2quik4u;376398 wrote:what everyone seems to forget was that so called "shit bag" team in 07 was a great defensive team

Bingo. That 2007 team was successful because EVERYBODY on the team bought into the system and played for one another.

I hate to say it, but Shaq absolutely divided this team and the chemistry within it.

Without Shaq, the Cavs were a well oiled machine. When he came back, we really faltered. It's obvious to me that when it mattered most, Shaq wasn't able to accept his role like he said he would. Not only that, but he openly complained about touches during the Chicago series.

krazie45;375905 wrote:If it were truly a "shit bag supporting cast" they wouldn't come anywhere near 60 wins. The Cavs during the first 4 years of the LeBron era...now THAT was a shitbag supporting cast. The team this year had the talent to get it done....they didn't, it happens in sports all of the time. Only one team can win it all.

And what will that "60 wins" get them now? A cup of coffee? Bottom line is, yes, they ARE a fine REGULAR SEASON team when there's no pressure but when it's crunch time (playoffs) his "shit bag" supporting cast shits in it's hat. He knows this and knows that, as constructed, they aren't even a top 5 NBA team right now.

BR1986FB;376441 wrote:And what will that "60 wins" get them now? A cup of coffee? Bottom line is, yes, they ARE a fine REGULAR SEASON team when there's no pressure but when it's crunch time (playoffs) his "shit bag" supporting cast shits in it's hat. He knows this and knows that, as constructed, they aren't even a top 5 NBA team right now.

I will disagree. This team had enough talent as is. Half the problem was chemistry at the end of the year and half the problem was Mike Brown not utilizing players the correct way (Antawn Jamsion, JJ Hickson, Mo Williams, etc...)

They're most definitely a top 5 NBA team as constructed, but they have the pieces to get much better and I expect them to do so.

hoops23;376446 wrote:I will disagree. This team had enough talent as is. Half the problem was chemistry at the end of the year and half the problem was Mike Brown not utilizing players the correct way (Antawn Jamsion, JJ Hickson, Mo Williams, etc...)

They're most definitely a top 5 NBA team as constructed, but they have the pieces to get much better and I expect them to do so.

Exactly. BR, you need to stick to football on this one. The Cavs are a top 5 team or the never would've gotten the best record. You say regular season all you want but they would not have the best record over a period of 82 games if they were not a top 5 team. They did not play up to their potential. They were out coached and players were put into the wrong places. A complete lack of adjustments were present. To say the team didn't have the talent to win a championship is both ill-informed and asinine.

Respectfully disagree on top 5. If they WERE to be top 5, they'd come in AT #5. Right now, you take Lebron off the Cavs and take the BEST player off the Lakers, Suns, Magic & Celtics and those four teams would SWEEP the Cavs scrubs in the NBA Finals (if both teams got there). THAT is why LBJ's "sidekicks" are a bunch of shitbags.

Regular season and the playoffs are TWO different things. Sure, Mo Williams can look all world in the regular season when teams are playing "loosey goosey" defense but when it MATTERS and teams start to lock him down, he gags like Linda Lovelace.

To say the team HAS the talent, as constructed, to win a championship is both ill-informed and asinine.

BR1986FB;376441 wrote:And what will that "60 wins" get them now? A cup of coffee? Bottom line is, yes, they ARE a fine REGULAR SEASON team when there's no pressure but when it's crunch time (playoffs) his "shit bag" supporting cast shits in it's hat. He knows this and knows that, as constructed, they aren't even a top 5 NBA team right now.

BR is right on this one. Don't fall off your chair BR. Right now when you look at the teams regular season and playoffs combined with more emphasis given to Playoffs because thats the real season I would rank the teams like this:

1. Lakers
2. Celtics
3. Suns
4. Magic
5. Jazz
6. Cavs

Cavs don't have a "Playoff Mentality" mindset. They think teams are just going to roll over because they had the best regular season record and their offense is terrible for the Playoffs.

Skyhook79;376482 wrote:
Cavs don't have a "Playoff Mentality" mindset. They think teams are just going to roll over because they had the best regular season record and their offense is terrible for the Playoffs.

^^^^this

I agree with BR as well.

I think the Cavs are pretty even with Utah, but I think Utah is more dangerous in the playoffs because they can score and are tough, but they ran into their worst possible matchup in the Lakers because of the size.

Everyone knows that the regular season is only good for home court advantage. Who really cares how you do in the regular season once you get into the playoffs? The Cavs want to hang their hat on the regular season, well guess what, the Lakers and Boston coasted through the regular season and look where they are now.



You take the top player off of all the playoffs teams and the Cavs are probably the worst of the bunch.

hoops23;376446 wrote:I will disagree. This team had enough talent as is. Half the problem was chemistry at the end of the year and half the problem was Mike Brown not utilizing players the correct way (Antawn Jamsion, JJ Hickson, Mo Williams, etc...)

