RealGM

I know you guys don't like talking about LeBron, but I think about this question a lot, and I wanted to get your opinions. I feel bad making this thread on your board, but I can't help but wonder "What if?"

Personally, I've watched a lot of the Cavs playoff series and old games, but I'm sort split with my decision. If he stayed, would have he ever gotten any help, and would he ever win a championship? I think deep down he wants to return to Cleveland someday when he's accomplished getting a ring or two.

Again, I'm sorry for making a thread that's been made a million times, but I just wanted to know your guys' thoughts.

If he stayed, Amare or Bosh would be wearing a Cleveland uniform on XMas and yes, he would've won at least one title.

I am not as bitter about LeBron as some other Cavs fans, but I do not want to see him back in a Cleveland uniform, especially after winning rings elsewhere.

Triumph36 wrote:If he stayed, Amare or Bosh would be wearing a Cleveland uniform on XMas and yes, he would've won at least one title.

I am not as bitter about LeBron as some other Cavs fans, but I do not want to see him back in a Cleveland uniform, especially after winning rings elsewhere.

I agree, if he would have stayed, it would have been because another big name player joined him in CLE...he tried recruiting Bosh if I remember correctly, but it was too little too late, and it almost seemed like PR. Bosh immediately declined. I wish that Z/Hickson/picks for Amare actually materialized...I feel we would have won it all that year. Mo/Parker/Bron/Stat/Shaq...that's a ring I don't care what anyone says.

We got destroyed in the Boston series because KG destroyed Jamison on possession after possession. It seemed like that Jamison move was a case of shiny new player syndrome, and I think I even remember LBJ saying something like "we don't need a stretch 4, and Hickson is good enough moving forward in our system." LOL I remember how damn obsessed everyone was with "stretch fours" at the time. Stupid move, Jamison's pitiful post defense for a PF allowed us to be destroyed (Still never know why we didn't put Anderson **** Varejao on KG!)

I also think it was kind of a slap in the face to Z at the time -coming after sitting him out the game he was supposed to break the record for games played (never gonna forgive potato for that) and than using his contract as trade fodder to get a player our superstar said we didn't need...I think that was the beginning of the end, and than that savior "stretch four" got us our ass handed to us, so it was just a big mess.

I'm glad Lebron, Ferry, and Mike Brown all left. That was one of the most depressing moments as a Cavs fan though, went it actually happened. We literally went from contending to a championship to the worst in the East overnight lol, all at once. That's why as Cavs fans, we are so excited about Irving and TT, if we kept LeBron, there would be no influx of younger talent. It just seemed like we kept renting vets, and never really had a cohesive unit despite success of those Cavs from when we made the big Delonte-Sczerbiak-Wallace trade to about 2010

Something was wrong with jamison when he came to Cleveland. Dude was only a mediocre scorer and an awful free throw shooter when he came to Cleveland.

TheOUTLAW wrote:Something was wrong with jamison when he came to Cleveland. Dude was only a mediocre scorer and an awful free throw shooter when he came to Cleveland.

That's what you call aging which is not uncommon among 34 year olds. There was nothing "wrong" with him.

Antawn wasnt a good fit with Lebron and coach Brown's defer to Lebron offense. Tawn isnt a catch and shoot scorer, he needs the ball to create his offense. His defense was/is poor and that didnt help this team either. I dont think the team would have won a ring with Lebron, he choked again in the finals last year with Wade and Bosh so I question whether he will ever win a ring. Time will tell I guess. The big question I have is would the Cavs have made the Mo trade if Lebron had stayed?

I don't think we would have won (yet) either.
LeBron folded in the finals again. Until he gets over that its not happening for him.

I'd like to think they would have made a lot of the same moves and at this point allowed a lot of the salary to fall off. Realistically we'd likely still be plugging in aging veterans Mavericks style though.

We are in the process of setting up a very nice supporting cast for him when its opt out time.

tidho wrote:I don't think we would have won (yet) either.
LeBron folded in the finals again. Until he gets over that its not happening for him.

I'd like to think they would have made a lot of the same moves and at this point allowed a lot of the salary to fall off. Realistically we'd likely still be plugging in aging veterans Mavericks style though.

We are in the process of setting up a very nice supporting cast for him when its opt out time. :P

gtfo

tidho wrote:We are in the process of setting up a very nice supporting cast for him when its opt out time.

With how players perceive Dan Gilbert now good luck with Cleveland ever signing a marquee free agent while he is the owner. What if Lebron stayed? We might never know how much of a petulant jackass Dan Gilbert is.

How do PLAYERS perceive Dan Gilbert? I doubt that you have any idea.

TheOUTLAW wrote:How do PLAYERS perceive Dan Gilbert? I doubt that you have any idea.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what player sentiment is towards Gilbert. How many marquee free agents has Cleveland signed since Gilbert became owner?

Anderson Varejao opted to sign with the BOBCATS rather than return to Cleveland and is only in Cleveland because the Cavs matched the Bobcats offer. Varejao extended only because Lebron was there and the Cavs overpaid for him.

