Henry Abbott reports (via The Painted Area) that Theodoros Papaloukas is looking to join the NBA. Papaloukas is a 6'7" point guard/playmaker who's dominated European basketball (and the United States in the 2006 Worlds). Here's a scouting report on the guy (link courtesy of The Painted Area).
I am cautiously endorsing Cleveland signing this guy. As I mention below, we really need a point guard/playmaker in Cleveland--someone to bring the ball up, get us into our offense, and handle the ball at the top of the key so that LeBron can start working to become lethal in the elbow/low block area. Papaloukas certainly fits that bill--he's got great court vision, he's tall, and he can post up most smaller point guards. Papaloukas would also allow us to create matchup problems for many teams--we could have a real big backcourt that would be pretty tough to guard (imagine Papaloukas as a 6'7" PG, Hughes/Pavlovic as a 6'7" slasher, and LeBron as a 6'8" SF) with Gibson and the other of Hughes/Pavlovic coming off the bench, and Gooden and Varejao down low. Wow--that would be a fun team to watch. Plus, Papaloukas has a good mid-range game, which the Cavs sorely lack.
On the flip side, though, my first concern is that Papaloukas isn't the purest outside shooter. I wonder if there's such a thing as too many slashers (Hughes, Papaloukas, LeBron, Pavlovic) such that the offense would stay cluttered and directionless. Though, Papaloukas could play a bit of post on smaller PG's and open up the floor for the other guys--and LeBron in the post could have the same effect. Plus, maybe Gibson and Pavlovic might be enough from 3-pt land if the latter gets a bit more consistent.
My other worry is this: Papaloukas at PG is like having Larry Hughes at PG, if Larry Hughes could make passes and initiate the offense (OK, fine, the only similarity is their size). But if we plug in Papaloukas, do we really have space for Hughes any more? I mean, right now, the guy is perhaps the fourth- or fifth-best offensive option on the team . . . Papaloukas would push him even farther down. Now, I'm not sure if Larry Hughes has much promise in Cleveland, but I don't know if we could move him even if we wanted to (especially not at 14 million per) and I worry about the effect him sitting would have.
Ideally, we could move Hughes and trot out a starting lineup of Papaloukas, Pavlovic, LeBron, Gooden, and Varejao, with Gibson on the bench. That lineup would be tough to defend--a great penetrator/facilitator, a good shooter/slasher, LeBron, and two reasonably athletic big men who could focus on rebounding more than scoring.
That being unlikely, we still desperately need a point/guard playmaker on this team. I'm not sure if there's anyone out there who would be better than Papaloukas, so maybe it's worth taking a shot. Or maybe, just maybe, we could send Larry Hughes to New York, to help Isiah complete his quest to trot out a complete lineup of past-their-prime former slashers?
UPDATE: We could also sign Papaloukas as a bench guy--someone to come in and fill the Ginobli role of mixing things up and providing instant life for the offense. The problem is, we still wouldn't have a starting point guard then, unless the Gibson experiment works out (Larry Hughes is NOT the answer at the point). I still think it's worth getting him--though most of his success in Europe has come off the bench, I'm sure he could develop into a good starter and solve our PG problem. If not, maybe we bring him off the bench and take our chances with Gibson at the point (hoping that he improves a lot) and always have a ready offensive facilitator when he struggles. Papaloukas does have plenty of experience (though not in the NBA game) and could help offset Gibson's youth and relative inexperience.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
There's Always Next Year
A familiar refrain for Cleveland fans, but one that I was singing last night. I suppose it's always possible for a team to come back from a 3-0 deficit, but I doubt that this team is going to do it. Last night, we got to see the Spurs at their absolute weakest, and they still found a way to get it going. That's the mark of a great team--the ability to grind out a win on a night when nothing is going right. The Cavs aren't close to being there yet. The Spurs are, and deserve to be champions.
Some thoughts for the Cavs going forward to the next game (and, more realistically, next season):
1.) LeBron absolutely got fouled on that last play, but I like that he's not complaining about it. It's a surprisingly mature move from a 22-year-old. I won't write more about this since Henry Abbott, as usual, has written a great post on the topic already.
2.) It is shocking how much better our offense looks when LeBron plays in the post/elbow area. He is a very good face-up player, no doubt, and on most nights that aspect of his game is enough. But last night, when he had the ball in the low block, he was that much better. He kept getting past Bowen, though he couldn't always finish (mostly due to not yet being comfortable down there), and Gibson and Pavlovic had more room to operate at the top of the key. He's too quick for big men to guard, and he's too big for little men to guard.
