If the Cavs get a top 5 pick...

mup · Post #1 » by **mup** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 12:48 pm

Is that the end of Mike Brown and Chris Grant?

The Cavs look horrible, have the 6th worst record in the NBA, but are 1 game away from having the 3rd worst record. It may be time to realize that the Cavs may end up in the lottery race after all.

If they do, they really can't afford to mess it up this time. They have to get it right.

Dan Gilbert is impulsive and impatient but he's not stupid. He reads. He talks to folks. He's not an oblivious owner locked in an ivory tower--- he knows that Grant's draft picks have been questioned. He sees that Brown's system is not working. Granted, there are a lot of things happening behind the scenes, but he knows more than we do that he can't be the guy pulling the Darko out of this year's magic draft hat.

So if the Cavs end up in a top 5 position, is it too important to trust the draft to Grant and the new rookie's development to Brown? I say yes--- if we end up picking top 5, I want to clean management house and give it a fresh start (again).

What say you?

KuruptedCav · Post #2 » by **KuruptedCav** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:58 pm

Lets keep in mind that Grant didn't draft
The most talented player in the draft Mr. Derrick Williams instead of the injury prone and unproven Kyrie Irving.
The most NBA ready, guaranteed not to bust player in the draft, Thomas Robinson instead of Waiters
The extremely verisitle, next Andrei Kirilenko Mr. Jan Vesely to fill the SF void left by LBJ, instead of Tristan Thompson.
Or Fab Melo instead of Zeller as many wanted...

Grass is always greener.

CLEbland · Post #3 » by **CLEbland** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:16 pm

Sigh. I'd probably be on board for getting rid of Grant, but Mike Brown I want to stick around for a few seasons at least. We clearly have personnel issues. But the fit of the Jack signing, pointless Earl Clark signing, and Anthony Bennett pick/fit are issues Grant likely lead the charge on and where we could have picked up pieces that actually helped some. I'm still happy with the Bynum signing with the way the contract was done. Let's see what this trade deadline brings. Time to consolidate some of these future picks if possible.

Niko23 · Post #4 » by **Niko23** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:28 pm

I think the next fall guy will be Chris Grant......

kiwibrindle · Post #5 » by **kiwibrindle** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:58 pm

Please please please Dan get rid of both these guys one because he has no system or process to select players and the second because we can't inbound the ball.

Does anyone think that San Antonio just gets lucky every year or maybe they have a process in place for talent evaluation and just drawng from my expence in life here but I have seen 4th grade cyo games that can get the ball in.

If Chud can get fired with no good picks, and no key players then the cavs can admit they made mistakes and pay these bums off too

BossHoggin · Post #6 » by **BossHoggin** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 4:14 pm

The Browns are a horribly run organization, I wouldn't compare them to a team that is full of young players still growing.

This team wasn't going to win as much as most of you thought. You don't go from worst record to playoff warrior overnight.

kiwibrindle · Post #7 » by **kiwibrindle** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:05 pm

I think you have your tenses screwed up. You said the Browns are ...., when you ment Brown is.....

I know its hard to keep crap from craps.

Post #8 » by **jbk1234** » Tue Dec 31, 2013 11:33 pm

Kyrie is getting an MRI on his knee tomorrow. If it's hurt, we're getting a top-five pick.

tidho · Post #9 » by **tidho** » Wed Jan 1, 2014 8:45 pm

Niko23 wrote:I think the next fall guy will be Chris Grant......

For sure.

As for the top 5 pick, there are five guys in this draft that grade out higher than anyone in last years draft. Whether we would take one of them is another question.

Post #10 » by **B Mac** » Wed Jan 1, 2014 8:51 pm

Well, I made it all the way to Jan 1st this year before I started looking at mock drafts and really caring about the college guys. The good news about this draft is that all of the top prospects fit position's of need.

mup · Post #11 » by **mup** » Thu Jan 2, 2014 2:01 am

KuruptedCav wrote:Lets keep in mind that Grant didn't draft
The most talented player in the draft Mr. Derrick Williams instead of the injury prone and unproven Kyrie Irving.
The most NBA ready, guaranteed not to bust player in the draft, Thomas Robinson instead of Waiters
The extremely verisitle, next Andrei Kirilenko Mr. Jan Vesely to fill the SF void left by LBJ, instead of Tristan Thompson.
Or Fab Melo instead of Zeller as many wanted...

Grass is always greener.

If your point is that he could have done worse, then ok, sure.

