Author Topic: Larry Nance Jr  (Read 4267 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #15 on: March 07, 2021, 06:37:05 AM »

Offline moiso

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7306
  • Tommy Points: 423
The Cavs aren't going to trade Nance unless they are absolutely blown away.  They really like him and being the local kid doesn't hurt.

Does he fit the Cavs timeline though? He is 28 and they have Allen at 22, Garland 21, Sexton 22, and Okoro at 20.
Did Kyle Kuzma and Anthony Davis fit LeBron's timeline?

Did Marc Gasol fit in Kawhi's and Siakam's timeline?

Did Andre Iguodala fit the Steph, Klay, Dray timeline?

Did Udonis Haslem with the Heat?

What about Rondo with the Big 3?

The idea of a timeline, sorry my friend, is MASSIVELY overblown and I am not sure it even exists with title winning clubs. Most title winners are experienced, meaning you probably aren't winning a title with an average team age of 24. Most consist of the top players in the league at that time. But they do have important members of the team from different age groups. No title winning team is made up of everyone on the same "timeline?
None of those teams were the 13 seed
Does it matter? Every young team doesn't need just young guys. Actually a vet or three on young teams to show them how to be good NBA players is probably advisable. Otherwise you get teams stuck in the "We have tons of young talent but just can't seem to win" mode like Minnesota, Sacramento, Atlanta, Orlando and New Orleans has been in for like a decade.

The whole "timeline" theory is a complete and utter fallacy.
TP for your take on the timeline theory.  100% agree.  Some posters here seem to think the goal is always to have all of the team's primary players  be the exactly the same age!

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #16 on: March 07, 2021, 04:38:07 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19723
  • Tommy Points: 1089
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
When did Nance become so good? He's a role player.
He is a role player, but he shoots the 3 at a high percentage, is a good passer for his size and has played pretty elite defence this year, all while being on a $10m a season deal. He's not anything crazy, but he's good
Fire Brad & Trade Smart

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #17 on: March 07, 2021, 04:56:30 PM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Bob Cousy
  • **************************
  • Posts: 26301
  • Tommy Points: 813
To Cavs: Theis, Edwards, future 1st and future 2nd

To Celtics: Nance Jr.

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #18 on: March 07, 2021, 05:00:52 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19723
  • Tommy Points: 1089
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
To Cavs: Theis, Edwards, future 1st and future 2nd

To Celtics: Nance Jr.
Theis and a 1st is probably an overpay
Fire Brad & Trade Smart

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #19 on: March 07, 2021, 05:29:10 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11649
  • Tommy Points: 1232
The Cavs aren't going to trade Nance unless they are absolutely blown away.  They really like him and being the local kid doesn't hurt.

Does he fit the Cavs timeline though? He is 28 and they have Allen at 22, Garland 21, Sexton 22, and Okoro at 20.
Did Kyle Kuzma and Anthony Davis fit LeBron's timeline?

Did Marc Gasol fit in Kawhi's and Siakam's timeline?

Did Andre Iguodala fit the Steph, Klay, Dray timeline?

Did Udonis Haslem with the Heat?

What about Rondo with the Big 3?

The idea of a timeline, sorry my friend, is MASSIVELY overblown and I am not sure it even exists with title winning clubs. Most title winners are experienced, meaning you probably aren't winning a title with an average team age of 24. Most consist of the top players in the league at that time. But they do have important members of the team from different age groups. No title winning team is made up of everyone on the same "timeline?
None of those teams were the 13 seed
Does it matter? Every young team doesn't need just young guys. Actually a vet or three on young teams to show them how to be good NBA players is probably advisable. Otherwise you get teams stuck in the "We have tons of young talent but just can't seem to win" mode like Minnesota, Sacramento, Atlanta, Orlando and New Orleans has been in for like a decade.

The whole "timeline" theory is a complete and utter fallacy.
TP for your take on the timeline theory.  100% agree.  Some posters here seem to think the goal is always to have all of the team's primary players  be the exactly the same age!