3.) On that note, I firmly believe that Mike Brown (or, if we're lucky, an offensive consultant of sorts) needs to redesign the offense around LeBron getting the ball in that area instead of bringing the ball up the court. As much as I like the idea of a 6'8" 240 lb. point-forward, I think the last few years have proven that LeBron is an even better player when he's not bringing the ball up. Let's consider the benefits:
OUR CURRENT OFFENSE:
LeBron brings the ball up (usually slowly) and, against good playoff teams, immediately gets trapped. He passes the ball out of the trap (usually cross-court) and then keeps moving up. Then, he moves to the top of the key to get the ball back. At this point, about 8-12 seconds have elapsed. Now the Cavs have 12 seconds left. We either pass it in to Z, who dribbles slowly three or four times, then passes it out or puts up a hook/jumper. Or, LeBron tries to dribble it in (which usually takes a few seconds) and then has to spend more time establishing position before he passes out. Occasionally, he gets to the rim and finishes. But otherwise, he has to give the ball up, and then Sasha or Gibson holds the ball for a while before attempting a drive. OR, teams don't trap LeBron, and he brings the ball up and then stands at the top of the key pounding the ball into the floor while the other (less talented) players get into some sort of position. LeBron has to pass the ball and then cut to get it back (which takes more time off the clock) or go 1-on-5 and hope for a shooter to do something right.
WHAT OUR OFFENSE COULD LOOK LIKE:
A point guard not named LeBron (not sure if Daniel Gibson is the answer as a starter, he really is more of a combo guard than a pure point, though maybe he can work on this in the offseason) brings the ball up quickly to take advantage of the Cavs' athleticism. LeBron runs up the floor and works to establish position in the elbow or low post area. Now, the Cavs have multiple options. Only six to eight seconds have come off the clock, and they have the ball in the frontcourt. The point guard can immediately pass it in to LeBron (who should be able to get the entry pass at pretty much any time) and let him work for a shot or find a shooter when the defense collapses. He can pass to Pavlovic or Gibson, who can try to create off the dribble, with more space to operate given LeBron's presence. Hell, even Larry Hughes would be free to play the game he is most comfortable with--slashing to the hoop from the outside instead of taking spot-up jumpers--because LeBron isn't the number one slasher anymore.
I really think this offense would be more productive and functional. We'd probably have to play smaller (maybe roll out a new PG, two of Gibson/Pavlovic/Hughes, LeBron, and Varejao or Gooden?) but I think the disadvantage we have in the low post is offset by the sheer athleticism of this team. Or, we could run with Gibson at the point (he'd have to improve) along with LeBron and Pavlovic/Hughes, Gooden, and Varejao if we wanted more size on the floor.
4.) Two things have to happen for this new offense to work. One is that LeBron needs to commit in the offseason to improving his low post game as well as his midrange jumper. We know he can improve in the offseason (remember his markedly better shot in year 2 than year 1). If he adds those two facets to his game, he's pretty much unstoppable. Right now, he's not great from the midrange area, so when he can't get right to the hoop he has to fade away or pass the ball. If he could hit that midrange jumper, teams basically have to pick their poison against him. He'd have the scoring ability of Kobe (though with a slightly worse jump shot from outside) along with the passing ability of Magic.
5.) The other thing is that we'd need to move Ilgauskas. I like the guy--he's been a Cav for a long time and he's one of the first players I remember being a fan of. He's stuck around for a lot of bad times and has played through a lot of pain. But he just doesn't fit this team anymore. Sure, he makes a few great tip-ins every game, and at times he's still a capable defender/offensive presence. Yet he's not the athletic big man this team needs--he can't play at an uptempo pace, he can't run the floor very well, and he forces us to slow down a lot in the halfcourt set. I don't think the Cavs should become a run-n-gun team because, as we've seen, they aren't very good at that style. But if we go to a LeBron-in-the-post offense, I'm not sure what Z can really do anymore. While he may be a bit more refined than Gooden, Gooden's a decent enough rebounder (as is Varejao) and both can get up the floor and have more upside.
6.) I'll have to do more research on this, but my gut tells me that there's got to be a team out there that plays a lot in the halfcourt set and needs an established big man to snag rebounds and try to tip in shot (boy, I wish Mike Fratello were coaching somewhere right now). If we could move Z, it would give us a bit more cap flexibility (depending on what type of contract we got in return) and would allow this team to develop a new, more cohesive offensive identity. Right now, we're don't have an offensive identity at all.
7.) I think last night showed how good Pavlovic could be, and also why he's not that good yet. He's explosive and athletic, he can get to the rim and get a shot off against most defenders, he has a good outside shot and can stretch the defense (his three to answer Parker's three and bring the deficit back to seven points at 60-53 in the fourth was fantastic). But, he's not yet comfortable being around LeBron--I think he's not sure how to play his game given that he has a similar style of game to LeBron but isn't as powerful or dominant. He also isn't sure when to defer to LeBron and when to go for his own shot. Hence, he plays tentatively and passively at times. I'd like to see LeBron and Sasha spend some time together in the offseason to get more comfortable with each other--the two of them plus Gibson really seem to me to be the future of this team and a good core to build around. Also, if LeBron did play more out of the post, Sasha would have more room to operate and could better establish himself as a double threat to shoot from outside or take it to the hoop.
8.) I'm not ready to give up on the Daniel-Gibson-as-starter experiment. If we could get an established PG in the offseason, that would be great, but I'm not certain there's anyone that good out there. Gibson's got plenty of tools already, and if he can spend some time in the offseason working on his handle and watching video of where he gets into trouble with traps, I think he should start next year. In many ways, he's the perfect compliment to LeBron since he's a better "outside-in" player (his outside shooting sets up the rest of the game) whereas LeBron is an "inside-out" player (his jump shot always seems to be more consistent after he's hit a few buckets inside.)
