Past, Present, and Future: Your Ideal Cavs Contender:

[rabman_gold]

I think this discussion is one worthy to debate for quite a while, as everyone has a personal preference of what the (supposedly future) champions should look like. Or even one that may have resembled our team from the past.

Last year's champions looked like this:

Tier	Center	Power Forward	Small Forward	Shooting Guard	Point Guard
Starters	C. Bosh	L. James	S. Battier	D. Wade	M. Chalmers
2nd String	J. Anthony	U. Haslem	M. Miller	--	--
3rd String	R. Turiaf	--	--	J. Jones	N. Cole

Our 2009 team had a very different taste:

Tier	Center	Power Forward	Small Forward	Shooting Guard	Point Guard
Starters	Z. Ilgauskas	B. Wallace	HIM	D. West	M. Williams
2nd String	A. Varejao	J. Smith	W. Szczerbiak	D. Gibson	--

How about 1992:

Tier	Center	Power Forward	Small Forward	Shooting Guard	Point Guard
Starters	B. Daugherty	L. Nance	M. Sanders	C. Ehlo	M. Price
2nd String	--	HR. Williams ^v	--	S. Kerr	T. Brandon/J. Battle

That's just some figurative examples.

What would YOU like to see as a future contender from the Cavs?

[foucault87]

I voted for the three-star method, although I might be interpreting this statement incorrectly. It seems to be the most tried and true system to have multiple "star" players who could impact any given game. While the term "star" seems arbitrary, the model can really be applied to pretty much any championship or contender, especially those that were relevant for several years. Just cherry-picking a few examples:

Early 2ks Kings: Peja, CWebb, Divac
80s Celtics: Parish, DJ, McHale, Bird
90s Bulls: Jordan, Pippen, Grant/Rodman etc.

It seems to me that a few things are needed for a team that plans to contend for several years: a primary star that can impact any given game and is also a leader when faced with difficult times, at least one to two more players who are good enough to be considered potential all-stars in any given season and also players that can impact a game (whether by passing, rebounding, defense) but not necessarily the main leaders of the team and willing to accept their roles as the second/third most important player, role players who are really good at what they do and sticking within their roles, at least one vet (probably a role player) with tons of playoff experience and possibly rings who is there mostly for the mental strength, and a token towel waver. The last role is super important.

Looking at our roster, it seems we have the primary star (Kyrie) and hopefully one of those supporting stars (Dion). There are a few other players that could fill different roles (role player - Gee, Boobie, Zeller vet - AV, Boobie). Sadly, we just released a player that could become a premier towel waver (Harangody), but others will come. There is a lot this team still needs, but I think that Grant has done a great job getting a foundation set and hopefully leading the Cavs to long years of contention and many championships.

[theSTEREO.]

Lotta exclamation marks in that poll

[Lottery God]

I voted for the three-star method, although I might be interpreting this statement incorrectly. It seems to be the most tried and true system to have multiple "star" players who could impact any given game. While the term "star" seems arbitrary, the model can really be applied to pretty much any championship or contender, especially those that were relevant for several years. Just cherry-picking a few examples:

Early 2ks Kings: Peja, CWebb, Divac
80s Celtics: Parish, DJ, McHale, Bird
90s Bulls: Jordan, Pippen, Grant/Rodman etc.

It seems to me that a few things are needed for a team that plans to contend for several years: a primary star that can impact any given game and is also a leader when faced with difficult times, at least one to two more players who are good enough to be considered potential all-stars in any given season and also players that can impact a game (whether by passing, rebounding, defense) but not necessarily the main leaders of the team and willing to accept their roles as the second/third most important player, role players who are really good at what they do and sticking within their roles, at least one vet (probably a role player) with tons of playoff experience and possibly rings who is there mostly for the mental strength, and a token towel waver. The last role is super important.

Looking at our roster, it seems we have the primary star (Kyrie) and hopefully one of those supporting stars (Dion). There are a few other players that could fill different roles (role player - Gee, Boobie, Zeller vet - AV, Boobie). Sadly, we just released a player that could become a premier towel waver (Harangody), but others will come. There is a lot this team still needs, but I think that Grant has done a great job getting a foundation set and hopefully leading the Cavs to long years of contention and many championships.

Our best towel-waver is forever gone now. His name was Wally Szczerbiak.

His contributions went far beyond towel-waving. Just look at these videos below:



Just look at Wally's clutch congratulations he gives (0:35) Mo Williams after he makes the 3/4ths court shot of game 1 in the 2009 NBA Eastern Conference Finals. Just sick.