I mean, lol. We have seen teams do this all the time in every sport. I don't even understand what you guys are trying to argue. It is literally the whole concept of rebuilding. I agree you want a few vets around to help the young players develop (ironically a vet minimum player like Haslem is a good example of this). If you have an older player that is making a substantial amount of money, and has value around the league, it is kind of common sense to trade him if you can get good value for him (again ironically, why we traded Rondo when we were going young). And your example of Kuzma is absolutely hilarious cause the Lakers traded literally every other young guy on their roster to get someone who was a star and could win titles during Lebron's timeline. i think that may be the silliest attempt at a point I have read on this board. Thanks for the chuckle.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2021, 05:36:34 PM by celticsclay »

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #20 on: March 07, 2021, 05:39:40 PM »

Offline celticbos

  • Aaron Nesmith
  • Posts: 82
  • Tommy Points: 5
Wish some people will give Theis credit.

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #21 on: March 07, 2021, 06:03:15 PM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Bob Cousy
  • **************************
  • Posts: 26301
  • Tommy Points: 813
To Cavs: Theis, Edwards, future 1st and future 2nd

To Celtics: Nance Jr.
Theis and a 1st is probably an overpay

I disagree

Nance Jr. Is a better player. Its close but edge to Nance Jr. For me

Also he is locked up to a very friendly contract for the next 3 years. 

This is going to cost something, like a  late 1st

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #22 on: March 07, 2021, 06:19:08 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19723
  • Tommy Points: 1089
  • 2019 & 2021 CS Historical Draft Champion
To Cavs: Theis, Edwards, future 1st and future 2nd

To Celtics: Nance Jr.
Theis and a 1st is probably an overpay

I disagree

Nance Jr. Is a better player. Its close but edge to Nance Jr. For me

Also he is locked up to a very friendly contract for the next 3 years. 

This is going to cost something, like a  late 1st
If it's any 1st but this year's I'd probably be okay with it, but the 2nd would be unnecessary. Would also throw a top 10 protection on the pick.

Nance is better, but it's fairly marginal
Fire Brad & Trade Smart

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #23 on: March 07, 2021, 07:14:24 PM »

Offline 86MaxwellSmart

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2807
  • Tommy Points: 286
Theis>Nance
Larry Bird was Greater than you think.

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #24 on: March 07, 2021, 10:44:30 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25048
  • Tommy Points: 1209
The Cavs aren't going to trade Nance unless they are absolutely blown away.  They really like him and being the local kid doesn't hurt.

Does he fit the Cavs timeline though? He is 28 and they have Allen at 22, Garland 21, Sexton 22, and Okoro at 20.
Did Kyle Kuzma and Anthony Davis fit LeBron's timeline?

Did Marc Gasol fit in Kawhi's and Siakam's timeline?

Did Andre Iguodala fit the Steph, Klay, Dray timeline?

Did Udonis Haslem with the Heat?

What about Rondo with the Big 3?

The idea of a timeline, sorry my friend, is MASSIVELY overblown and I am not sure it even exists with title winning clubs. Most title winners are experienced, meaning you probably aren't winning a title with an average team age of 24. Most consist of the top players in the league at that time. But they do have important members of the team from different age groups. No title winning team is made up of everyone on the same "timeline?
None of those teams were the 13 seed
Does it matter? Every young team doesn't need just young guys. Actually a vet or three on young teams to show them how to be good NBA players is probably advisable. Otherwise you get teams stuck in the "We have tons of young talent but just can't seem to win" mode like Minnesota, Sacramento, Atlanta, Orlando and New Orleans has been in for like a decade.

The whole "timeline" theory is a complete and utter fallacy.
TP for your take on the timeline theory.  100% agree.  Some posters here seem to think the goal is always to have all of the team's primary players  be the exactly the same age!