9. At the end of the day, though, I think the largest part of what the Cavs need to do this offseason is do a MUCH better job of playing to the strengths of their players. Larry Hughes is a slasher, not a spot-up shooter, so stop making him the spot-up shooter and start letting him create off the dribble. Sasha Pavlovic is dynamic enough to be a deadly second option, so let him loose and encourage him to constantly look to score instead of only going for shots when LeBron can't seem to. The team as a whole has trouble when LeBron brings the ball up, so don't have him do it--instead, let him get the ball in the post where he opens up Larry's and Sasha's games and can do the most damage to opponents. Basically, my macro thought for the Cavs' coaching staff is, "Design an offense around what you have, not what you wish you had." We don't have great shooters, so the "stretch" offense, while perhaps our best offense of the bunch we have right now, is still inconsistent. What we have is two players who can slash really well, one of whom is also a good outside shooter; a good three-point shooting combo guard with a decent enough ability to penetrate; a couple athletic but offensively-challenged big men; a big plodding center; and some stiffs. Create an offense that works to THAT set of personnel and move the people who don't fit. If doing this means asking LeBron to change his game, do it--he's a "team first" guy by all accounts, and if you couch it as "this will make you more unstoppable and everyone else around you much better," I can't imagine that he'd do anything other than jump at that chance.
10.) Henry Abbott notes the following, when I asked him about whether LeBron should get a shooting coach:
"I wish he'd pencil in a week with someone like David Thorpe or Tim Grover. It could really do things."
I agree. Hopefully this can happen, though it seems like LeBron may be really busy this summer, what with playing deeper into the playoffs than ever before, Team USA commitments, and the birth of a new child. But even if it doesn't work out, what about having him make these adjustments during the regular season? LeBron coasted through much of the regular season this year, so why not challenge him during the next regular season by installing this new post-friendly offense? Sure, he may miss a lot of shots early on, but if Sasha, Larry, and Gibson can improve in the offseason, they can pick up the slack to a degree--plus, LeBron should be able to improve quickly enough to keep the Cavs in the running given how weak the East is. 82 games plus practice should be enough to teach him how to play down low (though obviously, offseason prep would be ideal). Hell, we learned our defense on the fly this year, and it was outstanding come playoff time. Assuming everyone else gets familiar with the offense during the offseason, LeBron has the basketball IQ to adjust on the fly (he started to do this in the Finals this year) and let's be honest: the offense couldn't be much worse, and keeping things as is is the surest way to ensure that we never win the title that would keep LeBron in town.
Some thoughts for the Cavs going forward to the next game (and, more realistically, next season):
1.) LeBron absolutely got fouled on that last play, but I like that he's not complaining about it. It's a surprisingly mature move from a 22-year-old. I won't write more about this since Henry Abbott, as usual, has written a great post on the topic already.
2.) It is shocking how much better our offense looks when LeBron plays in the post/elbow area. He is a very good face-up player, no doubt, and on most nights that aspect of his game is enough. But last night, when he had the ball in the low block, he was that much better. He kept getting past Bowen, though he couldn't always finish (mostly due to not yet being comfortable down there), and Gibson and Pavlovic had more room to operate at the top of the key. He's too quick for big men to guard, and he's too big for little men to guard.
3.) On that note, I firmly believe that Mike Brown (or, if we're lucky, an offensive consultant of sorts) needs to redesign the offense around LeBron getting the ball in that area instead of bringing the ball up the court. As much as I like the idea of a 6'8" 240 lb. point-forward, I think the last few years have proven that LeBron is an even better player when he's not bringing the ball up. Let's consider the benefits:
OUR CURRENT OFFENSE:
LeBron brings the ball up (usually slowly) and, against good playoff teams, immediately gets trapped. He passes the ball out of the trap (usually cross-court) and then keeps moving up. Then, he moves to the top of the key to get the ball back. At this point, about 8-12 seconds have elapsed. Now the Cavs have 12 seconds left. We either pass it in to Z, who dribbles slowly three or four times, then passes it out or puts up a hook/jumper. Or, LeBron tries to dribble it in (which usually takes a few seconds) and then has to spend more time establishing position before he passes out. Occasionally, he gets to the rim and finishes. But otherwise, he has to give the ball up, and then Sasha or Gibson holds the ball for a while before attempting a drive. OR, teams don't trap LeBron, and he brings the ball up and then stands at the top of the key pounding the ball into the floor while the other (less talented) players get into some sort of position. LeBron has to pass the ball and then cut to get it back (which takes more time off the clock) or go 1-on-5 and hope for a shooter to do something right.
