2023 Playoffs Round 1: Cavs (4) / Knicks (5)

[JujitsuFlip]

Kinda weird they would put a potential elimination game on NBATV, is it going to be on Bally Sports too, does anyone know?

All the playoff games are on Bally (until they go fully bankrupt)

I think it's only the first round. Like they're definitely not showing the Finals on Bally if the Cavs make it.

Yeah, I knew there was a cutoff just wasn't sure when it was. Without cable I don't get Bally anyway but just thought it was odd game 5 was on NBA TV.

[KuruptedCav]

I hate to say it, but would we maybe go small next game? We've been giving up so many offensive rebounds, it is probably the wrong choice, but we really need to unlock our offense.

Garland, Mitchell, Okoro, LeVert, Mobley/Allen or Garland, Mitchell, Cedi/Green, LeVert, Mobley/Allen?

I just feel like Allen has been completely outplayed this series.

They should be running small. When they try to match the Knicks strength they average the team down. They don’t have the depth in the post to play that game, and trying to is death.

The Cavs should be staggering Allen/Mobley and running a guard heavy lineup at them. Let Green and Okoro defend the 4.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The question at this point though is who do you start at center then? Mobley is a great player but Robinson is going to eat him alive all night long. But if you start Allen, you’re missing out on Mobleys superior offense and range.

It just sucks that we ran into the Knicks in the first round. The nets would’ve been a pretty easy first round opponent.

Start Issac Okoro at Center. I’m perfectly fine with Robinson taking the ball out of Brunson’s hands on offense and chasing guards around on defense.

Mobley shouldn’t be the backup center and definitely shouldn’t be against a team like the Knicks. Mobley without Allen dilutes Mobley.

Honestly: my defensive matchups would look like PG: Mitchell, SG: Garland, SF: LeVert, PF: Mobley, and C: Okoro. Subbing Allen and Green at C & PF.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cgf]

I find it hilarious how many people in the “was the Mitchell trade a mistake” threads are suggesting that Garland be traded. Trading Garland is, besides trading Mobley of course, the worst possible thing Cleveland could do. Garland is locked in long term and loves Cleveland, and still has loads of potential with an all star appearance already on his resume and just turned 23. I really wish that people who didn’t watch the cavaliers would stop talking about them.

Those people like Mitchell playing PG better, and while he's improved, I find that questionable. Of course plenty want to trade Allen.

The problem I see isn't so much the Mitchell and Garland backcourt or the Allen and Mobley front court - it's that we didn't leverage those strengths in the playoffs. Our backcourt didn't generate constant offense, our two bigs didn't dominate the paint.

I just don't have a problem chalking that up to things like experience, chemistry, and yes coaching.

The people who like Mitchell playing PG better have no idea what they’re talking about and quite frankly, it’s an embarrassingly bad take. It’s not a position that he’s meant to play given his style. For a team like this, you need someone who is elite at running the offense and Garland is that.

Sorry to pry, I generally only lurk on other teams' boards and leave the conversation to the locals...but as someone who does think that trading one of Garland or Mitchell for someone like Ingram could be a nice move in a year or two (ideally with Allen being swapped for Murphy or Jones too); it's less about thinking Spida is best as a PG* and more about how much Mobley's potential as a playmaker intrigues me.

The idea being that as he fills out and polishes his game, you would be able to play through Mobley, with whichever guard was left over getting to focus more on scoring and not as much on having to control the offense. Kinda how the Kings playing through Sabonis allows Fox to just do his thing and not need to worry as much about running the team as he used to.

I fully acknowledge Garland has a much better sense for running a team than Mitchell, but if Mobley's going to become your main creative hub then you won't need as much of "traditional PG" at the 1. Giving you the flexibility to use whichever of your guards got you the pieces that you're lacking.


*at least offensively. Defensively, you'd obviously prefer for Mitchell to be the smallest guy on the court.

[TheLand13]

Those people like Mitchell playing PG better, and while he's improved, I find that questionable. Of course plenty want to trade Allen.

The problem I see isn't so much the Mitchell and Garland backcourt or the Allen and Mobley front court - it's that we didn't leverage those strengths in the playoffs. Our backcourt didn't generate constant offense, our two bigs didn't dominate the paint.

I just don't have a problem chalking that up to things like experience, chemistry, and yes coaching.

