RealGM

Welcome to the Cavaliers Mr. Porter!

Cavs fans here's a new vid somebody recently posted on youtube..

there is stuff out there about his childhood, it was nothing short of brutal, I think he got a pass by CLE for the immaturity issues that apparently still exist ( never would have fallen to 30 otherwise) just too much gifted iso dominant scoring ability with proto size,length,nba strengths etc.

Young guys putting it together..

https://www.nba.com/cavaliers/video/teams/cavaliers/2019/07/12/2730741/1562959076198-2019-mgm-resorts-summer-league-porter-jr-feature-2730741

Honestly with the way he's played and been progressing, he would've been worth the #5 pick.

Revenged25 wrote:Honestly with the way he's played and been progressing, he would've been worth the #5 pick.

Based on skillset alone I had him in the top 10 most of last year partially because of Little and Reddish sucking badly, but also because the amount of information regarding KPJ's suspensions and off court issues were still unclear until late so there were times I dropped him down some. I had CLE taking him at 5 in my mock which of course was Karma at its best when they got him at 30th... I just hope somehow the version of Garland we are seeing is based on him still not being strong enough and a victim of the org pushing development through fire.
the way he rarely attacks the rim and often settles for shots in the paint that dont require him to jump in traffic is a sign that is the case, but it's even more evident he might be "scared" out there of getting reinjured when he doesnt dunk or soft slam wide open fast break drives but throws up lower % shots with little elevation and misses usually.
anyway enough about garland, KPJ is the steal of the draft barring Bol doing something besides nothing

Stillwater wrote:

Revenged25 wrote:Honestly with the way he's played and been progressing, he would've been worth the #5 pick.

Based on skillset alone I had him in the top 10 most of last year partially because of Little and Reddish sucking badly, but also because the amount of information regarding KPJ's suspensions and off court issues were still unclear until late so there were times I dropped him down some. I had CLE taking him at 5 in my mock which of course was Karma at its best when they got him at 30th... I just hope somehow the version of Garland we are seeing is based on him still not being strong enough and a victim of the org pushing development through fire.
the way he rarely attacks the rim and often settles for shots in the paint that dont require him to jump in traffic is a sign that is the case, but it's even more evident he might be "scared" out there of getting reinjured when he doesnt dunk or soft slam wide open fast break drives but throws up lower % shots with little elevation and misses usually.
anyway enough about garland, KPJ is the steal of the draft barring Bol doing something besides nothing

Kendrick Nunn must be the steal of the undraft then, lol.

JonFromVA wrote:

Stillwater wrote:

Revenged25 wrote:Honestly with the way he's played and been progressing, he would've been worth the #5 pick.

Based on skillset alone I had him in the top 10 most of last year partially because of Little and Reddish sucking badly, but also because the amount of information regarding KPJ's suspensions and off court issues were still unclear until late so there were times I dropped him down some. I had CLE taking him at 5 in my mock which of course was Karma at its best when they got him at 30th... I just hope somehow the version of Garland we are seeing is based on him still not being strong enough and a victim of the org pushing development through fire.
the way he rarely attacks the rim and often settles for shots in the paint that dont require him to jump in traffic is a sign that is the case, but it's even more evident he might be "scared" out there of getting reinjured when he doesnt dunk or soft slam wide open fast break drives but throws up lower % shots with little elevation and misses usually.
anyway enough about garland, KPJ is the steal of the draft barring Bol doing something besides nothing

Kendrick Nunn must be the steal of the undraft then, lol.

i was pretty high on Nunn in college and there was very little buzz around him in 18 draft but he was pretty damn good in gleague last season.
doesnt surprise me he broke through this season as a nba rook despite the detour..too good not to get a shot at some point.

If they'd have taken KPJ at 5 and he was gifted playing in the SL instead of DG all season the outcomes would have been more favorable but now that things have gone differently we need to see dg and KPJ sharing the floor more and sed if dg is worth retaining. We already know sexton can score off the bench but right now he's the better player to run alongside kpj until dg proves different.

Is there any evidence that supports this assertion? Any at all? I mean Garland and KPJ played well together off the bench. They played well together last night with starters. I'd be curious if there's any stats backing up the idea that Sexton and KPJ are better together.

