jbk1234 wrote: JonFromVA wrote:
The best spin I can put on it is the cost was minimal and we can try him out for at least 30 games before having to make any long term commitment. If he opts in this summer, he may have more trade value this summer as a one year rental.
I don't know what happened in that TT game against Drummond but in the decade that TT has been in the league, that's happened once. He's a really limited player offensively. I suspect he just caught Drummond napping. Drummond is better offensively if for the simple fact he won't get his shot blocked in the post 4 times a game.
I think this is about trying to make peace with Kevin and trying to keep a front-court intact for the future. We have Bird rights for both Thompson and Drummond, and there isn't much money this Summer. We might get either one or both back on a reasonable deal -or- might get something back via a S&T. If Drummond takes his option, then we've got a huge expiring going in to the next season when a lot high-end players may be available in free-agency and/or if he falls through the cracks, another shot to re-sign him for cheap.
Please stop talking about re-signing both TT and Drummond as a real possibility. You're totally freaking me out. It's like when you use PF and Tristan in the same sentence. I understand what those words mean but they don't make any sense when they're put together like that.
I have a better idea. Why don't you try to understand the context I used around those words rather than applying your own?
I mean if we wake up next season, and PJ Tucker is one of the tallest C's in the league ... then sure, either Tristan or Kevin could be our starting C; but even with the league trending that way neither is ideally suited for that role because they both have PF size. For Kevin, there's a heightened injury risk playing him at C because of his back; and for Tristan the wear and tear saps his biggest strength (his motor). They say you are what you defend, and Tristan is best at defending PF's.
Andre, otoh, has terrific size and length for the position, can defend 7ft 300lb C's and yes, if they weren't going to cost a combined $50M (or whatever) they could potentially form a solid rotation at C.
So, if they both happened to "fall through the cracks", what exactly do you think that means?
If everyone either a) considers them dinosaurs, or b) lacks cap space to sign them ... what might they cost us to re-sign with our Bird rights? What if they're only getting MLE offers?
Would you take them back for $20M combined? $30M combined?
Maybe you don't like the idea of playing a non-floor spacing C in this day and age, so maybe there is no number for you. Maybe you think they're redundant. Heck, maybe we even agree?
"I think this is about ..." means I'm trying to figure out what the Cavs might be thinking.
They may very well like the idea of going big as the rest of the league goes small. They may see that as the next market weakness to be exploited.
Or not? Maybe this is just another case of Dan Gilbert loving all things Detroit ...
Part of being optimistic is hoping that all that money Dan Gilbert spends on his front office might very well lead to better decisions than we as fans of the team might make. Having an open mind means in spite of doubts or concerns - accepting that a move may actually be rational and make some sort of sense.
The trick is figuring out what.