Notice Shaedon out 4-6 weeks

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

So wtf does that have to do with Sharpe and Ant? Every situation is completely different because the players are completely different. Ricky Davis is considered one of the worst teammates in the history of the NBA. Are you saying that Ant is? Or more importantly, do you think his teammates think so?
Yeah, I don't think any of Grant/Simons/Ayton need to be removed from this team so any of our young guys can grow. Thats just not an issue, our lack of talent and G Leaguers playing extended minutes is evidence of that.

However it doesn't make sense to hold onto those vets when we could instead get an asset for the future, or use their salary space for a future asset. That is the reason it makes no sense to hold onto all 5 of the vets we do.

The vets actually have some small benefit in practice and games for our young players. However we can get that benefit from vet minimum guys. So again its a waste of our rebuild to have resources diverting to our vets being here. But agreed, it doesn't hurt any of Scoot/Sharpe/etc growing and taking steps to be a #1 option if they ever have that potential. I hope it becomes a problem where Simons/Grant are preventing the growth of Scoot/Sharpe. Right now I'm much more concerned Scoot/Sharpe will never be good starting level NBA players.

LeBron situation was totally different, he was obviously a MUCH better historic prospect. And Ricky Davis, Miles, etc were way worse teammates than anyone on the Blazers.
 
So wtf does that have to do with Sharpe and Ant? Every situation is completely different because the players are completely different. Ricky Davis is considered one of the worst teammates in the history of the NBA. Are you saying that Ant is? Or more importantly, do you think his teammates think so?
It is simply an example of when arguably the best player in the history of the NBA needed the runway cleared.

This isn't a personal attack on anybody.
 
It is simply an example of when arguably the best player in the history of the NBA needed the runway cleared.

The problem with that line of thinking is, there's no way of knowing that LeBron wouldn't have turned out just as good without jettisoning those vets. He was pretty damn good right out of the gates, so you're basing that theory entirely on his coach describing what they did which worked out well.

During those early years, LeBron was a lousy closer. Who knows, maybe he would have fared better in 4th quarters and big games if he had more of a veteran presence guiding him?
 
The problem with that line of thinking is, there's no way of knowing that LeBron wouldn't have turned out just as good without jettisoning those vets. He was pretty damn good right out of the gates, so you're basing that theory entirely on his coach describing what they did which worked out well.

During those early years, LeBron was a lousy closer. Who knows, maybe he would have fared better in 4th quarters and big games if he had more of a veteran presence guiding him?
I'm not making that claim. But the people in charge definitely noticed a difference. They noticed the problems and they noticed a marked improvement in the way he practiced and trained and behaved around the team.

Would LeBron have benefited from having a Dame or Tim Duncan as one of his vets? Absolutely. Would he have benefited from Ant? Or Grant? Or Ayton?

No. I don't think so.
 
Mark my words the timeline will come and go with no update. Then a little while after they’ll announce he’s out another 2-3 weeks.

After that ends, they’ll be another delay in announcing an update at which point they’ll come out and announce he’s out for pretty much the whole season with a surgery announcement.
 
Or maybe LeBron would have left the cavs earlier. Or maybe he would have gotten into trouble trying to deal with the stress. Or maybe he would have eaten himself into a Zion form...

The point is, nobody else has the same ability as LeBron. But it was a big enough problem even for LeBron that the franchise had to move guys to clear his runway. And his Coach noticed the difference enough to talk about it when interviewed about LeBron's first two seasons.
This is so not true. LeBron was good right away and the starting lineup was pretty balanced. LeBron/Davis/Miles/Boozer/Z. LeBron didn’t need people traded to become the man. He was the man right away.
 
It is simply an example of when arguably the best player in the history of the NBA needed the runway cleared.

This isn't a personal attack on anybody.
Look at LeBron’s first game vs Sac. Runway was already clear.
 
This is so not true. LeBron was good right away and the starting lineup was pretty balanced. LeBron/Davis/Miles/Boozer/Z. LeBron didn’t need people traded to become the man. He was the man right away.
You're right, they let those guys go for no reason.

Ricky Davis and Carlos Boozer weren't any good.
 
You're right, they let those guys go for no reason.

Ricky Davis and Carlos Boozer weren't any good.
Boozer was an All Star and All NBA player, much better than what Cleveland had at that position after he left.
 
This new medication for this little bug that I have is not allowing me to sleep, so I apologize in advance if I come off a little persnickety. But, are some of you fucking kidding me with your horseshit takes? To those this applies to, do us all a favor get to where you’re going with your takes and go fuck yourselves
 
This new medication for this little bug that I have is not allowing me to sleep, so I apologize in advance if I come off a little persnickety. But, are some of you fucking kidding me with your horseshit takes? To those this applies to, do us all a favor get to where you’re going with your takes and go fuck yourselves
That was less "Persnickety" and probably more " Fastidious" so no need to apologize.
 
