Is this too crazy? Kings-Cavs

[bpcox05]

Irving & Love barely won a title while having one of the greatest players we have ever seen next to them. What sort of ceiling can we expect with JUST Irving & Love? I'd pass on the Kings side.

Not commenting on this specific deal because I think we all understand regardless of what the Kings think of the deal, the Cavs are not breaking up a champion like this.

But Harden moved to Houston coming off a year he didn't win the title playing with 2 of the 5 best players in the league. But he certainly has shown he can carry a very mediocre Rockets team to the 2nd seed and the WCF.

Dallas let Nash walk over money and the Mavs with a top 15 all-time guy and several other talented players just washed out in the first round and he went on to win 2 MVP's.

KG had totally missed the playoffs for 3 straight years and went to Boston and immediately led them to a title.

Oh and of course Boogie hasn't yet led a team to 34 wins. Using that same logic it would seem you aren't giving up much ceiling either, right?

Cousins is just one player and more valuable than either one. The NBA has always been a game of quality over quantity. If Irving & Love (plus Lebron) barely won a title, why would we try with the same core minus Lebron? Seriously, why?

I think the lack of defense between an Irving & Love duo is one of the main reasons why their potential isn't very high. It took Lebron to overcome that. You'd obviously love to have your entire starting lineup be good defenders, but having 2 very poor defenders in your lineup that are going to be getting 35+ minutes a game is not something that is very appealing nor a good start to a championship team.

[c3j3h]

Is it me or are my fellow Kings brethren the most delusional group on this board? My god...

[bpcox05]

Is it me or are my fellow Kings brethren the most delusional group on this board? My god...

I hope you're not referring to me. If so, I'm more than happy to explain in greater detail why we shouldn't become the Cavs 2.0 without LeBron.

[Dat2U]

Kyrie should be a cav for life

He won them a championship. When every other player on the floor for both teams couldn't drop a pea in the ocean. Former and current MVPs went limp, got scared and was playing like kids at the ymca.


Kyrie rose up and made the game winning shot, in the nba finals, game 7, with everything on the line.

He is the face of the franchise. He should be a cav for life.

His finals performance convinced me he is something special. And not Steve Francis 2.0

Kyrie is completely untradeable at this point.

He owns the defining moment for the cabs franchise, with no disrespect to lebronze

You know that LeBron cat is pretty good. Irving had a very good five games but Irving may not even sniff the playoffs without LeBron. LeBron is not just the face of the Cleveland franchise, he's the face of the NBA.

And there's still the ugly truth that for his entire career, including last season the Cavs were better when Irving was off the court vs on... Mostly due to his woeful defense.

[mademan]

And there's still the ugly truth that for his entire career, including last season the Cavs were better when Irving was off the court vs on... Mostly due to his woeful defense.

Not true for his career at all, and only true for last year because he struggled coming off of injury

[Texas Chuck]

Is it me or are my fellow Kings brethren the most delusional group on this board? My god...

Let's not do this. Stick to discussing where you disagree with them.

[Texas Chuck]

And I don't really know what "barely" won a title even means. Obviously Lebron was the main factor, but that doesn't make Irving or Love somehow worth less. If anything Kyrie proved he could be a very big part of a champion. Certainly he's proven more in that regard than Boogie. (note this is your argument not mine).

But this idea that Boogie is a lock to be the best player on a champion is very flawed imo when he hasn't even gotten a team within sniffing distance of .500. Love did better than that with a similar lack of talent and poor coaching in Minnesota.

Again I don't care if you don't like this specific deal but the reasoning is really hard for me to understand here.

[bpcox05]

And I don't really know what "barely" won a title even means. Obviously Lebron was the main factor, but that doesn't make Irving or Love somehow worth less. If anything Kyrie proved he could be a very big part of a champion. Certainly he's proven more in that regard than Boogie. (note this is your argument not mine).

But this idea that Boogie is a lock to be the best player on a champion is very flawed imo when he hasn't even gotten a team within sniffing distance of .500. Love did better than that with a similar lack of talent and poor coaching in Minnesota.

Again I don't care if you don't like this specific deal but the reasoning is really hard for me to understand here.

Barely won a title is when you are down 3-1 and win 3 straight after Bogut goes down and with Draymond missing a game. That's a close call, and I'm not trying to take anything away from the Cavs. They won fair and square. The Cavs didn't have Irving & Love last year so who are the Warriors to make excuses, but the reality is they did just make it out of there.

I never said barely winning a title makes Love or Irving less. I look at the player and what they contribute.