Yet another clutch performance by Wally. He managed to not only slap LeBron's ass, but he got it right on the asshole, and he was watching while he did it.

Wally will always have a warm spot on the bench of my heart.

[rabman_gold]

I voted for the three-star method, although I might be interpreting this statement incorrectly. It seems to be the most tried and true system to have multiple "star" players who could impact any given game. While the term "star" seems arbitrary, the model can really be applied to pretty much any championship or contender, especially those that were relevant for several years. Just cherry-picking a few examples:

Nah. I just want to see what the other posters would like to see more of: stars, teams, draft picks, etc. Just depends on how you get there. For the 3 team method, I may as well say it's up to the poster's discretion. They could even post on here and say "trade Kyrie for Paul" or whatever if they feel that's better for our reasoning.

Early 2ks Kings: Peja, CWebb, Divac
80s Celtics: Parish, DJ, McHale, Bird
90s Bulls: Jordan, Pippen, Grant/Rodman etc.

Seems acceptable. Once again, up to the poster on the type of stars they feel we should have.

It seems to me that a few things are needed for a team that plans to contend for several years: a primary star that can impact any given game and is also a leader when faced with difficult times, at least one to two more players who are good enough to be considered potential all-stars in any given season and also players that can impact a game (whether by passing, rebounding, defense) but not necessarily the main leaders of the team and willing to accept their roles as the second/third most important player, role players who are really good at what they do and sticking within their roles, at least one vet (probably a role player) with tons of playoff experience and possibly rings who is there mostly for the mental strength, and a token towel waver. The last role is super important.

Very good points. I put mine to a minimum so it could free up discussion that I think we may have for a few years or so.

Looking at our roster, it seems we have the primary star (Kyrie) and hopefully one of those supporting stars (Dion). There are a few other players that could fill different roles (role player - Gee, Boobie, Zeller vet - AV, Boobie). Sadly, we just released a player that could become a premier towel waver (Harangody), but others will come. There is a lot this team still needs, but I think that Grant has done a great job getting a foundation set and hopefully leading the Cavs to long years of contention and many championships.

I think so too, but we're not the only ones with an opinion... Oh well.

Lotta exclamation marks in that poll

Yup. Sounds a lot like how some posters act on here, doesn't it ?

[The Voice]

The only time I can find above average players winning it all is with the Pistons, though I may be wrong. That's why I think the three star deal works best, but after those three stars you need a clutch veteran IMO.

[CleveRocks]

Top teams today are:

OKC Westbrook, Durant, Ibaka + Martin off bench
New York Melo, Chandler, Felton* + JR Smith off the bench
Clippers Paul, Griffin, Butler* + Crawford and Barns off the bench.. They also have DeAndre J who defends the rim
San Antonio Duncan, Parker + Manu off the bench+ Pops
Memphis Zbo, Gay, Gasol the younger and Conely. erratic bench
Golden State Curry, Thompson, Lee plus Barns/Green Jarret Jack from the bench.
Miami Wade, James, Bosh Allen off the bench...

So it looks to me as if you need three really good players starting and one volume scorer off the bench. It appears to be best when those three starters include a long physical and versatile wing with inside and outside offense plus defensive ability, and somebody around the basket rebounding, swatting shots and finishing. This is the original Celtics model, with Garnett, Pierce and Ray Allen, plus Rondo who I think was an unplanned surprise.

Or current configuration looks a lot more like Golden State. Our core is really two scoring ball handling guards. We are obviously looking for Thompson to be that rebounder blocker, but he is not there yet. So i think we are still two good pieces away from contention.

[Sawduzt]

I think the secret to the modern NBA is two guys who demand double teams. Everyone else's offence feeds off the defensive rotations. Irving is one of those guys, just need another one from the draft

[Jack Brickman]

I think the secret to the modern NBA is two guys who demand double teams. Everyone else's offence feeds off the defensive rotations. Irving is one of those guys, just need another one from the draft

I think Dion could be that guy in time.