The people who like Mitchell playing PG better have no idea what they’re talking about and quite frankly, it’s an embarrassingly bad take. It’s not a position that he’s meant to play given his style. For a team like this, you need someone who is elite at running the offense and Garland is that.

Sorry to pry, I generally only lurk on other teams' boards and leave the conversation to the locals...but as someone who does think that trading one of Garland or Mitchell for someone like Ingram could be a nice move in a year or two (ideally with Allen being swapped for Murphy or Jones too); it's less about thinking Spida is best as a PG* and more about how much Mobley's potential as a playmaker intrigues me.

The idea being that as he fills out and polishes his game, you would be able to play through Mobley, with whichever guard was left over getting to focus more on scoring and not as much on having to control the offense. Kinda how the Kings playing through Sabonis allows Fox to just do his thing and not need to worry as much about running the team as he used to.

I fully acknowledge Garland has a much better sense for running a team than Mitchell, but if Mobley's going to become your main creative hub then you won't need as much of "traditional PG" at the 1. Giving you the flexibility to use whichever of your guards got you the pieces that you're lacking.


*at least offensively. Defensively, you'd obviously prefer for Mitchell to be the smallest guy on the court.

You bring up interesting points, but I want to point out some things.

1. I don't have any issues with people believing that Mitchell needs to be traded at some point if this shows signs of clearly not working out. I think that's the logical route to take. It's getting rid of Garland and keeping Mitchell that I have major issues with. There is currently no guarantee that Mitchell is going to stay with Cleveland after his contract expires and quite frankly, we just wouldn't get nearly the same amount of assets that Mitchell would get us. If Donovan can have another season similar to the one he just had this year, there's no telling how much Cleveland can get in return for a deal revolving around him, but I can say with confidence that we'll at the very least get some pretty damn good role players and some draft capital on top of it. There are going to be teams that will want Donovan's services. I seriously doubt that anything Garland would get for us would justify putting so much faith in having Mitchell be our PG going forward, unless we know that Mitchell is staying. And by the time we know, odds are Garland will be even better than he is now and at that point the question becomes: why on earth would you want to trade him?

2. I don't really know if trading Jarett Allen is a good idea as we're limited in the amount of valuable role players we can get in return due to his contract not being very big right now. At best, he's going to just get us a swap for a player we need at a position, and that's just a waste. I'm not going to act like the Mobley/Allen duo is perfect, but people are truly overreacting to how poorly the pair is doing against the Knicks. I'm not acting like they're doing great or anything, but the Knicks really are the worst possible team this duo could have had their playoff debut together against. The Knicks have four physical and talented bigs that they can get away with giving limited minutes to. That's going to be tough for any duo to go up against. People tend to forget just how much value Allen brings to the team. This is a duo that made Cleveland the best defensive team in the league. At this early in their development, it would be insane to split them up.

3. Mobley's most important development shouldn't be his playmaking, it should be his scoring. The ideal scenario is that one day, Mobley will be able to take over as the number one option on offense. He certainly has the talent to do so, but obviously he's not even close to being ready to take on that task yet given the talent on the team. I don't deny Mobley's potential and abilities as a playmaker, but I want his scoring to be the thing he focuses on the most. If Donovan Mitchell is on the team, that's never going to happen.

None of the suggested scenarios we have here should be happening this upcoming offseason anyways. As mentioned before, the Knicks were a bad matchup for the Cavaliers and I truly do think that we will make roster upgrades this offseason, and I also expect our younger players to continue to improve. I'm very curious as to how Okoro will respond now to being taken out of the starting lineup during the playoffs, especially with how he has played since then. I'm wondering how much effort Mobley will put into covering up the weaknesses that (and it's okay to admit this part Cavaliers fans) are being exploited by New York here. I'm VERY curious as to how much of a leap Garland takes next season, and whether or not he can find a way to truly make things work with Mitchell. This series with the Knicks has made it clear that our lack of reliable wings isn't our only issue and that outside of our big four, we're lacking in players who can truly make a big impact apart from maybe LeVert (we'll see if Rubio can be back to form next season).

But I want to make this as clear as possible: Garland should be just as much off limits as Mobley currently is. And quite frankly, I don't think Jarrett Allen should ever be traded either.

[TheLand13]

There's also one thing I want to mention that I haven't seen anyone really point out.

