If they have to trade Kyrie are the Cavs screwed?

[clyde21]

Depends on who they get back, honestly. A trade to the Suns makes a lot of sense, but I'm not sure what they'd be willing to part with. I like Kyrie and think he's a top 15 or player (around that range), but he's not very impactful on his own.

If the Suns offer Eric Bledsoe+Marquise Chriss, for instance, I'd be tempted to pull the trigger, even if I'm not getting full value. One mistake that I think GMs consistently make is they wait too long before trading a player, often deflating their value more and more.

Go the Bill Belichik route. I'd rather trade a player a year too early than a year too late.

[bondom34]

How is losing your second best player the best thing that can happen to them? Especially when you take into account Lebrons situation it seems like one of the worst things that can happen to them. They aren't going to get much when trading Kyrie just look at at what the Pacers and Bulls got for much better players. What is there to keep Lebron in Cleveland now? It seems like this is the beginning of the end for the Cavs.

Love is better than Irving and Kyrie hasn't really shown he's able to win anything without Lebron. He's not good enough to be a guy who makes a team "screwed" if they lose him. I'd take the Cavs with Bledsoe and an extra player over the current Cavs.

Love hasn't shown he could win without Lebron either and when it comes to the Playoffs Kyrie has been much better than Love and then when you take age into account it's no surprise the Cavs where looking to get rid of Love and not Kyrie. It's also telling that teams werent willing to give up anything of value for Love.

Also what makes everyone think the Cavs can get Bledsoe who is less efficient and can't spread the floor like Kyrie who is a much better 3 point shooter. Suns already have their small guard ISO scorer in Booker it would make no sense to trade for Kyrie.

Love could at least get a bad team to 40 wins in a tough conference and has always had better advanced numbers. Kyrie can't defend an old man and Bledsoe is about as good as Irving when healthy. He's a massively better defender and distributor and to this point we don't have a hint that Kyrie does anything well other than score which the Cavs have plenty of.

As for the Suns Booker isn't a PG and Knight stinks and they could do a 3 team trade.

[Bruh Man]

No way are they screwed. This is almost the best thing that could've happened to them. It's just too bad the cavs didn't have this info sooner.

How is losing your second best player the best thing that can happen to them? Especially when you take into account Lebrons situation it seems like one of the worst things that can happen to them. They aren't going to get much when trading Kyrie just look at at what the Pacers and Bulls got for much better players. What is there to keep Lebron in Cleveland now? It seems like this is the beginning of the end for the Cavs.

Bulls and Pacers turned down better deals than what they got to keep their players out of the east.

Kyrie also has more years left on his deal than both of those guys and Cleveland is actually a good team that isn't being held hostage by Kyrie to trade him.

Do you think it's unrealistic that they can get someone like Bledsoe back in a trade?

I think whatever they get back will be a downgrade, especially since teams know Kyrie wants out there will be no reason for them to give up much. Plus the Cavs front office is in shambles right now after firing their GM, teams are going to low ball the Cavs knowing that they don't have much leverage.

[RCM88x]

How is losing your second best player the best thing that can happen to them? Especially when you take into account Lebrons situation it seems like one of the worst things that can happen to them. They aren't going to get much when trading Kyrie just look at at what the Pacers and Bulls got for much better players. What is there to keep Lebron in Cleveland now? It seems like this is the beginning of the end for the Cavs.

Bulls and Pacers turned down better deals than what they got to keep their players out of the east.

Kyrie also has more years left on his deal than both of those guys and Cleveland is actually a good team that isn't being held hostage by Kyrie to trade him.

Do you think it's unrealistic that they can get someone like Bledsoe back in a trade?

I think whatever they get back will be a downgrade, especially since teams know Kyrie wants out there will be no reason for them to give up much. Plus the Cavs front office is in shambles right now after firing their GM, teams are going to low ball the Cavs knowing that they don't have much leverage.

They just hired their GM, what are you reading?

They don't have much leverage? What?

[clyde21]

Depends, Kyrie was pretty awful when playing without lebron, if the Cavs dont get suckered into trading for more old vets, this can work.

Kyrie was a 21 year old averaging 23/4/6 the year before LeBron came back. I wouldn't call that awful, and it certainly isn't enough of a sample size to make a conclusion one way or the other.

[Bruh Man]

Love is better than Irving and Kyrie hasn't really shown he's able to win anything without Lebron. He's not good enough to be a guy who makes a team "screwed" if they lose him. I'd take the Cavs with Bledsoe and an extra player over the current Cavs.