[ajz20]

I think the secret to the modern NBA is two guys who demand double teams. Everyone else's offence feeds off the defensive rotations. Irving is one of those guys, just need another one from the draft

100 percent correct. However, I dont think we will be able to draft that player this year. I dont see a player of Irving's caliber in this draft so dont expect it this June. Len may demand double teams later on in his career, but that is 2-3 years from now. it is going to have to be trade or FA and using the draft to add "core pieces who are starters but not top 20 type players." Perhaps, Waiters turns into that player, you never know! For true contention, as several of us have stated countless times, we need to make 1-2 MAJOR Moves in FA or trade and add one top 20-25 NBA talent in the next 2 years. That is assuming Waiters develops into a 17-20 a night scorer. If our team ends up being Irving, Waiters and solid role players I doubt we will ever win anything other than one playoff series.

[mAo_mAo]

I really want a 2 superstar bigman model.

[randymoss1881]

100 percent correct. However, I dont think we will be able to draft that player this year. I dont see a player of Irving's caliber in this draft so dont expect it this June. Len may demand double teams later on in his career, but that is 2-3 years from now. it is going to have to be trade or FA and using the draft to add "core pieces who are starters but not top 20 type players." Perhaps, Waiters turns into that player, you never know! For true contention, as several of us have stated countless times, we need to make 1-2 MAJOR Moves in FA or trade and add one top 20-25 NBA talent in the next 2 years. That is assuming Waiters develops into a 17-20 a night scorer. If our team ends up being Irving, Waiters and solid role players I doubt we will ever win anything other than one playoff series.

You say Len could be that player but 2years from now then why not draft him. We wont be contending anytime soon anyway so whats the rush. Also waiters has shown plenty signs of being that player to. He gets to the rim and he his good in pick and roll and its only his rookie season. Give him time and when he starts getting calls and gets more comfortable he will easily be a 17-20ppg guy with good assist numbers and good defense.

[Jon]

Offensively, you need at least 3 guys who can shoot the ball for the sake of floor spacing, and at least 2 who can create a shot for a teammate. Defensively you need decent length combined with speed & smarts to make effective rotations and contest shots.

Tactically, I think we all want our team to play like a team ... not a star and his helpers, or even a pair of stars who take turns.

What I'd enjoy a lot is a team without an obvious weakness that opponents can exploit and a team that plays smart. Attacking and driving is a lot of work compared to just setting an effective screen and taking the resulting open shot.

[mds]

Yeah, I don't think just having 'stars' works. It needs to fit together. Miami has struggled with this and still does. It was really the role players who made last year work for them. Battier just shot the shit out of the ball. It spaced the floor and allowed Lebron to do his shit.

The current Lakers aren't working at all and they're loaded with stars. Lots of teams with big names never make it work.

Obviously you want the best players possible, but most championship teams have players that fit certain roles. Some are creators, some are shooters, some are defender/rebounders, 6th men, etc. You kind of need it all. The Spurs did/do so well because they have a great big man, a great point guard, a great 6th man, and solid role players who just shoot, play D, and rebound.

I have no idea how we're going to get there. Irving is one piece. Waiters might be another, and it might be 6th man. Everyone else is a role player at best. Of what we have now Andy is the only other piece I see contributing to a contender. If next years draft doesn't yield a legitimate player we're probably still years away unless we go nuts in free agency.

[Malt]

Yeah, I don't think just having 'stars' works. It needs to fit together. Miami has struggled with this and still does. It was really the role players who made last year work for them. Battier just shot the shit out of the ball. It spaced the floor and allowed Lebron to do his shit.

The current Lakers aren't working at all and they're loaded with stars. Lots of teams with big names never make it work.

Obviously you want the best players possible, but most championship teams have players that fit certain roles. Some are creators, some are shooters, some are defender/rebounders, 6th men, etc. You kind of need it all. The Spurs did/do so well because they have a great big man, a great point guard, a great 6th man, and solid role players who just shoot, play D, and rebound.

I have no idea how we're going to get there. Irving is one piece. Waiters might be another, and it might be 6th man. Everyone else is a role player at best. Of what we have now Andy is the only other piece I see contributing to a contender. If next years draft doesn't yield a legitimate player we're probably still years away unless we go nuts in free agency.

The ideal is drafting a great team, but the risk is the necessity of getting all (or most) of your picks right. But theoretically, letting young players learn the NBA game together will help with that cohesion. The Lakers, OTOH, have managed to combine a bunch of talented vets who all played under different systems, and then introduced a coach which teaches a system different from anything any of them have done before (with the exception of Nash, who's been hurt for most of Dantoni's current tenure). I still think the Cavs need a significant piece, and while I really like Dion, I'm not sure he'll be a perennial all-star type talent. Time will tell, but if he's not, we still need one. (Besides Kyrie)