They're most definitely a top 5 NBA team as constructed, but they have the pieces to get much better and I expect them to do so.

What talent? They have one player who is an above average NBA player.

And what pieces do they have in place to get much better? That's just a dumb comment. They have no pieces in place to get much better other than Lebron's improvement. Jamison isnt' getting better. Mo Williams isn't getting better. Varejao is limited. They have no center. Their off guards are average NBA players and they don't have a 1st round pick.

thedynasty1998;376500 wrote:What talent? They have one player who is an above average NBA player.

And what pieces do they have in place to get much better? That's just a dumb comment. They have no pieces in place to get much better other than Lebron's improvement. Jamison isnt' getting better. Mo Williams isn't getting better. Varejao is limited. They have no center. Their off guards are average NBA players and they don't have a 1st round pick.

Don't question his basketball intellect!!!

thedynasty1998;376499 wrote:I agree with BR as well.

I think the Cavs are pretty even with Utah, but I think Utah is more dangerous in the playoffs because they can score and are tough, but they ran into their worst possible matchup in the Lakers because of the size.

Everyone knows that the regular season is only good for home court advantage. Who really cares how you do in the regular season once you get into the playoffs? The Cavs want to hang their hat on the regular season, well guess what, the Lakers and Boston coasted through the regular season and look where they are now.



You take the top player off of all the playoffs teams and the Cavs are probably the worst of the bunch.

I put Utah ahead of the Cavs because Utah performed very well and they were missing 2 starters for the Playoffs.

I think it's fair to put Utah ahead of the Cavs. Derron Williams is arguably the best PG in the NBA, Boozer can score on the block, Millsap is a good player, you have a shooter in Korver and athletic wings. With Kirilinko and Okur they are even better and are a very good team.

thedynasty1998;376499 wrote:You take the top player off of all the playoffs teams and the Cavs are probably the worst of the bunch.

Not going to lie, I laughed in the middle of class reading this comment. Are you telling me the Heat minus Wade are better? The Bucks minus Jennings? The Hawks minus Johnson? The Thunder minus Durant? The Bulls minus Rose? Come on now....

The comment that they have one above average player is also hilarious. I assume the player you're talking about is Jamison. Varejao isn't above average? 2nd team All Defense (I'm sure you'll claim it's only because he played for the Cavs despite the fact that NBA coaches who know more than anyone on here combined about basketball voted for him). Shaq isn't above average even at his age? The guy was brought in specifically to shut down the best center in the game. Williams not above average? sure he wasn't as good as some of the PG's in the playoffs but I'd take him over a LOT of point guards in the league.

As for no promising talent. Varejao is still young, West is still young (though might be traded for another piece), Jamison should still be productive for the remainder of his contract, Mo is still young, Gibson is still young and still an elite outside shooter in the league, and anyone who hasn't seen the promise in Hickson didn't watch many Cavs games this year.

The fact is that Mike Brown lost control of this team and failed to put the best lineup on the floor. Now some of you guys might say "but but, Mike Brown didn't miss shots".....that's true. However when you build a team around a lot of outside shooting, you put yourself at the risk of going cold. When you have an offensive playbook resembling that of a high school team, your offense will stall in the playoffs. The Cavs lacked the COACHING necessary to win the title not the players. They have already addressed this problem and they will look to upgrade the roster as they do every year.

And the Cavs IMO would've beaten any team not named Boston in a series this year. Boston played the defense necessary to shut down the Cavs for a series. The Cavs even showed they were capable of beating the Celtics by giving them their worst home loss in their history. The 6th fucking best team in the league would NOT be able to do that in the playoffs, THAT I can guaran damn tee you.

You take Lebron off the Cavs and your best player is Jamison or Williams.


They are still better than Miami, Milwaukee and probably Chicago.
Not Oklahoma City because they have Green, Westbrook and Harden.
Atlanta has Crawford, Horford, Smith and Williams

Every playoff team in the West is better minus their top players.


BTW, I could argue that Jamison is an average NBA player, I would say he's outside of the top 10 players in the NBA at his position, so therefore he would be considered average.

A guy who averages 9 ppg and 8 rpg is the definition of average, so yes, Varejao is average.

Shaq is absolutely an average player at this time, if only for the fact that he can only play 20 minutes a game at his age.

Mo Williams? See Jamison argument. He's not a top 10 PG in the NBA, therefore he's average.


As for the potential, the fact that you cited Jamison and Boobie Gibson is all I needed to read.

thedynasty1998;376591 wrote:You take Lebron off the Cavs and your best player is Jamison or Williams.


They are still better than Miami, Milwaukee and probably Chicago.
Not Oklahoma City because they have Green, Westbrook and Harden.
Atlanta has Crawford, Horford, Smith and Williams

Every playoff team in the West is better minus their top players.


