Author Topic: Larry Nance Jr  (Read 4267 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #30 on: March 08, 2021, 12:13:03 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.

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 didn’t want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? That’s 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)

“Thompson, meanwhile, made it known to the Cavaliers that he would prefer to be moved to a contender leading up to this year’s trade deadline, according to league sources,”

https://cavaliersnation.com/2020/05/29/report-cleveland-had-multiple-trade-offers-tristan-thompson/
Or I'm in the Cleveland area and get far more Cavs news than you do.  There were countless articles from those well connected to the Cavs that stated both sides had a desire for Thompson to return. 

https://the6man.com/tristan-thompson-and-cleveland-cavaliers-have-a-mutual-interest/

Quote
“I think it’s fair to say that there is certainly a mutual interest,” said general manager Koby Altman of the opportunity to re-sign Thompson. “He’s been with this franchise his entire career since we designed it. He won a championship here. Of course, he means a lot to the players on the team right now, but it has to make sense. There are some things coming up – drafting a free one Agency – which we have to see if it makes sense to him. He deserves the right to be a full free agent and at this point in his career to look for opportunities.

https://www.basketballnews.com/stories/nba-cleveland-cavaliers-team-workouts-jb-bickerstaff-collin-sexton-darius-garland

Quote
It is important to note that the franchise does hold Tristan Thompson’s Bird rights, meaning if the Cavaliers decide to bring him back into the fold, they can go over the salary cap to sign him and still have their MLE. With that said, they’re likely not going to spend a ton of money to the point of dipping back into the luxury tax, especially since they did all that work to clear up their cap sheet in the previous two years. At this stage, it’s about hitting singles and adding those positives up -- Alfonzo McKinnie and his team-friendly contract is a perfect example of that.

The team source said that there’s “a lot of mutual interest” between Cleveland and Thompson. In a sense, who the team drafts could play a significant role in that free-agency decision. Would it make sense for Thompson to return if Onyeka Okongwu is the selection at five? Though unlikely, if James Wiseman were to surprisingly slide to the Cavaliers and they nabbed him, re-signing Thompson may no longer be a priority.

https://www.si.com/nba/cavaliers/nba/cavaliers/nba-amico/kevin-love-larry-nance-tristan-thompson-cleveland

Quote
Word is, they would love to have him back and he apparently is more than open to a return.

But as is always the case, it will all come down to numbers. Or more specifically, the next contract offer.

https://sportsrants.com/2020/11/tristan-thompson-not-happy-about-cavs-initial-offer/

Quote
“I am confident that Tristan Thompson has the framework that he can return to the Cavs, but as of right now, that framework isn’t at the level of compensation that he wants it,” Windhorst said, during an appearance on WKNR’s Really Big Show (h/t Nick Dudukovoch of Fansided).


https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/11/tristan-thompson-agrees-to-two-year-deal-with-boston-celtics-sources-say.html

Quote
The Celtics will sign Thompson using the full mid-level exception -- an offer that came in higher than Cleveland’s, sources say.


It really came down to money.  I don't think the Cavs thought anyone would be dumb enough to offer Thompson 9 million a year.  But to get Thompson to leave Cleveland and forego more likely championship teams (like the Clippers) the Celtics had to offer the full MLE and overpay for him wildly.  Much like Charlotte had to overpay for Hayward.
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 #31 on: March 08, 2021, 12:41:12 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.
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 didn’t want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? That’s 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)

“Thompson, meanwhile, made it known to the Cavaliers that he would prefer to be moved to a contender leading up to this year’s trade deadline, according to league sources,”

https://cavaliersnation.com/2020/05/29/report-cleveland-had-multiple-trade-offers-tristan-thompson/
Or I'm in the Cleveland area and get far more Cavs news than you do.  There were countless articles from those well connected to the Cavs that stated both sides had a desire for Thompson to return. 

https://the6man.com/tristan-thompson-and-cleveland-cavaliers-have-a-mutual-interest/

Quote
“I think it’s fair to say that there is certainly a mutual interest,” said general manager Koby Altman of the opportunity to re-sign Thompson. “He’s been with this franchise his entire career since we designed it. He won a championship here. Of course, he means a lot to the players on the team right now, but it has to make sense. There are some things coming up – drafting a free one Agency – which we have to see if it makes sense to him. He deserves the right to be a full free agent and at this point in his career to look for opportunities.

https://www.basketballnews.com/stories/nba-cleveland-cavaliers-team-workouts-jb-bickerstaff-collin-sexton-darius-garland

Quote
It is important to note that the franchise does hold Tristan Thompson’s Bird rights, meaning if the Cavaliers decide to bring him back into the fold, they can go over the salary cap to sign him and still have their MLE. With that said, they’re likely not going to spend a ton of money to the point of dipping back into the luxury tax, especially since they did all that work to clear up their cap sheet in the previous two years. At this stage, it’s about hitting singles and adding those positives up -- Alfonzo McKinnie and his team-friendly contract is a perfect example of that.

