Post Mortem 2023-24

[toooskies]

Even if true, it still does not indicate it's time to start the luxury tax timer just so we don't have to fill out our bench with different cheaper players.

The question is if we think the different cheaper players will be significantly worse than what we think Okoro will be.

Which players do you think we should look at his off-season if we part ways with Okoro?

My concern with Okoro is more due to how his contract will age (if we just want to duck the tax, I'm moving Niang). Outside of our core 4, we don't have much in the way of assets. If you pay Okoro at the very the top of his market, you could get stuck with him. Worse yet, you could have to attach even more future draft capital in a trade.

Okoro is useful on a team with Mitchell and Garland given his ability to be a situational POA defender. However, if Garland ends up getting traded for a guy like Ingram, Okoro's minutes and role could get even further reduced. If Daniels is part of that trade, Okoro could struggle to get minutes. Part of me thinks that Okoro should sign the Q.O. if he doesn't get a solid offer in the first week. He's the rare player who might actually benefit from it.

Again, this is assuming that the QO at $12.8m isn't too much money but a contract at $14+m per year is. If the Cavs aren't confident in Okoro's continued development then they shouldn't offer him the QO, they should go find someone on the MLE instead.

The only way Daniels is on the Cavs next year is if the Cavs make a bad trade, but even then, he's a worse shooter than Okoro in terms of both percentage and volume.

[JujitsuFlip]

Even if true, it still does not indicate it's time to start the luxury tax timer just so we don't have to fill out our bench with different cheaper players.

The question is if we think the different cheaper players will be significantly worse than what we think Okoro will be.

Which players do you think we should look at his off-season if we part ways with Okoro?

My concern with Okoro is more due to how his contract will age (if we just want to duck the tax, I'm moving Niang). Outside of our core 4, we don't have much in the way of assets. If you pay Okoro at the very the top of his market, you could get stuck with him. Worse yet, you could have to attach even more future draft capital in a trade.

Okoro is useful on a team with Mitchell and Garland given his ability to be a situational POA defender. However, if Garland ends up getting traded for a guy like Ingram, Okoro's minutes and role could get even further reduced. If Daniels is part of that trade, Okoro could struggle to get minutes. Part of me thinks that Okoro should sign the Q.O. if he doesn't get a solid offer in the first week. He's the rare player who might actually benefit from it.

Idk that dumping Niang makes the Cavs dodge the tax line.

It will then be $144 million for guaranteed money. Add in CPJ, Merrill, and Rubio's dead money. You're sitting at $149 million for 10 players.

If you chalk Okoro up to the QO plus the projected salary of pick #20 Cavs are sitting at $164 million needing to fill 2 more roster spots. Which means probably getting nothing worthwhile with whatever tiny part of the MLE that is used.

Plausible but playing the same song and dance of last season as far as keeping spot 15 open, 14 and 13 non-guaranteed plus 12 probably being an unplayable vet min guy. Less than an ideal situation, cross your fingers everyone has a clean bill of health because TJ is your 11th guy in this scenario.

[jbk1234]

The question is if we think the different cheaper players will be significantly worse than what we think Okoro will be.

Which players do you think we should look at his off-season if we part ways with Okoro?

My concern with Okoro is more due to how his contract will age (if we just want to duck the tax, I'm moving Niang). Outside of our core 4, we don't have much in the way of assets. If you pay Okoro at the very the top of his market, you could get stuck with him. Worse yet, you could have to attach even more future draft capital in a trade.

Okoro is useful on a team with Mitchell and Garland given his ability to be a situational POA defender. However, if Garland ends up getting traded for a guy like Ingram, Okoro's minutes and role could get even further reduced. If Daniels is part of that trade, Okoro could struggle to get minutes. Part of me thinks that Okoro should sign the Q.O. if he doesn't get a solid offer in the first week. He's the rare player who might actually benefit from it.

Again, this is assuming that the QO at $12.8m isn't too much money but a contract at $14+m per year is. If the Cavs aren't confident in Okoro's continued development then they shouldn't offer him the QO, they should go find someone on the MLE instead.

The only way Daniels is on the Cavs next year is if the Cavs make a bad trade, but even then, he's a worse shooter than Okoro in terms of both percentage and volume.

There are degrees of both confidence and uncertainty. We'll still have Bird rights if he plays on the Q.O. which allows the Cavs to hedge a bit and one more chance to show his offense is *developed* enough to stay on the court in the playoffs. That's an entirely different commitment than matching a minimum 3-year offer at $14+M.