As much as it pains me to admit it, getting rid of Kevin Love is starting to look like a mistake. While I understand Bickerstaff's line of thinking at the time with taking Love out of the rotation as he was practically unplayable, it feels like it's come back to haunt us not just in this series, but for our team going forward. Kevin's been playing a lot better lately with Miami, and he still at the very least would have provided us with critical rebounding and floor stretching, both of which we are desperate for in this series against the Knicks. Hindsight is a bitch, and right now it's rearing its ugly head. I just hope things work out for the best for Kev in the end, but either way, I do miss him right now in Cleveland.

[Andri]

Main overall take for me is that you need to win games in the RS, but you have to build a team for the PO's

[jbk1234]

Those people like Mitchell playing PG better, and while he's improved, I find that questionable. Of course plenty want to trade Allen.

The problem I see isn't so much the Mitchell and Garland backcourt or the Allen and Mobley front court - it's that we didn't leverage those strengths in the playoffs. Our backcourt didn't generate constant offense, our two bigs didn't dominate the paint.

I just don't have a problem chalking that up to things like experience, chemistry, and yes coaching.

The people who like Mitchell playing PG better have no idea what they’re talking about and quite frankly, it’s an embarrassingly bad take. It’s not a position that he’s meant to play given his style. For a team like this, you need someone who is elite at running the offense and Garland is that.

Sorry to pry, I generally only lurk on other teams' boards and leave the conversation to the locals...but as someone who does think that trading one of Garland or Mitchell for someone like Ingram could be a nice move in a year or two (ideally with Allen being swapped for Murphy or Jones too); it's less about thinking Spida is best as a PG* and more about how much Mobley's potential as a playmaker intrigues me.

The idea being that as he fills out and polishes his game, you would be able to play through Mobley, with whichever guard was left over getting to focus more on scoring and not as much on having to control the offense. Kinda how the Kings playing through Sabonis allows Fox to just do his thing and not need to worry as much about running the team as he used to.

I fully acknowledge Garland has a much better sense for running a team than Mitchell, but if Mobley's going to become your main creative hub then you won't need as much of "traditional PG" at the 1. Giving you the flexibility to use whichever of your guards got you the pieces that you're lacking.


*at least offensively. Defensively, you'd obviously prefer for Mitchell to be the smallest guy on the court.

It is precisely due to Mobley that Garland won't be traded. Bigs need good PG play. Mitchell is, at best, a serviceable PG. Big men need good PG play to excel. Mobley as a secondary facilitator is only working well because it's coming out of a double on Garland.

[JonFromVA]

Those people like Mitchell playing PG better, and while he's improved, I find that questionable. Of course plenty want to trade Allen.

The problem I see isn't so much the Mitchell and Garland backcourt or the Allen and Mobley front court - it's that we didn't leverage those strengths in the playoffs. Our backcourt didn't generate constant offense, our two bigs didn't dominate the paint.

I just don't have a problem chalking that up to things like experience, chemistry, and yes coaching.

The people who like Mitchell playing PG better have no idea what they’re talking about and quite frankly, it’s an embarrassingly bad take. It’s not a position that he’s meant to play given his style. For a team like this, you need someone who is elite at running the offense and Garland is that.

Sorry to pry, I generally only lurk on other teams' boards and leave the conversation to the locals...but as someone who does think that trading one of Garland or Mitchell for someone like Ingram could be a nice move in a year or two (ideally with Allen being swapped for Murphy or Jones too); it's less about thinking Spida is best as a PG* and more about how much Mobley's potential as a playmaker intrigues me.

The idea being that as he fills out and polishes his game, you would be able to play through Mobley, with whichever guard was left over getting to focus more on scoring and not as much on having to control the offense. Kinda how the Kings playing through Sabonis allows Fox to just do his thing and not need to worry as much about running the team as he used to.

I fully acknowledge Garland has a much better sense for running a team than Mitchell, but if Mobley's going to become your main creative hub then you won't need as much of "traditional PG" at the 1. Giving you the flexibility to use whichever of your guards got you the pieces that you're lacking.

*at least offensively. Defensively, you'd obviously prefer for Mitchell to be the smallest guy on the court.

Everyone wants to rush Mobley to the destination they envision for him whether that's playing C, becoming an offensive hub, getting stronger, developing a shot, and then remake the team around that.

When Evan has actually shown he can be an offensive hub, that's when we can start thinking how to best leverage it.

And I'm personally glad the Knicks are capable and coached well enough to exploit the Cavs weaknesses, it's far less likely to get brushed off than if it was the Celtics, Bucks, or Sixers teaching them these essential lessons.