The only chance Gilbert has of attracting talent in 2012 will be to massively overpay. I can guarantee no marquee free agents will sign with the Cavs in 2012 no matter how much cap space they have. Watch.

Wow someones angry. Maverick is that you?

Anyway - try not to contradict yourself when making posts. On one hand you ask how many free agents have we signed since Gilbert became the owner. Was player sentiment towards him negative as soon as he bought the team? I did not think so.

In the previous post your statement is "With how players perceive Dan Gilbert now good luck with Cleveland ever signing a marquee free agent while he is the owner."

So pick one please. Either players have always hated Gilbert or they just started to.

Or, the most logical argument, it's Cleveland not NY, LA, Orl, Bos, or Dallas. Most marquee FA's arent coming here whether or not you think Gilbert is a jackass. The only way to win is through the draft and trades. Only if/when the Cavs are on the cusp of winning it all will the marquee FA's seriously consider signing here for reasonable value. I think the Dan Gilbert hate thread is elsewhere, you should probably go try and find it.

Niko23 wrote:Wow someones angry. Maverick is that you?

Anyway - try not to contradict yourself when making posts. On one hand you ask how many free agents have we signed since Gilbert became the owner. Was player sentiment towards him negative as soon as he bought the team? I did not think so.

In the previous post your statement is "With how players perceive Dan Gilbert now good luck with Cleveland ever signing a marquee free agent while he is the owner."

So pick one please. Either players have always hated Gilbert or they just started to.

The way he cleared the decks when he got majority ownership was not well received - hence Varejao's attempt to go elsewhere. But player perception clearly got worse first with his letter after LeBron chose to leave and then the CP trade email to Stern.

We can revisit this during the 2012 offseason. I will be highly surprised if Cleveland gets anyone notable in free agency.

Septhaka wrote:

Niko23 wrote:Wow someones angry. Maverick is that you?

Anyway - try not to contradict yourself when making posts. On one hand you ask how many free agents have we signed since Gilbert became the owner. Was player sentiment towards him negative as soon as he bought the team? I did not think so.

In the previous post your statement is "With how players perceive Dan Gilbert now good luck with Cleveland ever signing a marquee free agent while he is the owner."

So pick one please. Either players have always hated Gilbert or they just started to.

The way he cleared the decks when he got majority ownership was not well received - hence Varejao's attempt to go elsewhere. But player perception clearly got worse first with his letter after LeBron chose to leave and then the CP trade email to Stern.

We can revisit this during the 2012 offseason. I will be highly surprised if Cleveland gets anyone notable in free agency.

This is ridiculous.

It doesnt take a genious to know that the Cavs wont sign any notable free agents next year and it has NOTHING to do with Gilbert. First of all, our team isnt going to be good for a few years so why would anyone big want to sign here? Secondly, why would we want to use up all of our money when we are building through the draft anyway?

The Varejao example is AWFUL and totally not a valid argument to the point you are trying to prove. The way Varejao's free agency played out is the same way all restricted free agencys play out. The player asks his own team for the amount of money he wants, that team low balls him, and then he goes out and tries to find the best deal he can, which the former team nearly always matches. That is a regular occurance in the NBA.

If you want a more current example, then look no further than last summer. Kyle Lowry blasted Dan Gilbert on twitter over his response to LeBron's Decision. It wasnt more than a few weeks later that Lowry signed an offer sheet with the very same Cavs that he blasted the owner of. The Rockets of course matched the deal and reupped Lowry. But this just goes to further disprove both of your supposed points. Not only was the very vocal Lowry willing to sign a deal with Gilbert, but the Rockets also made the exact same move as the Cavs. Does that mean that no one wants to play in Houston too?

On top of all that. When was the last big name free agent that the Cavs signed period? Actually, when was the last big named free agent that signed in Cleveland at all? Its got nothing to do with Dan Gilbert. If we couldnt get free agents to sign with LeBron here, why do you think that other free agents would sign here even if we had Steinbrenner as the owner of the team?

It just doesnt make sense.

Forgot about the Lowry offer sheet.

Septhaka wrote:

TheOUTLAW wrote:How do PLAYERS perceive Dan Gilbert? I doubt that you have any idea.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what player sentiment is towards Gilbert. How many marquee free agents has Cleveland signed since Gilbert became owner?

Anderson Varejao opted to sign with the BOBCATS rather than return to Cleveland and is only in Cleveland because the Cavs matched the Bobcats offer. Varejao extended only because Lebron was there and the Cavs overpaid for him.

The only chance Gilbert has of attracting talent in 2012 will be to massively overpay. I can guarantee no marquee free agents will sign with the Cavs in 2012 no matter how much cap space they have. Watch.

OWNED by BMac.

Septhaka wrote:

TheOUTLAW wrote:How do PLAYERS perceive Dan Gilbert? I doubt that you have any idea.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what player sentiment is towards Gilbert. How many marquee free agents has Cleveland signed since Gilbert became owner?