WHAT OUR OFFENSE COULD LOOK LIKE:
A point guard not named LeBron (not sure if Daniel Gibson is the answer as a starter, he really is more of a combo guard than a pure point, though maybe he can work on this in the offseason) brings the ball up quickly to take advantage of the Cavs' athleticism. LeBron runs up the floor and works to establish position in the elbow or low post area. Now, the Cavs have multiple options. Only six to eight seconds have come off the clock, and they have the ball in the frontcourt. The point guard can immediately pass it in to LeBron (who should be able to get the entry pass at pretty much any time) and let him work for a shot or find a shooter when the defense collapses. He can pass to Pavlovic or Gibson, who can try to create off the dribble, with more space to operate given LeBron's presence. Hell, even Larry Hughes would be free to play the game he is most comfortable with--slashing to the hoop from the outside instead of taking spot-up jumpers--because LeBron isn't the number one slasher anymore.
I really think this offense would be more productive and functional. We'd probably have to play smaller (maybe roll out a new PG, two of Gibson/Pavlovic/Hughes, LeBron, and Varejao or Gooden?) but I think the disadvantage we have in the low post is offset by the sheer athleticism of this team. Or, we could run with Gibson at the point (he'd have to improve) along with LeBron and Pavlovic/Hughes, Gooden, and Varejao if we wanted more size on the floor.
4.) Two things have to happen for this new offense to work. One is that LeBron needs to commit in the offseason to improving his low post game as well as his midrange jumper. We know he can improve in the offseason (remember his markedly better shot in year 2 than year 1). If he adds those two facets to his game, he's pretty much unstoppable. Right now, he's not great from the midrange area, so when he can't get right to the hoop he has to fade away or pass the ball. If he could hit that midrange jumper, teams basically have to pick their poison against him. He'd have the scoring ability of Kobe (though with a slightly worse jump shot from outside) along with the passing ability of Magic.
5.) The other thing is that we'd need to move Ilgauskas. I like the guy--he's been a Cav for a long time and he's one of the first players I remember being a fan of. He's stuck around for a lot of bad times and has played through a lot of pain. But he just doesn't fit this team anymore. Sure, he makes a few great tip-ins every game, and at times he's still a capable defender/offensive presence. Yet he's not the athletic big man this team needs--he can't play at an uptempo pace, he can't run the floor very well, and he forces us to slow down a lot in the halfcourt set. I don't think the Cavs should become a run-n-gun team because, as we've seen, they aren't very good at that style. But if we go to a LeBron-in-the-post offense, I'm not sure what Z can really do anymore. While he may be a bit more refined than Gooden, Gooden's a decent enough rebounder (as is Varejao) and both can get up the floor and have more upside.
6.) I'll have to do more research on this, but my gut tells me that there's got to be a team out there that plays a lot in the halfcourt set and needs an established big man to snag rebounds and try to tip in shot (boy, I wish Mike Fratello were coaching somewhere right now). If we could move Z, it would give us a bit more cap flexibility (depending on what type of contract we got in return) and would allow this team to develop a new, more cohesive offensive identity. Right now, we're don't have an offensive identity at all.
7.) I think last night showed how good Pavlovic could be, and also why he's not that good yet. He's explosive and athletic, he can get to the rim and get a shot off against most defenders, he has a good outside shot and can stretch the defense (his three to answer Parker's three and bring the deficit back to seven points at 60-53 in the fourth was fantastic). But, he's not yet comfortable being around LeBron--I think he's not sure how to play his game given that he has a similar style of game to LeBron but isn't as powerful or dominant. He also isn't sure when to defer to LeBron and when to go for his own shot. Hence, he plays tentatively and passively at times. I'd like to see LeBron and Sasha spend some time together in the offseason to get more comfortable with each other--the two of them plus Gibson really seem to me to be the future of this team and a good core to build around. Also, if LeBron did play more out of the post, Sasha would have more room to operate and could better establish himself as a double threat to shoot from outside or take it to the hoop.
8.) I'm not ready to give up on the Daniel-Gibson-as-starter experiment. If we could get an established PG in the offseason, that would be great, but I'm not certain there's anyone that good out there. Gibson's got plenty of tools already, and if he can spend some time in the offseason working on his handle and watching video of where he gets into trouble with traps, I think he should start next year. In many ways, he's the perfect compliment to LeBron since he's a better "outside-in" player (his outside shooting sets up the rest of the game) whereas LeBron is an "inside-out" player (his jump shot always seems to be more consistent after he's hit a few buckets inside.)
9. At the end of the day, though, I think the largest part of what the Cavs need to do this offseason is do a MUCH better job of playing to the strengths of their players. Larry Hughes is a slasher, not a spot-up shooter, so stop making him the spot-up shooter and start letting him create off the dribble. Sasha Pavlovic is dynamic enough to be a deadly second option, so let him loose and encourage him to constantly look to score instead of only going for shots when LeBron can't seem to. The team as a whole has trouble when LeBron brings the ball up, so don't have him do it--instead, let him get the ball in the post where he opens up Larry's and Sasha's games and can do the most damage to opponents. Basically, my macro thought for the Cavs' coaching staff is, "Design an offense around what you have, not what you wish you had." We don't have great shooters, so the "stretch" offense, while perhaps our best offense of the bunch we have right now, is still inconsistent. What we have is two players who can slash really well, one of whom is also a good outside shooter; a good three-point shooting combo guard with a decent enough ability to penetrate; a couple athletic but offensively-challenged big men; a big plodding center; and some stiffs. Create an offense that works to THAT set of personnel and move the people who don't fit. If doing this means asking LeBron to change his game, do it--he's a "team first" guy by all accounts, and if you couch it as "this will make you more unstoppable and everyone else around you much better," I can't imagine that he'd do anything other than jump at that chance.