I'm deeply skeptical there's anything left offensively in terms of development. I think he'll still have good hustle games against bad defensive teams who don't get back and struggle to protect the rim. I suspect he'll still have games where he doesn't feel any pressure and shoots well. He'll still be useful in certain rotations. That's worth something,

It's just that he might be worth more to a bad team with real defensive woes and that's okay.

[JonFromVA]

Milwaukee lucked into the Nets getting hurt, otherwise they'd still be chasing a title. Miami doesn't have a title and they've shuffled enough pieces that they won't be the same team if they compete for a title again.

Even if true, it still does not indicate it's time to start the luxury tax timer just so we don't have to fill out our bench with different cheaper players.

The question is if we think the different cheaper players will be significantly worse than what we think Okoro will be.

Which players do you think we should look at his off-season if we part ways with Okoro?

These are tough questions we have to face because we're near the tax limit. Trying to replace Okoro on the cheap is both an opportunity and a risk. Ideally you want multiple guys competing for those minutes and maybe even sharing the minutes if they each have different strengths and weaknesses. Ideally we also use those minutes to develop some young players because when we enter the tax we will need a continual influx of cheap players to fill out our bench.

So, Luke Travers? Emoni Bates? Craig Porter Jr? Our draft pick?

We could spread the opportunity around and then after the trade deadline we can consider whether there's a buyout candidate we want for the playoffs.

Or we can always stop going down the path of 3 max players and Allen who's going to want a hefty raise soon too.

And again, I wouldn't assume dumping Niang is even an option given his relationship with Mitchell. LeBron liked Shump, so they had to let Delly go. Just how it goes.

[JonFromVA]

My concern with Okoro is more due to how his contract will age (if we just want to duck the tax, I'm moving Niang). Outside of our core 4, we don't have much in the way of assets. If you pay Okoro at the very the top of his market, you could get stuck with him. Worse yet, you could have to attach even more future draft capital in a trade.

Okoro is useful on a team with Mitchell and Garland given his ability to be a situational POA defender. However, if Garland ends up getting traded for a guy like Ingram, Okoro's minutes and role could get even further reduced. If Daniels is part of that trade, Okoro could struggle to get minutes. Part of me thinks that Okoro should sign the Q.O. if he doesn't get a solid offer in the first week. He's the rare player who might actually benefit from it.

Again, this is assuming that the QO at $12.8m isn't too much money but a contract at $14+m per year is. If the Cavs aren't confident in Okoro's continued development then they shouldn't offer him the QO, they should go find someone on the MLE instead.

The only way Daniels is on the Cavs next year is if the Cavs make a bad trade, but even then, he's a worse shooter than Okoro in terms of both percentage and volume.

There are degrees of both confidence and uncertainty. We'll still have Bird rights if he plays on the Q.O. which allows the Cavs to hedge a bit and one more chance to show his offense is *developed* enough to stay on the court in the playoffs. That's an entirely different commitment than matching a minimum 3-year offer at $14+M.

I'm deeply skeptical there's anything left offensively in terms of development. I think he'll still have good hustle games against bad defensive teams who don't get back and struggle to protect the rim. I suspect he'll still have games where he doesn't feel any pressure and shoots well. He'll still be useful in certain rotations. That's worth something,

It's just that he might be worth more to a bad team with real defensive woes and that's okay.

The key to getting more out of Isaac is to get him cutting on offense not standing in the corner. Given he actually can set a screen, maybe even run some pick & pop with him albeit his length isn't ideal for that role. It was JBB who thought small forwards needed to stand in the corner and shoot 3's. He's finally gone and a new day is dawning.

[jbk1234]

Again, this is assuming that the QO at $12.8m isn't too much money but a contract at $14+m per year is. If the Cavs aren't confident in Okoro's continued development then they shouldn't offer him the QO, they should go find someone on the MLE instead.

The only way Daniels is on the Cavs next year is if the Cavs make a bad trade, but even then, he's a worse shooter than Okoro in terms of both percentage and volume.

There are degrees of both confidence and uncertainty. We'll still have Bird rights if he plays on the Q.O. which allows the Cavs to hedge a bit and one more chance to show his offense is *developed* enough to stay on the court in the playoffs. That's an entirely different commitment than matching a minimum 3-year offer at $14+M.