Anderson Varejao opted to sign with the BOBCATS rather than return to Cleveland and is only in Cleveland because the Cavs matched the Bobcats offer. Varejao extended only because Lebron was there and the Cavs overpaid for him.

The only chance Gilbert has of attracting talent in 2012 will be to massively overpay. I can guarantee no marquee free agents will sign with the Cavs in 2012 no matter how much cap space they have. Watch.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Look to Bmac's argument to understand why this is the case. LOL, the Cavs haven't signed any marquee free agents? The Cavs have never signed a marquee free agent.

I must say one thing, good thing you aren't a rocket scientist.

B Mac wrote:

Septhaka wrote:

Niko23 wrote:Wow someones angry. Maverick is that you?

Anyway - try not to contradict yourself when making posts. On one hand you ask how many free agents have we signed since Gilbert became the owner. Was player sentiment towards him negative as soon as he bought the team? I did not think so.

In the previous post your statement is "With how players perceive Dan Gilbert now good luck with Cleveland ever signing a marquee free agent while he is the owner."

So pick one please. Either players have always hated Gilbert or they just started to.

The way he cleared the decks when he got majority ownership was not well received - hence Varejao's attempt to go elsewhere. But player perception clearly got worse first with his letter after LeBron chose to leave and then the CP trade email to Stern.

We can revisit this during the 2012 offseason. I will be highly surprised if Cleveland gets anyone notable in free agency.

This is ridiculous.

It doesnt take a genious

genius you mean?

to know that the Cavs wont sign any notable free agents next year and it has NOTHING to do with Gilbert. First of all, our team isnt going to be good for a few years so why would anyone big want to sign here? Secondly, why would we want to use up all of our money when we are building through the draft anyway?

Bad teams have signed big free agents before. The team may decide to not sign big name free agents and rather build through the draft a la Oklahoma City but that doesn't invalidate the point that this may be the only option rather than a choice due to player opinion of Gilbert. This does not refute my point but rather enforces it.

The Varejao example is AWFUL and totally not a valid argument to the point you are trying to prove. The way Varejao's free agency played out is the same way all restricted free agencys play out. The player asks his own team for the amount of money he wants, that team low balls him, and then he goes out and tries to find the best deal he can, which the former team nearly always matches. That is a regular occurance in the NBA.

You apparently don't remember the facts. The Cavs offered Varejao 3 yrs and $20m which he turned down and opted to sign for LESS with the Bobcats at 3 yrs at $17.4m with a player option after year 2. The Bobcats deal was FOR LESS MONEY than the Cavs offer and Varejao opted to sign with the Bobcats. The regular occurrence is when the incumbent team offers X and a competing team offers more than X and the incumbent team matches the competing team. That is not what happened with Varejao. Varejao wanted out.

If you want a more current example, then look no further than last summer. Kyle Lowry blasted Dan Gilbert on twitter over his response to LeBron's Decision. It wasnt more than a few weeks later that Lowry signed an offer sheet with the very same Cavs that he blasted the owner of. The Rockets of course matched the deal and reupped Lowry. But this just goes to further disprove both of your supposed points. Not only was the very vocal Lowry willing to sign a deal with Gilbert, but the Rockets also made the exact same move as the Cavs. Does that mean that no one wants to play in Houston too?

This is unlike the Varejao example as the Lowry situation followed the traditional model of player being offered X and a competing team offering more. The Cavs offered Lowry 4 yrs and $24m when the Rockets were offering Lowry much less.

On top of all that. When was the last big name free agent that the Cavs signed period? Actually, when was the last big named free agent that signed in Cleveland at all? Its got nothing to do with Dan Gilbert. If we couldnt get free agents to sign with LeBron here, why do you think that other free agents would sign here even if we had Steinbrenner as the owner of the team?

It just doesnt make sense.

The Cavs are a small market team that makes signing big name players a struggle. But my point which has yet to be refuted is player opinion of Gilbert around the league is very poor and it only hurts the Cavs ability to sign free agents. The Cavs will need to overpay to get anyone and thats not a good thing.

Septhaka wrote:The Cavs are a small market team that makes signing big name players a struggle. But my point which has yet to be refuted is player opinion of Gilbert around the league is very poor and it only hurts the Cavs ability to sign free agents. The Cavs will need to overpay to get anyone and thats not a good thing.

But the Cavs would have to overpay to sign anyone regardless of what you think popular opinion of Gilbert is. Nothing has changed in that regard.

Thanks for the spelling lesson though.

B Mac wrote:

Septhaka wrote:The Cavs are a small market team that makes signing big name players a struggle. But my point which has yet to be refuted is player opinion of Gilbert around the league is very poor and it only hurts the Cavs ability to sign free agents. The Cavs will need to overpay to get anyone and thats not a good thing.

But the Cavs would have to overpay to sign anyone regardless of what you think popular opinion of Gilbert is. Nothing has changed in that regard.

Thanks for the spelling lesson though.

I agree. I'm just saying I think Gilbert is making it that much tougher. We'll see I guess.