Brian Stumble: Welcome to the preview installment of Hardwood Knocks. In this inaugural season, we'll be presenting unprecedented access inside the Cavaliers franchise. We'll take a look back at the history of the franchise, the current ownership's first 3 years, likely the most fiery of any new ownership group, including their successes and failures. We'll also look at this offseason and the season as it progresses. You'll get looks inside the front office, the huddle, the locker room, the team plane, and more.
Kick back with a snack, because you'll never want to miss an episode of Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland.
First up: How Cleveland Sucked, then Sucked More
Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
Last edited by 42PhD on Sat Nov 07, 2015 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
There's no "I" in team, but you can find "Eat me" if you push it too far.
-
IamQuailman
- Posts: 10407
- Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:25 am
- PBSL Team: Milwaukee Bucks
- Contact:
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
I heard someone wanted you to define "a winning offseason"
Sent via Morse code
Sent via Morse code
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
Brian Stumble: Tune in to have these and all your questions answered.
There's no "I" in team, but you can find "Eat me" if you push it too far.
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
What's the goal this year for your team? Is it to hold the ship steady until more help arrives? What's the long-term goal beyond this season?
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
Brian Stumble: Here's an interesting clip from the press conference.78# wrote:What's the goal this year for your team? Is it to hold the ship steady until more help arrives? What's the long-term goal beyond this season?
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1777&p=16720#p16720
There's no "I" in team, but you can find "Eat me" if you push it too far.
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
How Cleveland Sucked, then Sucked More
Brian Stumble:
45
36
43
30
12
15
21
31
47
42
34
Those are the win totals of the Cleveland Cavaliers from the inception of the League until new ownership stepped in. The new ownership group was a mystery. Known, but unknown. A safe but, but dangerous. Highly analytical, but wildly savage.
In a word, intriguing.
But that's about it, so far.
14
39
35
The franchise is averaging about the same number of games, their lowest win total is not as low as in prior seasons, and the high is not as high. Before the team featured players like Charles Barkley, Muggsy Bogues, Kevin Garnett, Steve Nash, Eddie Jones. Recently, Latrell Sprewell, Michael Redd, Allen Iverson.
All good names, a couple of great names, but the timing and the teams were right.
There have been the same excuses before and recently for trading away top talent or top draft picks, none of them translating into the things that franchises claim to care most about, which are wins, or that one thing they care about the most but they rarely speak of, at least in the truest, deepest sense: a title, a fundamental and indisputable acknowledgment that, just for a moment, you're the best in the world, before it all fades and you the world tries to take it all away . . . death being the only reward for life, how could sports be any other way?
Is the franchise cursed? Of course not. That's fine to joke about, but what we're here to do this season, and what's we've been granted unprecedented access, and in fact likely too much access, in order to answer the toughest questions of them all. They are, unsurprisingly, the simplest, and the oldest questions.
How?
Why?
This season . . . on Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland.
See you soon.
Next time: Inside the Cavaliers Front Office
Brian Stumble:
45
36
43
30
12
15
21
31
47
42
34
Those are the win totals of the Cleveland Cavaliers from the inception of the League until new ownership stepped in. The new ownership group was a mystery. Known, but unknown. A safe but, but dangerous. Highly analytical, but wildly savage.
In a word, intriguing.
But that's about it, so far.
14
39
35
The franchise is averaging about the same number of games, their lowest win total is not as low as in prior seasons, and the high is not as high. Before the team featured players like Charles Barkley, Muggsy Bogues, Kevin Garnett, Steve Nash, Eddie Jones. Recently, Latrell Sprewell, Michael Redd, Allen Iverson.
All good names, a couple of great names, but the timing and the teams were right.
There have been the same excuses before and recently for trading away top talent or top draft picks, none of them translating into the things that franchises claim to care most about, which are wins, or that one thing they care about the most but they rarely speak of, at least in the truest, deepest sense: a title, a fundamental and indisputable acknowledgment that, just for a moment, you're the best in the world, before it all fades and you the world tries to take it all away . . . death being the only reward for life, how could sports be any other way?