I mean the assertion that starting two score first guards would lead to winning ball seems counter intuitive. Sexton would have to fundamentally change his style of play, which he's shown very little interest in doing, for it to work. But you're not going to have your starting guards combine to average almost 40 FGAs per game and run any type of cohesive offense.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

jbk1234 wrote:Is there any evidence that supports this assertion? Any at all? I mean Garland and KPJ played well together off the bench. They played well together last night with starters. I'd be curious if there's any stats backing up the idea that Sexton and KPJ are better together.

I mean the assertion that starting two score first guards would lead to winning ball seems counter intuitive. Sexton would have to fundamentally change his style of play, which he's shown very little interest in doing, for it to work. But you're not going to have your starting guards combine to average almost 40 FGAs per game and run any type of cohesive offense.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

nba.com tracks player pairs and Garland-Porter are -1.5 compared to Sexton-Porter who are -4.1.

Hard to say how this plays out in an alternate world where Garland doesn't exist and Sexton and Porter Jr bonded and played as PG + SG, but I do feel that Garland's willingness to defer to his teammates makes him easier to have on the floor. When Sexton is forcing things and mostly getting stuffed at the rim, it makes sense to let him sit.

Drummond has been too much like that as well for a player who should be able to contribute in numerous ways. It caused a kerfuffle when SVG would bench him in the 4th quarter in Detroit, but it's becoming SOP. Someone should sit down with him and try to lay out a plan for him that'll keep him relevant as a big in the modern NBA. I think he realizes he needs more skills, but mostly he needs winning habits, consistency, and a clearer defined role.

As long as jbb continues to be open minded the Cavs just might be in good hands as far as putting together situational line ups on a game by game or even ¼ by ¼ basis without the old school necessity of having a set in stone starting line up that the opposition can more easily anticipate.
The whole idea that it has to be dg or cs because one is better at one thing or visa versa is really doa since neither are complete package . However like I mentioned when Beilein resigned as long as whomever was running the team put KPJ in the sl and see what the have with dg and KPJ I was good with it to close the season because Sextons to me has already proven he will become a legit distributor based on his work ethic regardless of how he fits in this rotation now and of course because his task this season was always score first anyway despite most assuming he's ignoring coaches and they were ok with it. Sextons will be in this league for s long time but until Garland proves sustainable in some way besides just being a nice kid... He's got a good egg, can he be that top 5 guy or does he need mr 30 to cover him

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Is there any evidence that supports this assertion? Any at all? I mean Garland and KPJ played well together off the bench. They played well together last night with starters. I'd be curious if there's any stats backing up the idea that Sexton and KPJ are better together.

I mean the assertion that starting two score first guards would lead to winning ball seems counter intuitive. Sexton would have to fundamentally change his style of play, which he's shown very little interest in doing, for it to work. But you're not going to have your starting guards combine to average almost 40 FGAs per game and run any type of cohesive offense.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

nba.com tracks player pairs and Garland-Porter are -1.5 compared to Sexton-Porter who are -4.1.

Hard to say how this plays out in an alternate world where Garland doesn't exist and Sexton and Porter Jr bonded and played as PG + SG, but I do feel that Garland's willingness to defer to his teammates makes him easier to have on the floor. When Sexton is forcing things and mostly getting stuffed at the rim, it makes sense to let him sit.

Drummond has been too much like that as well for a player who should be able to contribute in numerous ways. It caused a kerfuffle when SVG would bench him in the 4th quarter in Detroit, but it's becoming SOP. Someone should sit down with him and try to lay out a plan for him that'll keep him relevant as a big in the modern NBA. I think he realizes he needs more skills, but mostly he needs winning habits, consistency, and a clearer defined role.

I hope that the idea with Drummond was to see how he'd do in a system where the offense wasn't built around him. The concern I have is that the Piston maxed out Andre's value in SVG's high PNR system where he was getting high usage. Their ceiling was an eighth seed. There are players whose overall production falls off a cliff in an offensive system where they're not the focal point. Drummond can play a more motivated version of ball. Drummond can play a smarter/less sloppy version of ball. Drummond can't really play a more athletic version of ball, and that's a problem in terms of assigning him a key role or giving him big dollars.

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Is there any evidence that supports this assertion? Any at all? I mean Garland and KPJ played well together off the bench. They played well together last night with starters. I'd be curious if there's any stats backing up the idea that Sexton and KPJ are better together.

