Is Cleveland Really A "Top 5" Team

[alcstarheel]

We had starters injured all season. Big Ben lost everything when 2009 came around and literally we lost a player. JJ Hickson was injured so we could play him to end the year. He could've been our Courtny Lee. Delonte, Andy, and Z were injured for various portions of the year. LeBron had a freaking tumor even. Does LeBron have to go down for 50 games for it to be fair?

Read what you quoted, of my post, back to yourself. I said "major player sit injured for at least 25 games...in the latter half of the season into the 'offs." What's hard to understand about that? Major player, missing most of their games in the second half of the season.

 

Big Ben, not a major player.

 

JJ Hickson, bench player.

 

Z, games missed in first half of season.

 

Delonte, most of his missed games were in the first half of the season.

 

Varejao, played 81 games this year.

 

LeBron, played 81 games this year.

 

Like I said, injuries didn't hit the Cavs down the wire like the other teams.

[Cleveland's Finest]

Major player....Z started, Delonte started. After Big Ben came back...he didn't start a single game due to the injury. Before he did start. So we obviously lost a lot from him. My bad on Andy I was thinking of the year before for him.

 

And you mention SAS picking up Dice and ORL picking up Bass, but not CLE picking up Parker.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Cleveland's Finest

[alcstarheel]

That's fine that Z and Delonte started, but their injuries were not in the latter half of the season, which is what I said.

 

Wallace hasn't been an impact since his Detroit days.

 

Parker is an okay pickup, but he's coming into a situation fighting for shots with Mo and Delonte, with all three of them being similar players. The impact is not going to be as grand as with the other teams.

 

Artest

'Sheed

Jefferson & McDyess

Carter & Bass

Shaq & Parker

 

I'm still liking the acquisitions of the first four teams over the Cavs, along with those teams more than likely getting their full team together down the stretch.

[Flash]

If Miami lands Boozer where do you guys think they rank in the East?

[HornyWetPenguin]

I don't think the Spurs are that good anymore. Obviously they will still be up there cause of all the experience, and Duncan/Parker/Ginobili ain't no joke, but I don't think they are on the same level as the Lakers, Cavs, and the Magic.

[SRV]

If Miami lands Boozer where do you guys think they rank in the East?

Wade/Boozer/Odom/Beasley? maybe

 

That is a deadly team, if everyone stays healthy.

[Flash]

I don't think the Spurs are that good anymore. Obviously they will still be up there cause of all the experience, and Duncan/Parker/Ginobili ain't no joke, but I don't think they are on the same level as the Lakers, Cavs, and the Magic.

 

You do know that they just got Richard Jefferson or basically nothing, drafted Dejuan Blair and are most likely getting Bowen back. That team if they stay healthy will be very very good.

[Guest N4S]

1. Celtics

2. Lakers

3. Cavs

4. Spurs

5. Magic

[JWaLL]

I don't think the Spurs are that good anymore. Obviously they will still be up there cause of all the experience, and Duncan/Parker/Ginobili ain't no joke, but I don't think they are on the same level as the Lakers, Cavs, and the Magic.

You're joking right? Parker is still young and considered the 3rd best point guard in the league. Duncan still puts up double-double numbers virtually every night. Ginobili still plays with high energy and can still score easily. In addition to their old team, they now acquired an athletic swingman in Richard Jefferson while giving up almost nothing, they drafted DeJuan Blair, who is probably the biggest steal in the draft, and there is a chance they might re-acquire Bowen.

 

So tell me... how have the Spurs gotten worse? And how can they not compete with the Lakers, Cavs, or Magic?

[Cleveland's Finest]

Well if you're willing to say how did the Spurs get worse...then how did the Cavs or Lakers get worse?

 

Imo...San Antonio will be good, but they will choke in the playoffs in the 2nd round or conf. finals. LA is better than them and it's something that's gotta be accepted. Odom or no Odom.