They can start by trying to figure out what it takes to avoid elimination at home before having to revisit what it's going to take to win on the road.

Some commented the Cavs were playing desperate in game 2 ... well ... if so, they need to ask themselves why don't they always play desperate?

[cgf]

The people who like Mitchell playing PG better have no idea what they’re talking about and quite frankly, it’s an embarrassingly bad take. It’s not a position that he’s meant to play given his style. For a team like this, you need someone who is elite at running the offense and Garland is that.

Sorry to pry, I generally only lurk on other teams' boards and leave the conversation to the locals...but as someone who does think that trading one of Garland or Mitchell for someone like Ingram could be a nice move in a year or two (ideally with Allen being swapped for Murphy or Jones too); it's less about thinking Spida is best as a PG* and more about how much Mobley's potential as a playmaker intrigues me.

The idea being that as he fills out and polishes his game, you would be able to play through Mobley, with whichever guard was left over getting to focus more on scoring and not as much on having to control the offense. Kinda how the Kings playing through Sabonis allows Fox to just do his thing and not need to worry as much about running the team as he used to.

I fully acknowledge Garland has a much better sense for running a team than Mitchell, but if Mobley's going to become your main creative hub then you won't need as much of "traditional PG" at the 1. Giving you the flexibility to use whichever of your guards got you the pieces that you're lacking.


*at least offensively. Defensively, you'd obviously prefer for Mitchell to be the smallest guy on the court.

You bring up interesting points, but I want to point out some things.

1. I don't have any issues with people believing that Mitchell needs to be traded at some point if this shows signs of clearly not working out. I think that's the logical route to take. It's getting rid of Garland and keeping Mitchell that I have major issues with. There is currently no guarantee that Mitchell is going to stay with Cleveland after his contract expires and quite frankly, we just wouldn't get nearly the same amount of assets that Mitchell would get us. If Donovan can have another season similar to the one he just had this year, there's no telling how much Cleveland can get in return for a deal revolving around him, but I can say with confidence that we'll at the very least get some pretty damn good role players and some draft capital on top of it. There are going to be teams that will want Donovan's services. I seriously doubt that anything Garland would get for us would justify putting so much faith in having Mitchell be our PG going forward, unless we know that Mitchell is staying. And by the time we know, odds are Garland will be even better than he is now and at that point the question becomes: why on earth would you want to trade him?

2. I don't really know if trading Jarett Allen is a good idea as we're limited in the amount of valuable role players we can get in return due to his contract not being very big right now. At best, he's going to just get us a swap for a player we need at a position, and that's just a waste. I'm not going to act like the Mobley/Allen duo is perfect, but people are truly overreacting to how poorly the pair is doing against the Knicks. I'm not acting like they're doing great or anything, but the Knicks really are the worst possible team this duo could have had their playoff debut together against. The Knicks have four physical and talented bigs that they can get away with giving limited minutes to. That's going to be tough for any duo to go up against. People tend to forget just how much value Allen brings to the team. This is a duo that made Cleveland the best defensive team in the league. At this early in their development, it would be insane to split them up.

3. Mobley's most important development shouldn't be his playmaking, it should be his scoring. The ideal scenario is that one day, Mobley will be able to take over as the number one option on offense. He certainly has the talent to do so, but obviously he's not even close to being ready to take on that task yet given the talent on the team. I don't deny Mobley's potential and abilities as a playmaker, but I want his scoring to be the thing he focuses on the most. If Donovan Mitchell is on the team, that's never going to happen.

None of the suggested scenarios we have here should be happening this upcoming offseason anyways. As mentioned before, the Knicks were a bad matchup for the Cavaliers and I truly do think that we will make roster upgrades this offseason, and I also expect our younger players to continue to improve. I'm very curious as to how Okoro will respond now to being taken out of the starting lineup during the playoffs, especially with how he has played since then. I'm wondering how much effort Mobley will put into covering up the weaknesses that (and it's okay to admit this part Cavaliers fans) are being exploited by New York here. I'm VERY curious as to how much of a leap Garland takes next season, and whether or not he can find a way to truly make things work with Mitchell. This series with the Knicks has made it clear that our lack of reliable wings isn't our only issue and that outside of our big four, we're lacking in players who can truly make a big impact apart from maybe LeVert (we'll see if Rubio can be back to form next season).

But I want to make this as clear as possible: Garland should be just as much off limits as Mobley currently is. And quite frankly, I don't think Jarrett Allen should ever be traded either.