Love hasn't shown he could win without Lebron either and when it comes to the Playoffs Kyrie has been much better than Love and then when you take age into account it's no surprise the Cavs where looking to get rid of Love and not Kyrie. It's also telling that teams werent willing to give up anything of value for Love.

Also what makes everyone think the Cavs can get Bledsoe who is less efficient and can't spread the floor like Kyrie who is a much better 3 point shooter. Suns already have their small guard ISO scorer in Booker it would make no sense to trade for Kyrie.

Love could at least get a bad team to 40 wins in a tough conference and has always had better advanced numbers. Kyrie can't defend an old man and Bledsoe is about as good as Irving when healthy. He's a massively better defender and distributor and to this point we don't have a hint that Kyrie does anything well other than score which the Cavs have plenty of.

As for the Suns Booker isn't a PG and Knight stinks and they could do a 3 team trade.

That's not saying much when he leads his team to 7 more wins than Kyrie did when Love had a better team and was 5 years older with more NBA experience. Since then Kyrie has gotten better while Love has declined.

As for the Suns Kyrie is just not a great fit, Booker isn't a pg but he's an undersized SG who can't defend, why would they trade for Kyrie if like you said he can't defend either? Doesn't make sense for The Suns.

[Baski]

If I'm building around LeBron in an ideal world, I don't want a guy whose main attribute is his iso game. They made it work, but I think LeBron could work even better with other types of players.

I don't know what they'll do. First guy who comes to my mind - because the big names are a no-go, is Middleton. In theory it works because the Bucks aren't really using a point guard now, and Giannis to me really doesn't look like a serious half court floor general. But Giannis only took the next step when they handed him the offense, so I don't know if I'd want to throw Kyrie into that chemistry.

Completely agree. Been saying it for a while now. I have never understood this "he's the perfect fit next to LeBron" idea that gets thrown around here all the time. There is a good number of players, some of whom are worse overall players than Irving, who could make the Cavs better than they are now as starting the starting PG.

[Bruh Man]

Bulls and Pacers turned down better deals than what they got to keep their players out of the east.

Kyrie also has more years left on his deal than both of those guys and Cleveland is actually a good team that isn't being held hostage by Kyrie to trade him.

Do you think it's unrealistic that they can get someone like Bledsoe back in a trade?

I think whatever they get back will be a downgrade, especially since teams know Kyrie wants out there will be no reason for them to give up much. Plus the Cavs front office is in shambles right now after firing their GM, teams are going to low ball the Cavs knowing that they don't have much leverage.

They just hired their GM, what are you reading?

They don't have much leverage? What?

Read on Twitter

Lebron has lost trust in the front office and it seems Kyrie has too, they hired a GM who now has to deal with both Kyrie and Lebron wanting out. Sorry to say it but it's not looking good for Cleveland.

[clyde21]

How about something like Kyrie Irving and Iman Shumpert to the Pistons for Andre Drummond and Ish Smith. Works financially. The Cavs get a low maintenance PG in return and a stud rebounder/inside scorer in Drummond.

Ish Smith/Jose Calderon
J.R. Smith/Kyle Korver
LeBron James/Cedi Osman
Kevin Love/Jeff Green
Andre Drummond/Tristan Thompson

Do they get better?

[bondom34]

Love hasn't shown he could win without Lebron either and when it comes to the Playoffs Kyrie has been much better than Love and then when you take age into account it's no surprise the Cavs where looking to get rid of Love and not Kyrie. It's also telling that teams werent willing to give up anything of value for Love.

Also what makes everyone think the Cavs can get Bledsoe who is less efficient and can't spread the floor like Kyrie who is a much better 3 point shooter. Suns already have their small guard ISO scorer in Booker it would make no sense to trade for Kyrie.

Love could at least get a bad team to 40 wins in a tough conference and has always had better advanced numbers. Kyrie can't defend an old man and Bledsoe is about as good as Irving when healthy. He's a massively better defender and distributor and to this point we don't have a hint that Kyrie does anything well other than score which the Cavs have plenty of.

As for the Suns Booker isn't a PG and Knight stinks and they could do a 3 team trade.

That's not saying much when he leads his team to 7 more wins than Kyrie did when Love had a better team and was 5 years older with more NBA experience. Since then Kyrie has gotten better while Love has declined.

As for the Suns Kyrie is just not a great fit, Booker isn't a pg but he's an undersized SG who can't defend, why would they trade for Kyrie if like you said he can't defend either? Doesn't make sense for The Suns.

Except Love's numbers were better by pretty much every measure on his own than Kyrie's.

