jordo212000;670846 wrote: "One" player made a big difference on how many wins they are going to finish with this year. With Lebron they at least finish in the top 3 in the East. Without him they are a lottery team.
So let me get this straight. If we take everybody off the team (plus Sullinger) and have a draft... You are taking all of those guys before Sully? I just want to get this straightHickson, Jameson, Gibson. Andy , sessions, mo, do I need to continue?
jordo212000;670933 wrote:Let's be honest, if we have learned anything over the past year and a half, it is that Cavs fans aren't exactly the greatest at evaluating how "good" their team actually is
jordo212000;670965 wrote:Well the feelings of invincibility last season are part of what I am talking about. The other is that many of them thought that a team with moWilliams and Antawn Jamison as the core pieces could make the playoffs
jordo212000;670847 wrote:That's debatable
.jpg)
KR1245;670944 wrote:I love Jared Sullinger. He is dominating college players. There are PLENTY of great college players that have gone to the next level and done nothing. I think if you put a guy like Andy on Sully he will struggle
Obviously I wasn't being entirely serious as evidenced by SQ's 'lol' after my post.That's debatable
You really are that fucking dumb. Even if you don't think they have the skills they are sill a pro athlete.
jordo212000;670998 wrote:Obviously I wasn't being entirely serious as evidenced by SQ's 'lol' after my post.
By definition alone, just playing for an NBA team makes them a pro
Y-Town Steelhound;671039 wrote:Byron Scott>Thad Matta
ytownfootball;671049 wrote:Who the fuck would freak out about that? The two types (NBA/College) are completely fucking different.
Apples to oranges
CinciX12;671064 wrote:I mean obviously the Cavs would win. But I don't think you guys are actually watching some of their games lol. Yes there have been close games that ESPN keeps mentioning, but there are some that they look like a high school team in.
His x's and o's are scrutinized every damn game...win or lose lol...can't separate recruiting out of a college coaches attributes, agreed.Y-Town Steelhound;671069 wrote:Agreed, and it's not a knock on Matta who's one of the best coaches in college (and most would say that his recruiting is more valuable than his actual X's and O's knowledge). Byron Scott is a guy who's played a lot of years of basketball and coached a lot of great players in the NBA.
ytownfootball;671076 wrote:His x's and o's are scrutinized every damn game...win or lose lol...can't separate recruiting out of a college coaches attributes, agreed.
Y-Town Steelhound;671086 wrote:I'm not saying he doesn't know his X's and O's, I'm just saying that his biggest asset seems to be his recruiting, and given his track record it's hard to argue against that point. I will say that his love for 6-7 man rotations obviously wouldn't work in the NBA.
ytownfootball;671094 wrote:I know you're not, curious to me despite the 24-0 start we have gurus who think something should have been differently every game is all. To your point about 6-7 man rotations though, it would be hard for me to imagine him utilizing that strategy in the NBA. He could count on star players hanging around more than a season generally speaking. His recruiting wins often have a downside that they're one and dones, probably feels he might as well use them as much as possible while he can. Can't argue with the results imo.
SQ_Crazies;671112 wrote:I think people care because it's going to end up being the same old story with Thad Matta. He can recruit, he can run this 6-7 man rotation and win until he gets to March and April. He'll come up short again this year. I personally don't think he's that great of a coach, never have.