Oh I don't think it should be anytime soon either...need Mobley to fill out before he can handle the 5 and to polish his offensive game before he has the gravity needed to be that main hub that Sabonis is for the Kings...but next summer you can extend Mitchell, so you would know that he's sticking around before moving Garland in that scenario. I'd rather hold onto Garland than Mitchell too, but those same reasons are why I think you'd have a better chance of landing both Ingram & Murphy for a Garland+Allen package than a Mitchell+Allen one.

It is precisely due to Mobley that Garland won't be traded. Bigs need good PG play. Mitchell is, at best, a serviceable PG. Big men need good PG play to excel. Mobley as a secondary facilitator is only working well because it's coming out of a double on Garland.

*Some bigs. With the likes of Jokic, Bam, Sabonis, Draymond, etc. we've got a number of bigs in this league who are able to be their team's primary creative hub...or at least one of their main hubs...and I think that Mobley will get to that level when he fills out and polishes his offensive game. Still at least a couple of offseasons away, but with time I think he'll get there.

[cgf]

The people who like Mitchell playing PG better have no idea what they’re talking about and quite frankly, it’s an embarrassingly bad take. It’s not a position that he’s meant to play given his style. For a team like this, you need someone who is elite at running the offense and Garland is that.

Sorry to pry, I generally only lurk on other teams' boards and leave the conversation to the locals...but as someone who does think that trading one of Garland or Mitchell for someone like Ingram could be a nice move in a year or two (ideally with Allen being swapped for Murphy or Jones too); it's less about thinking Spida is best as a PG* and more about how much Mobley's potential as a playmaker intrigues me.

The idea being that as he fills out and polishes his game, you would be able to play through Mobley, with whichever guard was left over getting to focus more on scoring and not as much on having to control the offense. Kinda how the Kings playing through Sabonis allows Fox to just do his thing and not need to worry as much about running the team as he used to.

I fully acknowledge Garland has a much better sense for running a team than Mitchell, but if Mobley's going to become your main creative hub then you won't need as much of "traditional PG" at the 1. Giving you the flexibility to use whichever of your guards got you the pieces that you're lacking.

*at least offensively. Defensively, you'd obviously prefer for Mitchell to be the smallest guy on the court.

Everyone wants to rush Mobley to the destination they envision for him whether that's playing C, becoming an offensive hub, getting stronger, developing a shot, and then remake the team around that.

When Evan has actually shown he can be an offensive hub, that's when we can start thinking how to best leverage it.

And I'm personally glad the Knicks are capable and coached well enough to exploit the Cavs weaknesses, it's far less likely to get brushed off than if it was the Celtics, Bucks, or Sixers teaching them these essential lessons.

They can start by trying to figure out what it takes to avoid elimination at home before having to revisit what it's going to take to win on the road.

Some commented the Cavs were playing desperate in game 2 ... well ... if so, they need to ask themselves why don't they always play desperate?

Yeah. Like last summer wasn't the right time for us to move for Mitchell, I don't think this summer would be the right time for you to move Allen. My bad if that wasn't clear, I was talking about the long run...after Mitchell has signed a new contract with you and Mobley has had the time to fill out some more & polish his game.

[TheLand13]

Sorry to pry, I generally only lurk on other teams' boards and leave the conversation to the locals...but as someone who does think that trading one of Garland or Mitchell for someone like Ingram could be a nice move in a year or two (ideally with Allen being swapped for Murphy or Jones too); it's less about thinking Spida is best as a PG* and more about how much Mobley's potential as a playmaker intrigues me.

The idea being that as he fills out and polishes his game, you would be able to play through Mobley, with whichever guard was left over getting to focus more on scoring and not as much on having to control the offense. Kinda how the Kings playing through Sabonis allows Fox to just do his thing and not need to worry as much about running the team as he used to.

I fully acknowledge Garland has a much better sense for running a team than Mitchell, but if Mobley's going to become your main creative hub then you won't need as much of "traditional PG" at the 1. Giving you the flexibility to use whichever of your guards got you the pieces that you're lacking.


*at least offensively. Defensively, you'd obviously prefer for Mitchell to be the smallest guy on the court.

You bring up interesting points, but I want to point out some things.