Is the franchise cursed? Of course not. That's fine to joke about, but what we're here to do this season, and what's we've been granted unprecedented access, and in fact likely too much access, in order to answer the toughest questions of them all. They are, unsurprisingly, the simplest, and the oldest questions.
How?
Why?
This season . . . on Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland.
See you soon.
Next time: Inside the Cavaliers Front Office
There's no "I" in team, but you can find "Eat me" if you push it too far.
- NickMalone77
- Posts: 3631
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 2:36 pm
- PBSL Team: New Orleans Pelicans
- Location: Greenlawn, NY
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
Inside the Cavaliers Front Office
Brian Stumble: Welcome back to Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland. As we record this, we're approaching the season, and in the coming episodes you'll see just how this organization handled their first 3 seasons, built this team, and more.
Today, we sit down with the puppeteers in this sideshow, the Owner, GM, and Coach.
Gentleman, welcome.
Owner: I should say welcome to you, Brian. This is my Fryeing building in case you forgot.
GM: Sir, he meant to the show. I'm sure he feels your hospitality to be unparalleled.
Owner: Vegan <expletive deleted>.
Brian Stumble: Certainly, welcome to this forum, but really this is a journey we are taking together, and all your hospitality and, indeed, vision, is appreciated.
Owner: It's fine Brian, I'm just tickling your sack, but, Coach and I really need to go. We'll catch you later. Coach, tell him bye.
Coach: We gotta work. 110%
Owner: Here, boy! Here boy!
Brian Stumble: That'l be fine, sir. We'll catch up when you have time in your schedule.
Owner: I was telling, not asking. I'll send you a hooker. Oh, where the Frye did he go . . . . Pencildick, make sure he has enough carrots or <expletive deleted> . . .
GM: Yes, sir. Ok, Brian, how can I help you today?
Brian Stumble: Let's start with the obvious. This team's owner is nontraditional in terms of the history and culture of the League. Why is he here.
GM: That's actually pretty simple, Brian. I also think understanding him is key to understanding this team. He actually grew up as a simple man. You can tell he's exceptionally bright, like most of the Owners in the League. That's not rare. His gifts, however, are not those of the other owners. They all have grand visions, but he sees things in a decidedly abstract way. He's not a people person, at least not like other owners who made their fortunes in business. The skills needed there include very good people skills and understanding of groups and cultures, too. He sees the facts, but it's all fungible to him. Therein lies the weakness and the strength.
To answer your question, he's here because he thought this would be fun, he's trying to make some money, and he's just trying to win in a game with human pieces. In a sense, it's like that Connell story, The Hounds of Zaroff, and he's Zaroff. I'm here to make sure Rainsford does not get to sleep in the bed.
Brian Stumble: So? what about you? How did you get into this? This is not in your background, either.
GM: I helped him in a class in college once. He had trouble explaining what a professor was doing wrong in working out an economics problem. I interceded, explained the professor was wrong and why, and the matter was cleared up. Fast-forwarding, we are here. He trusts me as someone who has skills he does not, which annoys him, but he knows it be true. He also knows I'm right about some things he is not. This annoys him most of all, but he's believes he is better of with me than without me. I respect him tremendously, and his endeavors allow me to do many of the things I've always wanted to do, so it's not as bad as it seems. You just need to understand his communication style. And tolerate it, I suppose.
As for Coach, because that is coming next, we all know that Coach is not the best Coach in the League. We actually stayed away from that.
Brian Stumble: What? This is extraordinary. He burned his facility down and built a new one. He's sparing no expense. Why skimp here?
GM: It's not the expense. Coach is exactly what ownership wanted. He wants a guy who can deploy instructions to plays and get the most out of them. He wants the higher-level strategy left up to us. So, we optimized for what we wanted. If we are setting ourselves up for "failure," we can always adjust or leave the League, but for now we find value in the level on control Coach gives us. He's great with the guys, too. That can't be overlooked.
Brian Stumble: Fascinating, but it's troubling. Don't you owe something to the League? To Cleveland? How can you set that duty aside for your own whims?
