Jump to content

Cavaliers Thread: Embrace The Mediocrity


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, AkronsWitness said:

It's definitely not rigged but to have a draft system in place where the 12th worst team in the league even has a chance at a top 3 pick is completely stupid.

yet we got Kyrie with the 11th worst odds. lets not act like that the Cavs never benefited from it. also when the Cavs got the #1 pick, the odds were heavily more favorable for worst record

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, buno67 said:

yet we got Kyrie with the 11th worst odds. lets not act like that the Cavs never benefited from it. also when the Cavs got the #1 pick, the odds were heavily more favorable for worst record

Yeah...and that was stupid. I hate the lottery.

Because some teams dk the smart thing and tanked, actual terrible teams suffer. And the teams that tank can still get the top pick anyways...

In a league where it’s nearly impossible to land a superstar outside of the first 3 picks (and sometimes not even then), a lottery of luck makes zero sense.

Also, does anyone else hate protected draft picks? That’s nonsense, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LinebackerGod said:

Yeah...and that was stupid. I hate the lottery.

Because some teams dk the smart thing and tanked, actual terrible teams suffer. And the teams that tank can still get the top pick anyways...

In a league where it’s nearly impossible to land a superstar outside of the first 3 picks (and sometimes not even then), a lottery of luck makes zero sense.

Also, does anyone else hate protected draft picks? That’s nonsense, IMO.

yeah but in a league with no parity in it really, you know how boring it be with rewarded tanking? if their was no lottery, we would prolly see more teams tanking. it truly would hurt  more franchises. at least with the lottery, bad team can still try and be competitive and still get a good draft pick. then a top prospect comes a long, we would see a horrible season. 

biggest issue is the NBA needs to give franchises  more tools to be able to keep their talent. only difference is a slightly larger contract for resigning with your franchise, which does nothing really

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, buno67 said:

yet we got Kyrie with the 11th worst odds. lets not act like that the Cavs never benefited from it. also when the Cavs got the #1 pick, the odds were heavily more favorable for worst record

Might have your years mixed up. The Cavs in 2011 had the 2nd best odds behind Minny. They had a 20% chance of getting the #1 pick and got Kyrie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, buno67 said:

yeah but in a league with no parity in it really, you know how boring it be with rewarded tanking? if their was no lottery, we would prolly see more teams tanking. it truly would hurt  more franchises. at least with the lottery, bad team can still try and be competitive and still get a good draft pick. then a top prospect comes a long, we would see a horrible season. 

biggest issue is the NBA needs to give franchises  more tools to be able to keep their talent. only difference is a slightly larger contract for resigning with your franchise, which does nothing really

Yeah, but is it really more entertaining to watch a 25 win team? I feel like it doesn’t really matter. The NBA made this mess by allowing players to form superteams. It made the other 27 teams completely pointless. They need to fix that or fix the lottery. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AkronsWitness said:

Might have your years mixed up. The Cavs in 2011 had the 2nd best odds behind Minny. They had a 20% chance of getting the #1 pick and got Kyrie.

The cavs via the clippers pick 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AkronsWitness said:

Might have your years mixed up. The Cavs in 2011 had the 2nd best odds behind Minny. They had a 20% chance of getting the #1 pick and got Kyrie.

They had a 20% of landing the #1 pick because they were combining the LAC odds with the Cavs odds. The LAC pick had a .028% chance of getting the #1 pick and thats what got it. If the Cavs didnt make that trade, they dont get irving

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LinebackerGod said:

Yeah, but is it really more entertaining to watch a 25 win team? I feel like it doesn’t really matter. The NBA made this mess by allowing players to form superteams. It made the other 27 teams completely pointless. They need to fix that or fix the lottery. 

You really cant tell players they cant sign with a team or that team. The league could make it for the franchise to be able to keep players an advantage. Like only allow max type contracts for outside teams but the franchise that drafted them, has the ability to offer them anything they want but only the man contract numbers other teams could offer is the cap hit. Something that makes it more rewarding to stay with the franchise that drafted you

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, buno67 said:

You really cant tell players they cant sign with a team or that team. The league could make it for the franchise to be able to keep players an advantage. Like only allow max type contracts for outside teams but the franchise that drafted them, has the ability to offer them anything they want but only the man contract numbers other teams could offer is the cap hit. Something that makes it more rewarding to stay with the franchise that drafted you

The best thing would be to uncap contracts. So LeBron would be making significantly more than everyone else. Same with Durant...and others. It would prevent super teams, because players would go where the money was, not where they could just win. There will always be ring chasers that take less money, but it won’t be as easy to build a team with 5 stars like it is now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LinebackerGod said:

The best thing would be to uncap contracts. So LeBron would be making significantly more than everyone else. Same with Durant...and others. It would prevent super teams, because players would go where the money was, not where they could just win. There will always be ring chasers that take less money, but it won’t be as easy to build a team with 5 stars like it is now. 

Yes 100%. Slotted contracts are no longer needed now that the cap is so large. Guys like lebron,ad,curry,Giannis should be able to make as much as they want. Now if they want to take pay cuts to play with each other then so be it. But if lebron is being offered 100M a year I doubt he’s gonna take 50M to fit more guys in. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, buno67 said:

They had a 20% of landing the #1 pick because they were combining the LAC odds with the Cavs odds. The LAC pick had a .028% chance of getting the #1 pick and thats what got it. If the Cavs didnt make that trade, they dont get irving

Oh man I completely forgot about that Clipper pick because of Baron Davis if I remember right

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

But if lebron is being offered 100M a year I doubt he’s gonna take 50M to fit more guys in. 

Actually, I think he would.

He needs a few more titles for a run at "GOAT".

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bruceb said:

Actually, I think he would.

He needs a few more titles for a run at "GOAT".

Lebron has said several times that he’s never taking less money ever again.  Miami screwed him when he took less money to team up with those guys by doing everything they could to stay under the hard cap. That really irked him and ever since then he’s been 100% business first. And he’s railed against cap spots for a long time saying top guys should be able to get as much as they can. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

Lebron has said several times that he’s never taking less money ever again.  Miami screwed him when he took less money to team up with those guys by doing everything they could to stay under the hard cap. That really irked him and ever since then he’s been 100% business first. And he’s railed against cap spots for a long time saying top guys should be able to get as much as they can. 

And he wants more than anything to lay a legitimate claim to "GOAT".

He needs more rings to be able to do that...he knows that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, bruceb said:

And he wants more than anything to lay a legitimate claim to "GOAT".

He needs more rings to be able to do that...he knows that.

he already has a legitimate claim/argument for goat tho

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...