The team source said that there’s “a lot of mutual interest” between Cleveland and Thompson. In a sense, who the team drafts could play a significant role in that free-agency decision. Would it make sense for Thompson to return if Onyeka Okongwu is the selection at five? Though unlikely, if James Wiseman were to surprisingly slide to the Cavaliers and they nabbed him, re-signing Thompson may no longer be a priority.

https://www.si.com/nba/cavaliers/nba/cavaliers/nba-amico/kevin-love-larry-nance-tristan-thompson-cleveland

Quote
Word is, they would love to have him back and he apparently is more than open to a return.

But as is always the case, it will all come down to numbers. Or more specifically, the next contract offer.

https://sportsrants.com/2020/11/tristan-thompson-not-happy-about-cavs-initial-offer/

Quote
“I am confident that Tristan Thompson has the framework that he can return to the Cavs, but as of right now, that framework isn’t at the level of compensation that he wants it,” Windhorst said, during an appearance on WKNR’s Really Big Show (h/t Nick Dudukovoch of Fansided).


https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/11/tristan-thompson-agrees-to-two-year-deal-with-boston-celtics-sources-say.html

Quote
The Celtics will sign Thompson using the full mid-level exception -- an offer that came in higher than Cleveland’s, sources say.


It really came down to money.  I don't think the Cavs thought anyone would be dumb enough to offer Thompson 9 million a year.  But to get Thompson to leave Cleveland and forego more likely championship teams (like the Clippers) the Celtics had to offer the full MLE and overpay for him wildly.  Much like Charlotte had to overpay for Hayward.

Moranis, you literally just made a lot of noise here that has nothing to do with the post I made. As I shared, There were significant reports that Thompson wanted to play for a contender last year. I'll ask you again,  do you think those reporters were completely false/made up?

Also a team saying they want a guy back is very common and fairly irrelevant (no matter if you try to share the same quote from 5 different sources). There is literally no upside to being like "yeah we think it has run its course with this guy, he is definitely gone." He was also a fairly key player on their one championship team so they are going to certainly be extra nice to him with the press and speak highly of him.

Lastly, you realize living near a spot is completely irrelevant for how much you can follow a team in 2021 right? This isn't the 1970's were we relied on having access to the local newspaper in hand to follow beat reporters. I was able to get more info on the Celtics living in both California and Colorado cause of the ol internet we are communicating on this very moment.

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #32 on: March 08, 2021, 04:05:47 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.

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 didn’t want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? That’s 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)

“Thompson, meanwhile, made it known to the Cavaliers that he would prefer to be moved to a contender leading up to this year’s trade deadline, according to league sources,”

https://cavaliersnation.com/2020/05/29/report-cleveland-had-multiple-trade-offers-tristan-thompson/
Or I'm in the Cleveland area and get far more Cavs news than you do.  There were countless articles from those well connected to the Cavs that stated both sides had a desire for Thompson to return. 

https://the6man.com/tristan-thompson-and-cleveland-cavaliers-have-a-mutual-interest/

Quote
“I think it’s fair to say that there is certainly a mutual interest,” said general manager Koby Altman of the opportunity to re-sign Thompson. “He’s been with this franchise his entire career since we designed it. He won a championship here. Of course, he means a lot to the players on the team right now, but it has to make sense. There are some things coming up – drafting a free one Agency – which we have to see if it makes sense to him. He deserves the right to be a full free agent and at this point in his career to look for opportunities.

https://www.basketballnews.com/stories/nba-cleveland-cavaliers-team-workouts-jb-bickerstaff-collin-sexton-darius-garland

Quote
It is important to note that the franchise does hold Tristan Thompson’s Bird rights, meaning if the Cavaliers decide to bring him back into the fold, they can go over the salary cap to sign him and still have their MLE. With that said, they’re likely not going to spend a ton of money to the point of dipping back into the luxury tax, especially since they did all that work to clear up their cap sheet in the previous two years. At this stage, it’s about hitting singles and adding those positives up -- Alfonzo McKinnie and his team-friendly contract is a perfect example of that.

The team source said that there’s “a lot of mutual interest” between Cleveland and Thompson. In a sense, who the team drafts could play a significant role in that free-agency decision. Would it make sense for Thompson to return if Onyeka Okongwu is the selection at five? Though unlikely, if James Wiseman were to surprisingly slide to the Cavaliers and they nabbed him, re-signing Thompson may no longer be a priority.

https://www.si.com/nba/cavaliers/nba/cavaliers/nba-amico/kevin-love-larry-nance-tristan-thompson-cleveland

Quote
Word is, they would love to have him back and he apparently is more than open to a return.

But as is always the case, it will all come down to numbers. Or more specifically, the next contract offer.

https://sportsrants.com/2020/11/tristan-thompson-not-happy-about-cavs-initial-offer/

Quote
“I am confident that Tristan Thompson has the framework that he can return to the Cavs, but as of right now, that framework isn’t at the level of compensation that he wants it,” Windhorst said, during an appearance on WKNR’s Really Big Show (h/t Nick Dudukovoch of Fansided).


https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/11/tristan-thompson-agrees-to-two-year-deal-with-boston-celtics-sources-say.html

Quote
The Celtics will sign Thompson using the full mid-level exception -- an offer that came in higher than Cleveland’s, sources say.