GM: We feel that duty is inalienable, but what was done before just will not work. They were being short-changed before. Our goals and those duties are in perfect alignment. It's a question of methods. We have different methods, and they may fail. If they do, we'll readjust. We're not leaving this league until we take Cleveland to a 48+ win season, and we'll do whatever it takes. We'll spend whatever it takes. We'll try anything, but it'll be on our timeline. Timing is everything.
Brian Stumble: Couldn't agree with you more on that last sentiment, so let's wrap up for now. Thanks for your time, and extend the same to the entire organization. This is truly appreciated by all our viewers around the League.
Next time, we'll talk about the roster. See you soon.
Brian Stumble: Welcome back to Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland. As we record this, we're approaching the season, and in the coming episodes you'll see just how this organization handled their first 3 seasons, built this team, and more.
Today, we sit down with the puppeteers in this sideshow, the Owner, GM, and Coach.
Gentleman, welcome.
Owner: I should say welcome to you, Brian. This is my Fryeing building in case you forgot.
GM: Sir, he meant to the show. I'm sure he feels your hospitality to be unparalleled.
Owner: Vegan <expletive deleted>.
Brian Stumble: Certainly, welcome to this forum, but really this is a journey we are taking together, and all your hospitality and, indeed, vision, is appreciated.
Owner: It's fine Brian, I'm just tickling your sack, but, Coach and I really need to go. We'll catch you later. Coach, tell him bye.
Coach: We gotta work. 110%
Owner: Here, boy! Here boy!
Brian Stumble: That'l be fine, sir. We'll catch up when you have time in your schedule.
Owner: I was telling, not asking. I'll send you a hooker. Oh, where the Frye did he go . . . . Pencildick, make sure he has enough carrots or <expletive deleted> . . .
GM: Yes, sir. Ok, Brian, how can I help you today?
Brian Stumble: Let's start with the obvious. This team's owner is nontraditional in terms of the history and culture of the League. Why is he here.
GM: That's actually pretty simple, Brian. I also think understanding him is key to understanding this team. He actually grew up as a simple man. You can tell he's exceptionally bright, like most of the Owners in the League. That's not rare. His gifts, however, are not those of the other owners. They all have grand visions, but he sees things in a decidedly abstract way. He's not a people person, at least not like other owners who made their fortunes in business. The skills needed there include very good people skills and understanding of groups and cultures, too. He sees the facts, but it's all fungible to him. Therein lies the weakness and the strength.
To answer your question, he's here because he thought this would be fun, he's trying to make some money, and he's just trying to win in a game with human pieces. In a sense, it's like that Connell story, The Hounds of Zaroff, and he's Zaroff. I'm here to make sure Rainsford does not get to sleep in the bed.
Brian Stumble: So? what about you? How did you get into this? This is not in your background, either.
GM: I helped him in a class in college once. He had trouble explaining what a professor was doing wrong in working out an economics problem. I interceded, explained the professor was wrong and why, and the matter was cleared up. Fast-forwarding, we are here. He trusts me as someone who has skills he does not, which annoys him, but he knows it be true. He also knows I'm right about some things he is not. This annoys him most of all, but he's believes he is better of with me than without me. I respect him tremendously, and his endeavors allow me to do many of the things I've always wanted to do, so it's not as bad as it seems. You just need to understand his communication style. And tolerate it, I suppose.
As for Coach, because that is coming next, we all know that Coach is not the best Coach in the League. We actually stayed away from that.
Brian Stumble: What? This is extraordinary. He burned his facility down and built a new one. He's sparing no expense. Why skimp here?
GM: It's not the expense. Coach is exactly what ownership wanted. He wants a guy who can deploy instructions to plays and get the most out of them. He wants the higher-level strategy left up to us. So, we optimized for what we wanted. If we are setting ourselves up for "failure," we can always adjust or leave the League, but for now we find value in the level on control Coach gives us. He's great with the guys, too. That can't be overlooked.
Brian Stumble: Fascinating, but it's troubling. Don't you owe something to the League? To Cleveland? How can you set that duty aside for your own whims?
GM: We feel that duty is inalienable, but what was done before just will not work. They were being short-changed before. Our goals and those duties are in perfect alignment. It's a question of methods. We have different methods, and they may fail. If they do, we'll readjust. We're not leaving this league until we take Cleveland to a 48+ win season, and we'll do whatever it takes. We'll spend whatever it takes. We'll try anything, but it'll be on our timeline. Timing is everything.
