Are Cavs better without Kyrie & Love?

[MP.Trey]

I don't usually bump threads and I don't like rubbing teams' fans noses in it after they just lost (this isn't about that), but this was one of the more bewildering (and widely talked about) theories in and around the NBA last year at this time.

Were the Cavs better off playing Delly 40+ minutes a night instead of Ky and was not even having the option of putting in a double-double machine, even if it's for depth purposes, somehow a net positive?

I always thought this was a bizarre talking point, but it wasn't just an ISH thing. Guys like Tom Haberstroh and Haralabos Voulgaris swore by the philosophy.


So, here we are a year later... same teams, same matchup, except Irving is available for all 7 games and Love is available for 6.

The Cavs win the title. Since we spent so much time (inexplicably) talking about how they would have actually HURT the team last year (wut), is it now OK to wonder if having at least Irving would have been enough to win the Cavs a title last year?


Also, click around in this thread. With Irving unarguably out-playing Curry in this series and especially down the stretch of Game 7, some of the replies are pretty comical. Love also had an under-the-radar good finale. He didn't score a lot, but he played excellent defense and had 15 rebounds.

We did it RBA!

[RedBlackAttack]

We did it RBA!

I love you man.

[DMAVS41]

I don't usually bump threads and I don't like rubbing teams' fans noses in it after they just lost (this isn't about that), but this was one of the more bewildering (and widely talked about) theories in and around the NBA last year at this time.

Were the Cavs better off playing Delly 40+ minutes a night and not even having the option of putting in a double-double machine, even if it's for depth purposes?

I always thought this was a bizarre talking point, but it wasn't just an ISH thing. Guys like Tom Haberstroh and Haralabos Voulgaris swore by the philosophy.


So, here we are a year later... same teams, same matchup, except Irving is available for all 7 games and Love is available for 6.

The Cavs win the title. Since we spent so much time (inexplicably) talking about how they would have actually HURT the team last year (wut), is it now OK to wonder if having at least Irving would have been enough to win the Cavs a title last year?


Also, click around in this thread. With Irving unarguably out-playing Curry in this series and especially down the stretch of Game 7, some of the replies are pretty comical. Love also had an under-the-radar good finale. He didn't score a lot, but he played excellent defense and had 15 rebounds.

Epic bump.

I've been wrong about many things, but I fought the good fight in this thread.

Truly hilarious...

[DMAVS41]

I did say I see why it has to be done... It guarantees another solid player. But some other things happen in the process. Especially if TT demands a lot the ramifications can be pretty bad.

Shumpert, Mozgov and JR see how money is thrown around and will want some more. Mozgov is in his prime and close to equal the player on a per minute basis. And his height is needed.

Love is most likely to only opt in and see how the other big contract at his position works itself out. I don't see the advantage Love has by signing long term right now. So it could possibly cost Cleveland Love and Mozgov.

Isn't this primarily a one/two year problem??? because of the balloon jump in 2016 cap??? Why make it a five year problem with Lebron's great ability to attract free agents? 4 big contracts is a serious lock in without a "long" player in that 4.

I could be wrong here, but that jumps out at me.

Yes...yes...you could be...

[plowking]

It is all well and good to bump this and act like its the case, but it doesn't solve the debate at all. Kyrie is quite clearly a good defender at this point. Last season, he was absolutely terrible.
Love on the other hand, despite playing quite well tonight, was really a non factor throughout the series. Really didn't make that big a difference as a whole. Could have been replaced quite easily in this series.

Then the fact that the Warriors were quite clearly an injured and different team this time around. I still think they were better last year without Kyrie and Love. Seems like some of you really forget how bad Kyrie was last year defensively.

[Ben Simmons]

It is all well and good to bump this and act like its the case, but it doesn't solve the debate at all. Kyrie is quite clearly a good defender at this point. Last season, he was absolutely terrible.
Love on the other hand, despite playing quite well tonight, was really a non factor throughout the series. Really didn't make that big a difference as a whole. Could have been replaced quite easily in this series.

Then the fact that the Warriors were quite clearly an injured and different team this time around. I still think they were better last year without Kyrie and Love. Seems like some of you really forget how bad Kyrie was last year defensively.

No. Kyrie was a better defender last year. It was the only year he played defense

. This year he didnt play defense even in the playffs until like game 3 of the finals. In fact, the Cavs were better off vs the Eastern conference without him a lot of times this year.

[DMAVS41]

It is all well and good to bump this and act like its the case, but it doesn't solve the debate at all. Kyrie is quite clearly a good defender at this point. Last season, he was absolutely terrible.
Love on the other hand, despite playing quite well tonight, was really a non factor throughout the series. Really didn't make that big a difference as a whole. Could have been replaced quite easily in this series.

Then the fact that the Warriors were quite clearly an injured and different team this time around. I still think they were better last year without Kyrie and Love. Seems like some of you really forget how bad Kyrie was last year defensively.

Well...just when you thought reality would set in...this happens.

None of what you say above even matters. It's about having the option to play quality players and carve out some rest for your guys.

Also, Kyrie got shit on routinely in this series defensively. Yes, he has improved, but he's still a very poor defender and the Warriors feasted on him with cross matches a lot. That isn't to say he didn't do an admirable job given his role, but he was still a liability.

Going into the last game;

Steph on O vs Kyrie 1.37ppp
Kyrie on O vs Steph .87ppp

What about last year makes you think Kyrie wouldn't have been great? His game 1 performance that was really good?

Like I said...it's about options...I'm sorry, but in no world is Shumpert playing 36 minutes and Delly playing 32 minutes...better than having the option to play Kyrie and Love.