I mean the assertion that starting two score first guards would lead to winning ball seems counter intuitive. Sexton would have to fundamentally change his style of play, which he's shown very little interest in doing, for it to work. But you're not going to have your starting guards combine to average almost 40 FGAs per game and run any type of cohesive offense.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

nba.com tracks player pairs and Garland-Porter are -1.5 compared to Sexton-Porter who are -4.1.

Hard to say how this plays out in an alternate world where Garland doesn't exist and Sexton and Porter Jr bonded and played as PG + SG, but I do feel that Garland's willingness to defer to his teammates makes him easier to have on the floor. When Sexton is forcing things and mostly getting stuffed at the rim, it makes sense to let him sit.

Drummond has been too much like that as well for a player who should be able to contribute in numerous ways. It caused a kerfuffle when SVG would bench him in the 4th quarter in Detroit, but it's becoming SOP. Someone should sit down with him and try to lay out a plan for him that'll keep him relevant as a big in the modern NBA. I think he realizes he needs more skills, but mostly he needs winning habits, consistency, and a clearer defined role.

how many minutes did KPJ and Sexton play together? who else was on the floor at the time ?
all of these stats are just guidelines for empty talking points...Garland shares the ball , I would not say he does it well yet. In fact I would say it's about all he does other than score when noone is guarding him. I really want to see if he can be better and there are a lot of things to dislike about how long it is taking Sexton to be a team player, but I dont really give two rotten apples if Sexton ever shares the rock as it pertains to Garland who cant do anything much with it besides share it.

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Is there any evidence that supports this assertion? Any at all? I mean Garland and KPJ played well together off the bench. They played well together last night with starters. I'd be curious if there's any stats backing up the idea that Sexton and KPJ are better together.

I mean the assertion that starting two score first guards would lead to winning ball seems counter intuitive. Sexton would have to fundamentally change his style of play, which he's shown very little interest in doing, for it to work. But you're not going to have your starting guards combine to average almost 40 FGAs per game and run any type of cohesive offense.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

nba.com tracks player pairs and Garland-Porter are -1.5 compared to Sexton-Porter who are -4.1.

Hard to say how this plays out in an alternate world where Garland doesn't exist and Sexton and Porter Jr bonded and played as PG + SG, but I do feel that Garland's willingness to defer to his teammates makes him easier to have on the floor. When Sexton is forcing things and mostly getting stuffed at the rim, it makes sense to let him sit.

Drummond has been too much like that as well for a player who should be able to contribute in numerous ways. It caused a kerfuffle when SVG would bench him in the 4th quarter in Detroit, but it's becoming SOP. Someone should sit down with him and try to lay out a plan for him that'll keep him relevant as a big in the modern NBA. I think he realizes he needs more skills, but mostly he needs winning habits, consistency, and a clearer defined role.

I hope that the idea with Drummond was to see how he'd do in a system where the offense wasn't built around him. The concern I have is that the Piston maxed out Andre's value in SVG's high PNR system where he was getting high usage. Their ceiling was an eighth seed. There are players whose overall production falls off a cliff in an offensive system where they're not the focal point. Drummond can play a more motivated version of ball. Drummond can play a smarter/less sloppy version of ball. Drummond can't really play a more athletic version of ball, and that's a problem in terms of assigning him a key role or giving him big dollars.

When Detroit was able to actually field their starting lineup over the last 2 years, they were playing at a way higher level ... on par with Milwaukee's starting lineup for instance.

With KLove taking the place of Blake Griffin, it would seem the idea would be to try to reproduce whatever was working with those groups.

Clearly Andre can be a frustrating player and maybe he was a bad fit with Casey? But he's shown he can be a very effective player, and perhaps they just gave up on their core because they couldn't keep 'em on the floor. They couldn't dump Blake's contract, so they did the next best thing to make sure they don't "treadmill" and traded Andre.

Which is not to say the Cavs will figure out how to use him or that he will be able to adapt to what they want ... but just that there's technically a blueprint for using him in a winning way.

As for athleticism, it wasn't that long ago Drummond was considered a "freak athlete":

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/28779007/a-roller-coaster-winter-left-jazz-searching-identity

He's sitting out tonight with an injury - could just be "load management", but maybe we have not seen his best, yet?

Here's an old video from 2016 featuring his defense .vs. the Cavs in the playoffs:



Andre still just 26 should be enjoying his prime, right now.

