The Paul George Safari: LeBron Strikes Back!

[Rich]

Rich, I think you might be missing the larger portion of my point. My argument is that Love was not a major factor to our successful title run Cleveland; and that's true, he wasn't. I also said Wiggins would have helped us more than Love over the course of the first two title runs, improving our chances in the first run -- I don't see how one could possibly argue otherwise considering Love was atrocious in 2015-16, and didn't even play in 2014-15.

You're essentially saying that the team couldn't have used another body, a player who was statistically a standard deviation above replacement level, who was scoring 20 PPG on .535 TS% in the second half of his rookie year.

While it's certainly debatable as to whether or not we win; if you don't think so, fine -- but to argue that Wiggins would not have helped more than a completely absent player?

I don't think that's a tenable argument.

Good thing I didn't make it.

Just saying Andrew Wiggins isn't a very good basketball player and doesn't change the '15 loss into a win.

Obviously a live body helps more than someone who didn't play. He would have helped more than Irving in '15, too. Any healthy body would have.

As for helping us more in '16, the premise I have to accept there is that Wiggins would have been better than Love, who was "terrible." I don't think he would have. You take a high useage scorer who does almost nothing else, turn him into a 3rd option, and I think you've got a pretty useless basketball player.

Maybe Wiggins develops differently if he was here, learns how to impact the game in other ways. But now we're into like the 8th variable here.

Taking the Wiggins I see right now, putting him on the Cavs in '16 and removing Love..no, I don't think he helps us more. I think he has a pretty abysmal experience. Would be our Harrison Barnes.

 

[David.]

Having the foresight to predict a better player in Kevin Love would have less valur than Wiggins, who is largely awful, isn't realistic.

If love was healthy in 15,we probably win. He's normally healthy. Accounting for olynk ripping his arm out is unrealistic.

We can look at a snapshot of today and say "if all of these variables had even different, and all of these variables happened perfectly to present this situation", but why?

 

[Sebastian]

Having the foresight to predict a better player in Kevin Love would have less valur than Wiggins, who is largely awful, isn't realistic.

If love was healthy in 15,we probably win. He's normally healthy. Accounting for olynk ripping his arm out is unrealistic.

We can look at a snapshot of today and say "if all of these variables had even different, and all of these variables happened perfectly to present this situation", but why?

The year before the trade Love averaged 26 ppg and 12 rpg.

I would wager a shiny silver dollar that Wiggins never approaches those numbers. Nor is there any realistic expectation in 2014 that he would because those are historic numbers. From that point of view, from 2014, the Love trade is a no brainer. Even if they should have demanded Dieng along with Love as well.

 

[Flight479]

Id rather a dude be trash in games 1-6 and have a good game 7 than a dude be on fire in games 1-6 and have a shitty game 7 and we lose the title.


So he indeed did help us win.

Would we have needed a game 7 if Love was on fire? If he was on fire along with Bron and Kyrie then maybe it wouldn't have taken a game 7 to beat them.

 

[sleepmaster]

I just don't see how we get Paul George.

To be clear, I'm 100% for trading Love for George.

However, if Indiana is going into rebuilding mode, then why would they ever want Love or TT?

There are a LOT of other teams that can offer picks and young players for PG.

I think Love and TT have trade value, but not to rebuilding teams.

If this trade happens, it is ONLY because Paul George tells teams that he'll only re-sign with Cleveland or LA.

What is frustrating about Paul George is that his position seems to have, at least publicly, evolved from one-year rentals for everyone except Cleveland or LA into maybe resigning with Boston or Houston after seeing how things go. That came out when he said he'd commit if Lebron committed, so hopefully that was to publicly avoid seeming that he wanted the Cavs all along, and his agent is still privately telling Boston or Houston one year rental only. The way Isaiah Thomas is already recruiting Blake Griffin hard gives me hope that's the case.

 

[sleepmaster]

Maybe Wiggins develops differently if he was here, learns how to impact the game in other ways

I thought Wiggins was overrated back then and didn't think trading away Wiggins for Love was as close a call as many made it out to be. Wiggins was overly slight of build, not broad-shouldered in the least, and combined with a laid back unassertive temperment that often was "not with it" and lacking in on court awareness, he was said even back then to be the opposite of Lebron that way, so I never had a good feeling about Wiggins. On top of that, when has Cleveland ever been known to develop young talent? I wonder how Tristan and Kyrie would have developed if the Spurs drafted them.

 

[FrontPageNews]

Maybe Wiggins develops differently if he was here, learns how to impact the game in other ways

I thought Wiggins was overrated back then and didn't think trading away Wiggins for Love was as close a call as many made it out to be. Wiggins was overly slight of build, not broad-shouldered in the least, and combined with a laid back unassertive temperment that often was "not with it" and lacking in on court awareness, he was said even back then to be the opposite of Lebron that way, so I never had a good feeling about Wiggins. On top of that, when has Cleveland ever been known to develop young talent? I wonder how Tristan and Kyrie would have developed if the Spurs drafted them.

Kyrie being developed on the Spurs wouldn't be fair. He'd be an MVP by now.

 

[CalBuckeyeRob]

Wiggins is proving once again that there are very few players that impact wins and losses in a major way. With all the praise that LeBron has received in his career, the one thing that cannot be understated, is the effect he has on wins and losses. Cleveland is one of the best teams in the league, he leaves and they are immediately one of the worst. Miami becomes middle of the pack as soon as he is gone. Even now with Kyrie and Love, when LeBron doesn't play, the team loses. This shows that players that really impact wins have to be doing much more than is represented by their own stats. While that could be defense, it is more likely that and the way it forces other teams to handle them which creates better opportunities for everyone else.