I mean, lol. We have seen teams do this all the time in every sport. I don't even understand what you guys are trying to argue. It is literally the whole concept of rebuilding. I agree you want a few vets around to help the young players develop (ironically a vet minimum player like Haslem is a good example of this). If you have an older player that is making a substantial amount of money, and has value around the league, it is kind of common sense to trade him if you can get good value for him (again ironically, why we traded Rondo when we were going young). And your example of Kuzma is absolutely hilarious cause the Lakers traded literally every other young guy on their roster to get someone who was a star and could win titles during Lebron's timeline. i think that may be the silliest attempt at a point I have read on this board. Thanks for the chuckle.
But that isn't Nance.  He is only in year 6.  He was an older rookie so he is old for a 6th year man, but he is still only in year 6, so he is just entering his prime and should have a solid 5 or 6 years of prime left.  He isn't as valuable as Smart is, but that is how the Cavs view Nance.  The Cavs don't think of him as a vet, they think of him as a core piece that will be their starting PF for years to come and they really think they have something with Sexton, Garland, Okoro, Nance, and Allen.  I'm not sure they are wrong either, as that has the makings to be a very good team for a long time a few years down the line, and they will still have several years of Nance in his prime at that point.  The Cavs are clearly looking to move Drummond and Love, and are also taking offers for Osman.  They would move Nance, but it would cost way more than he is worth for the Cavs to move him, so in other words he isn't getting traded.
2021 Historical Draft - 5th Pick - Raptors
PG - Tiny Archibald 73, Don Buse 77, Terrell Brandon 96
SG - Chet Walker 67, Michael Cooper 87, Raja Bell 06
SF - Predrag "Peja" Stojakovic 04, Kiki Vandeweghe 87, Robert Covington 18
PF - Karl Malone 97, Spencer Haywood 73, David West 08
C - Ben Wallace 04, George Mikan 50, Al Jefferson 08

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #25 on: March 07, 2021, 11:41:34 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11649
  • Tommy Points: 1232
The Cavs aren't going to trade Nance unless they are absolutely blown away.  They really like him and being the local kid doesn't hurt.

Does he fit the Cavs timeline though? He is 28 and they have Allen at 22, Garland 21, Sexton 22, and Okoro at 20.
Did Kyle Kuzma and Anthony Davis fit LeBron's timeline?

Did Marc Gasol fit in Kawhi's and Siakam's timeline?

Did Andre Iguodala fit the Steph, Klay, Dray timeline?

Did Udonis Haslem with the Heat?

What about Rondo with the Big 3?

The idea of a timeline, sorry my friend, is MASSIVELY overblown and I am not sure it even exists with title winning clubs. Most title winners are experienced, meaning you probably aren't winning a title with an average team age of 24. Most consist of the top players in the league at that time. But they do have important members of the team from different age groups. No title winning team is made up of everyone on the same "timeline?
None of those teams were the 13 seed
Does it matter? Every young team doesn't need just young guys. Actually a vet or three on young teams to show them how to be good NBA players is probably advisable. Otherwise you get teams stuck in the "We have tons of young talent but just can't seem to win" mode like Minnesota, Sacramento, Atlanta, Orlando and New Orleans has been in for like a decade.

The whole "timeline" theory is a complete and utter fallacy.
TP for your take on the timeline theory.  100% agree.  Some posters here seem to think the goal is always to have all of the team's primary players  be the exactly the same age!

I mean, lol. We have seen teams do this all the time in every sport. I don't even understand what you guys are trying to argue. It is literally the whole concept of rebuilding. I agree you want a few vets around to help the young players develop (ironically a vet minimum player like Haslem is a good example of this). If you have an older player that is making a substantial amount of money, and has value around the league, it is kind of common sense to trade him if you can get good value for him (again ironically, why we traded Rondo when we were going young). And your example of Kuzma is absolutely hilarious cause the Lakers traded literally every other young guy on their roster to get someone who was a star and could win titles during Lebron's timeline. i think that may be the silliest attempt at a point I have read on this board. Thanks for the chuckle.
But that isn't Nance.  He is only in year 6.  He was an older rookie so he is old for a 6th year man, but he is still only in year 6, so he is just entering his prime and should have a solid 5 or 6 years of prime left.  He isn't as valuable as Smart is, but that is how the Cavs view Nance.  The Cavs don't think of him as a vet, they think of him as a core piece that will be their starting PF for years to come and they really think they have something with Sexton, Garland, Okoro, Nance, and Allen.  I'm not sure they are wrong either, as that has the makings to be a very good team for a long time a few years down the line, and they will still have several years of Nance in his prime at that point.  The Cavs are clearly looking to move Drummond and Love, and are also taking offers for Osman.  They would move Nance, but it would cost way more than he is worth for the Cavs to move him, so in other words he isn't getting traded.

You realize you literally wrote this exact same post last year about how much the Cavs loved Thompson and wanted him there long term? And we both agree your comparison examples were brutal? That was a painful read.

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #26 on: March 08, 2021, 12:46:17 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25048
  • Tommy Points: 1209
The Cavs aren't going to trade Nance unless they are absolutely blown away.  They really like him and being the local kid doesn't hurt.