 

 

And if Miami gives up Boozer, they still don't have a good center, and what they'd give up for boozer would hurt their already weak depth, so there are still negatives. Miami will be 5-8 seed. I'm sure Atl or Washington get the 4 seed, then it's a tossup between the team that doesn't get the 4 seed (Was or Atl), Miami, Toronto, Detroit, Chicago, and Philly.

[Flash]

Well if you're willing to say how did the Spurs get worse...then how did the Cavs or Lakers get worse?

 

Imo...San Antonio will be good, but they will choke in the playoffs in the 2nd round or conf. finals. LA is better than them and it's something that's gotta be accepted. Odom or no Odom.

 

 

And if Miami gives up Boozer, they still don't have a good center, and what they'd give up for boozer would hurt their already weak depth, so there are still negatives. Miami will be 5-8 seed. I'm sure Atl or Washington get the 4 seed, then it's a tossup between the team that doesn't get the 4 seed (Was or Atl), Miami, Toronto, Detroit, Chicago, and Philly.

 

The Lakers didn't get worse and neither did SA.

 

The Spurs are a veteran team that isn't going to make mistakes in tough situations. That's why they're such a great team.

 

Miami gets Boozer and still has Jermaine O'Neal at C. A healthy Jermaine is still a good player when he gets his minutes. I definitely see that move putting us ahead of Washington and Atlanta if it goes down. If we get Odom too, then I think we're right on par with Cleveland and O-Town.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Flash

[Cleveland's Finest]

You're not interpreting what I said first. Gil said how did the Spurs get worse to use it to show that they didn't lose anything....yet when I say how did the Cavs get worse no one recognizes it.

 

LMAO Cleveland, Orlando, and Boston are on par with each other. It's not like Boston is suddenly so elite. They still don't have Powe or Big Baby, still little depth, and still no backup pg. So you mean you'd be right up there with Cleveland, Orlando, AND Boston if you get Odom and Boozer. In some cases, I agree with you, but the odds of it happening are little to none because Riley doesn't seem like he's gonna make big roster change any time soon. Also, Odom can be inconsistent, and he'd be starting which he hasn't for awhile.....also Boozer has a lot of injury problems. If Odom and Boozer play like all-stars they once were then I put them up there,but I'll believe it when I see it.

[Diesel]

If Cleveland can add a 4 that can hit the mid range shot to pair up with Shaq it would be great. They really missed out by not getting Dice, but it is still an issue that needs to be addressed. If they can do that their set.

 

Anyway I've seen some interesting statements in this thread.

 

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?

 

 

Is this a joke? The top 5 in basketball right now isn't even debatable. It's the Cavs, Lakers, Celtics, Magic, and Spurs.

 

The Cavs are a lock to finish top 3 in the East. Unless LeBron James misses the entire season or the majority of it there's no way their not top 3.

 

The Cavs weren't overrated. Everyone had them as a lock going to the Finals and for good reason. They dominated the regular season and dominated the first two rounds of the playoffs winning by an insane margin each game. They just didn't match up well with that Orlando team. They had Big Z guarding Dwight who is way too slow(Shaq's speed is underrated, he'll do better) and they had Varejao guarding Shard a lot which was a disaster from the beginning.

 

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)

 

Holy [expletive] the Heat and Detroit finishing above the Cavs? Detroit will finish around the .500 mark and Miami will have a similar record to last season unless some tweaks are made. Detroit fans were complaining about Sheed and his three point fetish, I can't wait til they see Charlie Villanueva. At least Sheed brought some defense.

 

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.

 

So with one great player and a bunch of scrubs the Cavs won 66 games. Not bad. Now they add the third best center in the league for the upcoming season who is an all-star and future hall of famer. They add a shooter and a two-guard with size in Anthony Parker to provide additional depth. They didn't lose anything. The Cavs had their best season in franchise history last year and they added an all-star bigman. Other than the Magic series Cleveland was impressive all year.

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.