Brian Stumble: Couldn't agree with you more on that last sentiment, so let's wrap up for now. Thanks for your time, and extend the same to the entire organization. This is truly appreciated by all our viewers around the League.
Next time, we'll talk about the roster. See you soon.
There's no "I" in team, but you can find "Eat me" if you push it too far.
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
Setting the Depth Chart
Brian Stumble: Welcome back to the latest Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland. What we have for you today may seem a little odd since we haven't told you how this team was built this season, and we've completely skipping 3 years of the franchise, but we'll discuss that during the season. Right now, we're in the midst of the start of the season, and we took the opportunity to bring you a first-hand look at how this team has struggled to figure out what matters most to the success of the franchise: playing basketball.
Joining me, as will be custom, is the Cavaliers' General Manager. Welcome back, sir.
GM: Glad to have you, and happy to be here. Shall I just get right to it?
Brian Stumble: Be my guest.
GM: I know we'll get back to the roster itself and how it came to be, but let me just say that we knew a few things that shaped our roster choices that do affect our depth chart. Those things were putting a priority on keeping Michael Redd and Latrell Sprewell, and not shopping James Jones. We felt pretty sure we'd part ways with Shawn Bradley, Loren Woods, and Carlos Arroyo just for contract reasons. Shawn's contract did not allow us to come out of the tax given our other moves and goals, while Loren and Carlos were in the final year of their deals and we felt we could get value for them, including Travis Outlaw. We kept Dalibor Bagaric, but everyone else was traded or allowed to walk.
Given our choices, we decided to look for value picks, and we felt that was most likely to be manifest for players with defensive and talents apart from scoring. So, we sough out some defenders, filtering on other skills and attributes just a tad. Next, we wanted a flexible mix of players. In this way, as we found the team's pulse or were affected greatly by a remarkable camp, one way or another, we could adjust .
Defense, flexibility.
Brian Stumble: It makes sense. I have questions about that, but I know that's for another day.
GM: Yes, and we'll answer everything then.
Our very decision was to move Latrell Sprewell to point guard. We committed to playing him 48m to see if it was sustainable . . . more on that late. Keyon Dooling got time in preseason, so we felt ok with the idea. Latrell is the best on the team passing and handling, is a killer defender, and an offensive threat, but not like he used to be. We felt his size would give us an advantage, too. We installed Keyon as the backup, and our project Zoran Planinic is the reserve.
With that set, we looking at the other end of the spectrum and installed Michael Doleac at center largely based on defensive and rebounding considerations. While not as athletic as Brendan Haywood, we felt these edges, particularly in rebounding, made him the choice. Brendan the backup and Dalibor remains the reserve.
Our initial idea was to see if we could continue to bring Michael Redd of the bench to balance our usages and get him some better looks while drawing some attention away from the backups. This and the decision that we would relegate Maciej Lampe and Travis Outlaw to the development work for the season, team health allowing, left us with some particular needs at shooting guard, small forward, and power forward.
This is where our flexibility helped us. Darius Miles, who we are very intrigued by, to be frank, rated very well at power forward for us and very close to Malik Allen, but since he also rated, given our alternatives, as a decent small forward, we decided to bring him off the bench in a flexible role. Also, while similar to Malik in a broad way, Maik has more offense, and that starting unit could use a little more punch, we felt, whereas our best scorer was coming off the bench.
We decided that Quentin Richardson would be our starting shooting guard. Again, a good defender, size at the position, and some offensive firepower. He could also play small forward, so we figured he could get time in the game while Michael was playing. We chose Kirk Snyder as the reserve.
Brian Stumble: So it boils down to small forward.
GM: Exactly, our flexibility allows us to tune that position with our remaining players. Going back to defense, we chose Donnell Harvey, who can defend in the post like a center and can hold his own on the perimeter. He's not the best scorer, but we'd made our choice to go with defense. We added James Jones to fill in the leftover minutes.
Brian Stumble: That's who's playing. What about how you play?