Does he fit the Cavs timeline though? He is 28 and they have Allen at 22, Garland 21, Sexton 22, and Okoro at 20.
Did Kyle Kuzma and Anthony Davis fit LeBron's timeline?

Did Marc Gasol fit in Kawhi's and Siakam's timeline?

Did Andre Iguodala fit the Steph, Klay, Dray timeline?

Did Udonis Haslem with the Heat?

What about Rondo with the Big 3?

The idea of a timeline, sorry my friend, is MASSIVELY overblown and I am not sure it even exists with title winning clubs. Most title winners are experienced, meaning you probably aren't winning a title with an average team age of 24. Most consist of the top players in the league at that time. But they do have important members of the team from different age groups. No title winning team is made up of everyone on the same "timeline?
None of those teams were the 13 seed
Does it matter? Every young team doesn't need just young guys. Actually a vet or three on young teams to show them how to be good NBA players is probably advisable. Otherwise you get teams stuck in the "We have tons of young talent but just can't seem to win" mode like Minnesota, Sacramento, Atlanta, Orlando and New Orleans has been in for like a decade.

The whole "timeline" theory is a complete and utter fallacy.
TP for your take on the timeline theory.  100% agree.  Some posters here seem to think the goal is always to have all of the team's primary players  be the exactly the same age!

I mean, lol. We have seen teams do this all the time in every sport. I don't even understand what you guys are trying to argue. It is literally the whole concept of rebuilding. I agree you want a few vets around to help the young players develop (ironically a vet minimum player like Haslem is a good example of this). If you have an older player that is making a substantial amount of money, and has value around the league, it is kind of common sense to trade him if you can get good value for him (again ironically, why we traded Rondo when we were going young). And your example of Kuzma is absolutely hilarious cause the Lakers traded literally every other young guy on their roster to get someone who was a star and could win titles during Lebron's timeline. i think that may be the silliest attempt at a point I have read on this board. Thanks for the chuckle.
But that isn't Nance.  He is only in year 6.  He was an older rookie so he is old for a 6th year man, but he is still only in year 6, so he is just entering his prime and should have a solid 5 or 6 years of prime left.  He isn't as valuable as Smart is, but that is how the Cavs view Nance.  The Cavs don't think of him as a vet, they think of him as a core piece that will be their starting PF for years to come and they really think they have something with Sexton, Garland, Okoro, Nance, and Allen.  I'm not sure they are wrong either, as that has the makings to be a very good team for a long time a few years down the line, and they will still have several years of Nance in his prime at that point.  The Cavs are clearly looking to move Drummond and Love, and are also taking offers for Osman.  They would move Nance, but it would cost way more than he is worth for the Cavs to move him, so in other words he isn't getting traded.

You realize you literally wrote this exact same post last year about how much the Cavs loved Thompson and wanted him there long term? And we both agree your comparison examples were brutal? That was a painful read.
And yet the Cavs didn't trade Thompson despite getting offers for him and let his contract expire (just as I predicted).  And the Cavs absolutely wanted to keep Thompson as they offered him a contract last free agency, Thompson just wanted more money to stay on a rebuilding team than Cleveland felt he was worth offering and so Thompson decided to go to a playoff team like Boston rather than stay in Cleveland.
2021 Historical Draft - 5th Pick - Raptors
PG - Tiny Archibald 73, Don Buse 77, Terrell Brandon 96
SG - Chet Walker 67, Michael Cooper 87, Raja Bell 06
SF - Predrag "Peja" Stojakovic 04, Kiki Vandeweghe 87, Robert Covington 18
PF - Karl Malone 97, Spencer Haywood 73, David West 08
C - Ben Wallace 04, George Mikan 50, Al Jefferson 08

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #27 on: March 08, 2021, 09:40:03 AM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11649
  • Tommy Points: 1232
The Cavs aren't going to trade Nance unless they are absolutely blown away.  They really like him and being the local kid doesn't hurt.

Does he fit the Cavs timeline though? He is 28 and they have Allen at 22, Garland 21, Sexton 22, and Okoro at 20.
Did Kyle Kuzma and Anthony Davis fit LeBron's timeline?

Did Marc Gasol fit in Kawhi's and Siakam's timeline?