BTW, I could argue that Jamison is an average NBA player, I would say he's outside of the top 10 players in the NBA at his position, so therefore he would be considered average.

A guy who averages 9 ppg and 8 rpg is the definition of average, so yes, Varejao is average.

Shaq is absolutely an average player at this time, if only for the fact that he can only play 20 minutes a game at his age.

Mo Williams? See Jamison argument. He's not a top 10 PG in the NBA, therefore he's average.


As for the potential, the fact that you cited Jamison and Boobie Gibson is all I needed to read.

That's a hell of a scale for determining average. You're telling me you have to be top 10 at your position to be considered above average? What kind of scale is that? If you compared strictly playoff rosters then ok, but in the 30 team league with at least 2 or 3 players at that position?

When did I cite Jamison as having potential? I said his play should remain constant throughout the remainder of his contract. Please argue against that. All I said for Gibson is that he is an elite 3 point shooter in the league. Please argue against that. Look at the stats dude, and stop putting words in my mouth to try and fit your argument. That kind of stuff doesn't work in a real discussion.


Yea Atlanta looked real strong in the playoffs lol. The thunder will be good, but are still young and right now I would not put them over the Cavs. How about the Blazers without Roy? Yea they played well without him because Nate McMillan is an actual coach.

You might disagree that not being top 10 is average. And I was just comparing them to starters. So, you have 32 teams, 10 are above average, 10 are average and 10 are below average. I think that's fair. Fit the other 2 in wherever you want.

You first statement in the paragraph was, "As for no promising talent". I was assuming that everyone you listed in that paragraph you were considering to be promising talent. I'm sorry if I misread it. I agree that Jamison's production should be okay for the next two years. As for Boobie, I don't really see much promise in him. Sure he can shoot, but that's about all he can do, plus he's getting paid way too much money to be an off the bench shooter. Another reason why I wouldn't consider him to be promising.

See I wouldn't count him out. Injuries and additions to the roster buried him and he never really grew as a player. He's undersized but can shoot, can drive when he wants to (hits that baseline bank shot), and arguably plays better defense than Mo. The Cavs also have Telfair who though hasn't lived up to his hype coming out of high school, hasn't played on a team with much talent and hasn't gotten a chance to be a fast break guard. Depending on who the next coach is and his offensive system, I could see LeBron and Telfair developing some chemistry just based on the styles of their games. It's something we never really got a chance to see.

You bring up an interesting point about Telfair, as I think he could make an impact alongside Lebron. I haven't seen enough of him to really make a judgement, but he is a young player who could create and help out Lebron, assuming he stays.

I agree about Boobie. But I think we got fooled by his playoff performance a couple years back. He is overpaid and although I like him, I just don't see too much value in him. I do wish he would have gotten more chances this year though. Let him prove it one way or another on the court.

It may have been an anomaly but it's one more elite playoff game than Mo has had....not to mention the Cavs did well if I recall this season when Mo went down and Boobie had to step up in minutes.

hoops23;376410 wrote:Bingo. That 2007 team was successful because EVERYBODY on the team bought into the system and played for one another.

I hate to say it, but Shaq absolutely divided this team and the chemistry within it.

Without Shaq, the Cavs were a well oiled machine. When he came back, we really faltered. It's obvious to me that when it mattered most, Shaq wasn't able to accept his role like he said he would. Not only that, but he openly complained about touches during the Chicago series.

Not saying I told you so personally, but I told people in a certain thread that if they just waited they would see the real Shaq appear. Shaq has the biggest ego in sports and has never left a place in good terms.

What evidence is there of Shaq dividing the team? Or are you just blowing smoke out of your ass?

SQ_Crazies;377713 wrote:What evidence is there of Shaq dividing the team? Or are you just blowing smoke out of your ass?

Well, Windy said that after game 4 of the Boston series O'Neal and Mike Brown has a "dispute" in the locker room. That goes along with Shaq "demanding" more touches during the Chicago series. If you don't think that kind of stuff divides a team, especially against or for a coach, you're crazy bro.

I'll trust Windy seeing as how he's with the team.

hoops23;377729 wrote:Well, Windy said that after game 4 of the Boston series O'Neal and Mike Brown has a "dispute" in the locker room. That goes along with Shaq "demanding" more touches during the Chicago series. If you don't think that kind of stuff divides a team, especially against or for a coach, you're crazy bro.

I'll trust Windy seeing as how he's with the team.

This is correct. Shaq started whining and questioning Mike Brown. He got a few players to side with him and he essentially divided the locker room and they weren't buying into Brown's scheme. As someone else mentioned, teams may win championships with Shaq but when he leaves, he leaves a shitstorm in his aftermath.

The team was playing VERY well without him but once a rusty Shaq was brought back into the mix, it messed with their chemistry. Either way, as composed, they weren't a championship caliber team. Too many gutless wonders.