Post Mortem #23 - Cleveland Cavaliers

[kodo]

3. I personally think this is the best route to go... you do the same thing as above but with Garland/Mitchell, where Mitchell starts and Garland is his backup, especially if you lose Jerome. Strus is better suited being your starting two guard anyways, and you can still go with Hunter as your starting SF if you wanted. And even if you manage to lose Jerome and Merrill, you are still left with a bench unit of Garland/Okoro/Tyson/Wade. The only issue with this is that Mitchell is simply not a natural PG. And while he may be a talented passer, he can't run an offense like Garland can. But we also can't deny that a Darius Garland coming off the bench would be pretty deadly, and that the Cavaliers are much better defensively when the two small guards don't play together.

This sounds great on paper but you have to remember these are human beings with egos. It's could to be very hard to convince a player of Garland's caliber (and salary) to become a bench player.

I'd assume he'd ask to be traded at that point, and there were already trade rumors in the past.

[Franco]

Most overrated 60+ win team in history. I just knew their offense would collapse under playoff defense.

Not even the most overrated 60+ win team this season. The Celtics were bigger favorites to win it all, more healthy than us (until Tatum went down, but they were already down 2-1 and losing game 4), and still were getting embarassed in their own series.

[Iwasawitness]

3. I personally think this is the best route to go... you do the same thing as above but with Garland/Mitchell, where Mitchell starts and Garland is his backup, especially if you lose Jerome. Strus is better suited being your starting two guard anyways, and you can still go with Hunter as your starting SF if you wanted. And even if you manage to lose Jerome and Merrill, you are still left with a bench unit of Garland/Okoro/Tyson/Wade. The only issue with this is that Mitchell is simply not a natural PG. And while he may be a talented passer, he can't run an offense like Garland can. But we also can't deny that a Darius Garland coming off the bench would be pretty deadly, and that the Cavaliers are much better defensively when the two small guards don't play together.

This sounds great on paper but you have to remember these are human beings with egos. It's could to be very hard to convince a player of Garland's caliber (and salary) to become a bench player.

Garland has never been a big ego person. Same with Allen for that matter. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if either of them said yes to the idea.

[Iwasawitness]

Most overrated 60+ win team in history. I just knew their offense would collapse under playoff defense.

Atlanta Hawks erasure.

People really need to stop making this comparison. They have nothing in common and it’s just being lazy at that point. Once you dig a little deeper and actually compare the two teams, you quickly realize this is a stupid thing to say.

[Jadoogar]

3. I personally think this is the best route to go... you do the same thing as above but with Garland/Mitchell, where Mitchell starts and Garland is his backup, especially if you lose Jerome. Strus is better suited being your starting two guard anyways, and you can still go with Hunter as your starting SF if you wanted. And even if you manage to lose Jerome and Merrill, you are still left with a bench unit of Garland/Okoro/Tyson/Wade. The only issue with this is that Mitchell is simply not a natural PG. And while he may be a talented passer, he can't run an offense like Garland can. But we also can't deny that a Darius Garland coming off the bench would be pretty deadly, and that the Cavaliers are much better defensively when the two small guards don't play together.

This sounds great on paper but you have to remember these are human beings with egos. It's could to be very hard to convince a player of Garland's caliber (and salary) to become a bench player.

Garland has never been a big ego person. Same with Allen for that matter. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if either of them said yes to the idea.

There's been rumours of him wanting to be traded before.
I'm not even talking about ego as a bad thing in this situation. To make the NBA and become an allstar, you need to have some level of ego (or self confidence). Even the personal stuff aside, going to the bench is going to impact his next contract. It's absolutely fair for him to not want to be relegated to the bench.

[bisme37]

Sorry Cavs pals. It sucks when you have an incredible season and then the lasting memory is falling short in the end. But only one team gets to win each year and everyone else goes home mad. Your guys will come back strong.

[funkatron101]

I think if they faced any other team in the East, the Cavs end up in the Finals. The Pacers are a problem and it's going to take the right matchup to defeat them.

Knicks might have the right mix to do it. Thunder might. I think if it ends up being Wolves or Nuggets vs Pacers in the Finals, Pacers take it.

[KnicksGadfly]

I think if they faced any other team in the East, the Cavs end up in the Finals. The Pacers are a problem and it's going to take the right matchup to defeat them.