GM: This matters, of course, but for the first couple weeks we are taking a middle of the road approach and evaluating after that. If we need to add offense, we will. If we need more rebounding, we will adjust as much as possible to address the need. Additionally, we are testing if Latrell can handle 48 minutes, how Darius and Malik do with 24 minutes each, and more.
Brian Stumble: Interesting approach. We'll see how you do . . . This was of course recorded just before the season started, so we know a couple things. We'll talk more in depth soon, but Cleveland did manage to put together a better than expected defense and a worse than expected offense.
We'll talk more about that next time.
See you soon.
Brian Stumble: Welcome back to the latest Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland. What we have for you today may seem a little odd since we haven't told you how this team was built this season, and we've completely skipping 3 years of the franchise, but we'll discuss that during the season. Right now, we're in the midst of the start of the season, and we took the opportunity to bring you a first-hand look at how this team has struggled to figure out what matters most to the success of the franchise: playing basketball.
Joining me, as will be custom, is the Cavaliers' General Manager. Welcome back, sir.
GM: Glad to have you, and happy to be here. Shall I just get right to it?
Brian Stumble: Be my guest.
GM: I know we'll get back to the roster itself and how it came to be, but let me just say that we knew a few things that shaped our roster choices that do affect our depth chart. Those things were putting a priority on keeping Michael Redd and Latrell Sprewell, and not shopping James Jones. We felt pretty sure we'd part ways with Shawn Bradley, Loren Woods, and Carlos Arroyo just for contract reasons. Shawn's contract did not allow us to come out of the tax given our other moves and goals, while Loren and Carlos were in the final year of their deals and we felt we could get value for them, including Travis Outlaw. We kept Dalibor Bagaric, but everyone else was traded or allowed to walk.
Given our choices, we decided to look for value picks, and we felt that was most likely to be manifest for players with defensive and talents apart from scoring. So, we sough out some defenders, filtering on other skills and attributes just a tad. Next, we wanted a flexible mix of players. In this way, as we found the team's pulse or were affected greatly by a remarkable camp, one way or another, we could adjust .
Defense, flexibility.
Brian Stumble: It makes sense. I have questions about that, but I know that's for another day.
GM: Yes, and we'll answer everything then.
Our very decision was to move Latrell Sprewell to point guard. We committed to playing him 48m to see if it was sustainable . . . more on that late. Keyon Dooling got time in preseason, so we felt ok with the idea. Latrell is the best on the team passing and handling, is a killer defender, and an offensive threat, but not like he used to be. We felt his size would give us an advantage, too. We installed Keyon as the backup, and our project Zoran Planinic is the reserve.
With that set, we looking at the other end of the spectrum and installed Michael Doleac at center largely based on defensive and rebounding considerations. While not as athletic as Brendan Haywood, we felt these edges, particularly in rebounding, made him the choice. Brendan the backup and Dalibor remains the reserve.
Our initial idea was to see if we could continue to bring Michael Redd of the bench to balance our usages and get him some better looks while drawing some attention away from the backups. This and the decision that we would relegate Maciej Lampe and Travis Outlaw to the development work for the season, team health allowing, left us with some particular needs at shooting guard, small forward, and power forward.
This is where our flexibility helped us. Darius Miles, who we are very intrigued by, to be frank, rated very well at power forward for us and very close to Malik Allen, but since he also rated, given our alternatives, as a decent small forward, we decided to bring him off the bench in a flexible role. Also, while similar to Malik in a broad way, Maik has more offense, and that starting unit could use a little more punch, we felt, whereas our best scorer was coming off the bench.
We decided that Quentin Richardson would be our starting shooting guard. Again, a good defender, size at the position, and some offensive firepower. He could also play small forward, so we figured he could get time in the game while Michael was playing. We chose Kirk Snyder as the reserve.
Brian Stumble: So it boils down to small forward.
GM: Exactly, our flexibility allows us to tune that position with our remaining players. Going back to defense, we chose Donnell Harvey, who can defend in the post like a center and can hold his own on the perimeter. He's not the best scorer, but we'd made our choice to go with defense. We added James Jones to fill in the leftover minutes.
Brian Stumble: That's who's playing. What about how you play?