Is it really fair to say Irving has proven more than Cousins? Well...I guess technically but I'd like to see the roles reversed with Cousins having LeBron as a teammate. We shouldn't hold Cousins' lack of quality coaches, lack of franchise stability, and lack of talented players against him. If you want to look at the Olympics (where more factors should be controlled for considering they are on the same team), Irving had the worst net rating on the team (+28.3) while Cousins had the best on the team (+47.1). It's international ball so take it with a grain of salt, but it definitely shows that Cousins helped the team to a gold wayyyy more than Irving.

Who said Cousins is a lock to be the best player on a championship team? You're putting words in my mouth to make your argument appear stronger. Your arguing a point that I have not made. I do believe that Cousins has the ability to contribute more than Love or Irving. I think Love & Cousins are pretty close to how much they help a team win right now, but Cousins helps a team win with his defense whereas Love helps with his offense. As much talent as Cousins has on the offensive side of the ball, he needs to be smarter. He's too inefficient right now and needs to not force the issue. I think his lack of trust in his teammates might stem from the garbage he's had around him for the majority of his career, but nonetheless, he needs to play smarter (not harder) on that side of the floor. When (if) he does, I think he can be a #1 cog on a championship contender, but if he doesn't wise up, he's probably only a #2 on a contender.

I don't know why you think Love did better in a similar situation because, well, he didn't! These are the wins he had at Minnesota: 24, 15, 17, 26, 31, & 40. Keep in mind the year he won 40, they had Love, Pekovic, Rubio, & Martin along with a great head coach in Adelman. How are these situations similar again?

[Texas Chuck]

Who said Cousins is a lock to be the best player on a championship team? You're putting words in my mouth to make your argument appear stronger. Your arguing a point that I have not made.

You didn't say those exact words, but you essentially kept repeating you didn't like this deal because Love and Irving "barely won a title" while playing with Lebron. I think the clear implication there is that you don't think that duo is strong enough to build a contender around. Fine. I have no issues with that opinion regardless of how I or anyone else feels about it. But what I don't understand is using the same criteria you use with Love and Kyrie why you think Boogie looks much better? Because he doesn't. Again its fine to believe he can be the centerpiece of a champion. That's a perfectly valid opinion.

I guess I don't understand how you don't see the inconsistency is all.

[Texas Chuck]

I don't know why you think Love did better in a similar situation because, well, he didn't! These are the wins he had at Minnesota: 24, 15, 17, 26, 31, & 40. Keep in mind the year he won 40, they had Love, Pekovic, Rubio, & Martin along with a great head coach in Adelman. How are these situations similar again?

We will have to disagree on Adelmann being a great coach at that point, but I think the roster is very similar, no? What we always heard from Wolves fans that year was what a great starting lineup they had and how the bench let them down. Same thing with the Kings--the starting lineup we are told plays very well and the bench fails them.

Plus Kevin Love simply had a much better season that year than Cousins has ever had. We can't ignore the level of play of the guys in question when discussing their teammates. True franchise players are able to elevate the play of hte teammates because of how their presence impacts the other team making the game easier for those around him.

[mademan]

Is it really fair to say Irving has proven more than Cousins? Well...I guess technically but I'd like to see the roles reversed with Cousins having LeBron as a teammate. We shouldn't hold Cousins' lack of quality coaches, lack of franchise stability, and lack of talented players against him. If you want to look at the Olympics (where more factors should be controlled for considering they are on the same team), Irving had the worst net rating on the team (+28.3) while Cousins had the best on the team (+47.1). It's international ball so take it with a grain of salt, but it definitely shows that Cousins helped the team to a gold wayyyy more than Irving.

And Irving had a top 3 rating and won MVP 2 years before in FIBA. Small sample sizes with olympic competition and all

[jbk1234]

I really can't foresee a scenario where the Cavs would trade Love and Kyrie. That's just too much offensive production in the out box.

[Beam Me Up Foxy]

I really can't foresee a scenario where the Cavs would trade Love and Kyrie. That's just too much offensive production in the out box.

What if the op deal were altered to include Thompson and keep love in Cleveland?

[King Baller]

Irving & Love barely won a title while having one of the greatest players we have ever seen next to them. What sort of ceiling can we expect with JUST Irving & Love? I'd pass on the Kings side.

Well if you managed a playoff appearance as an 8th seed, it would be considerably better than anything the Kings have done in the last decade. That said, you wouldn't get an opportunity to "pass" on that trade.

Pass, let Lebron try again.

[King Baller]

Irving & Love barely won a title while having one of the greatest players we have ever seen next to them. What sort of ceiling can we expect with JUST Irving & Love? I'd pass on the Kings side.

Not commenting on this specific deal because I think we all understand regardless of what the Kings think of the deal, the Cavs are not breaking up a champion like this.

But Harden moved to Houston coming off a year he didn't win the title playing with 2 of the 5 best players in the league. But he certainly has shown he can carry a very mediocre Rockets team to the 2nd seed and the WCF.