Knicks might have the right mix to do it. Thunder might. I think if it ends up being Wolves or Nuggets vs Pacers in the Finals, Pacers take it.

Knicks would have wrecked the Cavs. We have Mitch back and he's beat up on Jarrett Allen and Evan Mobley 1 v 2 in a previous postseason...which kind of leads me to my next point.

A few years ago, Bickerstaff led a Cavs team against the Knicks. The Cavs were also huge favorites, with "4 of the 5 best players on the court," but they got wrecked and bullied. Talented team though.

This year, Bickerstaff leads a Detroit team that isn't as talented against a Knicks team that was more talented than several years ago, when they beat the Cavs (although it can be argued that the media anointed Cade as the best player). But this time, Bickerstaff's team plays a lot lot tougher, much tougher than the Cavs have ever played these past few postseasons, including that time when he coached them.

So my conclusion here...it isn't Bickerstaff. Sure, he can improve on his X and Os, but the Cavs have a toughness problem. I've said it over and over again. It's the players. Jarrett Allen disappearing. Donovan Mitchell choking. Stuff like that...how do you fix that?

[JujitsuFlip]

Losing 4 1 is embarrassing. The Cavs simply got out-coached in the series. They got little to no production from their bigs and wings. They need to get better in the coaching department. It shows the COY award is for the regular season not the playoff.

Let me guess, you're a Pistons fan hahaha

[Iwasawitness]

I think if they faced any other team in the East, the Cavs end up in the Finals. The Pacers are a problem and it's going to take the right matchup to defeat them.

Knicks might have the right mix to do it. Thunder might. I think if it ends up being Wolves or Nuggets vs Pacers in the Finals, Pacers take it.

Knicks would have wrecked the Cavs. We have Mitch back and he's beat up on Jarrett Allen and Evan Mobley 1 v 2 in a previous postseason...which kind of leads me to my next point.

A few years ago, Bickerstaff led a Cavs team against the Knicks. The Cavs were also huge favorites, with "4 of the 5 best players on the court," but they got wrecked and bullied. Talented team though.

This year, Bickerstaff leads a Detroit team that isn't as talented against a Knicks team that was more talented than several years ago, when they beat the Cavs (although it can be argued that the media anointed Cade as the best player). But this time, Bickerstaff's team plays a lot lot tougher, much tougher than the Cavs have ever played these past few postseasons.

So my conclusion here...it isn't Bickerstaff. Sure, he can improve on his X and Os, but the Cavs have a toughness problem. I've said it over and over again. It's the players. Jarrett Allen disappearing. Donovan Mitchell choking. Stuff like that...how do you fix that?

Cavs? Huge favorites in 2023? 4 out of the 5 best players? Is this just your attempt to justify this ridiculous post of yours?

[ConSarnit]

The Cavs falling short should not be shocking. If you expected a title run then I don’t know what to tell you. Title/finals teams almost always have a tier 1 superstar (the Cavs do not) or they have an extremely balanced roster (the Cavs do not). Everything would have had to go right for the Cavs to make the finals and it didn’t. They have a lot of good pieces but it’s not going to work with this iteration of the team, at least as a legit contender. You need the absolute highest end talent to win a title or you need an almost perfectly assembled “no holes” team, like ‘24 Celtics where everyone could shoot and defend (and even they had Tatum and Brown, 2 guys roughly in the same tier as Mitchell). Now, I think without injuries they could have gone further but I never had them as a legit title contender.

[Inigo Montoya]

Cavs fans are beginning to experience what Jazz fans went through. Can't remember the last time a Mitchell-led team didn't end their playoffs run in a non-disappointing, non-humuliating way, even when it's not his fault. For whatever reason it keeps happening.

The Cavs and Jazz have both made the same critical mistake with Mitchell, which is playing him next to a PG that has no size. I didn't want Mitchell in the trade, largely because a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt pairing is entirely too small, the same way a Conley or Garland / Mitchell pairing was too small. I get that he's not a great playmaker, but he needs to be next to someone like Dyson Daniels that can handle the ball a little, act as a connector and can defend multiple positions, your starting backcourt can't be 6'1" and 6'2" in this era. He should have been built around in the same way Steph was, with two 3 & D players and the connector playmaker.