GM: This matters, of course, but for the first couple weeks we are taking a middle of the road approach and evaluating after that. If we need to add offense, we will. If we need more rebounding, we will adjust as much as possible to address the need. Additionally, we are testing if Latrell can handle 48 minutes, how Darius and Malik do with 24 minutes each, and more.
Brian Stumble: Interesting approach. We'll see how you do . . . This was of course recorded just before the season started, so we know a couple things. We'll talk more in depth soon, but Cleveland did manage to put together a better than expected defense and a worse than expected offense.
We'll talk more about that next time.
See you soon.
There's no "I" in team, but you can find "Eat me" if you push it too far.
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
Adjusting the Depth Chart
Brian Stumble: It's a pleasure to welcome you back to Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland. When we last air, we walked through the thought process in setting the team's game plan to start the season. Since then, the team has gone 2-21, an abysmal showing, good for last in the League, though I probably shouldn't use the work good there.
You're not watching to get my opinion, however. Let's see what the General Manager has to say.
GM: Thanks, Brian. Look, we'd rather be 21-2 than 2-21, but the record isn't what it's about this season. We're starting our long-advertised rebuild. A rebuild happens off the court, not on the court. We'll be judged on the court at the end, but not at the beginning.
Brian Stumble: That makes sense, but that 2-21 record can't be a positive.
GM: No, it's not, but we look at that with a few other facts. We had 4 losses that were within 3 points, and 6 more that were larger single digit losses. Again, none of this is good, but it's also not out of hand when you take the long view.
Brian Stumble: Please, explain.
GM: We started off trying to build a team that was effective on defense. Relatively speaking, that's been true from the start. We're still working on it, but given our salary and the nature of our key players, we're please with that. We also wanted to work on rebounding, and our roster rebounds well, particularly offensively. We've tweaked things, and we're picking on the defensive boards, too. Beyond that, we're blocking well, but we need to get more steals.
Brian Stumble: So what that means is you are disappointed with the offense, right?
GM: Surprised and disappointed. We expected the offense to be behind the defense just because of what guided our choices, but we did not expect to be the worst in the League, especially by this margin. We initially had Michael coming off the bench in hopes to get him and Latrell more touches overall, but we moved Michael to the starting lineup pretty quickly. We also adjusted some of our guys' minutes to favor the offense. It helped, but not enough.
Looking at the first few weeks of the season, we decided we had enough telling us we needed to concentrate more inside. So, we made a few more roster tweaks. We didn't get wins, but we had 3 of those 4 closes losses, and in a tougher stretch, after these changes.
We're not done with the tweaking, but we're pleased that we could predict at least some aspects of our performance and that we are able to exert some control from there.
Brian Stumble: How likely is it you don't win another game?
GM: I think highly unlikely. Other teams are out there trying to lose, and they may or may not succeed, but there are many more games left to play.
Brian Stumble: In the face of the losing, we know you make some hard choices. Focusing only on the team performance and setting the game plan, what is the hardest thing part of making these adjustments.
GM: Good question. It's the trade-offs. With a roster like ours, the players have warts. They know it, we know it. The question is which deficiencies to you choose to inflict up on the team? Let's use Darius Miles for example. His offense isn't that great, but that's true for a number of people as on our roster. Still, he's one of the best rebounders on the team and one of the best defenders. He also turns the ball over too often. As a team, the turnover rate is ok, and this may let us explore more time with Darius, or at least not cutting what he has.
Brian Stumble: Can you tell us what's next?
GM: Nope. we're not sure.
Brian Stumble: We'll check back in on the record in a couple of weeks, but in the meantime, we're going to review just how this team was assembled. And why.
See you next time.
Brian Stumble: It's a pleasure to welcome you back to Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland. When we last air, we walked through the thought process in setting the team's game plan to start the season. Since then, the team has gone 2-21, an abysmal showing, good for last in the League, though I probably shouldn't use the work good there.
You're not watching to get my opinion, however. Let's see what the General Manager has to say.
GM: Thanks, Brian. Look, we'd rather be 21-2 than 2-21, but the record isn't what it's about this season. We're starting our long-advertised rebuild. A rebuild happens off the court, not on the court. We'll be judged on the court at the end, but not at the beginning.
