RealGM

Checking in. May be able to see me in the top left of your screen

ijspeelman wrote:Checking in. May be able to see me in the top left of your screen

Spoiler:

You couldn't have went a month earlier and snagged me some of that sick limited edition merch? Lol

Enjoy man!

Mobleys been hitting the mid range more frequently and at a better rate. If he can maintain this and make that a regular part of his offensive game… that’s enough to take Cleveland to the next level.

Well, didn't take long for CPJ to lose his spot in the rotation, lmfao

I’ll take that W all day every day but my god Mitchell… I know OG was on him all night but still.

JB literally played 7 guys 10+ minutes in November lol guy is a bum. Second night of a back to back and a 3n4 scenario, he decided a guy who got hurt last night should play a team high (and game high) 41+ minutes.

The win is cool but at what cost?

Was at the game....there is a noticeable difference in the offense with Mitchell vs Garland. Even with Garland atrocious turnovers there is more of a rhythm to and energy where with Mitchell the plays and outcome are hyper dependent on what he does on any given possession.

afarmenian wrote:Was at the game....there is a noticeable difference in the offense with Mitchell vs Garland. Even with Garland atrocious turnovers there is more of a rhythm to and energy where with Mitchell the plays and outcome are hyper dependent on what he does on any given possession.

Yeah, i think most fans are done with the Mitchell experiment.

If the organization wants to go through the motions this season and burn a year i guess i get it to see if he'll extend but i think we're headed for a familiar post season outcome as the last 2 seasons.

afarmenian wrote:Was at the game....there is a noticeable difference in the offense with Mitchell vs Garland. Even with Garland atrocious turnovers there is more of a rhythm to and energy where with Mitchell the plays and outcome are hyper dependent on what he does on any given possession.

Mitchell is not a PG, he's a SG who's a pretty good passer. Much like when we had Kyrie playing backup PG, things tended to go how Kyrie went when James was off the floor. It was his time to go get his and if for whatever reason he couldn't the team struggled.

Those minutes were few thanks to JBB playing DG over 41 minutes and yet somehow DG was +12 while Mitchell was just +1. JBB had the chance to bring in CPJ when DG went out, but instead was content to use Strus or LeVert as the secondary ball handler in those lineups.

I think we still rely heavily on the individual brilliance of DG and DM and getting to the point we can consistently create offense without someone being able to break down the defense with the ball in their hands is embryonic. Mobley and his midrange, the big to big game, Strus in motion, Okoro cutting, and all the other little pieces may eventually fill in the gap.

And then we have a guy who's been pretty good at attacking the rim AND moving the ball in CPJ ...

But we got the win and JBB has kept the wolves at bay another day ... alas there are bills to be paid for overplaying players.

JujitsuFlip wrote:

afarmenian wrote:Was at the game....there is a noticeable difference in the offense with Mitchell vs Garland. Even with Garland atrocious turnovers there is more of a rhythm to and energy where with Mitchell the plays and outcome are hyper dependent on what he does on any given possession.

Yeah, i think most fans are done with the Mitchell experiment.

If the organization wants to go through the motions this season and burn a year i guess i get it to see if he'll extend but i think we're headed for a familiar post season outcome as the last 2 seasons.

I know I don't speak for every fan, but I am trying not to dwell on two games and especially two that are probably the worst Mitchell has ever had with the Cavs.

However, the way these two games went with Mitchell were pretty damning. I agree with others that Mitchell takes over the offense occasionally and it doesn't fit in our flow, but these past two games have been the biggest example of this happening (to me, at least). I under the "shooters gotta shoot" mentality, but Mitchell is more off than off and he's still jacking up contest shots (occasionally early in the shot clock).

He shot the most out of any Cavs player for each of these past two games. I can give him a bit of a pass for this in the Lakers game as Garland was out, but the play was still out of the flow of the offense. At the game, I was legitemately groaning when Mitchell shot a contested shot.

Again, I don't want to say these last two games have been the whole Mitchell experience, but they have opened my eyes to how glaring the disconnect between Mitchell's play and the overall offense plan is.

ijspeelman wrote:

JujitsuFlip wrote:

afarmenian wrote:Was at the game....there is a noticeable difference in the offense with Mitchell vs Garland. Even with Garland atrocious turnovers there is more of a rhythm to and energy where with Mitchell the plays and outcome are hyper dependent on what he does on any given possession.

Yeah, i think most fans are done with the Mitchell experiment.

If the organization wants to go through the motions this season and burn a year i guess i get it to see if he'll extend but i think we're headed for a familiar post season outcome as the last 2 seasons.

I know I don't speak for every fan, but I am trying not to dwell on two games and especially two that are probably the worst Mitchell has ever had with the Cavs.