Also, you say Love could have been replaced quite easily...by who? Frye makes Love look like a defensive monster. He played what? Like 28 minutes a game even with the injury game in which he played 20 minutes iirc? I don't think you are grasping how hard it is to just replace 28 minutes a game. How are they making up those minutes over the course of a series. Please explain.

Like...really? You are still arguing this shit?

Just admit it made no sense...and we literally just ran the experiment. You talk about Warriors injuries...etc. How about the fact that the Warriors were better this year...and how about the Cavs being injured last year and making the Warriors look better than they actually were?

It goes both ways my friend.

Who knows if the Cavs would have won, but that isn't the argument...the argument is whether or not the Cavs were better off without Kyrie and Kevin Love. And a year later...apparently the stupidity hasn't stopped.

[plowking]

How full of yourself are you? Even this year Love proved to be a terrible match up in the series. That one is a straight up truth.
Kyrie was worse defensively. He is quite good this year, and he really put a bunch of effort in during the finals. More so than I've seen before.

Obviously having more players at your disposal is a plus. Who the fark is arguing against that?

Acting like this is the same shit all over again just isn't the case. Why the hell did the Cavs change their coach? Why did certain players get no minutes at all this time around (Mozgov)? Am I the only one aware of Curry messing up his MCL? Or Iggy more than likely not being 100%? Draymond missing a game? Bogut being out?

You're an absolute knob acting as if it was a simple replay of last year, and having the audacity to strut around and call others stupid.

[DMAVS41]

How full of yourself are you? Even this year Love proved to be a terrible match up in the series. That one is a straight up truth.
Kyrie was worse defensively. He is quite good this year, and he really put a bunch of effort in during the finals. More so than I've seen before.

[COLOR="Navy"][COLOR="DarkSlateGray"]Obviously having more players at your disposal is a plus. Who the fark is arguing against that? [/COLOR]
[/COLOR]
Acting like this is the same shit all over again just isn't the case. Why the hell did the Cavs change their coach? Why did certain players get no minutes at all this time around (Mozgov)? Am I the only one aware of Curry messing up his MCL? Or Iggy more than likely not being 100%? Draymond missing a game? Bogut being out?

You're an absolute knob acting as if it was a simple replay of last year, and having the audacity to strut around and call others stupid.

1. I never said it was an exact replay of last year, but it's close enough to draw conclusions...only an idiot or someone trying to defend a stupid position at all costs would claim otherwise.

2. The bold makes my points and RBA's points for us. If you are too stupid to figure out why...that's on you. I'll help..."why did Mozgov get less minutes?" Because the Cavs had their full ****ing team at their disposal and had the ability to play the way they wanted. What is so confusing?

3. The Warriors were better this year.

4.. God I can't wait until RBA sees this...I wish I could be there. He won't believe it...he had a hard time even fathoming the take last year...but now...after what we've seen and people are still arguing it? Holy shit...would pay to see him read this.

5. If you think having more players is a good thing...why are you arguing they were better last year without 2 of their 3 best players? Please explain.

[warriorfan]

Cavs had great success with Love off the floor in the 2016 Finals and Love struggled to find minutes. He was a poor matchup with Golden State. Love is a very talented player but its matchups over talent.

[plowking]

[/B]

1. I never said it was an exact replay of last year, but it's close enough to draw conclusions...only an idiot or someone trying to defend a stupid position at all costs would claim otherwise.

2. The bold makes my points and RBA's points for us. If you are too stupid to figure out why...that's on you. I'll help..."why did Mozgov get less minutes?" Because the Cavs had their full ****ing team at their disposal and had the ability to play the way they wanted. What is so confusing?

3. God I can't wait until RBA sees this...I wish I could be there. He won't believe it...he had a hard time even fathoming the take last year...but now...after what we've seen and people are still arguing it? Holy shit...would pay to see him read this.

So you completely ignore LeBron playing way better than last year, a new coach, Kyrie being significantly better on both ends, suspensions in the final, Bogut being out, Curry suffering an MCL tear, the motivation of "getting one back" on the team that beat you last year, and a whole lot of other factors.

But nah, same shit

And yeah, Love taking Mozgov's minutes would clearly be favourable for them given how shit he looked this series.

[DMAVS41]

Cavs had great success with Love off the floor in the 2016 Finals and Love struggled to find minutes. He was a poor matchup with Golden State. Love is a very talented player but its matchups over talent.

And even with that...which we all know and agreed with. It's still better to have him than not have him...because the other options aren't as good.

[DMAVS41]

So you completely ignore LeBron playing way better than last year, a new coach, Kyrie being significantly better on both ends, suspensions in the final, Bogut being out, Curry suffering an MCL tear, the motivation of "getting one back" on the team that beat you last year, and a whole lot of other factors.

But nah, same shit

And yeah, Love taking Mozgov's minutes would clearly be favourable for them given how shit he looked this series.

Lebron played better because he had the help of a full team. He was out there with better players rather than Shump and Delly for big minutes every night.

Love doesn't have to "take" Mozgov's minutes...he would just be a nice option to have to play depending on how the game is going and what lineup the Warriors have.

Guess what...the Cavs lose this series without Love. So while he has a terrible matchup and played poorly often in this series...it's still better to have the option to go to him than not having the option.

And please stop the Kyrie stuff man. He was great in game 1 last year despite not being 100%. The dude is a straight up baller and would have helped the Cavs immensely.

Again, the argument is not whether or not the Cavs win last year...it's whether or not they were better without Kyrie and Love.

And honestly....it's probably the 2nd dumbest thing I've ever heard on here. Only losing to Pointguard claiming that the Cavs would have lost to the ****ing Hawks if Love and Kyrie had been healthy.