Did Andre Iguodala fit the Steph, Klay, Dray timeline?

Did Udonis Haslem with the Heat?

What about Rondo with the Big 3?

The idea of a timeline, sorry my friend, is MASSIVELY overblown and I am not sure it even exists with title winning clubs. Most title winners are experienced, meaning you probably aren't winning a title with an average team age of 24. Most consist of the top players in the league at that time. But they do have important members of the team from different age groups. No title winning team is made up of everyone on the same "timeline?
None of those teams were the 13 seed
Does it matter? Every young team doesn't need just young guys. Actually a vet or three on young teams to show them how to be good NBA players is probably advisable. Otherwise you get teams stuck in the "We have tons of young talent but just can't seem to win" mode like Minnesota, Sacramento, Atlanta, Orlando and New Orleans has been in for like a decade.

The whole "timeline" theory is a complete and utter fallacy.
TP for your take on the timeline theory.  100% agree.  Some posters here seem to think the goal is always to have all of the team's primary players  be the exactly the same age!

I mean, lol. We have seen teams do this all the time in every sport. I don't even understand what you guys are trying to argue. It is literally the whole concept of rebuilding. I agree you want a few vets around to help the young players develop (ironically a vet minimum player like Haslem is a good example of this). If you have an older player that is making a substantial amount of money, and has value around the league, it is kind of common sense to trade him if you can get good value for him (again ironically, why we traded Rondo when we were going young). And your example of Kuzma is absolutely hilarious cause the Lakers traded literally every other young guy on their roster to get someone who was a star and could win titles during Lebron's timeline. i think that may be the silliest attempt at a point I have read on this board. Thanks for the chuckle.
But that isn't Nance.  He is only in year 6.  He was an older rookie so he is old for a 6th year man, but he is still only in year 6, so he is just entering his prime and should have a solid 5 or 6 years of prime left.  He isn't as valuable as Smart is, but that is how the Cavs view Nance.  The Cavs don't think of him as a vet, they think of him as a core piece that will be their starting PF for years to come and they really think they have something with Sexton, Garland, Okoro, Nance, and Allen.  I'm not sure they are wrong either, as that has the makings to be a very good team for a long time a few years down the line, and they will still have several years of Nance in his prime at that point.  The Cavs are clearly looking to move Drummond and Love, and are also taking offers for Osman.  They would move Nance, but it would cost way more than he is worth for the Cavs to move him, so in other words he isn't getting traded.

You realize you literally wrote this exact same post last year about how much the Cavs loved Thompson and wanted him there long term? And we both agree your comparison examples were brutal? That was a painful read.
And yet the Cavs didn't trade Thompson despite getting offers for him and let his contract expire (just as I predicted).  And the Cavs absolutely wanted to keep Thompson as they offered him a contract last free agency, Thompson just wanted more money to stay on a rebuilding team than Cleveland felt he was worth offering and so Thompson decided to go to a playoff team like Boston rather than stay in Cleveland.

So you are saying the cavs wanted to keep him even though he didnít want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? Thatís a heck of a way to run a team.

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #28 on: March 08, 2021, 10:08:56 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25048
  • Tommy Points: 1209
The Cavs aren't going to trade Nance unless they are absolutely blown away.  They really like him and being the local kid doesn't hurt.

Does he fit the Cavs timeline though? He is 28 and they have Allen at 22, Garland 21, Sexton 22, and Okoro at 20.
Did Kyle Kuzma and Anthony Davis fit LeBron's timeline?

Did Marc Gasol fit in Kawhi's and Siakam's timeline?

Did Andre Iguodala fit the Steph, Klay, Dray timeline?

Did Udonis Haslem with the Heat?

What about Rondo with the Big 3?

The idea of a timeline, sorry my friend, is MASSIVELY overblown and I am not sure it even exists with title winning clubs. Most title winners are experienced, meaning you probably aren't winning a title with an average team age of 24. Most consist of the top players in the league at that time. But they do have important members of the team from different age groups. No title winning team is made up of everyone on the same "timeline?
None of those teams were the 13 seed
Does it matter? Every young team doesn't need just young guys. Actually a vet or three on young teams to show them how to be good NBA players is probably advisable. Otherwise you get teams stuck in the "We have tons of young talent but just can't seem to win" mode like Minnesota, Sacramento, Atlanta, Orlando and New Orleans has been in for like a decade.