But lets be real here... he could have done better. Look, I'm as big a cavs homer as there is, and I'll defend Dion Waiters and even Anthony Bennett, but at best they are serviceable players. Getting "serviceable" players at those spots might be justifiable if they were the obvious selections, but they were both "I'm smarter than you picks" that alienated a good portion of the fanbase and havent worked out. I'll allow that Waiters may be even better than serviceable at some point but he's not projecting to be an all star.

The more important point, however, is that it seems there were better players available who are projecting as all stars. Dan is a perfectionist and my guess is that he's not happy that the running narrative is that we failed to make the most of those picks. I don't think Chris Grant is nearly as bad as some people believe, but he's clearly not the best out there. Does Dan stand for someone who is not the best?

We can defend Grant all we want but the proof is in the pudding. Just between us hens here, I think it's safe to assume there's been more than a few uncomfortable Tuesday morning status calls for Mr. Grant over the last two years. If fans are asking why we didn't draft Drummond or Barnes, then you don't think Dan is asking the same thing? Is Grant convincing him that we really did get the best player available at each of those spots?

The question then is whether Dan allows Grant another chance to add to the existing narrative that we left the best players on the table in 2 (and arguably 3) drafts already? My sense is that Dan won't allow it but I don't know--- that's why I asked the question.

Post #12 » by **B Mac** » Thu Jan 2, 2014 2:24 am

Well known Maximus on RealCavsFans just posted this gem in regards to Grant and Brown:

No GM hits on every pick. Grant has done pretty well. His picks are still all 22 years old or younger. He's had no busts yet...jury is out on Bennett..but that was a historically bad draft. We have a max slot available this summer and we have 8 picks in the next 2 drafts.
Yeah, he probably missed on Drummond, but so did a lot of other GM's and "experts".
He has acquired assets and still deserves another summer to get the missing pieces to become a contender.

Gilbert is responsible for Bynum, so he owns the problems that caused. Grant was the one that at least got creative with the contract, which turned a bad fit into something of potential value. That's all i'm saying about that...

As far as Brown goes, it's only 31 games in. The best player on the planet says he wouldn't be the player he is today if it wasn't for MB. Give MB a SF, which he doesn't have, give him some time without Bynum who was a cancer, and we'll be fine. We are the youngest team in the league, we were trying to fit a square peg into a round hole(Bynum), we are installing new systems with new coaches...it takes time. It's a transition year. For those that want any chance at re-signing Lebron, MB is a positive factor for his next "decision".

kiwibrindle · Post #13 » by **kiwibrindle** » Thu Jan 2, 2014 2:36 pm

[quote="B Mac"]Well, I made it all the way to Jan 1st this year before I started looking at mock drafts and really caring about the college guys. The good news about this draft is that all of the top prospects fit position's of need.[/quote]

Bmac. Look at it this way. I know its Jan 2nd, but Mike Brown had you ahead of schedule. He's the best at making others plan for the future. You know, he gives people ideas like taking your talents to South Beach, taking on retread coaches like Mike Dantoine etc. No wonder we have him back he's the best.

mup · Post #14 » by **mup** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 9:21 am

B Mac wrote:Well known Maximus on RealCavsFans just posted this gem in regards to Grant and Brown:

No GM hits on every pick. Grant has done pretty well. His picks are still all 22 years old or younger. He's had no busts yet...jury is out on Bennett..but that was a historically bad draft. We have a max slot available this summer and we have 8 picks in the next 2 drafts.
Yeah, he probably missed on Drummond, but so did a lot of other GM's and "experts".
He has acquired assets and still deserves another summer to get the missing pieces to become a contender.

Gilbert is responsible for Bynum, so he owns the problems that caused. Grant was the one that at least got creative with the contract, which turned a bad fit into something of potential value. That's all i'm saying about that...

As far as Brown goes, it's only 31 games in. The best player on the planet says he wouldn't be the player he is today if it wasn't for MB. Give MB a SF, which he doesn't have, give him some time without Bynum who was a cancer, and we'll be fine. We are the youngest team in the league, we were trying to fit a square peg into a round hole(Bynum), we are installing new systems with new coaches...it takes time. It's a transition year. For those that want any chance at re-signing Lebron, MB is a positive factor for his next "decision".

I think our standard needs to be higher than "well, they're not busts... yet."

Unlike in baseball, trades are controlled in the NBA, so you usually know what you're getting. So, gms make their money and lose their jobs in the draft.

Because of the impact of individual players on the game, the worst thing an NBA gm can do is draft a guy who turns out to be just a guy (not even a bust) and then have a team take an all-star behind him. It doesn't matter that the guy you took was ok or even meets our own lofty expectations as Cavs fans of "not a bust."

