Cleveland Cavs (2016 NBA Champions)

[OH10]

I don't necessarily disagree. However, look at Seattle/OKC and the Durant model:

06-07: 5th worst record, 2nd pick in Lottery (Durant)
07-08: 20-62 (.244), 2nd worst record, 4th pick (Westbrook)
08-09: 23-59 (.280), 4th worst record, 3rd pick (Harden)
09-10: 50-32 (.610)
10-11: 55-27 (.671)
11-12: 47-19 (.712)

Kyrie has shown that will to win just like Durant. I don't think that will just go away. Sizes aren't comparable but ability to create and make shots are similar. Kyrie is the Durant of the Cavs moving forward. Now they just need some more pieces and I don't think tanking 1 more year will hurt.

I'd prefer (in order) MKG, Beal, or Barnes. Just throwing out that Drummond will be in the discussion and how to work with it (trade up and get a wing).

The 2013 Center class looks pretty good too (Zeller, Noel, Adams) so another reason to go 2/3 this time around.

But not being good next year is a very real possibility, even a probability, imo.

The key to OKC's success has been that all three of those picks worked out like gangbusters. That's why it is so important for the Cavs to hit on this pick as well; which, in my opinion, means not taking a huge risk with a project like Drummond.

I agree that the Cavs are still far off being competitive at this point in time. But we can't simply plan for failure. We no longer have Antawn Jamison who, for all his faults, put up a lot of points for this team last year. We'll take a step back offensively, not by design, but by circumstances. I just don't think it's something we ought to be striving for.

 

[tsteele316]

The key to OKC's success has been that all three of those picks worked out like gangbusters. That's why it is so important for the Cavs to hit on this pick as well; which, in my opinion, means not taking a huge risk with a project like Drummond.

I agree that the Cavs are still far off being competitive at this point in time. But we can't simply plan for failure. We no longer have Antawn Jamison who, for all his faults, put up a lot of points for this team last year. We'll take a step back offensively, not by design, but by circumstances. I just don't think it's something we ought to be striving for.

do you mean taking a huge risk like okc drafting a guy in the top 5 with a limited resume but blew up in draft camps like jeff green? it's not like okc hit total bullseyes with all of their top 5 picks.

 

[Brutus1]

Here's the thing regarding Drummond: If he blows up at the Combine, he'll
quickly move into the top three and gone before the Cavs pick. If he just blows, then the Cavs will pass on him.

I don't mind taking a flyer on a guy that could hit or just as easily bust, but I'd much rather do it later in the draft, not in the top four.

I've never been impressed with Barnes like some here are, but if the F.O. thinks he's a long-term piece, then I'm on board with them.

Trading up to #2 would cost too much, but if they wanted to move to #3 to guarantee themselves Beal or MKG, then I could see the Bullets swapping picks if Gilbert took Rashard Lewis and his big contract off their hands.

If they keep all 4 picks, I'd like to see a sf, sg, c and another wing drafted.

 

[exhawg]

Here's the thing regarding Drummond: If he blows up at the Combine, he'll
quickly move into the top three and gone before the Cavs pick. If he just blows, then the Cavs will pass on him.

I don't mind taking a flyer on a guy that could hit or just as easily bust, but I'd much rather do it later in the draft, not in the top four.

I've never been impressed with Barnes like some here are, but if the F.O. thinks he's a long-term piece, then I'm on board with them.

Trading up to #2 would cost too much, but if they wanted to move to #3 to guarantee themselves Beal or MKG, then I could see the Bullets swapping picks if Gilbert took Rashard Lewis and his big contract off their hands.

If they keep all 4 picks, I'd like to see a sf, sg, c and another wing drafted.

I don't know if trading up to 2 would cost that much if the Bobcats are set on Robinson or Barnes. Cash might be enough or at worst they swap a bad contract for a guy like Walton. It all depends what the Bobcats want out of the draft. If the Bobcats want MKG there is no deal to be made.

