Whether he is s long term bad signing doesn't change the fact that he was a significant factor in winning a title. Maybe they only get one title out of him, big deal. That's a success. You have no idea how Wiggins would play in a different role on Cleveland than he plays now. Facts > Fantasy
This discussion was hypothetical from the start so I fail to see your point. The fact IS, Charles Barkley at age 60 could play better then TT in this series. Love, 1-9 last night in a MUST win game. Wiggins would've done better and would've guarded Durant instead of Lebron. Zaza making a min amount of cash, taking out TT who makes like 80 million. Wiggins and Delly with some big men would've done a better job last year. That IS fact. Both players non-effective. Or maybe we can blame the Kardashians instead
More than likely they still win last year without Love and TT, good for TT, getting 13 rebounds against a Warriors team with no big men [Bogut was out] Love sucks. TT sucks. Facts.
I thought at the time that hanging onto Wiggins was the better move but heck, Cleveland's 3 straight finals appearances & counting, 1 title & counting, Wiggins hasn't even made the playoffs in Minny, with all that it's hard to make the argument Cleveland made the wrong move there
That's because there's no threat in the East. Boston probably the worst #1 seed of all time. I give the Cavs credit last year, a lot of things lucked out for them in terms of the suspension for Draymond and Curry not being 100% Can't blame just Wiggins for the Wolves not making the playoffs, but Wiggins is a very solid defensive player that could've guarded Durant. Lebron has to score, get assists and guard Durant just for the Cavs to stand a chance. Irving is out there guarding Curry on a lot of possessions. They should've tried to get Delly back. Say you take out Love and TT and you instead have a Wiggins, Delly and maybe a Millsap? Lebron and Irving need help on the defensive side of the floor. There is nowhere for the Cavs to go but down. I do understand points because no one predicted Durant would've joined GS, but to build a dynasty? Cavs shouldn't have made that trade.
They don't win the series last year, and you don't know if they would win this year or future years. If you are saying they still win last year, I disagree. I don't agree with any of it.
What was so great about Love and TT? Granted both did their jobs on the glass. Would you say the real reasons why the Cavs won that series is due to the Bogut injury, Curry coming off an injury, and the Draymond Green suspension? Also LeBron and Irving just putting up crazy numbers? How do those factors compare to the impact of Love being healthy and TT rebounding and playing defense? List the order of impact from best to worst in terms of why the Cavs won that series.
Haha so Boston is the worst #1 seed of all time, but they made it to the ECF. and were the only team to beat either GS or CLE. It's fun to just throw shit at a wall and hope you hit a valid point. Guess that would make CLE one of the worst Finals teams in NBA history, as they were the 2nd seed and lost a home game to the worst 1 seed in history with their best player (IT) injured? You avoid everything that goes against your points and just use facts the suit you. You call out Kevin Love as being useless, but ignore the fact he's 17 and 11 shooting .440 on over 6 3 pointers a game this postseason and had his best defensive season to date. You can ignore it as much as you want, but Love was key in game 7. He was the 3rd best player on the winning team that day, which is what he is supposed to be. But your best line... Saying Wiggins is a solid defensive player, the KD stopper, is all anyone needs to know. Laughable statement. He is considered the worst defender at small forward. There are 8 people who had a worst defensive plus/minus in the entire NBA, but he can guard Durant. Got it. The guy was .6 better than 5' 9" Isiah Thomas in DPM. This is probably where you will blame Minnesota's defense, completely ignoring this is a individual stat. You must be looking at his stellar 2.8 defensive rebounds per game, or his Anthony Davis-esque .4 blocks a game. Not only do you know nothing about basketball, you have proven you don't even seem to watch it. Your man crush (Delly) is also considered a below league average defender and his defensive numbers put him at the bottom half of NBA PGs. You probably saw him jaw at a couple people, maybe steal a ball or 2 in the NBA finals and you considered him to be Wiggins level elite on the defensive end. I sure hope you can enlighten everyone on how you watch players and grade their defensive capabilities, because you apparently are light years ahead of not only us, but paid basketball people. Look up the numbers and you will see that TT and Love were DPOY candidates compared to these 2 guys. I am intentionally not giving you many numbers so you can get some practice in actually looking up information before making an argument. My question to you is, why all the Delly love? List to me the reasons, from strongest to weakest. Is it the below average D, his .360 3P FG%, or his key spot as a reserve? The Milsap thing is so dumb it's not worth more characters to address.
Stats don't matter. All that matters is that if Wiggins was on Cleveland he'd score 50 a game and hold Durant to -14. Love has never done that.
It didn't feel like it was that thought through, just CLE had a chance to get a star and there was no answer other than yes. You are going to find people on both sides of the argument, and both have valid points. Sort of like the Brooklyn trade with Boston, but obviously that one was a million times worse, Celtics seemed like they could have asked for whatever they want... Sort of had a similar feel. But I guess that's what teams do when they go for it. Celtics traded a lot for KG and Allen, and they got a championship out of it so it was worth it.
That's not true. The overwhelming opinion of the trade was that the acquisition of Love was a tremendous trade for Cleveland. Yahoo stated it created "the most devastating trio in the NBA and will instantly make the Cavaliers a front runner to win the NBA Championship." Obviously this was before anyone expected the Warriors to emerge like they did that season. CBS stated the Cavs "now arguably have two of the five best players in the NBA in their front court." I can't find any rhetoric that eludes to Wiggins having that kind of value at all. The trade was universally heralded in the Cavs favor and that they benefited more by having an established all star than an unknown rookie.
I posted about it and that's how I felt. I believe I read other opinions that agreed with me. Cleveland overpaid just because LeBron insisted they use all possible assets to acquire immediate help for the new superteam he was building. Remember, the only reason he came back to Cleveland was their #1 picks. Wiggins was considered a future superstar and it was a selfish move by LeBron who didn't want to play with a rookie.
Whether it was the wrong move is certainly an acceptable opinion, but you says Wiggins had more value and that would have to be based on something more than your own personal opinion. That inherently is making a statement of how Wiggins was viewed in the league and thus what his worth was, and there doesn't seem to be any statements anywhere in which Wiggins was considered more valuable, as a rookie with zero NBA experience, than Kevin Love the proven NBA All-Star.
I looked up last year's thread: So it was worse than just Wiggins for Love. Wiggins and a 2015 first rounder. That is without a doubt a horrible trade considering Wiggins' value at the time.
And there was still more. Wiggins, 2015 first rounder, and Anthony Bennett, who amounted to nothing but was the first overall pick in 2013. Two #1 overalls and another first for Love. Oh, and Love opted out of his contract after the season so Cleveland had to outbid the rest of the league for him anyway. They traded all that for one season of Love (they could've just waited for Love to become a free agent and tried to sign him then). That is an all-time horrible trade.
You still aren't addressing the issue -- by all accounts Love had more value than Wiggins. It's not even debatable.
Of course it's debatable. Everyone agreed Wiggins was by far the top player in the draft and multiple teams tanked for him. There were a number of articles written on whether Cleveland should give up Wiggins for Love (not even factoring in Bennett/other first rounder). Plus I was basing the original post you're focusing on on an incorrect recollection of the trade. Factoring in all the things they traded, it was without a doubt an awful trade at the time. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-would-you-trade-wiggins-for-love-shootaround/
The trade was made to win a championship, which they did. There is zero objective criteria to judge it a bad trade. There is zero commentary anywhere in the vast published world we live in that deemed it a bad trade. The trade was considered a good trade when it happened and is still considered a good trade. You can disagree with it but that makes your opinion the extreme minority.
