Minnesota Sports Forum

Why wouldn't Love simply pick up his player option and become a FA when the cap goes up?

60WinTim wrote:Why wouldn't Love simply pick up his player option and become a FA when the cap goes up?

I think he will do that, Tim. I'm just saying that the Cavs know now what he brings, good and bad, and won't be one of the teams bidding for him.

TRKO wrote:

monsterpile wrote:The comparisons are fun and also very subjective especially when you go across eras especially back to Bill Russell. Imo when it comes to this stuff keep it fun celebrate the players accomplishments people see guys differently that's totally reasonable there have been a lot of really special players just in the past 30 years.

Lebron is a heck of a player and will go down as one of the best players of all time and this is coming from someone that's never really been a fan. I've just never connected with him for some reason. His game is a little different than anyone else I can think of. He is kind of a combination of Magic (passing) Jordan athletically (gifted and more of an attacking player) and KG (in that he is able to do just about anything really well) plus Lebron is built bigger than a guy like Artest. I'm not saying Lebron takes every good thing from those guys and makes him the best it's just he is a very unique guy not a take over at will scorer but a guy looking to pass but also is the most powerful wing player we may ever see but very explosive. It's a special and quite frankly odd combination because some of his traits seem opposite of what you might expect given his physical makeup.

To me he is a combo of Magic and Shaq. Has the skill of magic and the power (for a wing) of Shaq. And like Shaq he gets away with a ton of offensive fouls. I think LeBron and Shaq's strength allows them to dominate like they do.

Yes thank you the power of Shaq. I was not a fan of Shaq but at some point I felt bad for the guy. The only way anyone could hope to guard him was absolutely physical play. he couldn't move without hitting a guy and of course people flopped (divac was the best at it). There were times he fouled guys but he was fouled a lot before he even did anything either. Shaq changed the whole game, the way people played it (hack a Shaq was where it really began) the type of body type people had massive bodies had value because of him. After he left the league you immediately saw some guys drop weight. Now you see big guys slim down even more because the game has changed but part of that is there is no dominate force to deal with and being quicker is the name of the game. Shaq was just so big strong and quick for his size (he was quicker than guys that were smaller than him) he was unguardable and he was very skilled it wasn't just his physical gift he was actually skilled. The only player I have seen be as dominate in my lifetime as Shaq was is Jordan and it was a different way but it was dominance. This is coming from a guy that really didn't like Shaq. I wouldn't say I am anna of his but I don't think I saw I dislike him now.

longstrangetrip wrote:
A completely dominating performance. 4-0 sweep with an average score of 106-93. During the regular season, with Kevin Love in the lineup for every game, Atlanta won 3 out of 4 with an average score of 109-106. Small sample size of only 8 games, but certainly a significant difference. It's telling to me that the Cavs offensive output was identical with and without Love, but they gave up 16 fewer points per game with Love out. I have said often that I think Love doesn't help the Cavs, but these results were even more dramatic than I would have predicted. In all 4 games the Cavs looked like a team, rather than a collection of individuals, and I didn't see that often during the regular season.

I agree that Love is gone...I just don't think the Cavs are going to offer him much now that they know how they play with a much cheaper TT at PF rather than Love. Personally, I hope that he goes to the Lakers. or some other Western conference team.

Love averaged less than 11.8 pts and 7.8 rbs with .341 FG% and -7.2 plus/minus in regular season against Atlanta, so it is not surprise that Cleveland is not missing him in playoffs against Atlanta. It is very difficult to use regular season games as a comparison how these teams would play against each other since they played only one game with current rosters and we all saw how much better Cleveland played after trading for Mozgov, Shumbert and Smith.

Atlanta won that game 106 - 97 with Carroll playing tremendous defense against LeBron who scored just 18 pts with below .40 FG% and had 9 turnovers. They got also huge lift from their bench that scored 36 pts in that game.

Mikkeman, I think the law of diminishing returns applies to Love on the Cavs. You only need so many alpha-scorers, and with Kyrie and LeBron on the team - both of whom have the benefit of being primary ball handlers - it meant that he became the 3rd option on offense. That's a LOT of money to pay a 3rd option. If Love were a defensive/rebounding Center or elite perimeter 3 & D wing, he would be a much more synergistic fit with those guys.

I always go back to my hypothetical example of trying to assemble the best possible team from players that have been around since, say, 1980. I'd probably have Jordan, LeBron, and Hakeem at the 2, 3, and 5. But I might put Rodman at the 4 because the guy doesn't need shots to be effective. And the 1 might be someone like Nash because I need a shooter out there. That's not the best 5 players from the past 35 years, but it might make for the best team.

Q12543 wrote:Mikkeman, I think the law of diminishing returns applies to Love on the Cavs. You only need so many alpha-scorers, and with Kyrie and LeBron on the team - both of whom have the benefit of being primary ball handlers - it meant that he became the 3rd option on offense. That's a LOT of money to pay a 3rd option. If Love were a defensive/rebounding Center or elite perimeter 3 & D wing, he would be a much more synergistic fit with those guys.

I always go back to my hypothetical example of trying to assemble the best possible team from players that have been around since, say, 1980. I'd probably have Jordan, LeBron, and Hakeem at the 2, 3, and 5. But I might put Rodman at the 4 because the guy doesn't need shots to be effective. And the 1 might be someone like Nash because I need a shooter out there. That's not the best 5 players from the past 35 years, but it might make for the best team.

This is another reason why Flip will play all these games leading up to the draft, but he WILL select Towns.

monsterpile - I agree on Shaq. They made rules just to try and stop him. Amazing talent.

Q - I like your team with Rodman. He could cover anyone. Even Shaq in the day. I would probably go with Shaq and Stockon to fill out 1/5 for me. Shaq just couldn't be left alone and I just think Stockon could be the shooter and play better defense then Nash.

bleedspeed177 wrote:monsterpile - I agree on Shaq. They made rules just to try and stop him. Amazing talent.

Q - I like your team with Rodman. He could cover anyone. Even Shaq in the day. I would probably go with Shaq and Stockon to fill out 1/5 for me. Shaq just couldn't be left alone and I just think Stockon could be the shooter and play better defense then Nash.

Rodman might be the greatest role player in the history of the game. He is the ultimate example of someone that can significantly impact a game without ever scoring a single point. He averaged 19 rebounds a game at the age of 30. Think about that. The next closest guy that year was Kevin Willis at 15.5.

My all-time lineup would be Magic, MJ, Bron, Garnett, Hakeem. Oh, and we'd probably do a ton of switching on defense.

Q12543 wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:monsterpile - I agree on Shaq. They made rules just to try and stop him. Amazing talent.

Q - I like your team with Rodman. He could cover anyone. Even Shaq in the day. I would probably go with Shaq and Stockon to fill out 1/5 for me. Shaq just couldn't be left alone and I just think Stockon could be the shooter and play better defense then Nash.

Rodman might be the greatest role player in the history of the game. He is the ultimate example of someone that can significantly impact a game without ever scoring a single point. He averaged 19 rebounds a game at the age of 30. Think about that. The next closest guy that year was Kevin Willis at 15.5.

Good to see Rodman getting some love he was an amazing player. Ben Wallace was the same type of guy he was basically a star player and he never averaged 10ppg. He won't be considered one of the best centers of all time but he was one of the best defenders I've seen in my lifetime.