I'm deeply skeptical there's anything left offensively in terms of development. I think he'll still have good hustle games against bad defensive teams who don't get back and struggle to protect the rim. I suspect he'll still have games where he doesn't feel any pressure and shoots well. He'll still be useful in certain rotations. That's worth something,

It's just that he might be worth more to a bad team with real defensive woes and that's okay.

The key to getting more out of Isaac is to get him cutting on offense not standing in the corner. Given he actually can set a screen, maybe even run some pick & pop with him albeit his length isn't ideal for that role. It was JBB who thought small forwards needed to stand in the corner and shoot 3's. He's finally gone and a new day is dawning.

Sometimes there is no key to getting more out of players. Sometimes the players just are who they are, and trying to force the issue only makes it worse. There's not some long list of Cavs players who blossomed in another setting after we parted ways.

[jbk1234]

The question is if we think the different cheaper players will be significantly worse than what we think Okoro will be.

Which players do you think we should look at his off-season if we part ways with Okoro?

My concern with Okoro is more due to how his contract will age (if we just want to duck the tax, I'm moving Niang). Outside of our core 4, we don't have much in the way of assets. If you pay Okoro at the very the top of his market, you could get stuck with him. Worse yet, you could have to attach even more future draft capital in a trade.

Okoro is useful on a team with Mitchell and Garland given his ability to be a situational POA defender. However, if Garland ends up getting traded for a guy like Ingram, Okoro's minutes and role could get even further reduced. If Daniels is part of that trade, Okoro could struggle to get minutes. Part of me thinks that Okoro should sign the Q.O. if he doesn't get a solid offer in the first week. He's the rare player who might actually benefit from it.

Idk that dumping Niang makes the Cavs dodge the tax line.

It will then be $144 million for guaranteed money. Add in CPJ, Merrill, and Rubio's dead money. You're sitting at $149 million for 10 players.

If you chalk Okoro up to the QO plus the projected salary of pick #20 Cavs are sitting at $164 million needing to fill 2 more roster spots. Which means probably getting nothing worthwhile with whatever tiny part of the MLE that is used.

Plausible but playing the same song and dance of last season as far as keeping spot 15 open, 14 and 13 non-guaranteed plus 12 probably being an unplayable vet min guy. Less than an ideal situation, cross your fingers everyone has a clean bill of health because TJ is your 11th guy in this scenario.

I mean if you're counting on the guys who occupy the 13-15 slots on your roster to make meaningful contributions, you're probably already in trouble. Best case scenario, those spots are reserved for prospects that are fringe NBA players or break-glass-in-case-of-emergency vets.

[JujitsuFlip]

Again, this is assuming that the QO at $12.8m isn't too much money but a contract at $14+m per year is. If the Cavs aren't confident in Okoro's continued development then they shouldn't offer him the QO, they should go find someone on the MLE instead.

The only way Daniels is on the Cavs next year is if the Cavs make a bad trade, but even then, he's a worse shooter than Okoro in terms of both percentage and volume.

There are degrees of both confidence and uncertainty. We'll still have Bird rights if he plays on the Q.O. which allows the Cavs to hedge a bit and one more chance to show his offense is *developed* enough to stay on the court in the playoffs. That's an entirely different commitment than matching a minimum 3-year offer at $14+M.

I'm deeply skeptical there's anything left offensively in terms of development. I think he'll still have good hustle games against bad defensive teams who don't get back and struggle to protect the rim. I suspect he'll still have games where he doesn't feel any pressure and shoots well. He'll still be useful in certain rotations. That's worth something,

It's just that he might be worth more to a bad team with real defensive woes and that's okay.

The key to getting more out of Isaac is to get him cutting on offense not standing in the corner. Given he actually can set a screen, maybe even run some pick & pop with him albeit his length isn't ideal for that role. It was JBB who thought small forwards needed to stand in the corner and shoot 3's. He's finally gone and a new day is dawning.

Okoro pick and pop is just his defender staying home because he's scared to shoot lol

[JujitsuFlip]

My concern with Okoro is more due to how his contract will age (if we just want to duck the tax, I'm moving Niang). Outside of our core 4, we don't have much in the way of assets. If you pay Okoro at the very the top of his market, you could get stuck with him. Worse yet, you could have to attach even more future draft capital in a trade.