Stillwater wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Is there any evidence that supports this assertion? Any at all? I mean Garland and KPJ played well together off the bench. They played well together last night with starters. I'd be curious if there's any stats backing up the idea that Sexton and KPJ are better together.

I mean the assertion that starting two score first guards would lead to winning ball seems counter intuitive. Sexton would have to fundamentally change his style of play, which he's shown very little interest in doing, for it to work. But you're not going to have your starting guards combine to average almost 40 FGAs per game and run any type of cohesive offense.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

nba.com tracks player pairs and Garland-Porter are -1.5 compared to Sexton-Porter who are -4.1.

Hard to say how this plays out in an alternate world where Garland doesn't exist and Sexton and Porter Jr bonded and played as PG + SG, but I do feel that Garland's willingness to defer to his teammates makes him easier to have on the floor. When Sexton is forcing things and mostly getting stuffed at the rim, it makes sense to let him sit.

Drummond has been too much like that as well for a player who should be able to contribute in numerous ways. It caused a kerfuffle when SVG would bench him in the 4th quarter in Detroit, but it's becoming SOP. Someone should sit down with him and try to lay out a plan for him that'll keep him relevant as a big in the modern NBA. I think he realizes he needs more skills, but mostly he needs winning habits, consistency, and a clearer defined role.

how many minutes did KPJ and Sexton play together? who else was on the floor at the time ?
all of these stats are just guidelines for empty talking points...Garland shares the ball , I would not say he does it well yet. In fact I would say it's about all he does other than score when noone is guarding him. I really want to see if he can be better and there are a lot of things to dislike about how long it is taking Sexton to be a team player, but I dont really give two rotten apples if Sexton ever shares the rock as it pertains to Garland who cant do anything much with it besides share it.

You're free to fill in those holes. If you're not sure where to look, just ask and I'm sure someone will point you to what you want to know.

That's the nice thing about stats .vs. words.

I'm personally hoping JBB's experimentation will give us some more data to look at that just wasn't available due to Beilein's rigid lineups.

But the floor time data is for real ... game in and game out the team is performing better with Darius on the floor than Collin and the gap between their overall numbers keeps widening.

And it's not even like we even had any consistency in our second unit since Clarkson was traded.

I mean, chew on this thought .... this lineup with Collin has been pretty good:

Sexton-Dellavedova-Osman-Love-Thompson (58 minutes)

And this unit with Collin has been atrocious:

Sexton-Exum-Osman-Love-Thompson (33 minutes)

The difference is Delly .vs. Exum.

The view jbk and I share on the importance of moving the ball, I think it's pretty clear why there's a disparity here. Can your view make sense of it?

JonFromVA wrote:

Stillwater wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
nba.com tracks player pairs and Garland-Porter are -1.5 compared to Sexton-Porter who are -4.1.

Hard to say how this plays out in an alternate world where Garland doesn't exist and Sexton and Porter Jr bonded and played as PG + SG, but I do feel that Garland's willingness to defer to his teammates makes him easier to have on the floor. When Sexton is forcing things and mostly getting stuffed at the rim, it makes sense to let him sit.

Drummond has been too much like that as well for a player who should be able to contribute in numerous ways. It caused a kerfuffle when SVG would bench him in the 4th quarter in Detroit, but it's becoming SOP. Someone should sit down with him and try to lay out a plan for him that'll keep him relevant as a big in the modern NBA. I think he realizes he needs more skills, but mostly he needs winning habits, consistency, and a clearer defined role.

how many minutes did KPJ and Sexton play together? who else was on the floor at the time ?
all of these stats are just guidelines for empty talking points...Garland shares the ball , I would not say he does it well yet. In fact I would say it's about all he does other than score when noone is guarding him. I really want to see if he can be better and there are a lot of things to dislike about how long it is taking Sexton to be a team player, but I dont really give two rotten apples if Sexton ever shares the rock as it pertains to Garland who cant do anything much with it besides share it.

You're free to fill in those holes. If you're not sure where to look, just ask and I'm sure someone will point you to what you want to know.

That's the nice thing about stats .vs. words.

I'm personally hoping JBB's experimentation will give us some more data to look at that just wasn't available due to Beilein's rigid lineups.

But the floor time data is for real ... game in and game out the team is performing better with Darius on the floor than Collin and the gap between their overall numbers keeps widening.