Dallas let Nash walk over money and the Mavs with a top 15 all-time guy and several other talented players just washed out in the first round and he went on to win 2 MVP's.

KG had totally missed the playoffs for 3 straight years and went to Boston and immediately led them to a title.

Oh and of course Boogie hasn't yet led a team to 34 wins. Using that same logic it would seem you aren't giving up much ceiling either, right?

I don't see any logic in any of that, sorry.

[mademan]

Cavs dont trade Kyrie straight up for Cousins. I like Cousins, and he is a better player in a vacuum, but he just has soo much baggage. And Cavs dont need to be doing high risk-high reward trades

[Texas Chuck]

Irving & Love barely won a title while having one of the greatest players we have ever seen next to them. What sort of ceiling can we expect with JUST Irving & Love? I'd pass on the Kings side.

Not commenting on this specific deal because I think we all understand regardless of what the Kings think of the deal, the Cavs are not breaking up a champion like this.

But Harden moved to Houston coming off a year he didn't win the title playing with 2 of the 5 best players in the league. But he certainly has shown he can carry a very mediocre Rockets team to the 2nd seed and the WCF.

Dallas let Nash walk over money and the Mavs with a top 15 all-time guy and several other talented players just washed out in the first round and he went on to win 2 MVP's.

KG had totally missed the playoffs for 3 straight years and went to Boston and immediately led them to a title.

Oh and of course Boogie hasn't yet led a team to 34 wins. Using that same logic it would seem you aren't giving up much ceiling either, right?

I don't see any logic in any of that, sorry.

It's not my logic mate. Take it up with him. I think this is very specious reasoning for evaluating these players, but if he was going to use that standard against Kyrie and Love he really should be consistent and use it against Boogie.

[Laimbeer]

I don't know if the Cavs would even give Kyrie for Boogie at this point. Love + is a more likely deal. I just don't know what that + might be.

[bpcox05]

Not commenting on this specific deal because I think we all understand regardless of what the Kings think of the deal, the Cavs are not breaking up a champion like this.

But Harden moved to Houston coming off a year he didn't win the title playing with 2 of the 5 best players in the league. But he certainly has shown he can carry a very mediocre Rockets team to the 2nd seed and the WCF.

Dallas let Nash walk over money and the Mavs with a top 15 all-time guy and several other talented players just washed out in the first round and he went on to win 2 MVP's.

KG had totally missed the playoffs for 3 straight years and went to Boston and immediately led them to a title.

Oh and of course Boogie hasn't yet led a team to 34 wins. Using that same logic it would seem you aren't giving up much ceiling either, right?

I don't see any logic in any of that, sorry.

It's not my logic mate. Take it up with him. I think this is very specious reasoning for evaluating these players, but if he was going to use that standard against Kyrie and Love he really should be consistent and use it against Boogie.

I did. I think you're just having difficulty following along.

Love/Irving + stable franchise + competent coaching + good roleplayers (Dellavedova, Smith, Shumpert, Jefferson, Thompson, Mozgov) + Lebron = Championship

Love/Irving + stable franchise + competent coaching + good roleplayers (Dellavedova, Smith, Shumpert, Jefferson, Thompson, Mozgov) - Lebron = Not a championship (it's not proven, but I'd be willing to bet the odds are heavily in my favor here)

Cousins - stable franchise - competent coaching + decent but ill fitting roleplayers - Lebron = 34 wins


That's the logic right there. If the Cavs swept the championship series against a fully healthy Warriors teams, perhaps they have the talent to win without LeBron. I just don't understand how someone can essentially give such little value to one of the best players to walk on the court.

Now having said that, Cousins may not be better than Love or Irving. I personally think he's better than Irving right now and Love and him are pretty close, but that's neither here nor there. The truth is we have a pretty good idea that a team led by Irving & Love would not be able to get over the hump & win a championship (by looking at the result and doing the math above). Could a Cousins/Irving or Cousins/Love do it? I don't know, but why would you make the trade when the odds are that you're not going to win a championship with Irving & Love as your best players? Who knows. The odds may be exactly the same with Cousins, but we don't know. And not knowing what the ceiling is or could be is much better than knowing you're never going to be good enough to win a championship. Why not roll the dice rather than accepting a ceiling that won't get you to the promise land?

Kings say no.

[Texas Chuck]

I never once gave little value to Lebron. I mean cmon now.

I just think we have seen all three of these guys being the best player on a bad team and I don't see any evidence in their history that suggests Boogie has had more success.

That's it. The rest of this is just so much noise. I just think giving as your main reason for declining this trade that Kyrie and Love "barely won" makes no sense. If you want to say I think in Sacramento I can build a contender easier around Cousins than I could the combo of Love/Kyrie then fine. It's fine to project whatever you want.