And how is adding talent a bad idea for the Suns? You want talent and his age fits there better.

And again 3 team trades are a thing.

[RCM88x]

I think whatever they get back will be a downgrade, especially since teams know Kyrie wants out there will be no reason for them to give up much. Plus the Cavs front office is in shambles right now after firing their GM, teams are going to low ball the Cavs knowing that they don't have much leverage.

They just hired their GM, what are you reading?

They don't have much leverage? What?

Read on Twitter

Lebron has lost trust in the front office and it seems Kyrie has too, they hired a GM who now has to deal with both Kyrie and Lebron wanting out. Sorry to say it but it's not looking good for Cleveland.

Do you know how long a week is in the NBA?

Considering they kept this secret for over a week is extremely impressive.

But still, I don't see how this screws them over. He doesn't have a no trade clause. He still had two years left on his deal. The Cavs have no reason to trade him.

The only leverage Kyrie has is that the team is slightly worse when he plays poorly.

[Bruh Man]

Love could at least get a bad team to 40 wins in a tough conference and has always had better advanced numbers. Kyrie can't defend an old man and Bledsoe is about as good as Irving when healthy. He's a massively better defender and distributor and to this point we don't have a hint that Kyrie does anything well other than score which the Cavs have plenty of.

As for the Suns Booker isn't a PG and Knight stinks and they could do a 3 team trade.

That's not saying much when he leads his team to 7 more wins than Kyrie did when Love had a better team and was 5 years older with more NBA experience. Since then Kyrie has gotten better while Love has declined.

As for the Suns Kyrie is just not a great fit, Booker isn't a pg but he's an undersized SG who can't defend, why would they trade for Kyrie if like you said he can't defend either? Doesn't make sense for The Suns.

Except Love's numbers were better by pretty much every measure on his own than Kyrie's.

And how is adding talent a bad idea for the Suns? You want talent and his age fits there better.

And again 3 team trades are a thing.

Well I'm not arguing who can carry a team better because neither can. The point is that Love has declined while Irving has gotten better, that is why more teams want Kyrie. Plus he is 5 years younger and has shown to be the better playoff performer.

It's clear that Kyrie's trade value is higher and players around the league seem to want to play with him more than Love given the recent reports.

Even if the Suns trade Bledsoe for Kyrie it would be a lateral move at best for the Cavs, and given his injuries I don't know if the Cavs would want to risk it since they need to put together a contending team for Lebron to stay.

[bondom34]

That's not saying much when he leads his team to 7 more wins than Kyrie did when Love had a better team and was 5 years older with more NBA experience. Since then Kyrie has gotten better while Love has declined.

As for the Suns Kyrie is just not a great fit, Booker isn't a pg but he's an undersized SG who can't defend, why would they trade for Kyrie if like you said he can't defend either? Doesn't make sense for The Suns.

Except Love's numbers were better by pretty much every measure on his own than Kyrie's.

And how is adding talent a bad idea for the Suns? You want talent and his age fits there better.

And again 3 team trades are a thing.

Well I'm not arguing who can carry a team better because neither can. The point is that Love has declined while Irving has gotten better, that is why more teams want Kyrie. Plus he is 5 years younger and has shown to be the better playoff performer.

It's clear that Kyrie's trade value is higher and players around the league seem to want to play with him more than Love given the recent reports.

Even if the Suns trade Bledsoe for Kyrie it would be a lateral move at best for the Cavs, and given his injuries I don't know if the Cavs would want to risk it since they need to put together a contending team for Lebron to stay.

To the first line nobody's valued Kyrie. So we can't say how he's even valued, and Love did carry a team that sucked without him. The Cavs were better w Irving on the bench when Lebron wasn't even there and they sucked.

Your second line is entirely speculation with no basis.

And the third line I'm saying trade for Bledsoe plus additional assets. And Kyrie's injured plenty himself.

[Bruh Man]

Except Love's numbers were better by pretty much every measure on his own than Kyrie's.

And how is adding talent a bad idea for the Suns? You want talent and his age fits there better.

And again 3 team trades are a thing.

Well I'm not arguing who can carry a team better because neither can. The point is that Love has declined while Irving has gotten better, that is why more teams want Kyrie. Plus he is 5 years younger and has shown to be the better playoff performer.

It's clear that Kyrie's trade value is higher and players around the league seem to want to play with him more than Love given the recent reports.

Even if the Suns trade Bledsoe for Kyrie it would be a lateral move at best for the Cavs, and given his injuries I don't know if the Cavs would want to risk it since they need to put together a contending team for Lebron to stay.