Brian Stumble: That makes sense, but that 2-21 record can't be a positive.
GM: No, it's not, but we look at that with a few other facts. We had 4 losses that were within 3 points, and 6 more that were larger single digit losses. Again, none of this is good, but it's also not out of hand when you take the long view.
Brian Stumble: Please, explain.
GM: We started off trying to build a team that was effective on defense. Relatively speaking, that's been true from the start. We're still working on it, but given our salary and the nature of our key players, we're please with that. We also wanted to work on rebounding, and our roster rebounds well, particularly offensively. We've tweaked things, and we're picking on the defensive boards, too. Beyond that, we're blocking well, but we need to get more steals.
Brian Stumble: So what that means is you are disappointed with the offense, right?
GM: Surprised and disappointed. We expected the offense to be behind the defense just because of what guided our choices, but we did not expect to be the worst in the League, especially by this margin. We initially had Michael coming off the bench in hopes to get him and Latrell more touches overall, but we moved Michael to the starting lineup pretty quickly. We also adjusted some of our guys' minutes to favor the offense. It helped, but not enough.
Looking at the first few weeks of the season, we decided we had enough telling us we needed to concentrate more inside. So, we made a few more roster tweaks. We didn't get wins, but we had 3 of those 4 closes losses, and in a tougher stretch, after these changes.
We're not done with the tweaking, but we're pleased that we could predict at least some aspects of our performance and that we are able to exert some control from there.
Brian Stumble: How likely is it you don't win another game?
GM: I think highly unlikely. Other teams are out there trying to lose, and they may or may not succeed, but there are many more games left to play.
Brian Stumble: In the face of the losing, we know you make some hard choices. Focusing only on the team performance and setting the game plan, what is the hardest thing part of making these adjustments.
GM: Good question. It's the trade-offs. With a roster like ours, the players have warts. They know it, we know it. The question is which deficiencies to you choose to inflict up on the team? Let's use Darius Miles for example. His offense isn't that great, but that's true for a number of people as on our roster. Still, he's one of the best rebounders on the team and one of the best defenders. He also turns the ball over too often. As a team, the turnover rate is ok, and this may let us explore more time with Darius, or at least not cutting what he has.
Brian Stumble: Can you tell us what's next?
GM: Nope. we're not sure.
Brian Stumble: We'll check back in on the record in a couple of weeks, but in the meantime, we're going to review just how this team was assembled. And why.
See you next time.
There's no "I" in team, but you can find "Eat me" if you push it too far.
-
IamQuailman
- Posts: 10407
- Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:25 am
- PBSL Team: Milwaukee Bucks
- Contact:
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
As you should, Buck-o
There's no "I" in team, but you can find "Eat me" if you push it too far.
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
Trash to Treasure?
Brian Stumble: Welcome back to Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland. We have been bringing you a peek behind the curtain, giving you views of just what goes into running these franchises in the League. Our path has been a meandering one, and this week we actually take a step back into the offseason.
The Cavaliers have 7 Wins just past the halfway mark of the season. They have a young guard in his prime, and aging superstar that has returned to earth, and a roster full of minimum contract players and late first-round picks. The team also traded away some similar players prior to the start of the season.
It seems like yet another lost season for a lost franchise, but I can't help but feel like there's some method to this madness. With that, I'd like to welcome back the GM of the Cavaliers to enlighten us about the offseason.
GM: Thanks, Brian. You're right, we have a method. From our perspective, we're starting the rebuild, and we're doing it in a better position than we were in than when we took over 3 seasons ago. That team had the aging Steve Nash on long deal, we have Michael Redd. That team had some young prospects, some have done well and some have not, but we were clearing house as part of a clean break with the past. Ownership felt very strongly about this, so as to never have any successes of this franchises ever questioned . . . a very real thing in this League.
We also went into the tax the past 2 seasons, and given our goals, we wanted to ensure we go below the tax, which is why we traded Shawn Bradley, since we did not have the resources to compete for the playoffs and the tax would we a waste. We took on some long term salary to do that, which is fine. At any rate, this is part of the rebuild and the philosophy.