It is absolutely imperative that the gm get the best player available when he picks. If the player you took was the consensus pick, you will likely get a pass (e.g., nobody busts on Portland for Greg Oden), but if you're reaching and missing... hopefully the resume is in order. Many gms might not survive even one such gaffe, but more than once is almost always a death sentence... except in Cleveland. Grant has missed twice without question and arguably has missed 3 times (I don't agree Thompson was a miss... I think he's better than the players taken after him).

Niko23 · Post #15 » by **Niko23** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 5:05 pm

So Waiters was a miss?

KuruptedCav · Post #16 » by **KuruptedCav** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 5:57 pm

mup wrote:
B Mac wrote:Well known Maximus on RealCavsFans just posted this gem in regards to Grant and Brown:

No GM hits on every pick. Grant has done pretty well. His picks are still all 22 years old or younger. He's had no busts yet...jury is out on Bennett..but that was a historically bad draft. We have a max slot available this summer and we have 8 picks in the next 2 drafts.
Yeah, he probably missed on Drummond, but so did a lot of other GM's and "experts".
He has acquired assets and still deserves another summer to get the missing pieces to become a contender.

Gilbert is responsible for Bynum, so he owns the problems that caused. Grant was the one that at least got creative with the contract, which turned a bad fit into something of potential value. That's all i'm saying about that...

As far as Brown goes, it's only 31 games in. The best player on the planet says he wouldn't be the player he is today if it wasn't for MB. Give MB a SF, which he doesn't have, give him some time without Bynum who was a cancer, and we'll be fine. We are the youngest team in the league, we were trying to fit a square peg into a round hole(Bynum), we are installing new systems with new coaches...it takes time. It's a transition year. For those that want any chance at re-signing Lebron, MB is a positive factor for his next "decision".
I think our standard needs to be higher than "well, they're not busts... yet."

Unlike in baseball, trades are controlled in the NBA, so you usually know what you're getting. So, gms make their money and lose their jobs in the draft.

Because of the impact of individual players on the game, the worst thing an NBA gm can do is draft a guy who turns out to be just a guy (not even a bust) and then have a team take an all-star behind him. It doesn't matter that the guy you took was ok or even meets our own lofty expectations as Cavs fans of "not a bust."

It is absolutely imperative that the gm get the best player available when he picks. If the player you took was the consensus pick, you will likely get a pass (e.g., nobody busts on Portland for Greg Oden), but if you're reaching and missing... hopefully the resume is in order. Many gms might not survive even one such gaffe, but more than once is almost always a death sentence... except in Cleveland. Grant has missed twice without question and arguably has missed 3 times (I don't agree Thompson was a miss... I think he's better than the players taken after him).

Only Drummond and Lilliard were drafted after Waiters and turned out arguably better. And the PG didn't fit w/ Kyrie.

gflem · Post #17 » by **gflem** » Sat Jan 4, 2014 6:31 pm

For all the "fire Grant" posters, I have a question. First, I am not in the mode of he is doing a great job, I have issues with his picks as well, but who is available that has the track record to suggest that he would be a better GM? I am not trying to be difficult, and I wouldn't lose any sleep if Grant was let go, I just don't know who else is out there now.

mup · Post #18 » by **mup** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 8:42 am

Niko23 wrote:So Waiters was a miss?

That depends. Is there any single player taken in the draft after Waiters for whom you would trade him straight up right now? If the answer is yes (and for me, it is), that means it's a miss.

It doesn't mean he's a bad player. It just means we didn't maximize the pick and that's not good for a gm.

mup · Post #19 » by **mup** » Sun Jan 5, 2014 8:43 am

gflem wrote:For all the "fire Grant" posters, I have a question. First, I am not in the mode of he is doing a great job, I have issues with his picks as well, but who is available that has the track record to suggest that he would be a better GM? I am not trying to be difficult, and I wouldn't lose any sleep if Grant was let go, I just don't know who else is out there now.

Having started this discussion, I should have an answer to this, but I'm embarrassed to say I don't know.

BossHoggin · Post #20 » by **BossHoggin** » Mon Jan 6, 2014 4:40 am

mup wrote:
Niko23 wrote:So Waiters was a miss?
That depends. Is there any single player taken in the draft after Waiters for whom you would trade him straight up right now? If the answer is yes (and for me, it is), that means it's a miss.

It doesn't mean he's a bad player. It just means we didn't maximize the pick and that's not good for a gm.

So Denver missed in 2003 because they would have traded Melo for Wade? Missing is taking Thabeet.