However, the way these two games went with Mitchell were pretty damning. I agree with others that Mitchell takes over the offense occasionally and it doesn't fit in our flow, but these past two games have been the biggest example of this happening (to me, at least). I under the "shooters gotta shoot" mentality, but Mitchell is more off than off and he's still jacking up contest shots (occasionally early in the shot clock).

He shot the most out of any Cavs player for each of these past two games. I can give him a bit of a pass for this in the Lakers game as Garland was out, but the play was still out of the flow of the offense. At the game, I was legitemately groaning when Mitchell shot a contested shot.

Again, I don't want to say these last two games have been the whole Mitchell experience, but they have opened my eyes to how glaring the disconnect between Mitchell's play and the overall offense plan is.

I groan too, but I'd be a lot more concerned if the Cavs weren't +6.9 when Mitchell and Garland are on the floor.

ijspeelman wrote:

JujitsuFlip wrote:

afarmenian wrote:Was at the game....there is a noticeable difference in the offense with Mitchell vs Garland. Even with Garland atrocious turnovers there is more of a rhythm to and energy where with Mitchell the plays and outcome are hyper dependent on what he does on any given possession.

Yeah, i think most fans are done with the Mitchell experiment.

If the organization wants to go through the motions this season and burn a year i guess i get it to see if he'll extend but i think we're headed for a familiar post season outcome as the last 2 seasons.

I know I don't speak for every fan, but I am trying not to dwell on two games and especially two that are probably the worst Mitchell has ever had with the Cavs.

However, the way these two games went with Mitchell were pretty damning. I agree with others that Mitchell takes over the offense occasionally and it doesn't fit in our flow, but these past two games have been the biggest example of this happening (to me, at least). I under the "shooters gotta shoot" mentality, but Mitchell is more off than off and he's still jacking up contest shots (occasionally early in the shot clock).

He shot the most out of any Cavs player for each of these past two games. I can give him a bit of a pass for this in the Lakers game as Garland was out, but the play was still out of the flow of the offense. At the game, I was legitemately groaning when Mitchell shot a contested shot.

Again, I don't want to say these last two games have been the whole Mitchell experience, but they have opened my eyes to how glaring the disconnect between Mitchell's play and the overall offense plan is.

Yeah, it's tough man. It's the chicken and the egg for me, as far as how to "correct" it.

Like the team seems cohesive without him but when he comes back is JB driving that Mitchell has a green light from wherever on the floor and whenever in the clock? Even if it is JB, would a new coach be able to "rein" Mitchell in?

I don't think Mitchell has an ounce of Harden's quit in him but is Mitchell doing this on purpose? I doubt it but i don't think you can 100% rule it out, even if it's just in his subconscious or an ego thing.

JonFromVA wrote:

afarmenian wrote:Was at the game....there is a noticeable difference in the offense with Mitchell vs Garland. Even with Garland atrocious turnovers there is more of a rhythm to and energy where with Mitchell the plays and outcome are hyper dependent on what he does on any given possession.

Mitchell is not a PG, he's a SG who's a pretty good passer. Much like when we had Kyrie playing backup PG, things tended to go how Kyrie went when James was off the floor. It was his time to go get his and if for whatever reason he couldn't the team struggled.

Those minutes were few thanks to JBB playing DG over 41 minutes and yet somehow DG was +12 while Mitchell was just +1. JBB had the chance to bring in CPJ when DG went out, but instead was content to use Strus or LeVert as the secondary ball handler in those lineups.

I think we still rely heavily on the individual brilliance of DG and DM and getting to the point we can consistently create offense without someone being able to break down the defense with the ball in their hands is embryonic. Mobley and his midrange, the big to big game, Strus in motion, Okoro cutting, and all the other little pieces may eventually fill in the gap.

And then we have a guy who's been pretty good at attacking the rim AND moving the ball in CPJ ...

But we got the win and JBB has kept the wolves at bay another day ... alas there are bills to be paid for overplaying players.

CPJ is only okay at moving the ball IMO. Better at running the break than a half court offense. After teams start giving him the Ben Simmons treatment, we'll see if he can make them pay by shooting over them, because that's coming. Unless Niang, Strus, Mitchell, or maybe Wade are setting the pick, there's zero reason to go over it.

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

afarmenian wrote:Was at the game....there is a noticeable difference in the offense with Mitchell vs Garland. Even with Garland atrocious turnovers there is more of a rhythm to and energy where with Mitchell the plays and outcome are hyper dependent on what he does on any given possession.

Mitchell is not a PG, he's a SG who's a pretty good passer. Much like when we had Kyrie playing backup PG, things tended to go how Kyrie went when James was off the floor. It was his time to go get his and if for whatever reason he couldn't the team struggled.

Those minutes were few thanks to JBB playing DG over 41 minutes and yet somehow DG was +12 while Mitchell was just +1. JBB had the chance to bring in CPJ when DG went out, but instead was content to use Strus or LeVert as the secondary ball handler in those lineups.