Okoro is useful on a team with Mitchell and Garland given his ability to be a situational POA defender. However, if Garland ends up getting traded for a guy like Ingram, Okoro's minutes and role could get even further reduced. If Daniels is part of that trade, Okoro could struggle to get minutes. Part of me thinks that Okoro should sign the Q.O. if he doesn't get a solid offer in the first week. He's the rare player who might actually benefit from it.

Idk that dumping Niang makes the Cavs dodge the tax line.

It will then be $144 million for guaranteed money. Add in CPJ, Merrill, and Rubio's dead money. You're sitting at $149 million for 10 players.

If you chalk Okoro up to the QO plus the projected salary of pick #20 Cavs are sitting at $164 million needing to fill 2 more roster spots. Which means probably getting nothing worthwhile with whatever tiny part of the MLE that is used.

Plausible but playing the same song and dance of last season as far as keeping spot 15 open, 14 and 13 non-guaranteed plus 12 probably being an unplayable vet min guy. Less than an ideal situation, cross your fingers everyone has a clean bill of health because TJ is your 11th guy in this scenario.

I mean if you're counting on the guys who occupy the 13-15 slots on your roster to make meaningful contributions, you're probably already in trouble. Best case scenario, those spots are reserved for prospects that are fringe NBA players or break-glass-in-case-of-emergency vets.

Cavs aren't playing 15 guys per night but dang it sure would be nice to upgrade past about the 7th guy in our rotation.

[toooskies]

There are degrees of both confidence and uncertainty. We'll still have Bird rights if he plays on the Q.O. which allows the Cavs to hedge a bit and one more chance to show his offense is *developed* enough to stay on the court in the playoffs. That's an entirely different commitment than matching a minimum 3-year offer at $14+M.

I'm deeply skeptical there's anything left offensively in terms of development. I think he'll still have good hustle games against bad defensive teams who don't get back and struggle to protect the rim. I suspect he'll still have games where he doesn't feel any pressure and shoots well. He'll still be useful in certain rotations. That's worth something,

It's just that he might be worth more to a bad team with real defensive woes and that's okay.

The key to getting more out of Isaac is to get him cutting on offense not standing in the corner. Given he actually can set a screen, maybe even run some pick & pop with him albeit his length isn't ideal for that role. It was JBB who thought small forwards needed to stand in the corner and shoot 3's. He's finally gone and a new day is dawning.

Sometimes there is no key to getting more out of players. Sometimes the players just are who they are, and trying to force the issue only makes it worse. There's not some long list of Cavs players who blossomed in another setting after we parted ways.

I don't know why you insist a 23 year old has no growth potential left, especially because we saw plenty of growth this season.

[JonFromVA]

There are degrees of both confidence and uncertainty. We'll still have Bird rights if he plays on the Q.O. which allows the Cavs to hedge a bit and one more chance to show his offense is *developed* enough to stay on the court in the playoffs. That's an entirely different commitment than matching a minimum 3-year offer at $14+M.

I'm deeply skeptical there's anything left offensively in terms of development. I think he'll still have good hustle games against bad defensive teams who don't get back and struggle to protect the rim. I suspect he'll still have games where he doesn't feel any pressure and shoots well. He'll still be useful in certain rotations. That's worth something,

It's just that he might be worth more to a bad team with real defensive woes and that's okay.

The key to getting more out of Isaac is to get him cutting on offense not standing in the corner. Given he actually can set a screen, maybe even run some pick & pop with him albeit his length isn't ideal for that role. It was JBB who thought small forwards needed to stand in the corner and shoot 3's. He's finally gone and a new day is dawning.

Sometimes there is no key to getting more out of players. Sometimes the players just are who they are, and trying to force the issue only makes it worse. There's not some long list of Cavs players who blossomed in another setting after we parted ways.

And sometimes you can't reverse years of negligent development, but you never know until you try.

Goes without saying, Lauri was 25 and under a new coach willing to run the stuff they ran for him on the Finnish National team before he broke out. We're still wondering what we've got in Craig Porter Jr as he enters his 2nd season in the league, but consider at 24 he's a year older than Isaac.

[JonFromVA]

There are degrees of both confidence and uncertainty. We'll still have Bird rights if he plays on the Q.O. which allows the Cavs to hedge a bit and one more chance to show his offense is *developed* enough to stay on the court in the playoffs. That's an entirely different commitment than matching a minimum 3-year offer at $14+M.