And it's not even like we even had any consistency in our second unit since Clarkson was traded.

I mean, chew on this thought .... this lineup with Collin has been pretty good:

Sexton-Dellavedova-Osman-Love-Thompson (58 minutes)

And this unit with Collin has been atrocious:

Sexton-Exum-Osman-Love-Thompson (33 minutes)

The difference is Delly .vs. Exum.

The view jbk and I share on the importance of moving the ball, I think it's pretty clear why there's a disparity here. Can your view make sense of it?

It's not about how good the "team " is when you are tanking and despite your assessment being very speculative in nature you are relying on stats as positives when the outcome is the same big fat L.
The difference against Miami was KPJ and Larry Nance Jr playing like all stars not the fact that your boy was on the court.
I guess you'll be more comfortable benching Garland after he proves he can't do what Sexton was able to. Lol

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
nba.com tracks player pairs and Garland-Porter are -1.5 compared to Sexton-Porter who are -4.1.

Hard to say how this plays out in an alternate world where Garland doesn't exist and Sexton and Porter Jr bonded and played as PG + SG, but I do feel that Garland's willingness to defer to his teammates makes him easier to have on the floor. When Sexton is forcing things and mostly getting stuffed at the rim, it makes sense to let him sit.

Drummond has been too much like that as well for a player who should be able to contribute in numerous ways. It caused a kerfuffle when SVG would bench him in the 4th quarter in Detroit, but it's becoming SOP. Someone should sit down with him and try to lay out a plan for him that'll keep him relevant as a big in the modern NBA. I think he realizes he needs more skills, but mostly he needs winning habits, consistency, and a clearer defined role.

I hope that the idea with Drummond was to see how he'd do in a system where the offense wasn't built around him. The concern I have is that the Piston maxed out Andre's value in SVG's high PNR system where he was getting high usage. Their ceiling was an eighth seed. There are players whose overall production falls off a cliff in an offensive system where they're not the focal point. Drummond can play a more motivated version of ball. Drummond can play a smarter/less sloppy version of ball. Drummond can't really play a more athletic version of ball, and that's a problem in terms of assigning him a key role or giving him big dollars.

When Detroit was able to actually field their starting lineup over the last 2 years, they were playing at a way higher level ... on par with Milwaukee's starting lineup for instance.

With KLove taking the place of Blake Griffin, it would seem the idea would be to try to reproduce whatever was working with those groups.

Clearly Andre can be a frustrating player and maybe he was a bad fit with Casey? But he's shown he can be a very effective player, and perhaps they just gave up on their core because they couldn't keep 'em on the floor. They couldn't dump Blake's contract, so they did the next best thing to make sure they don't "treadmill" and traded Andre.

Which is not to say the Cavs will figure out how to use him or that he will be able to adapt to what they want ... but just that there's technically a blueprint for using him in a winning way.

As for athleticism, it wasn't that long ago Drummond was considered a "freak athlete":

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/28779007/a-roller-coaster-winter-left-jazz-searching-identity

He's sitting out tonight with an injury - could just be "load management", but maybe we have not seen his best, yet?

Here's an old video from 2016 featuring his defense .vs. the Cavs in the playoffs:

Watch on YouTube

Andre still just 26 should be enjoying his prime, right now.

I remember that series very well. The Pistons also had Stanley Johnson, Morris, and T. Harris as wings to throw at LBJ. People, myself included, thought that team was going places. But in four years it never happened. Not even after trading for Blake. I don't know that they've won a single playoff game with Drummond. They were 19-34 when they traded him this year so I'm not even sure they had to worry about treadmilling.

Not all of it was his fault obviously. RJ, Kennard, and Blake had injury issues. But Rose and Wood were unexpected pluses who offset some of that. There has also been that shot clock/offensive rebound rule change in the interim. With three point shots becoming more prevalent, there are more long rebounds. So that mitigates his rebounding advantage.

My bottom line is that Andre isn't great defensively, and once you factor in his turnovers, he's not all that efficient offensively. If you have good defensive wings in front of him, he can anchor behind them. But his lateral foot speed and lack of vertical leaping ability keep him from being the type of rim protector who scares off opposing players. Also, Andre getting outplayed by quicker energy bigs is no longer a rare occurrence. It's occurring too often. At least too often for someone who wants to be treated and paid like a key guy.

