If they have to trade Kyrie are the Cavs screwed?

[Bruh Man]

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.

Ok to each his own, Rubio and Bledsoe could only dream of having the type of offensive output Kyrie has in the finals and what they add on the defensive end isn't going to be that effective against the Warriors. Rubio's playmaking isn't needed when you have Lebron, and Bledsoe might be an even worse fit with Lebron who plays better with players that can hit the 3 at a good percentage.

[bondom34]

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.

Ok to each his own, Rubio and Bledsoe could only dream of having the type of offensive output Kyrie has in the finals and what they add on the defensive end isn't going to be that effective against the Warriors. Rubio's playmaking isn't needed when you have Lebron, and Bledsoe might be an even worse fit with Lebron who plays better with players that can hit the 3 at a good percentage.

And yet the Cavs offense hasn't been an issue, even without Kyrie. Defense has.

[Trophy13781]

Yes they are. As it stands even with Kyrie, one of the best #2 options in league history, the Cavs have basically a slim to none chance of beating the Warriors since the addition of superstar Kevin Durant made the Warriors probably the greatest team in NBA history. The post-season we just witnessed was further evidence of the Warriors' unprecedented level of dominance and greatness, and given the fact that they have not gotten one bit worse (actually got better I'd say) while the Cavs have not improved in any way at all..... the oddsmakers are correct in massively favoring GSW over everyone else.

Now remove Kyrie from that team, and guaranteed there is no way they get equal value for him. Someone like Butler or George would have been around equal value, but they're all gone. The Cavs become a markedly worse team and don't have any prayer whatsoever at beating the Warriors.

I still favor the Cavs over the Celtics or anyone else in the East but would be shocked if they got anything other than destroyed in the Finals by the Warriors.

[bondom34]

Last one, to hammer it home.

2 years of games, we've got about 4400 minutes of Lebron/Kyrie and 2700 no Kyrie.

http://nbawowy.com/#/quxcq4ichu

With him 117.9 O/107.6 D - 10.3 Net

http://nbawowy.com/hx447lbkco#/hx447lbkco

Without him 113.6 O/103.0 D - 10.6 Net

I guess I don't see the big deal.

[rebirthoftheM]

Last one, to hammer it home.

2 years of games, we've got about 4400 minutes of Lebron/Kyrie and 2700 no Kyrie.

http://nbawowy.com/#/quxcq4ichu

With him 117.9 O/107.6 D - 10.3 Net

http://nbawowy.com/hx447lbkco#/hx447lbkco

Without him 113.6 O/103.0 D - 10.6 Net

I guess I don't see the big deal.

All the negative movement occurs in the defensive department. Kyrie is known as a below average defender, but then again, I am always suspicious of defensive indicators with perimeter players, wings, and especially point guards. Not sure how much I can pin these shifts on their actual play. Offense is another case tho and it appears Kyrie really did help their offense.

Kyrie has the unfortunate circumstance of playing in an era where +/- stuff trumps everything else. Only a few years ago, someone who averaged 25 PPG, on 47% FG/40% 3/58% TS, with 5.8 APG/2.5 TOPG (30% AST/10% TOV) would be celebrated. But alas, he is now destined to the dustbin of history as an iso scorer that is considered to play anti-championship basketball.

Clearly Kyrie has become a much better basketball player than he was in the pre-Lebron years. Will be interesting to see him on a non-Lebron Centric team as a #1, particularly in the area of impact indicators. Will get to see whether LBJ's rep as hurting other stars games also applies to Kyrie, or whether LBJ was indeed masking Kyrie's fatal flaws.

In general, LBJ centric teams +/- stuff are themselves an interesting case study.

[bondom34]

Last one, to hammer it home.

2 years of games, we've got about 4400 minutes of Lebron/Kyrie and 2700 no Kyrie.

http://nbawowy.com/#/quxcq4ichu

With him 117.9 O/107.6 D - 10.3 Net

http://nbawowy.com/hx447lbkco#/hx447lbkco

Without him 113.6 O/103.0 D - 10.6 Net

I guess I don't see the big deal.

All the negative movement occurs in the defensive department. Kyrie is known as a below average defender, but then again, I am always suspicious of defensive indicators with perimeter players, wings, and especially point guards. Not sure how much I can pin these shifts on their actual play. Offense is another case tho and it appears Kyrie really did help their offense.

Kyrie has the unfortunate circumstance of playing in an era where +/- stuff trumps everything else. Only a few years ago, someone who averaged 25 PPG, on 47% FG/40% 3/58% TS, with 5.8 APG/2.5 TOPG (30% AST/10% TOV) would be celebrated. But alas, he is now destined to the dustbin of history as an iso scorer that is considered to play anti-championship basketball.

Clearly Kyrie has become a much better basketball player than he was in the pre-Lebron years. Will be interesting to see him on a non-Lebron Centric team as a #1, particularly in the area of impact indicators. Will get to see whether LBJ's rep as hurting other stars games also applies to Kyrie, or whether LBJ was indeed masking Kyrie's fatal flaws.

In general, LBJ centric teams +/- stuff are themselves an interesting case study.

I mean, he's barely a plus offensively too. So find a decently average starter and there you are.

He's the exact same he's always been.

[BasketballFan7]

Last one, to hammer it home.

2 years of games, we've got about 4400 minutes of Lebron/Kyrie and 2700 no Kyrie.

http://nbawowy.com/#/quxcq4ichu

With him 117.9 O/107.6 D - 10.3 Net

http://nbawowy.com/hx447lbkco#/hx447lbkco

Without him 113.6 O/103.0 D - 10.6 Net

I guess I don't see the big deal.

