Is Cleveland Really A "Top 5" Team

[EastCoastNiner]

Alright, I'm sure a lot of you guys believe the are, but I'm not necessarily buying it.

 

Just watching the regular season last year, although the Cleveland Cavaliers got the #1 Seed the Eastern Conference, I really wasn't THAT impressed with them.

 

I really though the Boston Celtics and the Orlando Magic had the best chance to win the Eastern Conference.

 

 

Then, after watching the first few rounds of the playoffs, I somewhat bought into the hype about the Cleveland Cavaliers, but realized that they weren't that good after the Eastern Conference Finals.

 

They are LeBron James and Mo Williams, and that's about it.

 

 

 

I don't think they are a "Top 5" team, and I really wouldn't be surprised to see them finish with about the 5th or 6th best record in the Eastern Conference.

 

 

So, does anyone else think that they are vastly over-rated?

[Flight]

So, does anyone else think that they are vastly over-rated?

No.

[Flash]

I always thought they were good which they were, but championship teams have a certain "aura" about them and I never got that feeling from the Cavs last year. The Lakers had that just like the C's last year and the Heat in 06.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Flash

[SRT Spidey]

1. Spurs/Celtics

2. Spurs/Celtics

3. Lakers

4. Magic

5. Cleveland

[EastCoastNiner]

I always thought they were good which they were, but championship teams have a certain "aura" about them and I never got that feeling from the Cavs last year. The Lakers had that just like the C's last year and the Heat in 06.

 

I really think that the following teams could end up with better records:

 

- Boston Celtics

- Orlando Magic

- Miami Heat(That's right)

- Detroit(I really like what they did this off-season)

 

 

Actually, when I started this topic I was basing it off of last years team, so I totally forgot about Shaq, so......nevermind, I think they may finish #1. .

[KurbyFX]

You serious about Detroit? Bringing in two players who score but don't play defense? Not to mention they still have a combo-guard that isn't known for creating plays? C'mon, get real. Cavaliers are going to have a better record than the Heat and Pistons. Toss up if they beat Celtics and Magic. They might just be the Hornets. Where they snuck up on people.

[EastCoastNiner]

You serious about Detroit? Bringing in two players who score but don't play defense? Not to mention they still have a combo-guard that isn't known for creating plays? C'mon, get real. Cavaliers are going to have a better record than the Heat and Pistons. Toss up if they beat Celtics and Magic. They might just be the Hornets. Where they snuck up on people.

 

Nahh, I don't really think that.

 

I over-exaggerated with the amount of teams that I thought would be better, so I added them. http://www.otrbasketball.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/cool.gif .

[Warren2ThaG]

1. Spurs/Celtics

2. Spurs/Celtics

3. Lakers

4. Magic

5. Cleveland

 

Were the Champions.

 

1. Lakers

2. Spurs

3. Celtics

4. Magic/Cavs

[MainEv3nt]

mavericks >>>>>> lakers, celtics, spurs, cavs, pistons, bobcats.

 

yep. i can be bias to like everyone else in this thread

[KurbyFX]

Were the Champions.

 

1. Lakers

2. Spurs

3. Celtics

4. Magic/Cavs

 

Your the champs alright.

[MainEv3nt]

Your the champs alright.

 

what does this post even mean lol. he just said lakers was champs

[moeroadkill]

spurs/celts/lakers (if lakers keep odom) are all pretty much even

but i if i had to put them in order, celts lakers (if they have odom) then spurs (with healthy rosters)

cavs, yeah, they can win reg game. come playoffs no one shows up expect bron bron

so my top teams

1 celtics

2 Lakers

3 Spurs

4 Nuggets

5/6 magic/cavs (the lose of hedo has made me a bit iffy about them along with Lee)

[Real Deal]

Top five are Lakers, Spurs, Celtics, Cavs and Magic. The Nuggets and the Mavs will be sneaking up on those teams...and I would say Denver over the Spurs, but if Manu is going to stay healthy, San Antonio is too good.

[Built Ford Tough]

The top 5 teams in the NBA next season will be the Lakers, Celtics, Cavs, Spurs and Magic (in no particular order) and to be perfectly honest, I don't think that any other team has a chance of joining this fab five group. The Nuggets and Mavs are both teams that could sneak up and maybe join this group, but I don't think that they will. No other team in the league has a case at all of being mentioned with those 5 outside of the Mavs and Nuggets though. If one of these teams (Mavs or Nuggets) gets hot in the playoffs they could make some noise but as of right now I think that those 5 teams are in a league of their own.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Built Ford Tough

[Multi-Billionaire]

I didn't really believe in them, but once they got to a quick start, I started to... their defense especially was great and I thought they'd be close to undefeated in playoffs... but Orlando really gave them matchup problems. Once they broke down defensively, they began to really fall apart. IF Shaq shows up, IF Shaq plays like he is not done, and can stay healthy, they can maintain as one of the best teams in the L.

[Flash]

I'd put Denver ahead of Cleveland.

[Jenneral]

No way the Pistons or the Heat are better than the Cavs. The Cavs are without a doubt, a top 3 team.

[KurbyFX]

what does this post even mean lol. he just said lakers was champs

 

Were and We're

 

Your and You're

 

 

And just because Warren likes to spam everything.

[Cleveland's Finest]

So let me get get this straight....a team wins 66 games....then signs Shaq and Anthony Parker and they are supposed to suddenly be a bad team?