 

That's because Phoenix was a fastbreak team prior to Shaq. Before Nash came back to Phoenix for his second stint he was just your above average point guard. The fast break game utilized his advantages and when Shaq came they had to slow down and play more of a halfcourt game to get him involved. Suddenly Nash turned back into the guy he was in Dallas. And everyone on ESPN said that it was a dumb trade for the Suns, I remember.

 

Cleveland however was probably the slowest paced team in the league last year so Shaq will have no trouble fitting in and Cleveland won't have to change their gameplan to accommodate for Shaq.

 

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).

 

The reason people say the Spurs are old because other than Parker everyone of their key players is in their 30's. Duncan is the catalyst for the Spurs. Shaq is not the catalyst for the Cavs. LeBron is.

 

shaq wont do jack [expletive] for cleveland .

 

He's going to do more for Cleveland than that dumbass Sheed in your sig. Less minutes for KG and Perkins. Can't say I'm against it.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Diesel

[Real Deal]

Before Nash came back to Phoenix for his second stint he was just your above average point guard.

18 points, 8-9 assists, 48-49% shooting, two-time all-star during his stint in Dallas...you make it sound like we're talking about Raymond Felton.

 

The Suns played two different ways with O'Neal, three different coaches. Both were failures. Porter, Gentry, D'Antoni, run and gun or half-court Spurs basketball, nothing was working for Nash, Shaq, Amare or anyone else on that team.

 

And Cleveland's offense isn't the biggest concern. Saying that LeBron had scrubs is like saying Iverson had scrubs. Defense is a hell of a weapon, and the Cavaliers have been a top defensive team even when LeBron was a poor defensive player.

 

It's going to change, maybe not throughout the season, but definitely when they need it most.

 

Once a team figures out the lane will be wide open with just a simple pick and roll, the Cavaliers are in too deep, just as the Suns were against the Spurs. It wasn't their offense that actually lost them games, it was their lack of defense from 1-5. Losing Bell and Marion sure the hell didn't help them, but Cleveland doesn't have any exceptional man-to-man defensive players that are able to defend guards, either, despite what others may say about LeBron.

[Diesel]

18 points, 8-9 assists, 48-49% shooting, two-time all-star during his stint in Dallas...you make it sound like we're talking about Raymond Felton.

 

The Suns played two different ways with O'Neal, three different coaches. Both were failures. Porter, Gentry, D'Antoni, run and gun or half-court Spurs basketball, nothing was working for Nash, Shaq, Amare or anyone else on that team.

 

And Cleveland's offense isn't the biggest concern. Saying that LeBron had scrubs is like saying Iverson had scrubs. Defense is a hell of a weapon, and the Cavaliers have been a top defensive team even when LeBron was a poor defensive player.

 

It's going to change, maybe not throughout the season, but definitely when they need it most.

 

Once a team figures out the lane will be wide open with just a simple pick and roll, the Cavaliers are in too deep, just as the Suns were against the Spurs. It wasn't their offense that actually lost them games, it was their lack of defense from 1-5. Losing Bell and Marion sure the hell didn't help them, but Cleveland doesn't have any exceptional man-to-man defensive players that are able to defend guards, either, despite what others may say about LeBron.

 

Like I said Nash was an above average point guard in Dallas, but no way in hell was he being discussed for MVP which is still laughable to this day. He was one of those borderline all-star players for most of his tenure there. He still played absolutely pitiful defense. In fact after Nash left as a FA Dallas became a better team immedietly with Jason Terry at point.

 

The Suns thing was doomed from the beginning and was just a stupid trade for them sacrificing the team's greatest strength for an old Shaq which wasn't worth it. I think I said this before.

 

Cleveland previously had Big Z in the middle who isn't the best pick and roll defender either. Big Z's speed in the playoffs made Shaq look like Usain Bolt. They did fine with Big Z in the middle and isn't significantly worse or anything than Big Z on defense. Cleveland didn't need any shut down perimeter defenders to be the third best defensive team last year. Giving Z slightly less minutes and putting Shaq in there isn't going to lower that rank by much at all.

[kingfish]

Happy bumpings, guys.

[The Artesticle]

They're still a top 5 team in the league...