Q12543 wrote:Khans has a pretty compelling case. If we want to go really crazy on hypotheticals, what if we went Giannis AND Gobert over Shabazz and Dieng? How about this lineup:
PG - Rubio
SG - LaVine
SF - Giannis
PF - Love
C - Gobert
Holy shit. That might be a top 3 defense - even if Flip were coaching!
Oh, did the league also hypothetically change so that the winning team scores way fewer points than the other team as well? Kidding....kind of...
Q12543 wrote:Khans has a pretty compelling case. If we want to go really crazy on hypotheticals, what if we went Giannis AND Gobert over Shabazz and Dieng? How about this lineup:
PG - Rubio
SG - LaVine
SF - Giannis
PF - Love
C - Gobert
Holy shit. That might be a top 3 defense - even if Flip were coaching!
Q12543 wrote:Khans has a pretty compelling case. If we want to go really crazy on hypotheticals, what if we went Giannis AND Gobert over Shabazz and Dieng? How about this lineup:
PG - Rubio
SG - LaVine
SF - Giannis
PF - Love
C - Gobert
Holy shit. That might be a top 3 defense - even if Flip were coaching!
2/5 of that defense is pretty poor though...
It contains 3 of the most important types of defenders. An elite rim protector, elite wing defender and a PG who can keep up with most of the elite offensive PG's in the league. I think Gobert is good enough to cover for the two poor defenders. Love clearly can carry the scoring load and I think Lavine is good enough to be the second scorer and Giannis is a good enough third option. I would take that team over Wiggins and Towns.
Q12543 wrote:Khans has a pretty compelling case. If we want to go really crazy on hypotheticals, what if we went Giannis AND Gobert over Shabazz and Dieng? How about this lineup:
PG - Rubio
SG - LaVine
SF - Giannis
PF - Love
C - Gobert
Holy shit. That might be a top 3 defense - even if Flip were coaching!
Oh, did the league also hypothetically change so that the winning team scores way fewer points than the other team as well? Kidding....kind of...
Before Love went to Cleveland, he was a top 4 offensive threat in the NBA. He's proven that he can carry a big load offensively and do so efficiently. LaVine would definitely have to step up big time offensively in this lineup. Giannis still hasn't reach his ceiling either.
Q12543 wrote:Khans has a pretty compelling case. If we want to go really crazy on hypotheticals, what if we went Giannis AND Gobert over Shabazz and Dieng? How about this lineup:
PG - Rubio
SG - LaVine
SF - Giannis
PF - Love
C - Gobert
Holy shit. That might be a top 3 defense - even if Flip were coaching!
2/5 of that defense is pretty poor though...
It contains 3 of the most important types of defenders. An elite rim protector, elite wing defender and a PG who can keep up with most of the elite offensive PG's in the league. I think Gobert is good enough to cover for the two poor defenders. Love clearly can carry the scoring load and I think Lavine is good enough to be the second scorer and Giannis is a good enough third option. I would take that team over Wiggins and Towns.
Love is not a great defender, but he can certainly help a team defense with his rebounding and positional post defense, which he's actually pretty good at. Look at how Zach Randolph has fared in Memphis and he by no means was ever known as a great defender.
I'm not sure I would take this squad over Towns/Wiggins (in the long run), but it would be really, really close.
I'm late to the discussion and I haven't read everything posted, but I feel the Cavs would have been better not making the trade. The main reason is the financial flexibility Wiggins gives you. I'm not a cap expert, but I wonder if they would have been able to make a play for Aldridge had they not had Love. I'm not sure giving your third scoring option who plays below average defense a max contract is a wise allocation of funds. By keeping Wiggins it also prolongs the championship window. A duo of Wiggins and Irving gives you a bright future.
TRKO wrote:I'm late to the discussion and I haven't read everything posted, but I feel the Cavs would have been better not making the trade. The main reason is the financial flexibility Wiggins gives you. I'm not a cap expert, but I wonder if they would have been able to make a play for Aldridge had they not had Love. I'm not sure giving your third scoring option who plays below average defense a max contract is a wise allocation of funds. By keeping Wiggins it also prolongs the championship window. A duo of Wiggins and Irving gives you a bright future.
The Cavs are going to be in the Luxury Tax for as long as LeBron is there so there was going to be no real cap flexibility, with Love or Wiggins.
TRKO wrote:I'm late to the discussion and I haven't read everything posted, but I feel the Cavs would have been better not making the trade. The main reason is the financial flexibility Wiggins gives you. I'm not a cap expert, but I wonder if they would have been able to make a play for Aldridge had they not had Love. I'm not sure giving your third scoring option who plays below average defense a max contract is a wise allocation of funds. By keeping Wiggins it also prolongs the championship window. A duo of Wiggins and Irving gives you a bright future.
You realize Aldridge would actually be a worse fit in Cleveland than Love, right? Aldridge would be their third option, who can't hit threes consistently and plays the same level defense as Love at this stage of his career. And no, they likely wouldn't have had the necessary cap space to get Aldridge anyway.