You're right, they let those guys go for no reason.

Ricky Davis and Carlos Boozer weren't any good.
As far as I remember, they didn't want Boozer to leave. By my recollection, they chose not to exercise his option so they could give him a big raise as a free agent, and he shocked them (and most around the league) by leaving Cleveland and unexpectedly signing with Utah.

https://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=1848196
 
As far as I remember, they didn't want Boozer to leave. By my recollection, they chose not to exercise his option so they could give him a big raise as a free agent, and he shocked them (and most around the league) by leaving Cleveland and unexpectedly signing with Utah.

https://www.espn.com/nba/news/story?id=1848196
After he said that Darius Miles was better than LeBron. Sounds like he was really sold on LeBron's leadership...
 
After he said that Darius Miles was better than LeBron. Sounds like he was really sold on LeBron's leadership...
C'mon--you're better than this. When exactly did Boozer make that comment? Was Lebron even on the Cavs at that point? Wouldn't any good teammate say that that his own team's starting SF is better than a high-schooler?

 
C'mon--you're better than this. When exactly did Boozer make that comment? Was Lebron even on the Cavs at that point? Wouldn't any good teammate say that that his own team's starting SF is better than a high-schooler?


And then he left the Cavs for less money after the Cavs drafted Lebron and after Boozer had played a full season with him.

And no, I would expect a good teammate would probably say something more like "Young fella is killing it! We'd be excited to get a guy like that who can play any position on the court".

Do you expect Scoot or Sharpe to talk shit about Flagg this season? I'd personally be disappointed if they did.

*Edit* Now, this isn't to say any of these guys are bad guys. Just that you have to get guys who are on the same page if you want to build a successful team. Regardless of how good the guys you are drafting are.
 
Last edited:
It was pretty well know that they didn't want Ricky and Miles to be a negative impact on 'Bron. Don't listen to the self appointed expert.

That's a totally different issue. Most teams try to keep their prize rookies away from negative influences. If that's all it's about, Silas was probably just being nice by not calling them out as such, instead saying LeBron needed the runway cleared.

Context matters.
 
And then he left the Cavs for less money after the Cavs drafted Lebron and after Boozer had played a full season with him.

And no, I would expect a good teammate would probably say something more like "Young fella is killing it! We'd be excited to get a guy like that who can play any position on the court".

Do you expect Scoot or Sharpe to talk shit about Flagg this season? I'd personally be disappointed if they did.
Boozer left for more money. Perhaps you didn't read the link I provided. Utah offered $27M more than Cleveland was able to because the Gilbert Arenas rule didn't exist yet.

Regardless, it's incredibly disingenuous to suggest that comments Boozer made while Lebron was still in high school were somehow indicative of his opinion of Lebron's leadership abilities in the pro's.
 
Boozer left for more money. Utah offered more than Cleveland was able to because the Gilbert Arenas rule didn't exist yet.

Regardless, it's incredibly disingenuous to suggest that comments Boozer made while Lebron was still in high school were somehow indicative of his opinion of Lebron's leadership abilities in the pro's.
There was a loophole around that limit, and Cleveland was going to do it.

Boozer claims he was afraid that it wouldn't be allowed, so he took the Utah offer. But it all stinks to me, especially given Paul Silas's comments. I'm not claiming conclusively anything about Boozer. I'm simply saying there are signs that he may have been among those not excited about Lebron. There are signs that Miles was one. There are signs that Ricky Davis was one. I believe Paul Silas when he says there were guys who weren't happy. And there is a lot of evidence other than Paul's comments that some guys weren't happy and were not supportive.

That's it. All of this evidence together makes it pretty clear that some guys weren't happy and the roster needed to be shuffled to get the new era going to the right direction.
 
No, there wasn't. The $41M was the max the Cavs could offer. The $68M was far more than they could offer. Boozer knew that had he chosen to accept the much lesser amount, the league would probably investigate the Cavs for tampering, which was why he took the Jazz's money.

https://cavaliersnation.com/2023/03...n-2004-in-order-to-avoid-them-being-crippled/
Wasn't that $40 million offer just shorter years, but more per year? Then the Cavs could have maxed him out.

It's not like Utah offered twice as much per year, right?
 
Wasn't that $40 million offer just shorter years, but more per year? Then the Cavs could have maxed him out.

It's not like Utah offered twice as much per year, right?
No--both offers were 6 years.
 
It was pretty well know that they didn't want Ricky and Miles to be a negative impact on 'Bron. Don't listen to the self appointed expert.
Yes due to their locker room presence, nothing to do with them on the court and then taking away from Lebron which is what we are talking about here.

Lebron was the man on the that team from day 1 regardless who he was on the court with.

Ant, Grant and Ayton are not locker room problems so difference in what we are discussing.

boozer was suppose to resign with them and gave them his word then turned around and signed with the Jazz and left the Cavs fuming.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top