The Consiglieri wrote:Let's forget what we think, and go with what the scouts think:
Irving > Wall
Scouts like Irving better, pretty much everyone except some Wiz fans. You and I think Wall has a higher ceiling because he's pass first, but Irving is definitely better right now.
What scouts though? When would they have looked at them after the draft? Wall was a more highly thought of prospect than Kyrie. Wall was the transcendent talent, the next DRose. Kyrie was the clear #1, but it was a lukewarm endorsement. The question people kept asking about him was, when is Kyrie Irving ever going to make an AS game in a league with Derrick Rose, Rajon Rondo, Tony Parker, Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Russell Westbrook, and
John Wall.
People underestimated him certainly. But the logic behind that sentiment is still valid today. Kyrie is smaller than Wall and not the transcendent athlete Wall is. His "ceiling" is lower.
But I don't think you have to appeal to abstract upside to argue for Wall any more. We got a taste of what Wall's ceiling actually looks like this year. Wall reached a level of play in March and April that Kyrie has never reached before. Wall was the second best player in the league in March! He has legit top five player at any position potential if he gives you a whole season of March and April.
Kyrie is a considerably better shooter than Wall and a better all around scorer--though I think Wall is a better slasher. Wall is a much, much better defender than Kyrie and always will be. Kyrie is a horrible defender, one of the worst in the league and has a long way to go just to be adequate. John is already getting pretty good, and he has the potential to be one of the best defenders at the PG position in the league. And John is a better passer and facilitator than him too. He's bigger and stronger and longer and faster and a better leaper. I think he's more durable than Kyrie too. Even with the serious knee injury, John only missed ten more games than Kyrie this season. Kyrie gets nicked up.
I think John's more capable of dragging a team to wins on his back than Kyrie because he's a better all around player. Kyrie's teams haven't been winning with or without him. When John came back from injury, he got a team that was 5-28 and on pace to be one of the worst teams in NBA history to play .500+ ball until they started tanking at the end of the season and sat out five of their top six players.
I think Kyrie's obvious weaknesses get glossed over by the NBA world. I think the cool commercials and the spectacular performance in the 3 PT competition and some of the highlights and the fact that he is in Cleveland and thriving in LeBron's shadow created an atmosphere where the league was overly eager to embrace him. But if Cleveland doesn't start winning this year, the shine is going to wear off of him and people will be nearly as critical of him as they were of Wall.
Waiters < Beal
Beal is better right now, but it's fairly close.
I don't really think it's going to be that close in the end. I think their numbers were close this year, but not their level of play. Like Wall, I think Beal is a significantly better all around player than Waiters, a much better defender, and a higher IQ offensive player. And I think he's a better fit with Wall than Waiters is with Kyrie. Waiters is going to have to play on the second line a lot because both he and Kyrie are ball dominant. Beal is the ying to John's yang. There is some serious synergy there.
Karasev =< Porter
Scouts like Porter better but not by as much as you may think, there was and is a ton of love for Karasev, and a view that Karasev has more long term upside in some circles. Being reasonable though, Porter deserves the slight nod.
Slight nod? I know you're not really a Porter man, but he's a lot better than Karasev. If a GM called another GM up and wanted to trade Karasev for Porter, he'd get laughed at and hung up on. Porter had a chance to go first overall and there is absolutely no way Karasev could have. Karasev didn't even go in the lottery. I think Waiters and Irving are good enough that there can be a fun debate about them versus Wall and Beal. But there is just no comparison between Porter and Karasev. Karasev is probably not going to be one of the foundation pieces of Cleveland's build. It makes a lot more sense to compare Porter to Bennett. And I think even when you do that, Porter is still a little better than Bennett.
Thompson/Bennett > Nene/Booker/Vesely
Thompson/Bennett easily trump the foundation pieces we have at 4, and probably in the short term as well considering Nene's health and wish to retire during this past season.
Well it depends on how you view Nene's future. I think he has some good years left in him. As of today, he's a better player than Thompson and should be through the next couple of years. And judging from Cleveland's attempt to trade Thompson, I'm not sure he's considered part of the foundation any more.
I actually like Thompson, I think he's an underrated player. But I don't think he's a good fit with Bennett. Bennett is 6'7-6'8 playing PF. Thompson is a 6'8-6'9 PF/C tweener. That front court has size issues and defensive issues.
Speights/Zeller/Varajeo >Seraphin/Okafor expiring
Speights and Varajeo aren't probably long for the Cavs, neither is Okafor long for the Wiz, and so in a Zeller Seraphin match up I go w/the higher rated prospect in Zeller, even though neither are foundation pieces.
Varejao is a really good player, but he's even more unreliable than Oak IMO. His health problems last season were scary. Yeah, I don't think Okafor or Speights or Varejao are long term pieces. But if given the choice, I probably take Okafor over the other two. Zeller is better than Seraphin. But it's kind of meh.
+ the Cavs have '14 Kings first rounder (top 12 protected), '14 Heat's first rounder (top 10 protected), Magic's '14 2nd rounder (likely top 35), and Grizz 2nd rounder (likely 50th-60th).
So essentially Cleveland has at worst, 2 first rounders, and 3 second rounders in the best draft in at least a decade next year, and if the Kings can put together a reasonable season (38 wins), 3 first rounders.
Miami's going to probably pick 29th or 30th, that pick is not a significant team building asset. Neither are the second rounders. Top 12 protection means they probably won't be getting Sacramento's pick this year. And even if they got a pick in the teens, that's a role player, not a star. And I think their own draft pick will end up somewhere in the late lottery. They might even make the playoffs as a late seed though I kind of doubt it. 2014 is loaded with star power at the very top. Three or four obvious franchise caliber talents, maybe three or four more players who can be difference makers. Assuming every one comes out of course, which I wouldn't bet on. It's an unusually large amount of top end talent, but it doesn't help Cleveland land anything other than another good role player if they end up in the late lottery.
But you never know, maybe they fall apart and pick really high again. That's not necessarily something good for this Cleveland construction. Just like it would be really bad for our construction if we fall apart next season. You're going to be talking about a very different core if that happens.
And at any rate, Cleveland's roster is a kindergarten class and that's a
huge problem. They're too young and don't need to be adding four or five rookies every year. They need to get older and they need to start trying to turn quantity into quality. No NBA team can successfully develop more than a couple young players at once. You can't have four or five guys on the court together who are getting on the job training. If you do, no one is going to be able to do their job well and your team is going to be horrible and lose a ton of games. When your team keeps losing a ton of games, people get fired, young players get replaced by veterans, and you get an endless shuffling of lottery picks that get moved or abandoned before they actually come to fruition. We should know. That's been our MO for years.
One of the hardest things for an NBA team to do is keep a young core together long enough for it to realize it's potential.
So I don't agree that all of their draft picks give them a significant long term advantage over us. They're already too young as is. The NBA is all about having paper, not coins too. You get your big 2 or 3 together and then you fill in the cracks. I think our big 3 is better than theirs, and that's what matters most. Our pieces fit together better than theirs. We're a much higher IQ team. Much, much better defensive team. A better passing team. We're just better than them, and you'll start seeing in the W/L column this season IMO.
Now if they get LeBron back, that's a different story. They could be a juggernaut then. Just like it would be a diferent story if we lure in a DeMarcus Cousins type talent. Let's be real though, LeBron isn't leaving Miami. He's winning championships there. They'll retool around him before they lose him, and they will always be the premier FA draw so long as he's there and in MVP form.