 

[OH10]

do you mean taking a huge risk like okc drafting a guy in the top 5 with a limited resume but blew up in draft camps like jeff green? it's not like okc hit total bullseyes with all of their top 5 picks.

Jeff Green didn't blow up at camps. He blew up at Georgetown where he was the go-to-guy for a fairly good Hoyas team that made to the Final Four. He's been somewhat disappointing as a pro, but not a total flop. Drummond has total flop potential and the Cavs can't afford to throw away a top 5 pick.

I heard an analyst say on the radio today that Drummond could be as good as Bynum with the right system. If that's his ceiling, with all of the risk, pass. Bynum took years to develop and he's still weak during the most important times.

If Drummond had stayed in school, developed his game offensively, he might be worth a top 5 pick in future draft. Not this one. If the Cavs take that risk, and it fails, it will be a huge setback for the rebuilding process.

 

[tsteele316]

Jeff Green didn't blow up at camps. He blew up at Georgetown where he was the go-to-guy for a fairly good Hoyas team that made to the Final Four. He's been somewhat disappointing as a pro, but not a total flop. Drummond has total flop potential and the Cavs can't afford to throw away a top 5 pick.

I heard an analyst say on the radio today that Drummond could be as good as Bynum with the right system. If that's his ceiling, with all of the risk, pass. Bynum took years to develop and he's still weak during the most important times.

If Drummond had stayed in school, developed his game offensively, he might be worth a top 5 pick in future draft. Not this one. If the Cavs take that risk, and it fails, it will be a huge setback for the rebuilding process.

so, the cavs need to follow the okc model, which included throwing away a top 5 pick, but can't take a risk on a freakish athlete at the toughest position to fill in basketball, because they might throw away a top 5 pick.

as for whatever analyst you heard on the radio, nonsense. first, bynum's major issue his entire career has been staying healthy. and, in case you didn't watch him this year, bynum was quite good, and even better without kobe in the lineup, not surprisingly.

 

[stowfan]

Here's another recently updated mock draft, check out both rounds

http://www.mynbadraft.com/2012-NBA-Mock-Draft

If the the Cavs handle this draft reasonably well, I don't think they go back to the lottery for a long time to come. Before the Cavs traded Ramon Sessions, and before Andy got hurt, the Cavs lost a lot of games they were competitive in. With the addition of two more good players, I could see the Cavs as the eighth seed in the East.

Next year they may have three first round picks, and they say, there will be several center prospects in next years draft. I wouldn't be unhappy if the Cavs loaded up with wing players this year and completely ignored the center spot. If the Cavs find a team that has a center, but not much else, the Cavs could trade all three picks to move up and get a front line center.

 

[Brutus1]

Considering Bynum started his career as the youngest player ever in the league, He was playing decently by his second year. It's not his fault Kobe is a ball hog and rode him like a rented mule. Imagine how your confidence would get shot when you have such a great player treating you like shit all the time. That couldn't have helped his development at all.

I can understand you not liking Drummond or taking the risk, but you won't take a chance on a guy that has potential to reach Bynum, but you'll gladly take Harrison Barnes? Ouch!

 

[Piney]

Here's another recently updated mock draft, check out both rounds

http://www.mynbadraft.com/2012-NBA-Mock-Draft

If the the Cavs handle this draft reasonably well, I don't think they go back to the lottery for a long time to come. Before the Cavs traded Ramon Sessions, and before Andy got hurt, the Cavs lost a lot of games they were competitive in. With the addition of two more good players, I could see the Cavs as the eighth seed in the East.

Next year they may have three first round picks, and they say, there will be several center prospects in next years draft. I wouldn't be unhappy if the Cavs loaded up with wing players this year and completely ignored the center spot. If the Cavs find a team that has a center, but not much else, the Cavs could trade all three picks to move up and get a front line center.

