for Love. They probably aren't panicking and trading him before the season to anybody else. I think the Cavs should see what they have first. See how good Wiggins is right now, see if the big guys they have now are good enough to win with, on this particular team, see if Bennett is the player they thought they were drafting, etc. They might be good enough with what they have over the next few years.

Back to Wiggins...I think Carmelo and Durant may have set the bar too high to where any highly touted freshman who doesn't completely dominate gets written off a bit. Maybe he didn't meet the too high expectations, but he still averaged 17 and 6 on 45% shooting as a freshman, had a 41 point game, 30 in that Ok. State game, etc. It almost seems like he's getting underrated now.

 

[Alsacs]

Boston has 18 players under contract with 3 of them on non-guaranteed contracts including Keith Boggans at 5 million dollars next year. Brooklyn/Boston gave Boggans 5 million dollars last year as a going away gift and to make their trade happen. Boston also has a 4.2 million dollar trade exemption and Cleveland has Memphis and Miami's first round picks if the Cavs want Love they won't have to sacrifice Haywood. Ainge loves hoarding picks Boggans 5 million dollar non guaranteed contract along with Wiggins 5.5 million Bennett 5.2 million gets Love to Cleveland, young guys to Minnesota, more picks to Boston for a dead contract.

 

[Timonen]

What financial flexibility does Wiggins give you? The Cavs are already over the cap so they aren't going to have cap space either way. Wiggins and Bennett will combine for 9 million that isn't exactly cheap. How do having them on the team give the Cavs more financial flexibility?

2 players who combined make up about 2/3 of what love would make (that's a guess) plus paying for the extra roster spot and doing it for fewer years (love would get max) is flexibility, no?

 

[Alsacs]

2 players who combined make up about 2/3 of what love would make (that's a guess) plus paying for the extra roster spot and doing it for fewer years (love would get max) is flexibility, no?

You didn't get my point. The Cavs are already over the cap you can obviously go over the cap to pay your own guys which is how the Cavs could give Love a 4 year max. Bennett and Wiggins are the #1 picks in the draft and don't have cheap cap fits for rookies they will combine for 10.7 million exactly next year and it will go up each year. The Cavs don't save any financial cap space all they save with Wiggins/Bennett is Dan Gilbert paying more luxury taxes than he would have to pay with Love. I mean Wiggins's cheap cap hit "5" million means he needs to produce while it's that low for 3 years but it doesn't give the Cavs anymore cap space.

 

[MikeSU02]

What financial flexibility does Wiggins give you? The Cavs are already over the cap so they aren't going to have cap space either way. Wiggins and Bennett will combine for 9 million that isn't exactly cheap. How do having them on the team give the Cavs more financial flexibility?

How are the Cavs already over the cap? They still have around $2 million once they sign Wiggins.

 

[Alsacs]

How are the Cavs already over the cap? They still have around $2 million once they sign Wiggins.

Why do you think the Cavs haven't officially signed Mike Miller for 2.75 million next year under a 2 year 5.5 million dollar dear.
The Cavs haven't signed Wiggins yet so they can add Miller. Cleveland doesn't have a MLE this year because they started this offseason under the cap which they used to sign Lebron to a max contract and the Cavs had to give away Jarred Jack and Tyler Zeller to get there.
Your point is semantics and still how do Wiggins/Bennett give the Cavs financial flexibility? They aren't really cheap 10,7 million for next year and it will go up.

 

[Timonen]

Why do you think the Cavs haven't officially signed Mike Miller for 2.75 million next year under a 2 year 5.5 million dollar dear.
The Cavs haven't signed Wiggins yet so they can add Miller. Cleveland doesn't have a MLE this year because they started this offseason under the cap which they used to sign Lebron to a max contract and the Cavs had to give away Jarred Jack and Tyler Zeller to get there.
Your point is semantics and still how do Wiggins/Bennett give the Cavs financial flexibility? They aren't really cheap 10,7 million for next year and it will go up.

having two smaller pieces gives flexibility because you're not tied to both of them. neither can be an albatross on the franchise like love *could* be with that contract (e.g., Amare). and they're hardly burdensome cap #s. my only point is that they should exercise patience. there's a reason both those guys were #1 overall picks. the cavs will 100% be a destination for free agents and sign/trade where guys will be willing to sign on. give it a couple months of seeing them practice/mesh. see what you've got. if bennett is crap, you can give him away to free up the money later. no big deal.

 

[realorange]

It will likely all come down this week because Wiggins is supposed to sign his contract in that time period. If that happens then the Cavs can't trade him for 30 days.