I'm deeply skeptical there's anything left offensively in terms of development. I think he'll still have good hustle games against bad defensive teams who don't get back and struggle to protect the rim. I suspect he'll still have games where he doesn't feel any pressure and shoots well. He'll still be useful in certain rotations. That's worth something,

It's just that he might be worth more to a bad team with real defensive woes and that's okay.

The key to getting more out of Isaac is to get him cutting on offense not standing in the corner. Given he actually can set a screen, maybe even run some pick & pop with him albeit his length isn't ideal for that role. It was JBB who thought small forwards needed to stand in the corner and shoot 3's. He's finally gone and a new day is dawning.

Okoro pick and pop is just his defender staying home because he's scared to shoot lol

He's not that bad, the defender would need to at least pretend to run at him, but yeah emphasizing Isaac's shooting really shouldn't be our primary goal with him. It's just weird we never seem to run pick & pops. It's just so basic ... like a pick & roll where the big doesn't slip and the guard doesn't snake, or a simple post up in the paint.

[jbk1234]

The key to getting more out of Isaac is to get him cutting on offense not standing in the corner. Given he actually can set a screen, maybe even run some pick & pop with him albeit his length isn't ideal for that role. It was JBB who thought small forwards needed to stand in the corner and shoot 3's. He's finally gone and a new day is dawning.

Sometimes there is no key to getting more out of players. Sometimes the players just are who they are, and trying to force the issue only makes it worse. There's not some long list of Cavs players who blossomed in another setting after we parted ways.

I don't know why you insist a 23 year old has no growth potential left, especially because we saw plenty of growth this season.

I didn't see plenty of growth. I saw an offensively limited player have some good gsmes against bad teams and still really struggle against good teams. Aside from being more efficient, on even fewer shots, his stats are nearly identical to his rookie year.

I'm not insisting Okoro is done developing. I am calculating that significant improvement on the offensive end seems extremely improbable at this point and that calculation should inform what the Cavs are willing to offer him.

[JujitsuFlip]

The key to getting more out of Isaac is to get him cutting on offense not standing in the corner. Given he actually can set a screen, maybe even run some pick & pop with him albeit his length isn't ideal for that role. It was JBB who thought small forwards needed to stand in the corner and shoot 3's. He's finally gone and a new day is dawning.

Okoro pick and pop is just his defender staying home because he's scared to shoot lol

He's not that bad, the defender would need to at least pretend to run at him, but yeah emphasizing Isaac's shooting really shouldn't be our primary goal with him. It's just weird we never seem to run pick & pops. It's just so basic ... like a pick & roll where the big doesn't slip and the guard doesn't snake, or a simple post up in the paint.

I mean who of our bigs can pop?

Maybe Niang but he has no lift and a slow release.

Allen and Mobley for sure aren't. This past season TT as our "3rd big" isn't going to.

You could say Wade but he plays 3 a lot too.

Could be a lot more personnel is the reason and not scheme.

[JonFromVA]

Okoro pick and pop is just his defender staying home because he's scared to shoot lol

He's not that bad, the defender would need to at least pretend to run at him, but yeah emphasizing Isaac's shooting really shouldn't be our primary goal with him. It's just weird we never seem to run pick & pops. It's just so basic ... like a pick & roll where the big doesn't slip and the guard doesn't snake, or a simple post up in the paint.

I mean who of our bigs can pop?

Maybe Niang but he has no lift and a slow release.

Allen and Mobley for sure aren't. This past season TT as our "3rd big" isn't going to.

You could say Wade but he plays 3 a lot too.

Could be a lot more personnel is the reason and not scheme.

It's certainly a benefit of running a P&P if you can draw a big away from the rim, but no matter what you blame for why we don't run simple plays like that ... it sure seems like a problem we should be trying to fix.

[JujitsuFlip]

He's not that bad, the defender would need to at least pretend to run at him, but yeah emphasizing Isaac's shooting really shouldn't be our primary goal with him. It's just weird we never seem to run pick & pops. It's just so basic ... like a pick & roll where the big doesn't slip and the guard doesn't snake, or a simple post up in the paint.

I mean who of our bigs can pop?

Maybe Niang but he has no lift and a slow release.

Allen and Mobley for sure aren't. This past season TT as our "3rd big" isn't going to.

You could say Wade but he plays 3 a lot too.

Could be a lot more personnel is the reason and not scheme.

It's certainly a benefit of running a P&P if you can draw a big away from the rim, but no matter what you blame for why we don't run simple plays like that ... it sure seems like a problem we should be trying to fix.