10.) Henry Abbott notes the following, when I asked him about whether LeBron should get a shooting coach:
"I wish he'd pencil in a week with someone like David Thorpe or Tim Grover. It could really do things."
I agree. Hopefully this can happen, though it seems like LeBron may be really busy this summer, what with playing deeper into the playoffs than ever before, Team USA commitments, and the birth of a new child. But even if it doesn't work out, what about having him make these adjustments during the regular season? LeBron coasted through much of the regular season this year, so why not challenge him during the next regular season by installing this new post-friendly offense? Sure, he may miss a lot of shots early on, but if Sasha, Larry, and Gibson can improve in the offseason, they can pick up the slack to a degree--plus, LeBron should be able to improve quickly enough to keep the Cavs in the running given how weak the East is. 82 games plus practice should be enough to teach him how to play down low (though obviously, offseason prep would be ideal). Hell, we learned our defense on the fly this year, and it was outstanding come playoff time. Assuming everyone else gets familiar with the offense during the offseason, LeBron has the basketball IQ to adjust on the fly (he started to do this in the Finals this year) and let's be honest: the offense couldn't be much worse, and keeping things as is is the surest way to ensure that we never win the title that would keep LeBron in town.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
More on the Offseason
Before we get to discussing Game Three, I thought I'd fill you in on an interesting email discussion I had with Henry Abbott of TrueHoop. I emailed Henry some questions about the possibility of Gilbert in Cleveland, and here was his response:
"Teams are SO reluctant to get combo guards. Can't imagine Cleveland would go for two at once. And, if they have a way to bring in a big-dollar player, I'd have to think they'd want an athletic big man who can score.
But all that said, it would be pretty wouldn't it? The only question is, who gets the ball with seven seconds left? Not sure Arenas can share."
The euphoria haven worn off, I think Henry is right--Gilbert would be a fun addition to the Cavs but not necessarily a championship-winning addition. What this team really does need is an athletic big man to replace Z, but I worry that we won't be able to do that until after the guy retires.
Henry added later that he thinks every team could use Tayshaun Prince, and that Victor Kryhapa would be a good fit in Cleveland. I agree with him on both counts (Tayshaun did not show his true skills against the Cavs) but think that both are unrealistic targets. Especially with the Cavs winning the East, I can't imagine Chicago or Detroit would want to trade to and potentially strengthen the Cavs. Kryhapa is a free agent next year--maybe we can make a run at him then? Though he is restricted.
Bottom line, I don't think we can make any big moves this offseason (and can't think of any really worth making). I wish we could get Larry Hughes' salary off the books (in addition to Donyell's and Z's.) My new thought is that we should see if we can trade one of those guys for another overpaid player in addition to a draft pick--something the Cavs sorely need. I'll analyze potential trade targets after the season ends.
Thanks to Henry for the discussion.
"Teams are SO reluctant to get combo guards. Can't imagine Cleveland would go for two at once. And, if they have a way to bring in a big-dollar player, I'd have to think they'd want an athletic big man who can score.
But all that said, it would be pretty wouldn't it? The only question is, who gets the ball with seven seconds left? Not sure Arenas can share."
The euphoria haven worn off, I think Henry is right--Gilbert would be a fun addition to the Cavs but not necessarily a championship-winning addition. What this team really does need is an athletic big man to replace Z, but I worry that we won't be able to do that until after the guy retires.
Henry added later that he thinks every team could use Tayshaun Prince, and that Victor Kryhapa would be a good fit in Cleveland. I agree with him on both counts (Tayshaun did not show his true skills against the Cavs) but think that both are unrealistic targets. Especially with the Cavs winning the East, I can't imagine Chicago or Detroit would want to trade to and potentially strengthen the Cavs. Kryhapa is a free agent next year--maybe we can make a run at him then? Though he is restricted.
Bottom line, I don't think we can make any big moves this offseason (and can't think of any really worth making). I wish we could get Larry Hughes' salary off the books (in addition to Donyell's and Z's.) My new thought is that we should see if we can trade one of those guys for another overpaid player in addition to a draft pick--something the Cavs sorely need. I'll analyze potential trade targets after the season ends.
Thanks to Henry for the discussion.
Gilbert???
I just read an interesting excerpt of Tony Kornheiser's Talking Points for the Washington Post:
"Wouldn't he look good in a Cleveland uniform next to LeBron [James]? A lot of guys don't go in free agency because they can make more money with the Larry Bird rule staying where they are. He's the kind of guy I think would go."
Wow. Now, this is total pie-in-the-sky at this point, but imagine if we could find a way to clear Larry Hughes' salary off the books by then (he made close to 14 million this year--yikes) and make a run at Gilbert. A backcourt of Gilbert, Daniel Hughes, and LeBron? If LeBron could work on his post game and do more work from the elbow like he did on Sunday night, this team would be ridiculous. Gilbert would thrive with a pass-first player like LeBron, and with Gilbert and Gibson bringing the ball up, LeBron would be able to play in the post or catch the ball off screens/picks (which is when he's at the best). Plus, Gilbert can hit the three--something Cleveland sorely needs.