All the negative movement occurs in the defensive department. Kyrie is known as a below average defender, but then again, I am always suspicious of defensive indicators with perimeter players, wings, and especially point guards. Not sure how much I can pin these shifts on their actual play. Offense is another case tho and it appears Kyrie really did help their offense.

Kyrie has the unfortunate circumstance of playing in an era where +/- stuff trumps everything else. Only a few years ago, someone who averaged 25 PPG, on 47% FG/40% 3/58% TS, with 5.8 APG/2.5 TOPG (30% AST/10% TOV) would be celebrated. But alas, he is now destined to the dustbin of history as an iso scorer that is considered to play anti-championship basketball.

Clearly Kyrie has become a much better basketball player than he was in the pre-Lebron years. Will be interesting to see him on a non-Lebron Centric team as a #1, particularly in the area of impact indicators. Will get to see whether LBJ's rep as hurting other stars games also applies to Kyrie, or whether LBJ was indeed masking Kyrie's fatal flaws.

In general, LBJ centric teams +/- stuff are themselves an interesting case study.

How?

[Bruh Man]

Last one, to hammer it home.

2 years of games, we've got about 4400 minutes of Lebron/Kyrie and 2700 no Kyrie.

http://nbawowy.com/#/quxcq4ichu

With him 117.9 O/107.6 D - 10.3 Net

http://nbawowy.com/hx447lbkco#/hx447lbkco

Without him 113.6 O/103.0 D - 10.6 Net

I guess I don't see the big deal.

All the negative movement occurs in the defensive department. Kyrie is known as a below average defender, but then again, I am always suspicious of defensive indicators with perimeter players, wings, and especially point guards. Not sure how much I can pin these shifts on their actual play. Offense is another case tho and it appears Kyrie really did help their offense.

Kyrie has the unfortunate circumstance of playing in an era where +/- stuff trumps everything else. Only a few years ago, someone who averaged 25 PPG, on 47% FG/40% 3/58% TS, with 5.8 APG/2.5 TOPG (30% AST/10% TOV) would be celebrated. But alas, he is now destined to the dustbin of history as an iso scorer that is considered to play anti-championship basketball.

Clearly Kyrie has become a much better basketball player than he was in the pre-Lebron years. Will be interesting to see him on a non-Lebron Centric team as a #1, particularly in the area of impact indicators. Will get to see whether LBJ's rep as hurting other stars games also applies to Kyrie, or whether LBJ was indeed masking Kyrie's fatal flaws.

In general, LBJ centric teams +/- stuff are themselves an interesting case study.

How?

Probably by working on his game in the offseason

On a serious note he put up his most ppg and had his most efficient season this last year.

[rebirthoftheM]

How?

He is a much better scorer now+ his AST/TO stuff has gotten better too. I also don't think pre-Lebron Kyrie was capable of having the final outputs that current Kyrie has been able to. He clearly has grown as a player, even if folks are not happy with the progression of it.

And if you like the impact stuff like RAPM, he rates out much better, particularly on the offensive end. And the more box score driven stuff like RPM (which seems to underrate younger players tho*) pegs him much higher.

I don't know how one can doubt this. You can pin it on LBJ, or whoever but Kyrie is currently more productive than he was in the pre-LB days. Which is natural, because he was a young kid back in 2014.

[BasketballFan7]

How?

He is a much better scorer now+ his AST/TO stuff has gotten better too. I also don't think pre-Lebron Kyrie was capable of having the final outputs that current Kyrie has been able to. He clearly has grown as a player, even if folks are not happy with the progression of it.

And if you like the impact stuff like RAPM, he rates out much better, particularly on the offensive end. And the more box score driven stuff like RPM (which seems to underrate younger players tho*) pegs him much higher.

I don't know how one can doubt this. You can pin it on LBJ, or whoever but Kyrie is currently more productive than he was in the pre-LB days. Which is natural, because he was a young kid back in 2014.

Hm, 2014? I think it makes more sense to compare 2017 to 2015, as the 2014 ---> 2015 jump clearly seems to be the result of an improved roster.

I think it's a stretch to call him a much better scorer. His scoring efficiency is identical to 2015. His PER is up (increased usage) and his WS48 is down. BPM/VORP, too, although it's all related there. I'm not sure how 2015 compares to 2017 on RPM or RAPM. He was better defensively in 2015. I've watched a lot of the Cavaliers' games. He is still generally terrible at orchestrating the pick and roll and gets the same tunnel vision.

[rebirthoftheM]

How?

He is a much better scorer now+ his AST/TO stuff has gotten better too. I also don't think pre-Lebron Kyrie was capable of having the final outputs that current Kyrie has been able to. He clearly has grown as a player, even if folks are not happy with the progression of it.

And if you like the impact stuff like RAPM, he rates out much better, particularly on the offensive end. And the more box score driven stuff like RPM (which seems to underrate younger players tho*) pegs him much higher.

I don't know how one can doubt this. You can pin it on LBJ, or whoever but Kyrie is currently more productive than he was in the pre-LB days. Which is natural, because he was a young kid back in 2014.

Hm, 2014? I think it makes more sense to compare 2017 to 2015, as the 2014 ---> 2015 jump clearly seems to be the result of an improved roster.

I think it's a stretch to call him a much better scorer. His scoring efficiency is identical to 2015. His PER is up (increased usage) and his WS48 is down. BPM/VORP, too, although it's all related there. I'm not sure how 2015 compares to 2017 on RPM or RAPM. He was better defensively in 2015. I've watched a lot of the Cavaliers' games. He is still generally terrible at orchestrating the pick and roll and gets the same tunnel vision.

I was speaking about pre-Lebron James era in the OP. 2015 therefore doesn't count!

[NO-KG-AI]

I would think so, it's doubtful they can get a return equal to how good Kyrie actually is, and he's a damn good fit with LeBron for my money.