We also drew a line in the sand where we were keeping our draft picks going forward, so we knew we had help coming if we had patience. Meanwhile, we committed not to trade Latrell Sprewell, despite many trade offers, to help preserve the power balance of the League. His contract coming off the books in the coming offseason is also a form of help.
So, knowing that we were going to have room for at least one nice free agent and that we would have draft picks, we traded away rookies that were not going to clearly help us in the coming seasons or that we might be able to reacquire on the market and decided to go in early to the top of the bottom of the free agent pool.
Brian Stumble: You can't keep this up, though, can you?
GM: We don't want to. We're just taking a bigger swing at it this season. In the future, we'll do this on a smaller scale
Brian Stumble: Well, that was the plan. How's it working?
GM: We're happy. We feel like we have some guys who can play well in extended minutes, just not with these teammates against other teams' starters. However, if these guys can be ok without much support and in long minutes, they'll be better in fewer minutes, in a defined role, on a better team. We feel we are accelerating the rebuild rather than just kicking back and trying to lose.
Brian Stumble: I must say, that's a different way to look at the situation. Looking forward to see how it unfolds.
Next time, we'll look even farther back, going back to the current ownership's first three seasons. See you soon.
Brian Stumble: Welcome back to Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland. We have been bringing you a peek behind the curtain, giving you views of just what goes into running these franchises in the League. Our path has been a meandering one, and this week we actually take a step back into the offseason.
The Cavaliers have 7 Wins just past the halfway mark of the season. They have a young guard in his prime, and aging superstar that has returned to earth, and a roster full of minimum contract players and late first-round picks. The team also traded away some similar players prior to the start of the season.
It seems like yet another lost season for a lost franchise, but I can't help but feel like there's some method to this madness. With that, I'd like to welcome back the GM of the Cavaliers to enlighten us about the offseason.
GM: Thanks, Brian. You're right, we have a method. From our perspective, we're starting the rebuild, and we're doing it in a better position than we were in than when we took over 3 seasons ago. That team had the aging Steve Nash on long deal, we have Michael Redd. That team had some young prospects, some have done well and some have not, but we were clearing house as part of a clean break with the past. Ownership felt very strongly about this, so as to never have any successes of this franchises ever questioned . . . a very real thing in this League.
We also went into the tax the past 2 seasons, and given our goals, we wanted to ensure we go below the tax, which is why we traded Shawn Bradley, since we did not have the resources to compete for the playoffs and the tax would we a waste. We took on some long term salary to do that, which is fine. At any rate, this is part of the rebuild and the philosophy.
We also drew a line in the sand where we were keeping our draft picks going forward, so we knew we had help coming if we had patience. Meanwhile, we committed not to trade Latrell Sprewell, despite many trade offers, to help preserve the power balance of the League. His contract coming off the books in the coming offseason is also a form of help.
So, knowing that we were going to have room for at least one nice free agent and that we would have draft picks, we traded away rookies that were not going to clearly help us in the coming seasons or that we might be able to reacquire on the market and decided to go in early to the top of the bottom of the free agent pool.
Brian Stumble: You can't keep this up, though, can you?
GM: We don't want to. We're just taking a bigger swing at it this season. In the future, we'll do this on a smaller scale
Brian Stumble: Well, that was the plan. How's it working?
GM: We're happy. We feel like we have some guys who can play well in extended minutes, just not with these teammates against other teams' starters. However, if these guys can be ok without much support and in long minutes, they'll be better in fewer minutes, in a defined role, on a better team. We feel we are accelerating the rebuild rather than just kicking back and trying to lose.
Brian Stumble: I must say, that's a different way to look at the situation. Looking forward to see how it unfolds.
Next time, we'll look even farther back, going back to the current ownership's first three seasons. See you soon.
There's no "I" in team, but you can find "Eat me" if you push it too far.
-
IamQuailman
- Posts: 10407
- Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:25 am
- PBSL Team: Milwaukee Bucks
- Contact:
Re: Hardwood Knocks: Cleveland
AWARDED 5 POINTS (2 for team centric initial post, then 3 more for each subsequent installation)
 |  |  |  |