Yeah, this move makes a lot of sense. I really wonder if we can get it done . . . getting rid of Hughes looks even more attractive now. Signing Gilbert would no doubt keep LeBron in town, and would give this team the established second option it sorely needs.
"Wouldn't he look good in a Cleveland uniform next to LeBron [James]? A lot of guys don't go in free agency because they can make more money with the Larry Bird rule staying where they are. He's the kind of guy I think would go."
Wow. Now, this is total pie-in-the-sky at this point, but imagine if we could find a way to clear Larry Hughes' salary off the books by then (he made close to 14 million this year--yikes) and make a run at Gilbert. A backcourt of Gilbert, Daniel Hughes, and LeBron? If LeBron could work on his post game and do more work from the elbow like he did on Sunday night, this team would be ridiculous. Gilbert would thrive with a pass-first player like LeBron, and with Gilbert and Gibson bringing the ball up, LeBron would be able to play in the post or catch the ball off screens/picks (which is when he's at the best). Plus, Gilbert can hit the three--something Cleveland sorely needs.
Yeah, this move makes a lot of sense. I really wonder if we can get it done . . . getting rid of Hughes looks even more attractive now. Signing Gilbert would no doubt keep LeBron in town, and would give this team the established second option it sorely needs.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Quick Offseason Thoughts
Looking to the offseason, I'm curious as to how the Cavs can improve. LeBron and Gibson are the core of the team, and you'd want to build around them. Varejao is worth resigning as our PF/C of the future (I actually think the guy is in the throes of developing a decent offensive game) and Pavlovic is good at everything but finishing after a good drive (I'd really like to see him spend the offseason working on his jump shot and decision-making skills, he really is one of the more explosive offensive players in the league but has a mental block at the rim). Eric Snow's a good guy to have around for defense, and Gooden is getting better by the year (though he needs to get more consistent). The question is, what do we do with the rest of the players? Z's clearly not the right fit for this roster, though can we move the guy (or will we have the stones to)? Marshall, Damon Jones, Ira Newble, and Scot Pollard are dead weight. Who knows what Shannon Brown is capable of. And Larry Hughes is basically Eric Snow, but with poorer shot selection (he actually takes shots).
So the question is--which of these guys can we move? Who can we get in return? If we do have to part with one of the "core three," who is it (LeBron is obviously excluded)? I don't think we can move Varejao, because though he's our hottest commodity, he's also close to being our best interior player. Gibson is just too good to trade right now, plus LeBron would flip. So that leaves Pavlovic. But I worry about trading him--he has all the tools to be a star if we can get him going. And what would we trade him for? Could we spin him to the Kings (along with Z and maybe Gooden) for Bibby? It would give the Kings a team somewhat like the one they used to have--Euro shooter/scorer; big, not particularly mobile center on the downswing of his career; athletic power forward. But would the Kings do it? Should we? How else do we improve, given the lack of a draft pick? Can Shannon Brown be an answer for us on offense next year? Is there any way we can move Larry Hughes? And what the hell do we do about offensive coaching?
All questions I will be pondering over the next few weeks--stay tuned for my thoughts on the answers after the Finals are over. In the meantime, I'd love to know what thoughts you have.
So the question is--which of these guys can we move? Who can we get in return? If we do have to part with one of the "core three," who is it (LeBron is obviously excluded)? I don't think we can move Varejao, because though he's our hottest commodity, he's also close to being our best interior player. Gibson is just too good to trade right now, plus LeBron would flip. So that leaves Pavlovic. But I worry about trading him--he has all the tools to be a star if we can get him going. And what would we trade him for? Could we spin him to the Kings (along with Z and maybe Gooden) for Bibby? It would give the Kings a team somewhat like the one they used to have--Euro shooter/scorer; big, not particularly mobile center on the downswing of his career; athletic power forward. But would the Kings do it? Should we? How else do we improve, given the lack of a draft pick? Can Shannon Brown be an answer for us on offense next year? Is there any way we can move Larry Hughes? And what the hell do we do about offensive coaching?
All questions I will be pondering over the next few weeks--stay tuned for my thoughts on the answers after the Finals are over. In the meantime, I'd love to know what thoughts you have.
Ten Thoughts on Games 1 and 2
Since Games 1 and 2 were so similar in outcome, and since I was busy moving this weekend, I thought I'd offer ten observations on the games in San Antonio.
1.) Why is Larry Hughes still playing? The guy had zero points in 20 minutes in Game 2. Two points in 23 minutes in Game 1. And he's no longer able to shut down the opposing team's point guard like he did in the Detroit series. I know that having an injured guy play gives some inspiration to a team, but I think we are well past the point at which the Cavs care about him "gutting it out."
2.) Why is Boobie Gibson not starting? The kid can get to the hole, he is quick enough to at least come close to staying with Parker, AND he can hit threes. I am more perplexed than ever with Mike Brown's coaching strategy on offense.