Here is the thing with the NBA draft... it isn't like the NFL draft where you can trade 3 late 1st rounders to move up into the top 5. Just the difference in the games where in the NFL you start 22 players and one guy might not be a big difference. In the NBA, a top 5 pick can give you a player that turns your team into a playoff/title contender. And players outside the top 10 rarely can transform a team.

So in the NBA, outside factors are the main reason for people willing to trade high picks. For example normally Charlotte would be out of their mind to trade down to #4. BUT if the owner needs to shed payroll and they want to get rid of a bad contract, you can leverage that situation to trade.

So let's say the Cavs just miss the playoffs and pick 10-12. They just couldn't move up to the top 5 even if they give up all there other 1st rounders which should be late 1st rounders, those late first rounders don't have any value to a team looking for a Top 5 talent.

 

[Piney]

Considering Bynum started his career as the youngest player ever in the league, He was playing decently by his second year. It's not his fault Kobe is a ball hog and rode him like a rented mule. Imagine how your confidence would get shot when you have such a great player treating you like shit all the time. That couldn't have helped his development at all.

I can understand you not liking Drummond or taking the risk, but you won't take a chance on a guy that has potential to reach Bynum, but you'll gladly take Harrison Barnes? Ouch!

Drummond is an interesting guy. Personally I wouldn't touch him with a 10 foot pole. But I have heard that his personal workout a couple days ago was awesome. Basically he is the boom or bust guy.

While Bynum is one comparrison, another I have heard is Dwight Howard. It will all be about being able to motivate him and maximize his raw talent. This is where Byron Scott has to make the call, does he feel he can tap into this kid's talents.

 

[OH10]

so, the cavs need to follow the okc model, which included throwing away a top 5 pick, but can't take a risk on a freakish athlete at the toughest position to fill in basketball, because they might throw away a top 5 pick.

as for whatever analyst you heard on the radio, nonsense. first, bynum's major issue his entire career has been staying healthy. and, in case you didn't watch him this year, bynum was quite good, and even better without kobe in the lineup, not surprisingly.

You missed my point. OKC didn't throw away a top 5 pick. Jeff Green was productive and they turned him into Kendrick Perkins, who likewise has been productive. Not stars, but solid contributors.

I can understand you not liking Drummond or taking the risk, but you won't take a chance on a guy that has potential to reach Bynum, but you'll gladly take Harrison Barnes? Ouch!

I consider his potential to reach Bynum-level as slim to none. I consider his bust potential a probability. And I don't consider the center position in today's NBA to be a significant position of need.

The Bulls did just fine with Luc Longley; the Pistons did just fine with 6'9" Ben Wallace; the Celtics won w/ Kendrick Perkins; and the Heat are winning with Joel freaking Anthony. It's a myth that you need a center.

Plus, we have Andy, who isn't old and is no slouch. We need an offensively-minded player like Harrison Barnes, who physically is NBA ready at the perimeter. We are already stacked with post defensive players. Why be redundant with a risky player like Drummond?

 

[tsteele316]

You missed my point. OKC didn't throw away a top 5 pick. Jeff Green was productive and they turned him into Kendrick Perkins, who likewise has been productive. Not stars, but solid contributors.



I consider his potential to reach Bynum-level as slim to none. I consider his bust potential a probability. And I don't consider the center position in today's NBA to be a significant position of need.

The Bulls did just fine with Luc Longley; the Pistons did just fine with 6'9" Ben Wallace; the Celtics won w/ Kendrick Perkins; and the Heat are winning with Joel freaking Anthony. It's a myth that you need a center.

Plus, we have Andy, who isn't old and is no slouch. We need an offensively-minded player like Harrison Barnes, who physically is NBA ready at the perimeter. We are already stacked with post defensive players. Why be redundant with a risky player like Drummond?

lol. saying you don't need a true center in the nba is like saying you don't need to worry about defense in the nfl because it's now a passing league. what it really comes down to is that while just about every nba scout and gm looks at future projections when drafting players, you've watched uconn a handful of times and have determined that drummond will bust based on what limited things you've seen.

the kid might sink like a stone on draft day, or he may flame out, but the logic behind your conclusion is suspect at best, especially when pimping a guy like harrison barnes. i'll just use your drummond logic and call him marvin williams part 2.