To the first line nobody's valued Kyrie. So we can't say how he's even valued, and Love did carry a team that sucked without him. The Cavs were better w Irving on the bench when Lebron wasn't even there and they sucked.

Your second line is entirely speculation with no basis.

And the third line I'm saying trade for Bledsoe plus additional assets. And Kyrie's injured plenty himself.

Usually where there's smoke there's fire, there have been reports for a while now that the Cavs were shopping Love. Didn't seem like many teams were interested.

As for players wanting to play with Kyrie there have been reports already that Butler and Towns are trying to recruit Irving, I obviously don't know what their exact trade value is but I doubt Love could get them more back in a trade than Kyrie. Add the fact that Lebron was apparently "devastated" when he heard the news, I don't like what I'm hearing if I'm a Cavs fan.

[LikeABosh]

No way are they screwed. This is almost the best thing that could've happened to them. It's just too bad the cavs didn't have this info sooner.

How is losing your second best player the best thing that can happen to them? Especially when you take into account Lebrons situation it seems like one of the worst things that can happen to them. They aren't going to get much when trading Kyrie just look at at what the Pacers and Bulls got for much better players. What is there to keep Lebron in Cleveland now? It seems like this is the beginning of the end for the Cavs.

Because Kyrie Irving is overrated and they can get a pretty decent haul for him. Bledsoe/Melo make the Cavs way better

[G35]

Right now there are a lot of sensitive feelings surrounding any topic with "Lebron" "Kyrie" "Cleveland" involved...it is hard to get some basic analysis without somebody's agenda being thrown in.

I will try and answer the question without all the who shot john.

I believe that Lebron plays better with role players surrounding him than stars...I have said that for a while now. In the RS, stars do not matter as much as other factors:

- how motivated the team is in the RS (CLE has not been motivated much in the past couple years)
- coaching
- player movement
- player development

In the RS you could put a variety of non-stars around Lebron and I would not be surprised if they won 60+ games, similarly to those late 2000 Cavaliers teams that "had Mo Williams as the 2nd best player". So if the Cavaliers management play it right they can get some players in the fold that mesh better with Lebron than Kyries skill set.

Now if your goal is to have great seeding/RS record then the Cavs are not screwed at all.

OTOH, if your goal is to win titles based around Lebron's preferred method of playing /skill set then that is an entirely different set of problems since you need stars to beat Golden State. Even if you bring in a top tier player i.e. an All-NBA level player (which is not going to happen) the issue is how does that player fit around Lebron:

- big men/post players are not the ideal fit around Lebron aka Anthony Davis/Cousins would be great if he stays out of the lane and develops a 3pt shot in the corner

- a ball-handler/perimeter player....if you could have your choice of WB, Harden, Wall, Isaiah, Lillard are players that are use to having the ball and shooting from preferred locations on the floor. In the cases of WB/Harden/Lillard/Isaiah they all have systems built around their skill sets....they would likely have to adapt or the CLE coaching staff/Ty Lue would have to become creative and do something incorporate a system.

- Swingman i.e. Paul George, Giannis, Derozan...I thought there would be more but that's about it. This is where the coaching staff would have to decide which positions players are going to defend. Is Lebron still going to want to defend SF's or will he go to the four...it is hard to say because the missing piece is what is Lebron willing to do for the team.

Imo, if they could get Jimmy Butler that would have been good, if they could get Klay Thompson that would be awesome as well. a KAT's might work, maybe a Blake Griffin.

TL;DR Lebron/CLE would be just fine with some average players who fit around Lebron's talent in place of Kyrie, but winning titles would be a dicier proposition.......

[bondom34]

Well I'm not arguing who can carry a team better because neither can. The point is that Love has declined while Irving has gotten better, that is why more teams want Kyrie. Plus he is 5 years younger and has shown to be the better playoff performer.

It's clear that Kyrie's trade value is higher and players around the league seem to want to play with him more than Love given the recent reports.

Even if the Suns trade Bledsoe for Kyrie it would be a lateral move at best for the Cavs, and given his injuries I don't know if the Cavs would want to risk it since they need to put together a contending team for Lebron to stay.

To the first line nobody's valued Kyrie. So we can't say how he's even valued, and Love did carry a team that sucked without him. The Cavs were better w Irving on the bench when Lebron wasn't even there and they sucked.

Your second line is entirely speculation with no basis.

And the third line I'm saying trade for Bledsoe plus additional assets. And Kyrie's injured plenty himself.

Usually where there's smoke there's fire, there have been reports for a while now that the Cavs were shopping Love. Didn't seem like many teams were interested.