The whole "timeline" theory is a complete and utter fallacy.
TP for your take on the timeline theory.  100% agree.  Some posters here seem to think the goal is always to have all of the team's primary players  be the exactly the same age!

I mean, lol. We have seen teams do this all the time in every sport. I don't even understand what you guys are trying to argue. It is literally the whole concept of rebuilding. I agree you want a few vets around to help the young players develop (ironically a vet minimum player like Haslem is a good example of this). If you have an older player that is making a substantial amount of money, and has value around the league, it is kind of common sense to trade him if you can get good value for him (again ironically, why we traded Rondo when we were going young). And your example of Kuzma is absolutely hilarious cause the Lakers traded literally every other young guy on their roster to get someone who was a star and could win titles during Lebron's timeline. i think that may be the silliest attempt at a point I have read on this board. Thanks for the chuckle.
But that isn't Nance.  He is only in year 6.  He was an older rookie so he is old for a 6th year man, but he is still only in year 6, so he is just entering his prime and should have a solid 5 or 6 years of prime left.  He isn't as valuable as Smart is, but that is how the Cavs view Nance.  The Cavs don't think of him as a vet, they think of him as a core piece that will be their starting PF for years to come and they really think they have something with Sexton, Garland, Okoro, Nance, and Allen.  I'm not sure they are wrong either, as that has the makings to be a very good team for a long time a few years down the line, and they will still have several years of Nance in his prime at that point.  The Cavs are clearly looking to move Drummond and Love, and are also taking offers for Osman.  They would move Nance, but it would cost way more than he is worth for the Cavs to move him, so in other words he isn't getting traded.

You realize you literally wrote this exact same post last year about how much the Cavs loved Thompson and wanted him there long term? And we both agree your comparison examples were brutal? That was a painful read.
And yet the Cavs didn't trade Thompson despite getting offers for him and let his contract expire (just as I predicted).  And the Cavs absolutely wanted to keep Thompson as they offered him a contract last free agency, Thompson just wanted more money to stay on a rebuilding team than Cleveland felt he was worth offering and so Thompson decided to go to a playoff team like Boston rather than stay in Cleveland.

So you are saying the cavs wanted to keep him even though he didnít want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? Thatís a heck of a way to run a team.
No I'm saying that he would have been fine being on a rebuilding team if he would have received more money than the Cavs wanted to pay him.  You can't know that until you get to free agency.  I mean we saw that quite clearly with Hayward this past free agency as well (or Horford the summer prior).  Hollinger and plenty of other well known basketball people were putting Thompson's value in the veteran minimum type range.  The Cavs offered him more than that.  One of the reasons Boston had to pay the full MLE was because they had to beat Cleveland's offer, but I don't think anyone truly believed Thompson was worth the full MLE, even on a short term basis.  And we've seen in Boston he isn't worth that contract (and if Boston didn't come along, I pretty confident Thompson would in fact be a Cav right now).  So the Cavs wanted to keep him, they just didn't want to break the bank for a role player that isn't going to move the needle on wins and losses, especially for a rebuilding team.  Sometimes you just lose players in free agency, even players you want to keep, and even players you offer good money to.
2021 Historical Draft - 5th Pick - Raptors
PG - Tiny Archibald 73, Don Buse 77, Terrell Brandon 96
SG - Chet Walker 67, Michael Cooper 87, Raja Bell 06
SF - Predrag "Peja" Stojakovic 04, Kiki Vandeweghe 87, Robert Covington 18
PF - Karl Malone 97, Spencer Haywood 73, David West 08
C - Ben Wallace 04, George Mikan 50, Al Jefferson 08

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #29 on: March 08, 2021, 10:40:39 AM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11649
  • Tommy Points: 1232
The Cavs aren't going to trade Nance unless they are absolutely blown away.  They really like him and being the local kid doesn't hurt.

Does he fit the Cavs timeline though? He is 28 and they have Allen at 22, Garland 21, Sexton 22, and Okoro at 20.
Did Kyle Kuzma and Anthony Davis fit LeBron's timeline?

Did Marc Gasol fit in Kawhi's and Siakam's timeline?

Did Andre Iguodala fit the Steph, Klay, Dray timeline?