1. I don't have any issues with people believing that Mitchell needs to be traded at some point if this shows signs of clearly not working out. I think that's the logical route to take. It's getting rid of Garland and keeping Mitchell that I have major issues with. There is currently no guarantee that Mitchell is going to stay with Cleveland after his contract expires and quite frankly, we just wouldn't get nearly the same amount of assets that Mitchell would get us. If Donovan can have another season similar to the one he just had this year, there's no telling how much Cleveland can get in return for a deal revolving around him, but I can say with confidence that we'll at the very least get some pretty damn good role players and some draft capital on top of it. There are going to be teams that will want Donovan's services. I seriously doubt that anything Garland would get for us would justify putting so much faith in having Mitchell be our PG going forward, unless we know that Mitchell is staying. And by the time we know, odds are Garland will be even better than he is now and at that point the question becomes: why on earth would you want to trade him?

2. I don't really know if trading Jarett Allen is a good idea as we're limited in the amount of valuable role players we can get in return due to his contract not being very big right now. At best, he's going to just get us a swap for a player we need at a position, and that's just a waste. I'm not going to act like the Mobley/Allen duo is perfect, but people are truly overreacting to how poorly the pair is doing against the Knicks. I'm not acting like they're doing great or anything, but the Knicks really are the worst possible team this duo could have had their playoff debut together against. The Knicks have four physical and talented bigs that they can get away with giving limited minutes to. That's going to be tough for any duo to go up against. People tend to forget just how much value Allen brings to the team. This is a duo that made Cleveland the best defensive team in the league. At this early in their development, it would be insane to split them up.

3. Mobley's most important development shouldn't be his playmaking, it should be his scoring. The ideal scenario is that one day, Mobley will be able to take over as the number one option on offense. He certainly has the talent to do so, but obviously he's not even close to being ready to take on that task yet given the talent on the team. I don't deny Mobley's potential and abilities as a playmaker, but I want his scoring to be the thing he focuses on the most. If Donovan Mitchell is on the team, that's never going to happen.

None of the suggested scenarios we have here should be happening this upcoming offseason anyways. As mentioned before, the Knicks were a bad matchup for the Cavaliers and I truly do think that we will make roster upgrades this offseason, and I also expect our younger players to continue to improve. I'm very curious as to how Okoro will respond now to being taken out of the starting lineup during the playoffs, especially with how he has played since then. I'm wondering how much effort Mobley will put into covering up the weaknesses that (and it's okay to admit this part Cavaliers fans) are being exploited by New York here. I'm VERY curious as to how much of a leap Garland takes next season, and whether or not he can find a way to truly make things work with Mitchell. This series with the Knicks has made it clear that our lack of reliable wings isn't our only issue and that outside of our big four, we're lacking in players who can truly make a big impact apart from maybe LeVert (we'll see if Rubio can be back to form next season).

But I want to make this as clear as possible: Garland should be just as much off limits as Mobley currently is. And quite frankly, I don't think Jarrett Allen should ever be traded either.

Oh I don't think it should be anytime soon either...need Mobley to fill out before he can handle the 5 and to polish his offensive game before he has the gravity needed to be that main hub that Sabonis is for the Kings...but next summer you can extend Mitchell, so you would know that he's sticking around before moving Garland in that scenario. I'd rather hold onto Garland than Mitchell too, but those same reasons are why I think you'd have a better chance of landing both Ingram & Murphy for a Garland+Allen package than a Mitchell+Allen one.

It is precisely due to Mobley that Garland won't be traded. Bigs need good PG play. Mitchell is, at best, a serviceable PG. Big men need good PG play to excel. Mobley as a secondary facilitator is only working well because it's coming out of a double on Garland.

*Some bigs. With the likes of Jokic, Bam, Sabonis, Draymond, etc. we've got a number of bigs in this league who are able to be their team's primary creative hub...or at least one of their main hubs...and I think that Mobley will get to that level when he fills out and polishes his offensive game. Still at least a couple of offseasons away, but with time I think he'll get there.

A Mitchell/Allen for Ingram/Murphy swap is, in all honesty, a terrible idea.

[JujitsuFlip]

At this point, i don't really care about the outcome of game 5, just want to end the season healthy.

[ijspeelman]

At this point, i don't really care about the outcome of game 5, just want to end the season healthy.

Selfishly, I want them to come out with some fire and attempt to bring this to a game 7. I’d disappointed with a series loss no matter what, but progressively less the more games there are.

[JujitsuFlip]

At this point, i don't really care about the outcome of game 5, just want to end the season healthy.