 

[fan0283]

Kyrie being developed on the Spurs wouldn't be fair. He'd be an MVP by now.

We've all thought this. Average organisations just give their young players the ball and tell them to lead them to the promise land. We've also had a hand to play in Lebron's preference for direct offense. He and Kyrie never learnt the benefits of a detailed motion offense.

If Tony Parker, a broke man's Kyrie could do that in the Spurs system imagine what Kyrie would be by now.

 

[bboy]

in my opinion Wiggins is a one dimensional player...all he really does is shoot and shoot alot. He is athletic but other than that doesn't provide much. For all his faults Love is superior and we don't win a title with Wiggins. Love has actually improved on defense as well...of course he's not winning defensive player of the year but he's improved since he got here

 

[buzzdog]

It is absurd to use a freak injury to in any way justify one player over another. If we would have kept Wiggins who is to say he wouldn't have also gotten hurt in 2015? Similar if not the same odds of it happening as Love once you're altered the reality and let it play out. Butterfly effect. You simply can't plug Minnesota Wiggins in for Love once you've changed the reality without giving him some chance of catastrophic injury similar to what happened to Love. The fact that both Love and Kyrie suffered catastrophic injuries in 2015 seems to indicate that it just wasn't in the cards for the Cavs that year.

 

[gourimoko]

Good thing I didn't make it.

Just saying Andrew Wiggins isn't a very good basketball player and doesn't change the '15 loss into a win.

Obviously a live body helps more than someone who didn't play. He would have helped more than Irving in '15, too. Any healthy body would have.

Well, if you're saying this, then we don't disagree about 2014-15.

As for helping us more in '16, the premise I have to accept there is that Wiggins would have been better than Love, who was "terrible." I don't think he would have. You take a high useage scorer who does almost nothing else, turn him into a 3rd option, and I think you've got a pretty useless basketball player.

Again, if we're going off of Wiggins very poor advanced metrics as an indicator; those poor metrics are better than Kevin Love's same metrics over that series.. I've covered this in a previous post.

So we can't have our cake and eat it too; i.e., we can't say Wiggins is bad because stats a/b say so, yet, somehow Kevin Love, who was objectively awful in that series, was somehow more impactful regardless of those same metrics. If we're doing as close to an apples to apples comparison, Wiggins metrics indicate he'd have hypothetically helped the Cavs more than Love historically did if you swap the two players.

Now you might not agree, and might feel that, Wiggins as a third option is a "useless" player. I disagree, but I'd be open to the argument.

But for me, I think you'd need to demonstrate a strong correlation between Wiggins' shot attempts and the quality of opposing defender against him, relative to his field goal percentage. Because I think it's counterintuitive and likely counterfactual to suggest that Wiggins' efficiency and scoring ability is a product of being the #1 option -- his net output is, but I don't think his shooting efficiency is at all; in fact, I think the exact opposite is true as it would be for most NBA players.

Moreover, it's hard to envision Wiggins' usage being as high on the Cavs in his sophomore year playing along side Kyrie and LeBron.

Maybe Wiggins develops differently if he was here, learns how to impact the game in other ways. But now we're into like the 8th variable here.

While this is a very valid point; I don't think you need to even bother with as deep an analysis as this.

I think it's really as simple as comparing Wiggins later splits prior to the playoffs (say, post-ASG) to Love's Finals performance (Wiggins didn't play in the Finals so we can't directly compare). If you think Love's Finals metrics are better, then I'd like to hear how you've come to that conclusion. But if you don't, then I don't see how we are in disagreement?

Taking the Wiggins I see right now, putting him on the Cavs in '16 and removing Love..no, I don't think he helps us more. I think he has a pretty abysmal experience. Would be our Harrison Barnes.

Right, and again, I don't think that's a tenable argument given just how bad Kevin Love was in the 2015-16 Finals. I can explain in detail just how bad he was if you like; but honestly, that wasn't my point and I'm not really fond of coming off this negative when it comes to our Big 3.

That's why I just wanted to keep the argument as a concise thought-experiment wrapped around the impossible idea of going back in time and informing the Cavs of our current situation. I think, with foreknowledge, it's very very difficult to argue the Cavs should ultimately make the Wiggins/Love trade.

Without foreknowledge, however, making a contemporaneous decision; of course you do that trade; 10 times out of 10...

 

[gourimoko]

It is absurd to use a freak injury to in any way justify one player over another.

Isn't it equally absurd to talk about travelling back in time and informing oneself of future events? The whole topic is a mental framework in which we can test certain assumptions...

I think some people are rushing to judgement here and missing the context of the original post. It's not a judgement against Kevin Love.... It's a manner in which one objectively measures the outcome of a decision; not the rationale for said decision.

 

[MarkPriceFan]

I am loving this whole Wiggins rehash...

 

[gourimoko]

in my opinion Wiggins is a one dimensional player...all he really does is shoot and shoot alot. He is athletic but other than that doesn't provide much. For all his faults Love is superior and we don't win a title with Wiggins. Love has actually improved on defense as well...of course he's not winning defensive player of the year but he's improved since he got here

The bolded doesn't make sense. Love wasn't superior to anyone in the Finals that we actually won a title.

I don't disagree with anything else here; but again, a lot of people are missing the point.. I get it's nuanced, and not at all realistic; but it's not intended to be realistic. It's designed to make one objectively analyze the outcome of decisions we've made in a present and dispassionate sense rather than contemporaneous and vested manner.