3.) And on that note, Mike Brown sitting LeBron James for 9 minutes in the first quarter was just absurd. I know, as Brian Windhorst noted, that we only dropped six points with LeBron out of the game. And that we lost a bunch more when he came back in. But LeBron was setting the tone for the team in the few minutes he played. He was aggressive, he was taking it to the rim, he was moving on offense. The second they took him out, it was like all the wind came out of the Cavs' sails--the Spurs instantly had to expend about 50% less energy on the defensive end and thus had more energy on offense. LeBron is a smart player--and he only had one foul for the REST OF THE GAME. This move was a complete bonehead blunder by Mike Brown. You don't sit your superstar in a game of this importance unless they get 4 fouls in the first half. No way.
4.) Our best lineup, believe it or not, is Daniel Gibson, Damon Jones, LeBron James, Drew Gooden, and Anderson Varejao. This lineup gets almost no playing time in the game. When they do get time, they play well. People say this isn't a great defensive lineup--but the Cavs play team defense, not individual defense. They have a scheme and these guys can execute it as well as anyone. With Larry Hughes getting beat more frequently than Mark Madsen in a game of one-on-one against Michael Jordan, and Raggedy Andy being enough of an offensive liability so as to not play him at the same time as snow, AND Z getting destroyed by Tim Duncan with great regularity, I don't see why Mike Brown does not play this lineup more. It would be one thing if the three aforementioned Cavs were playing at a high level. But they couldn't be playing worse (except for Snow, who was OK in the minutes he played).
5.) One thing I just don't get is the Cavs' attitude in this series. They have been written off by just about everyone, especially after Game 1. They're playing in the NBA Finals against a superior team. They're way ahead of schedule in getting to the finals. So why are they the more lackadasical team on the floor? Why are they treating these finals like the coast-at-all-costs regular season? Hell, even LeBron James admitted today in the Post that the team is not playing particularly hard for most of the game. I just don't get it. All throughout the playoffs I figured that the Cavs might rise to the occasion in the Finals and play like the Golden State Warriors--not really sure what the hell they're doing, but ready to give it all the energy they have and enjoy the experience. Instead, they seem moribund and depressed. What am I missing here?
6.) For any fans who went to the Q for Game 2, I'm curious to know what it was like to watch the slaughter in 3-D; I was nauseous enough watching it in 2-D.
7.) I would really like to see the Cavs get up the floor quicker. I hate to toot my own horn, but the "walk it up" effect is in full force here. When we are slow getting the ball in the frontcourt, we get slow and stagnant and are easy to defend. When we bring the ball up quick, we are a much better team. Yet another argument for starting the explosive Boobie Gibson -- and yet Mike Brown doesn't do it.
8.) Does anyone know if LeBron has continued his pregame ritual from the Detroit series of shooting for several hours before the game? His jumper is looking balky again and I'm wondering if that's why. In Game 2 he showed an ability to get to the rim and finish most of the time (though he did have a few key misses on tough drives). If he could start hitting that jumper again, it would open up the offense a lot more.
9.) Back to the Finals. In this online chat on ESPN, someone mentions the thought of mugging Parker as he goes through the lane. I think this might be a good idea. I'm not talking about a McDyess hooligan foul, I'm talking about a good, hard playoff foul that maybe gets a flagrant but makes him think twice about being so fearless in the paint. I'm talking about the equivalent of a brushback pitch, not a heater to the forehead. Why the hell else is Pollard on the roster?
10. All of this said, I don't think the series is over. San Antonio is going to win, but we still can make the series competitive and at least avoid the sweep. If Mike Brown sees the writing on the wall and plays the lineup that works; if LeBron keeps driving to the rim instead of trying to get his jumper going early (he's an inside-out player, I think--his shot gets better as he keeps driving); if we can stop having fourteen defensive breakdowns on Ginobli every quarter; we can sneak a few wins away. Plus we'll have home court, and as I mentioned last night, that has been big in the past for the Cavs. But, it's definitely going to be an uphill road. Who knows, maybe I'll finally get to start writing about the Indians by the weekend (though I hope not!)
1.) Why is Larry Hughes still playing? The guy had zero points in 20 minutes in Game 2. Two points in 23 minutes in Game 1. And he's no longer able to shut down the opposing team's point guard like he did in the Detroit series. I know that having an injured guy play gives some inspiration to a team, but I think we are well past the point at which the Cavs care about him "gutting it out."
2.) Why is Boobie Gibson not starting? The kid can get to the hole, he is quick enough to at least come close to staying with Parker, AND he can hit threes. I am more perplexed than ever with Mike Brown's coaching strategy on offense.
3.) And on that note, Mike Brown sitting LeBron James for 9 minutes in the first quarter was just absurd. I know, as Brian Windhorst noted, that we only dropped six points with LeBron out of the game. And that we lost a bunch more when he came back in. But LeBron was setting the tone for the team in the few minutes he played. He was aggressive, he was taking it to the rim, he was moving on offense. The second they took him out, it was like all the wind came out of the Cavs' sails--the Spurs instantly had to expend about 50% less energy on the defensive end and thus had more energy on offense. LeBron is a smart player--and he only had one foul for the REST OF THE GAME. This move was a complete bonehead blunder by Mike Brown. You don't sit your superstar in a game of this importance unless they get 4 fouls in the first half. No way.