Splitting up Allen and Mobley (one off the bench) is a no brainer to me. They will obviously still have some overlap but that right there opens up the offense, as we saw when one of them was hurt last season.

We'll see though, most the coaching candidates they're linked to are offensive minded. Then again, so were Blatt and Beilein. What ended up happening is their defensive minded associate head coahces took over. So if we hire an associate head coach who is defensive minded i guess we know the pattern shows he will be the head coach in short order.

[JonFromVA]

I mean who of our bigs can pop?

Maybe Niang but he has no lift and a slow release.

Allen and Mobley for sure aren't. This past season TT as our "3rd big" isn't going to.

You could say Wade but he plays 3 a lot too.

Could be a lot more personnel is the reason and not scheme.

It's certainly a benefit of running a P&P if you can draw a big away from the rim, but no matter what you blame for why we don't run simple plays like that ... it sure seems like a problem we should be trying to fix.

Splitting up Allen and Mobley (one off the bench) is a no brainer to me. They will obviously still have some overlap but that right there opens up the offense, as we saw when one of them was hurt last season.

We'll see though, most the coaching candidates they're linked to are offensive minded. Then again, so were Blatt and Beilein. What ended up happening is their defensive minded associate head coahces took over. So if we hire an associate head coach who is defensive minded i guess we know the pattern shows he will be the head coach in short order.

We can dream I suppose.

Even when Allen or Mobley were injured, Bickerstaff struggled to play a 4-out lineup.

And we should at least have the personnel on the bench to go 5-out.

And by 4/5 out I don't mean Isaac or Caris, but shooters with enough gravity that their man has to think twice before completely cheating off them to help on drives.

[JujitsuFlip]

It's certainly a benefit of running a P&P if you can draw a big away from the rim, but no matter what you blame for why we don't run simple plays like that ... it sure seems like a problem we should be trying to fix.

Splitting up Allen and Mobley (one off the bench) is a no brainer to me. They will obviously still have some overlap but that right there opens up the offense, as we saw when one of them was hurt last season.

We'll see though, most the coaching candidates they're linked to are offensive minded. Then again, so were Blatt and Beilein. What ended up happening is their defensive minded associate head coahces took over. So if we hire an associate head coach who is defensive minded i guess we know the pattern shows he will be the head coach in short order.

We can dream I suppose.

Even when Allen or Mobley were injured, Bickerstaff struggled to play a 4-out lineup.

And we should at least have the personnel on the bench to go 5-out.

And by 4/5 out I don't mean Isaac or Caris, but shooters with enough gravity that their man has to think twice before completely cheating off them to help on drives.

I would love to play 5 out full time, it is the perfect offense for the modern NBA. So much space. As the Celtics and Nuggets showed, it is next to impossible to defend.

Would be cool if Mobley could be the 5 in those lineups but he currently does not have the gravity to do so.

[jbk1234]

Splitting up Allen and Mobley (one off the bench) is a no brainer to me. They will obviously still have some overlap but that right there opens up the offense, as we saw when one of them was hurt last season.

We'll see though, most the coaching candidates they're linked to are offensive minded. Then again, so were Blatt and Beilein. What ended up happening is their defensive minded associate head coahces took over. So if we hire an associate head coach who is defensive minded i guess we know the pattern shows he will be the head coach in short order.

We can dream I suppose.

Even when Allen or Mobley were injured, Bickerstaff struggled to play a 4-out lineup.

And we should at least have the personnel on the bench to go 5-out.

And by 4/5 out I don't mean Isaac or Caris, but shooters with enough gravity that their man has to think twice before completely cheating off them to help on drives.

I would love to play 5 out full time, it is the perfect offense for the modern NBA. So much space. As the Celtics and Nuggets showed, it is next to impossible to defend.

Would be cool if Mobley could be the 5 in those lineups but he currently does not have the gravity to do so.

I mean the Nuggets lost to a team that started two 7 footers, who in turn lost to a team that rotates two traditional big men. The Clippers have yet to get to a conference finals and they've been running a 5 out offense for half a decade. The Celtics are good because they start two firsts options, two second options, and elite defender who can shoot 3s.

[jbk1234]

Scotto interviewing Fedor.

https://hoopshype.com/lists/cavs-rumors-donovan-mitchell-extension-darius-garland-jarrett-allen-trade-talks/