Can we safely say Cavs are better without Love?

[2swift4u]

I didn't even notice that Love wasn't playing. I mean of course I knew he was out but nothing was missing and that says a lot. I doesn't say they are better without him but he's definitely not a piece they gotta have in order to win.

He's not a bad player at all but looks to me like he's a) not made for the big moments when it really counts. And b) he's not playing tall but he's not fast enough to play defense against smaller guys either. So he's neither a big man nor a athletic wing player. He's somewhere in the middle and that's a bad spot to be imo because you're going to be exposed either way.

[GINOBILI!]

Yes. They should trade him this summer and get pieces that fit better. They can still probably net a decent amount for him.

[TheReal Kendall]

No. Role players just showed up.

[rodman91]

Love is horrible defender. He doesn't have athleticism, lenght, knowledge or even interest for a good defender. If one guy fails, whole team defense fails especially against a team which plays team offense.

Love for Wiggins was so dumb. Just imagine a guys like Wiggins on offense/defense right now. Cavs needs somebody to get inside and finish strong. Lebron is only option, Shump can do any of that. Defensively he could be quite good Warriors scorers.

[TheOne]

It's confirmed. I can't believe Cavs didn't continue the winning theme and palyed Love.

[TheOne]

Confirmed * 10000000000000000000000000000000