Selfishly, I want them to come out with some fire and attempt to bring this to a game 7. I’d disappointed with a series loss no matter what, but progressively less the more games there are.

I would love if they could find a way to be in that 5% that comes back, this franchise obviously knows about it but they just seem to be sleepwalking through the series.

[ijspeelman]

If this means anything, out of all the losing teams in the playoffs we have the best net rating (which means the Knicks have the worst net rating of all the winning teams). It gives us the statistical best chance of coming back, but I'm still not holding my breath lol.

[jasonxxx102]

I have absolutely no faith in the Cavs coming back, let alone winning this game. This is what we've seen all year. They never come out strong. For whatever reason, JB, the players, youth... whatever they don't get up for big games. They always start slow and have to fight their way back. Of course this works in the regular season when teams aren't as locked in.

I really admire your undying hope ijspeelman. I don't know that net rating really proves anything because they've been absolutely bludgeoned in the 3 losses. So I guess they lost less bad then the other losing teams?

FWIW I bet on the Knicks every game this series so far. I also bet on the Knicks to win the series and the O5.5. In retrospect this outcome was so predictable.

[cgf]

You bring up interesting points, but I want to point out some things.

1. I don't have any issues with people believing that Mitchell needs to be traded at some point if this shows signs of clearly not working out. I think that's the logical route to take. It's getting rid of Garland and keeping Mitchell that I have major issues with. There is currently no guarantee that Mitchell is going to stay with Cleveland after his contract expires and quite frankly, we just wouldn't get nearly the same amount of assets that Mitchell would get us. If Donovan can have another season similar to the one he just had this year, there's no telling how much Cleveland can get in return for a deal revolving around him, but I can say with confidence that we'll at the very least get some pretty damn good role players and some draft capital on top of it. There are going to be teams that will want Donovan's services. I seriously doubt that anything Garland would get for us would justify putting so much faith in having Mitchell be our PG going forward, unless we know that Mitchell is staying. And by the time we know, odds are Garland will be even better than he is now and at that point the question becomes: why on earth would you want to trade him?

2. I don't really know if trading Jarett Allen is a good idea as we're limited in the amount of valuable role players we can get in return due to his contract not being very big right now. At best, he's going to just get us a swap for a player we need at a position, and that's just a waste. I'm not going to act like the Mobley/Allen duo is perfect, but people are truly overreacting to how poorly the pair is doing against the Knicks. I'm not acting like they're doing great or anything, but the Knicks really are the worst possible team this duo could have had their playoff debut together against. The Knicks have four physical and talented bigs that they can get away with giving limited minutes to. That's going to be tough for any duo to go up against. People tend to forget just how much value Allen brings to the team. This is a duo that made Cleveland the best defensive team in the league. At this early in their development, it would be insane to split them up.

3. Mobley's most important development shouldn't be his playmaking, it should be his scoring. The ideal scenario is that one day, Mobley will be able to take over as the number one option on offense. He certainly has the talent to do so, but obviously he's not even close to being ready to take on that task yet given the talent on the team. I don't deny Mobley's potential and abilities as a playmaker, but I want his scoring to be the thing he focuses on the most. If Donovan Mitchell is on the team, that's never going to happen.

None of the suggested scenarios we have here should be happening this upcoming offseason anyways. As mentioned before, the Knicks were a bad matchup for the Cavaliers and I truly do think that we will make roster upgrades this offseason, and I also expect our younger players to continue to improve. I'm very curious as to how Okoro will respond now to being taken out of the starting lineup during the playoffs, especially with how he has played since then. I'm wondering how much effort Mobley will put into covering up the weaknesses that (and it's okay to admit this part Cavaliers fans) are being exploited by New York here. I'm VERY curious as to how much of a leap Garland takes next season, and whether or not he can find a way to truly make things work with Mitchell. This series with the Knicks has made it clear that our lack of reliable wings isn't our only issue and that outside of our big four, we're lacking in players who can truly make a big impact apart from maybe LeVert (we'll see if Rubio can be back to form next season).

But I want to make this as clear as possible: Garland should be just as much off limits as Mobley currently is. And quite frankly, I don't think Jarrett Allen should ever be traded either.

Oh I don't think it should be anytime soon either...need Mobley to fill out before he can handle the 5 and to polish his offensive game before he has the gravity needed to be that main hub that Sabonis is for the Kings...but next summer you can extend Mitchell, so you would know that he's sticking around before moving Garland in that scenario. I'd rather hold onto Garland than Mitchell too, but those same reasons are why I think you'd have a better chance of landing both Ingram & Murphy for a Garland+Allen package than a Mitchell+Allen one.