You saw something similar with DAJ's perceived value around the league. First, the Clippers couldn't get value for him, and if the Nets didn't offer him $10M per as a favor to Durant, I'm not sure he gets it elsewhere. I'll be shocked if TT gets more than the MLE. I don't mind parting with a lousy second to kick the tires. But I don't see this ending well. We'll either overpay him and get stuck, or we won't and he'll be upset about it.

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
I hope that the idea with Drummond was to see how he'd do in a system where the offense wasn't built around him. The concern I have is that the Piston maxed out Andre's value in SVG's high PNR system where he was getting high usage. Their ceiling was an eighth seed. There are players whose overall production falls off a cliff in an offensive system where they're not the focal point. Drummond can play a more motivated version of ball. Drummond can play a smarter/less sloppy version of ball. Drummond can't really play a more athletic version of ball, and that's a problem in terms of assigning him a key role or giving him big dollars.

When Detroit was able to actually field their starting lineup over the last 2 years, they were playing at a way higher level ... on par with Milwaukee's starting lineup for instance.

With KLove taking the place of Blake Griffin, it would seem the idea would be to try to reproduce whatever was working with those groups.

Clearly Andre can be a frustrating player and maybe he was a bad fit with Casey? But he's shown he can be a very effective player, and perhaps they just gave up on their core because they couldn't keep 'em on the floor. They couldn't dump Blake's contract, so they did the next best thing to make sure they don't "treadmill" and traded Andre.

Which is not to say the Cavs will figure out how to use him or that he will be able to adapt to what they want ... but just that there's technically a blueprint for using him in a winning way.

As for athleticism, it wasn't that long ago Drummond was considered a "freak athlete":

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/28779007/a-roller-coaster-winter-left-jazz-searching-identity

He's sitting out tonight with an injury - could just be "load management", but maybe we have not seen his best, yet?

Here's an old video from 2016 featuring his defense .vs. the Cavs in the playoffs:

Watch on YouTube

Andre still just 26 should be enjoying his prime, right now.

I remember that series very well. The Pistons also had Stanley Johnson, Morris, and T. Harris as wings to throw at LBJ. People, myself included, thought that team was going places. But in four years it never happened. Not even after trading for Blake. I don't know that they've won a single playoff game with Drummond. They were 19-34 when they traded him this year so I'm not even sure they had to worry about treadmilling.

Not all of it was his fault obviously. RJ, Kennard, and Blake had injury issues. But Rose and Wood were unexpected pluses who offset some of that. There has also been that shot clock/offensive rebound rule change in the interim. With three point shots becoming more prevalent, there are more long rebounds. So that mitigates his rebounding advantage.

My bottom line is that Andre isn't great defensively, and once you factor in his turnovers, he's not all that efficient offensively. If you have good defensive wings in front of him, he can anchor behind them. But his lateral foot speed and lack of vertical leaping ability keep him from being the type of rim protector who scares off opposing players. Also, Andre getting outplayed by quicker energy bigs is no longer a rare occurrence. It's occurring too often. At least too often for someone who wants to be treated and paid like a key guy.

You saw something similar with DAJ's perceived value around the league. First, the Clippers couldn't get value for him, and if the Nets didn't offer him $10M per as a favor to Durant, I'm not sure he gets it elsewhere. I'll be shocked if TT gets more than the MLE. I don't mind parting with a lousy second to kick the tires. But I don't see this ending well. We'll either overpay him and get stuck, or we won't and he'll be upset about it.

I can't disagree, but I do still see a glimmer of hope and really it starts and ends with those starting lineups.

Health, consistency, and chemistry are all super important and the Pistons have little of it.

I mean, even this season which has been a train wreck for the Pistons, the Brown-Kennard-Snell-Griffin-Drummond has played just 115 minutes together (no other lineup has played more than 87) and has been a +17 pp100.

If you've got a starting lineup that can give you +17 for near 82 games, you don't need much of a bench to win 60 games.

Stillwater is right about one thing. Our discussions have mostly revolved around relative suckiness rather than winning basketball, Most of our lineups are far in to the negative, and the ones that have been productive are not getting consistent minutes.

Until we start finding some lineups that work consistently, it's hard to oppose even as radical an idea as blowing up the entire roster.

Ultimately the kids need time and the Cavs need to stop changing coaches twice per year.

In the meantime, I'll keep watching those baby steps.