 

[AKAK]

You missed my point. OKC didn't throw away a top 5 pick. Jeff Green was productive and they turned him into Kendrick Perkins, who likewise has been productive. Not stars, but solid contributors.



I consider his potential to reach Bynum-level as slim to none. I consider his bust potential a probability. And I don't consider the center position in today's NBA to be a significant position of need.

The Bulls did just fine with Luc Longley; the Pistons did just fine with 6'9" Ben Wallace; the Celtics won w/ Kendrick Perkins; and the Heat are winning with Joel freaking Anthony. It's a myth that you need a center.

Plus, we have Andy, who isn't old and is no slouch. We need an offensively-minded player like Harrison Barnes, who physically is NBA ready at the perimeter. We are already stacked with post defensive players. Why be redundant with a risky player like Drummond?

The Bulls had Jordan. If we had Jordan, who cares who the Center is.

And, if we thought this dude was going to be in some way as good as Ben Wallace in his prime, you'd think about taking him, I think.

You must also point out that the Heat are winning with not-Chris Bosh.

Having said all that, I dont' really like him, but, not just because he's a center, or not.

 

[OH10]

The Bulls had Jordan. If we had Jordan, who cares who the Center is.

And, if we thought this dude was going to be in some way as good as Ben Wallace in his prime, you'd think about taking him, I think.

You must also point out that the Heat are winning with not-Chris Bosh.

Having said all that, I dont' really like him, but, not just because he's a center, or not.

And that's the point. I think people are advocating taking him simply because of his size. If that were the case, why weren't people upset when we let Ryan Hollins go? You can't just draft size. Everyone here would love to have Anthony Davis because he's skilled. You have to draft talent and not one person has pointed out any discernible offensive talent for Drummond.

i'll just use your drummond logic and call him marvin williams part 2.

At least I've pointed some identifiable talent for Barnes. He really does have a good shooting stroke. He is physically gifted and skilled. The only knock on him has been his ability to take over a game. Well, who else in this draft demonstrated the ability to take over a game at the college level? Not MKG, who averaged 11 pts/gm. Maybe Davis, but not on the offensive side of the ball. Certainly not Drummond.

So if Barnes' glaring weakness isn't a strength for anybody else, then why again are we debating whether to take him?

 

[stowfan]

Here is the thing with the NBA draft... it isn't like the NFL draft where you can trade 3 late 1st rounders to move up into the top 5. Just the difference in the games where in the NFL you start 22 players and one guy might not be a big difference. In the NBA, a top 5 pick can give you a player that turns your team into a playoff/title contender. And players outside the top 10 rarely can transform a team.

So in the NBA, outside factors are the main reason for people willing to trade high picks. For example normally Charlotte would be out of their mind to trade down to #4. BUT if the owner needs to shed payroll and they want to get rid of a bad contract, you can leverage that situation to trade.

So let's say the Cavs just miss the playoffs and pick 10-12. They just couldn't move up to the top 5 even if they give up all there other 1st rounders which should be late 1st rounders, those late first rounders don't have any value to a team looking for a Top 5 talent.

I know what you're saying about the impact of one star player in the NBA but allow me to give you a hypothetical, just to waste more time.

Let's say hypothetically, the Cavs have the 12 pick next year, Sacramento's pick owed us is 19, and the Heat's pick is 29. Again hypothetically, the Hornets have only one draft pick the first round, and the only elite player, can't miss player for them to take at 5, is almost a clone of Davis. We will use this mock draft as the hypothetical example.

http://nbadraft.net/2012mock_draft

We would get the Davis clone, and they would get:

Tyler Zeller C at 12
Moe Harkless or Terrance Jones SF at 19
Jon Jenkins SG at 29

I'd make that trade if I were the Hornets