It is precisely due to Mobley that Garland won't be traded. Bigs need good PG play. Mitchell is, at best, a serviceable PG. Big men need good PG play to excel. Mobley as a secondary facilitator is only working well because it's coming out of a double on Garland.

*Some bigs. With the likes of Jokic, Bam, Sabonis, Draymond, etc. we've got a number of bigs in this league who are able to be their team's primary creative hub...or at least one of their main hubs...and I think that Mobley will get to that level when he fills out and polishes his offensive game. Still at least a couple of offseasons away, but with time I think he'll get there.

A Mitchell/Allen for Ingram/Murphy swap is, in all honesty, a terrible idea.

Fair enough, wouldn't be the first time I rate NBAers very differently than do most folks I just feel like Ingram vs Mitchell/Garland is really close either way, and I like Murphy more than Allen even without any other depth pieces heading your way...as I do think you could snag Valenciunas & maybe one of Lewis/Alverado in a trade like this.

But I was really high on Murphy as a prospect, while Allen always left me kinda underwhelmed as a Net; so I could be very offbase on Ingram v Mitchell/Garland and Murphy vs Allen, but with another year+ of development I think a Mitchell/Garland - Okoro/MLE/24 FRP - Ingram - Murphy - Mobley starting-5 could be well balanced and as talented as any in the east.


On that note I'll leave this topic to y'all; didn't want to argue the point, just share my thinking as one of those people who has suggested a Garland & Allen trade...at least once Mitchell is extended & Mobley fills out.

Anyways, good luck tonight & win or lose I hope we run into each other next year as well. Hope it's a fun game and nobody gets hurt!

[ijspeelman]

I have absolutely no faith in the Cavs coming back, let alone winning this game. This is what we've seen all year. They never come out strong. For whatever reason, JB, the players, youth... whatever they don't get up for big games. They always start slow and have to fight their way back. Of course this works in the regular season when teams aren't as locked in.

I really admire your undying hope ijspeelman. I don't know that net rating really proves anything because they've been absolutely bludgeoned in the 3 losses. So I guess they lost less bad then the other losing teams?

FWIW I bet on the Knicks every game this series so far. I also bet on the Knicks to win the series and the O5.5. In retrospect this outcome was so predictable.

I guess it means the series has been the closest (besides the Warriors Kings) series even though we are currently at 3-1. I don't really have hope we will win the series, but I do have hope for at least one more game (I think).

[jasonxxx102]

I have absolutely no faith in the Cavs coming back, let alone winning this game. This is what we've seen all year. They never come out strong. For whatever reason, JB, the players, youth... whatever they don't get up for big games. They always start slow and have to fight their way back. Of course this works in the regular season when teams aren't as locked in.

I really admire your undying hope ijspeelman. I don't know that net rating really proves anything because they've been absolutely bludgeoned in the 3 losses. So I guess they lost less bad then the other losing teams?

FWIW I bet on the Knicks every game this series so far. I also bet on the Knicks to win the series and the O5.5. In retrospect this outcome was so predictable.

I guess it means the series has been the closest (besides the Warriors Kings) series even though we are currently at 3-1. I don't really have hope we will win the series, but I do have hope for at least one more game (I think).

That feels really sad considering how badly we've lost each of the 3 games.

Also probably not true anymore after the Hawks won yesterday

[ijspeelman]

I have absolutely no faith in the Cavs coming back, let alone winning this game. This is what we've seen all year. They never come out strong. For whatever reason, JB, the players, youth... whatever they don't get up for big games. They always start slow and have to fight their way back. Of course this works in the regular season when teams aren't as locked in.

I really admire your undying hope ijspeelman. I don't know that net rating really proves anything because they've been absolutely bludgeoned in the 3 losses. So I guess they lost less bad then the other losing teams?

FWIW I bet on the Knicks every game this series so far. I also bet on the Knicks to win the series and the O5.5. In retrospect this outcome was so predictable.

I guess it means the series has been the closest (besides the Warriors Kings) series even though we are currently at 3-1. I don't really have hope we will win the series, but I do have hope for at least one more game (I think).

That feels really sad considering how badly we've lost each of the 3 games.

Also probably not true anymore after the Hawks won yesterday

Still true, at least net rating rise. If it were SRS, probably a different story.