It's not a bad idea but personally, I don't think the Cavs lost this series because they had a small back court.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Cavs fans are beginning to experience what Jazz fans went through. Can't remember the last time a Mitchell-led team didn't end their playoffs run in a non-disappointing, non-humuliating way, even when it's not his fault. For whatever reason it keeps happening.

The Cavs and Jazz have both made the same critical mistake with Mitchell, which is playing him next to a PG that has no size. I didn't want Mitchell in the trade, largely because a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt pairing is entirely too small, the same way a Conley or Garland / Mitchell pairing was too small. I get that he's not a great playmaker, but he needs to be next to someone like Dyson Daniels that can handle the ball a little, act as a connector and can defend multiple positions, your starting backcourt can't be 6'1" and 6'2" in this era. He should have been built around in the same way Steph was, with two 3 & D players and the connector playmaker.

It's not a bad idea but personally, I don't think the Cavs lost this series because they had a small back court.

I think it's a major factor in why Mitchell teams fall short, especially when his backcourt mate doesn't have it going. It turns into a cascading effect, the smaller guard isn't scoring well & they're a potential target on defense, whereas if his backcourt mate were bigger you could lean on defense if the offense isn't working.

He should be slotted in at the 1, and that has always been the mistake building around him.

[Wizop]

If my Pacers had won one more regular season game against the Knicks, we'd have been 3rd and your second round opponent would've been different. As the saying goes, there are horses for courses. I submit that there is nothing the Cavs need to fix and they would still be playing had they not drawn the Pacers in the second round. The internet is full of Cavs bashing today, but you'll be back better than ever.

[schnakenpopanz]

It's time to move on from Donovan Mitchell. He is another Booker in my eyes. Good as 2nd or 3rd star, but not the one leading you tothe promised land.

[ITYSL]

Wait why are people blaming Mitchell? Thats just silly.

Only blaming Mitchell is wrong. Realizing that Mitchell deserves part of the blame is correct. He shot poorly for the series, and that's his primary value on the team.

[Hoop Hunter]

The injuries really hurt them. They have a great team and coach. They need to not panic and just run it back. They got beat by really good team, who was healthier.

[Bobbymcgee]

Trade Mobley for Giannis.

[Inigo Montoya]

The Cavs and Jazz have both made the same critical mistake with Mitchell, which is playing him next to a PG that has no size. I didn't want Mitchell in the trade, largely because a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt pairing is entirely too small, the same way a Conley or Garland / Mitchell pairing was too small. I get that he's not a great playmaker, but he needs to be next to someone like Dyson Daniels that can handle the ball a little, act as a connector and can defend multiple positions, your starting backcourt can't be 6'1" and 6'2" in this era. He should have been built around in the same way Steph was, with two 3 & D players and the connector playmaker.

It's not a bad idea but personally, I don't think the Cavs lost this series because they had a small back court.

I think it's a major factor in why Mitchell teams fall short, especially when his backcourt mate doesn't have it going. It turns into a cascading effect, the smaller guard isn't scoring well & they're a potential target on defense, whereas if his backcourt mate were bigger you could lean on defense if the offense isn't working.

He should be slotted in at the 1, and that has always been the mistake building around him.

The Cavs missed a lot of open shots and couldn't hold a lead. They had no problem going up 15+ points and then giving those leads away multiple times. I can't say that it's because they had a small back court or because he wasn't slotted at the 1. He's not really a PG and he needs someone who can run an offense next to him. The problem the Cavs are having now is that some fans want to trade Garland (I don't presume to know what the Cavs need, Cavs fans know much better than I do) but if Garland is moved for a 3&D player and you play Mitchell at the 1, the Cavs are going to lose a lot of shot creation and all the offensive load would be on Mitchell and that's not a good recipe for success.

[Doctor MJ]

In general I'm just very positive about the Cavs year. Pacers might have beaten them anyway, but the Cavs injuries were legit, and Mobley is probably going to keep getting better.

Were I to hear about the Cavs deciding to trade Garland or Allen it wouldn't strike me as a clear mistake depending on what they got back, but just in general there's no particular reason to think that a Mitchell-led team should be seen as "championship or bust", because as great as Mitchell is, he ain't prime LeBron. Unless Mobley gets to the point he's actually an MVP level player, the Cavs are always going to have beat the odds to win a chip.