I think we still rely heavily on the individual brilliance of DG and DM and getting to the point we can consistently create offense without someone being able to break down the defense with the ball in their hands is embryonic. Mobley and his midrange, the big to big game, Strus in motion, Okoro cutting, and all the other little pieces may eventually fill in the gap.

And then we have a guy who's been pretty good at attacking the rim AND moving the ball in CPJ ...

But we got the win and JBB has kept the wolves at bay another day ... alas there are bills to be paid for overplaying players.

CPJ is only okay at moving the ball IMO. Better at running the break than a half court offense. After teams start giving him the Ben Simmons treatment, we'll see if he can make them pay by shooting over them, because that's coming. Unless Niang, Strus, Mitchell, or maybe Wade are setting the pick, there's zero reason to go over it.

He doesn't need to make them pay by shooting over them. I think he can? He has a decent looking shot and he made a decent number of 3's in college, but there are other ways to attack a defense for a player that can score from anywhere on the floor and is fearless attacking the paint.

Are defenses going to double him when Garland or Mitchell are on the floor too?

I'd love to see that.

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
Mitchell is not a PG, he's a SG who's a pretty good passer. Much like when we had Kyrie playing backup PG, things tended to go how Kyrie went when James was off the floor. It was his time to go get his and if for whatever reason he couldn't the team struggled.

Those minutes were few thanks to JBB playing DG over 41 minutes and yet somehow DG was +12 while Mitchell was just +1. JBB had the chance to bring in CPJ when DG went out, but instead was content to use Strus or LeVert as the secondary ball handler in those lineups.

I think we still rely heavily on the individual brilliance of DG and DM and getting to the point we can consistently create offense without someone being able to break down the defense with the ball in their hands is embryonic. Mobley and his midrange, the big to big game, Strus in motion, Okoro cutting, and all the other little pieces may eventually fill in the gap.

And then we have a guy who's been pretty good at attacking the rim AND moving the ball in CPJ ...

But we got the win and JBB has kept the wolves at bay another day ... alas there are bills to be paid for overplaying players.

CPJ is only okay at moving the ball IMO. Better at running the break than a half court offense. After teams start giving him the Ben Simmons treatment, we'll see if he can make them pay by shooting over them, because that's coming. Unless Niang, Strus, Mitchell, or maybe Wade are setting the pick, there's zero reason to go over it.

He doesn't need to make them pay by shooting over them. I think he can? He has a decent looking shot and he made a decent number of 3's in college, but there are other ways to attack a defense for a player that can score from anywhere on the floor and is fearless attacking the paint.

Are defenses going to double him when Garland or Mitchell are on the floor too?

I'd love to see that.

No. They're not going to double him, but he is going to have to beat his defender off the dribble as the PNR is a lot less effective when the defense stops worrying about going over the pick. How many times has he faced a good POA defender in the NBA? I disagree that he's shown he can score anywhere on the floor. I'd love to see his shot charts because I think they'll look very different from what you're remembering.

The CPJ stuff is largely moot because the guy was glued to the bench last night and the team isn't even at full strength yet.

I do wanna give some praise, in 7:29, TT had some major impact. 4 rebs all offensive, 4 assists and 4 points (100%).

Also, pretty cool to see our shooters coming through, Strus 4 triples (44%) and Niang with 2 triples (40%).

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
CPJ is only okay at moving the ball IMO. Better at running the break than a half court offense. After teams start giving him the Ben Simmons treatment, we'll see if he can make them pay by shooting over them, because that's coming. Unless Niang, Strus, Mitchell, or maybe Wade are setting the pick, there's zero reason to go over it.

He doesn't need to make them pay by shooting over them. I think he can? He has a decent looking shot and he made a decent number of 3's in college, but there are other ways to attack a defense for a player that can score from anywhere on the floor and is fearless attacking the paint.

Are defenses going to double him when Garland or Mitchell are on the floor too?

I'd love to see that.

No. They're not going to double him, but he is going to have to beat his defender off the dribble as the PNR is a lot less effective when the defense stops worrying about going over the pick. How many times has he faced a good POA defender in the NBA? I disagree that he's shown he can score anywhere on the floor. I'd love to see his shot charts because I think they'll look very different from what you're remembering.

Craig is pretty clever working a screen, there's an example of that in the other thread where he had Reeves spinning in circles and then stepped backed and buried a 3 on him. He doesn't literally have to blow by his man, there are many ways to get a step; and if he doesn't? He can always reset the play and pass it back to Garland or Mitchell.

So, stop raising the bar. He's competing for backup minutes with other players who've proven they will struggle if the defense keys in on them. At least CPJ is a blank slate, and that's a fun place to be.

JujitsuFlip wrote:The CPJ stuff is largely moot because the guy was glued to the bench last night and the team isn't even at full strength yet.

On the "bright" side, he's just another Garland or Mitchell injury from being back in the rotation ...