Did Udonis Haslem with the Heat?

What about Rondo with the Big 3?

The idea of a timeline, sorry my friend, is MASSIVELY overblown and I am not sure it even exists with title winning clubs. Most title winners are experienced, meaning you probably aren't winning a title with an average team age of 24. Most consist of the top players in the league at that time. But they do have important members of the team from different age groups. No title winning team is made up of everyone on the same "timeline?
None of those teams were the 13 seed
Does it matter? Every young team doesn't need just young guys. Actually a vet or three on young teams to show them how to be good NBA players is probably advisable. Otherwise you get teams stuck in the "We have tons of young talent but just can't seem to win" mode like Minnesota, Sacramento, Atlanta, Orlando and New Orleans has been in for like a decade.

The whole "timeline" theory is a complete and utter fallacy.
TP for your take on the timeline theory.  100% agree.  Some posters here seem to think the goal is always to have all of the team's primary players  be the exactly the same age!

I mean, lol. We have seen teams do this all the time in every sport. I don't even understand what you guys are trying to argue. It is literally the whole concept of rebuilding. I agree you want a few vets around to help the young players develop (ironically a vet minimum player like Haslem is a good example of this). If you have an older player that is making a substantial amount of money, and has value around the league, it is kind of common sense to trade him if you can get good value for him (again ironically, why we traded Rondo when we were going young). And your example of Kuzma is absolutely hilarious cause the Lakers traded literally every other young guy on their roster to get someone who was a star and could win titles during Lebron's timeline. i think that may be the silliest attempt at a point I have read on this board. Thanks for the chuckle.
But that isn't Nance.  He is only in year 6.  He was an older rookie so he is old for a 6th year man, but he is still only in year 6, so he is just entering his prime and should have a solid 5 or 6 years of prime left.  He isn't as valuable as Smart is, but that is how the Cavs view Nance.  The Cavs don't think of him as a vet, they think of him as a core piece that will be their starting PF for years to come and they really think they have something with Sexton, Garland, Okoro, Nance, and Allen.  I'm not sure they are wrong either, as that has the makings to be a very good team for a long time a few years down the line, and they will still have several years of Nance in his prime at that point.  The Cavs are clearly looking to move Drummond and Love, and are also taking offers for Osman.  They would move Nance, but it would cost way more than he is worth for the Cavs to move him, so in other words he isn't getting traded.

You realize you literally wrote this exact same post last year about how much the Cavs loved Thompson and wanted him there long term? And we both agree your comparison examples were brutal? That was a painful read.
And yet the Cavs didn't trade Thompson despite getting offers for him and let his contract expire (just as I predicted).  And the Cavs absolutely wanted to keep Thompson as they offered him a contract last free agency, Thompson just wanted more money to stay on a rebuilding team than Cleveland felt he was worth offering and so Thompson decided to go to a playoff team like Boston rather than stay in Cleveland.

So you are saying the cavs wanted to keep him even though he didnít want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? Thatís a heck of a way to run a team.
No I'm saying that he would have been fine being on a rebuilding team if he would have received more money than the Cavs wanted to pay him.  You can't know that until you get to free agency.  I mean we saw that quite clearly with Hayward this past free agency as well (or Horford the summer prior).  Hollinger and plenty of other well known basketball people were putting Thompson's value in the veteran minimum type range.  The Cavs offered him more than that.  One of the reasons Boston had to pay the full MLE was because they had to beat Cleveland's offer, but I don't think anyone truly believed Thompson was worth the full MLE, even on a short term basis.  And we've seen in Boston he isn't worth that contract (and if Boston didn't come along, I pretty confident Thompson would in fact be a Cav right now).  So the Cavs wanted to keep him, they just didn't want to break the bank for a role player that isn't going to move the needle on wins and losses, especially for a rebuilding team.  Sometimes you just lose players in free agency, even players you want to keep, and even players you offer good money to.

This really seems like you doing a lot of mental gymnastics here. Are you saying you believe this report was totally fabricated and Thompson did not want to play for a contender? (and only ended up one because of money)

ďThompson, meanwhile, made it known to the Cavaliers that he would prefer to be moved to a contender leading up to this yearís trade deadline, according to league sources,Ē

https://cavaliersnation.com/2020/05/29/report-cleveland-had-multiple-trade-offers-tristan-thompson/