 

If anything all the marks are putting Celtics/Lakers already.

 

We blew out Denver last year and beat down Portland and Detroit. Getting Shaq and Parker only makes us better. Seriously........Cavs management is the best in the league and they really know how to trick you guys. Last year no one thought we'd be the best....this year no one thinks we'll be in the freaking top 5?

 

We will win the east. Boston is older than [expletive] and they'll have injury troubles and they still don't have Big Baby or Leon Powe. Orlando lost their true playmaker and Lee.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Cleveland's Finest

[moeroadkill]

who cares how many wins you have. and if the cavs were the "best" team in the league, may i ask why they didnt walk away with a ring?

big deal, u won the east last year and look were it got you?

[JWaLL]

As an overall team, I would say yes the Cavs are overrated, because their wins come based off of an MVP dominant player and his sidekick point guard. One all-star and one already-future hall of famer. While they get a lot of wins utilizing those 2 players in virtually every play, the "team" is not great. If you take out Mo, you have an average to slightly above average team. If you take out Lebron, you have probably one of the worst rosters in the league. They are a very "player reliant" squad, with no alternative weapons to come in and save the day.

 

The Lakers have one of the most efficient benches in the league, and every player has an equal feel for the rotation and can come in and immediately provide help. If Kobe is having an off night, there are multiple people who can step in and pick up the slack for him.

 

The Spurs have many energetic bench players waiting to come in. They start Roger Mason, and then Ginobili will come in for either him or Finley and light up the court. They have so many weapons: Tony Parker, Tim Duncan, Richard Jefferson, Roger Mason, Manu Ginobili, and a 3 point shooting center in Matt Bonner.

 

The Magic just got better acquiring Vince Carter, to add to their already huge list of weapons. It's not like the plan is "give the ball to Dwight and let him work", unlike the Cavs, who just seem to give the ball to Lebron and let him run the show. You can't stop him, so obviously that's the plan.

 

The Celtics circle around "the big 3", but they have (had) a lot of effective weapons. Big Baby would come in and provide size in the post as well as a deadly mid range jumper. Eddie House will light you up from the 3 point line all game long, as he's proven to be a very effective bench player. Perkins is as strong as centers come, and is a big presence down low. And of course, you have the vastly improving Rajon Rondo, who is running the show for all of these players.

 

So you see, the Cavs just aren't a team like these guys. They have one great player, and one unstoppable "almost unfair to play against" player (that's a compliment, don't flame). If Lebron ever has an off game, there's a good chance the Cavs probably lost that game. There just isn't anyone on that roster who can fill the void for a struggling Lebron.

[Cleveland's Finest]

who cares how many wins you have. and if the cavs were the "best" team in the league, may i ask why they didnt walk away with a ring?

big deal, u won the east last year and look were it got you?

 

Not every teams gonna win a ring lmao.

 

I just don't see ow the Cavs got worse in the offseason.

 

We were 2 wins away from the finals. Not like we got swept in the first round.

 

It's amazing how people are so quick to suddenly take us out of the top 5. It amuses me that a team that loses nothing is suddenly put to the bottom.

 

And you guys think the Magic got better?

 

The Spurs and Celts will have injury troubles with their age and SA lost depth with their trade.

 

If you think the Cavs are not in the top 5 you might as well ban yourself from this forum because you are an idiot. That's how serious I am about this pathetic assumption.

[Real Deal]

Cleveland is definitely still in the top five, but don't be quick to think that Shaq helps your team. That's exactly what everyone thought when the Suns got him, also...and everyone can claim that it was the offense that didn't fit Shaq, and they are correct, but I was one of the few that was actually saying that the day of the trade.

 

And not everyone wrote Cleveland off to start the season. I knew they would be in the ECF. I predicted that they would have the best record in the East.

 

But if you're going to tell us that the Spurs are old (and they aren't...Duncan is 33 and was actually putting up better numbers than Gasol, other than field goal percentage), then you've gotta question what Shaq will do at age 37 (38 by the time the 2010 Playoffs start).

[Cleveland's Finest]

All I know is we got a guy who was third team all nba last year as well as an all-star (look at his stats). For a 36 year old, how much more did the Suns want from him last year?

 

And our offense isn't run and shoot or give to Shaq like Pheonix's......so why bring that up.

Edited July 10, 2009 by Cleveland's Finest

[Real Deal]

All I know is we got a guy who was third team all nba last year as well as an all-star (look at his stats). For a 36 year old, how much more did the Suns want from him last year?

 

And our offense isn't run and shoot or give to Shaq like Pheonix's......so why bring that up.

The Suns fans thought the same thing you did, and despite the offense, they really thought Shaq would fit in.

 

But it wasn't the offense that he had problems in, it was his defense. Tony Parker and Tim Duncan literally murdered Shaq and the Suns in points in the paint that first year in the playoffs, so much that I believe they nearly set a record for it over the course of the first three games (Phoenix lost in the first round).

 

And not only that, but no matter the offense, Shaq took the ball out of Nash's hands quite a bit, and it led to Steve actually putting up arguably his worst set of numbers since being in Phoenix, and helping him miss the All-Star Game this past season.

 

You can believe the hype, but Shaq isn't going to add anything to Cleveland's wonderful defense. He will take away from it. And there's a large chance he turns that offense inside-out, and there are two very important opponents (Dwight and Perkins) who won't double-team Shaq as much as they would've had to four years ago.