4.) Our best lineup, believe it or not, is Daniel Gibson, Damon Jones, LeBron James, Drew Gooden, and Anderson Varejao. This lineup gets almost no playing time in the game. When they do get time, they play well. People say this isn't a great defensive lineup--but the Cavs play team defense, not individual defense. They have a scheme and these guys can execute it as well as anyone. With Larry Hughes getting beat more frequently than Mark Madsen in a game of one-on-one against Michael Jordan, and Raggedy Andy being enough of an offensive liability so as to not play him at the same time as snow, AND Z getting destroyed by Tim Duncan with great regularity, I don't see why Mike Brown does not play this lineup more. It would be one thing if the three aforementioned Cavs were playing at a high level. But they couldn't be playing worse (except for Snow, who was OK in the minutes he played).
5.) One thing I just don't get is the Cavs' attitude in this series. They have been written off by just about everyone, especially after Game 1. They're playing in the NBA Finals against a superior team. They're way ahead of schedule in getting to the finals. So why are they the more lackadasical team on the floor? Why are they treating these finals like the coast-at-all-costs regular season? Hell, even LeBron James admitted today in the Post that the team is not playing particularly hard for most of the game. I just don't get it. All throughout the playoffs I figured that the Cavs might rise to the occasion in the Finals and play like the Golden State Warriors--not really sure what the hell they're doing, but ready to give it all the energy they have and enjoy the experience. Instead, they seem moribund and depressed. What am I missing here?
6.) For any fans who went to the Q for Game 2, I'm curious to know what it was like to watch the slaughter in 3-D; I was nauseous enough watching it in 2-D.
7.) I would really like to see the Cavs get up the floor quicker. I hate to toot my own horn, but the "walk it up" effect is in full force here. When we are slow getting the ball in the frontcourt, we get slow and stagnant and are easy to defend. When we bring the ball up quick, we are a much better team. Yet another argument for starting the explosive Boobie Gibson -- and yet Mike Brown doesn't do it.
8.) Does anyone know if LeBron has continued his pregame ritual from the Detroit series of shooting for several hours before the game? His jumper is looking balky again and I'm wondering if that's why. In Game 2 he showed an ability to get to the rim and finish most of the time (though he did have a few key misses on tough drives). If he could start hitting that jumper again, it would open up the offense a lot more.
9.) Back to the Finals. In this online chat on ESPN, someone mentions the thought of mugging Parker as he goes through the lane. I think this might be a good idea. I'm not talking about a McDyess hooligan foul, I'm talking about a good, hard playoff foul that maybe gets a flagrant but makes him think twice about being so fearless in the paint. I'm talking about the equivalent of a brushback pitch, not a heater to the forehead. Why the hell else is Pollard on the roster?
10. All of this said, I don't think the series is over. San Antonio is going to win, but we still can make the series competitive and at least avoid the sweep. If Mike Brown sees the writing on the wall and plays the lineup that works; if LeBron keeps driving to the rim instead of trying to get his jumper going early (he's an inside-out player, I think--his shot gets better as he keeps driving); if we can stop having fourteen defensive breakdowns on Ginobli every quarter; we can sneak a few wins away. Plus we'll have home court, and as I mentioned last night, that has been big in the past for the Cavs. But, it's definitely going to be an uphill road. Who knows, maybe I'll finally get to start writing about the Indians by the weekend (though I hope not!)
Sunday, June 10, 2007
A Quick Thought
First of all, sorry for not posting more over the last few days--I was moving into a new apartment. I'll have more comprehensive thoughts on Games 1 and 2 tomorrow, but for now, I, the eternal pessimist, will leave you Cleveland fans with some positive chi to help you sleep tonight:
Last year, the Cavs looked completely overmatched in the Conference Finals against Detroit. They lost Game 1 by a score of 113-86. They were losing at halftime of Game 2 by a score of 52-36. In the fourth quarter, they made a furious comeback to get the game much closer than it should have been in terms of final score. The Cavs then went on to win three in a row.
Now, San Antonio is damn good. They're simply much better than we are. But, all I'm saying is, there's not yet cause to say all is lost. The Cavs could still make this series competitive at home and get back in this thing (lose in 6 or 7 instead of 4). Plus, we all know what happened the next year against the Pistons . . .
At least, that's what I'm telling myself to allow me to sleep tonight. More to come tomorrow.
Last year, the Cavs looked completely overmatched in the Conference Finals against Detroit. They lost Game 1 by a score of 113-86. They were losing at halftime of Game 2 by a score of 52-36. In the fourth quarter, they made a furious comeback to get the game much closer than it should have been in terms of final score. The Cavs then went on to win three in a row.
Now, San Antonio is damn good. They're simply much better than we are. But, all I'm saying is, there's not yet cause to say all is lost. The Cavs could still make this series competitive at home and get back in this thing (lose in 6 or 7 instead of 4). Plus, we all know what happened the next year against the Pistons . . .
At least, that's what I'm telling myself to allow me to sleep tonight. More to come tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)