As for players wanting to play with Kyrie there have been reports already that Butler and Towns are trying to recruit Irving, I obviously don't know what their exact trade value is but I doubt Love could get them more back in a trade than Kyrie. Add the fact that Lebron was apparently "devastated" when he heard the news, I don't like what I'm hearing if I'm a Cavs fan.

You seem to think Kyrie's remarkably better than his on court play has actually shown and not replacable. I think there are about 10-15 PGs who make them just as good and they could add one of them plus another player who makes them even better. To this point we don't have any evidence Irving is remotely as good as he's being sold.

Also, if the Wolves get him, Rubio to Irving is likely a downgrade too.

[clyde21]

I don't think Kyrie wants to be 'the man' somewhere else. He's been the second best player on a team that just went to three straight finals, and the guy better than him might be the GOAT.

I just think he's tired of being held hostage by LeBron at this point. Will he go? Will he stay? Will someone get traded to make room for one of LeBron's guys? Just not a good situation to be in, and if I was Kyrie I'd wanna bounce too before **** hits the fan.

[Bruh Man]

To the first line nobody's valued Kyrie. So we can't say how he's even valued, and Love did carry a team that sucked without him. The Cavs were better w Irving on the bench when Lebron wasn't even there and they sucked.

Your second line is entirely speculation with no basis.

And the third line I'm saying trade for Bledsoe plus additional assets. And Kyrie's injured plenty himself.

Usually where there's smoke there's fire, there have been reports for a while now that the Cavs were shopping Love. Didn't seem like many teams were interested.

As for players wanting to play with Kyrie there have been reports already that Butler and Towns are trying to recruit Irving, I obviously don't know what their exact trade value is but I doubt Love could get them more back in a trade than Kyrie. Add the fact that Lebron was apparently "devastated" when he heard the news, I don't like what I'm hearing if I'm a Cavs fan.

You seem to think Kyrie's remarkably better than his on court play has actually shown and not replacable. I think there are about 10-15 PGs who make them just as good and they could add one of them plus another player who makes them even better. To this point we don't have any evidence Irving is remotely as good as he's being sold.

Also, if the Wolves get him, Rubio to Irving is likely a downgrade too.

I do like Kyrie but I don't think I'm overrating him, he seems to be in the top 10 amongst all point guards in a lot of the advanced stat categories. He seems to have more room for improvement as well compared to most of the guys being mentioned.

My thing is that I just don't think they will get enough value to make the team better. Rubio and Bledsoe seem like the Cavs best options for a replacement but to me it seems like it isn't really an improvement especially when you factor in the time it will take them to gel.

I think Kyrie makes the Wolves better, they would be the third best backcourt in the league and Butlers defense would make up for Kyries lack of. Plus he is young just like the rest of their core. I am interested to see how Kyrie does on a different team because it seems like people here think he doesn't add much to the Cavs.

[bondom34]

Usually where there's smoke there's fire, there have been reports for a while now that the Cavs were shopping Love. Didn't seem like many teams were interested.

As for players wanting to play with Kyrie there have been reports already that Butler and Towns are trying to recruit Irving, I obviously don't know what their exact trade value is but I doubt Love could get them more back in a trade than Kyrie. Add the fact that Lebron was apparently "devastated" when he heard the news, I don't like what I'm hearing if I'm a Cavs fan.

You seem to think Kyrie's remarkably better than his on court play has actually shown and not replacable. I think there are about 10-15 PGs who make them just as good and they could add one of them plus another player who makes them even better. To this point we don't have any evidence Irving is remotely as good as he's being sold.

Also, if the Wolves get him, Rubio to Irving is likely a downgrade too.

I do like Kyrie but I don't think I'm overrating him, he seems to be in the top 10 amongst all point guards in a lot of the advanced stat categories. He seems to have more room for improvement as well compared to most of the guys being mentioned.

My thing is that I just don't think they will get enough value to make the team better. Rubio and Bledsoe seem like the Cavs best options for a replacement but to me it seems like it isn't really an improvement especially when you factor in the time it will take them to gel.

I think Kyrie makes the Wolves better, they would be the third best backcourt in the league and Butlers defense would make up for Kyries lack of. Plus he is young just like the rest of their core. I am interested to see how Kyrie does on a different team because it seems like people here think he doesn't add much to the Cavs.

He may be borderline top 10 in PGs. But so are Rubio and Bledsoe then, all that he does well is volume score and on a team with Lebron and Love that's not needed. The reason people don't think he adds much is because he really hasn't and to this point we don't have any real evidence he does on a consistent basis.