It really came down to money.  I don't think the Cavs thought anyone would be dumb enough to offer Thompson 9 million a year.  But to get Thompson to leave Cleveland and forego more likely championship teams (like the Clippers) the Celtics had to offer the full MLE and overpay for him wildly.  Much like Charlotte had to overpay for Hayward.

Moranis, you literally just made a lot of noise here that has nothing to do with the post I made. As I shared, There were significant reports that Thompson wanted to play for a contender last year. I'll ask you again,  do you think those reporters were completely false/made up?

Also a team saying they want a guy back is very common and fairly irrelevant (no matter if you try to share the same quote from 5 different sources). There is literally no upside to being like "yeah we think it has run its course with this guy, he is definitely gone." He was also a fairly key player on their one championship team so they are going to certainly be extra nice to him with the press and speak highly of him.

Lastly, you realize living near a spot is completely irrelevant for how much you can follow a team in 2021 right? This isn't the 1970's were we relied on having access to the local newspaper in hand to follow beat reporters. I was able to get more info on the Celtics living in both California and Colorado cause of the ol internet we are communicating on this very moment.
I'm sure he probably did prefer to play for a contender as the Cavs are rebuilding, but at the end of the day he signed for the largest contract offer he received and rejected the Clippers a team that is clearly much closer to a title than the Celtics are.  So clearly it wasn't about winning championships for him, it was cash.  And if Boston had signed Millsap, Thompson would still be a Cav. 

And you obviously didn't read all of those articles, because they all say the feeling was mutual, that Thompson likes Cleveland, and would have been interested in returning if the money was right (here is another one from a Cavs beat writer https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/07/tristan-thompson-showed-why-he-wouldnt-be-easy-to-replace-cleveland-cavaliers-season-review.html).  Thompson made a financial decision and Boston gave him more money than anyone else.  And we have more evidence that that was truly his driving force because of all of the reports that Thompson wouldn't accept a buy out.  He wasn't willing to give any money back to go to a contender last year.  Thompson is a financial mercenary.  Period.  He just wants to be paid.  Had Cleveland given him more than the C's, he would still be a Cav, but Cleveland knew he wasn't worth 9 million a year. 
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 #33 on: March 08, 2021, 05:20:43 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.
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 didn’t want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? That’s 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)

“Thompson, meanwhile, made it known to the Cavaliers that he would prefer to be moved to a contender leading up to this year’s trade deadline, according to league sources,”

https://cavaliersnation.com/2020/05/29/report-cleveland-had-multiple-trade-offers-tristan-thompson/
Or I'm in the Cleveland area and get far more Cavs news than you do.  There were countless articles from those well connected to the Cavs that stated both sides had a desire for Thompson to return. 

https://the6man.com/tristan-thompson-and-cleveland-cavaliers-have-a-mutual-interest/

Quote
“I think it’s fair to say that there is certainly a mutual interest,” said general manager Koby Altman of the opportunity to re-sign Thompson. “He’s been with this franchise his entire career since we designed it. He won a championship here. Of course, he means a lot to the players on the team right now, but it has to make sense. There are some things coming up – drafting a free one Agency – which we have to see if it makes sense to him. He deserves the right to be a full free agent and at this point in his career to look for opportunities.

https://www.basketballnews.com/stories/nba-cleveland-cavaliers-team-workouts-jb-bickerstaff-collin-sexton-darius-garland

Quote
It is important to note that the franchise does hold Tristan Thompson’s Bird rights, meaning if the Cavaliers decide to bring him back into the fold, they can go over the salary cap to sign him and still have their MLE. With that said, they’re likely not going to spend a ton of money to the point of dipping back into the luxury tax, especially since they did all that work to clear up their cap sheet in the previous two years. At this stage, it’s about hitting singles and adding those positives up -- Alfonzo McKinnie and his team-friendly contract is a perfect example of that.

The team source said that there’s “a lot of mutual interest” between Cleveland and Thompson. In a sense, who the team drafts could play a significant role in that free-agency decision. Would it make sense for Thompson to return if Onyeka Okongwu is the selection at five? Though unlikely, if James Wiseman were to surprisingly slide to the Cavaliers and they nabbed him, re-signing Thompson may no longer be a priority.

https://www.si.com/nba/cavaliers/nba/cavaliers/nba-amico/kevin-love-larry-nance-tristan-thompson-cleveland

Quote
Word is, they would love to have him back and he apparently is more than open to a return.

But as is always the case, it will all come down to numbers. Or more specifically, the next contract offer.

https://sportsrants.com/2020/11/tristan-thompson-not-happy-about-cavs-initial-offer/

Quote
“I am confident that Tristan Thompson has the framework that he can return to the Cavs, but as of right now, that framework isn’t at the level of compensation that he wants it,” Windhorst said, during an appearance on WKNR’s Really Big Show (h/t Nick Dudukovoch of Fansided).


https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/11/tristan-thompson-agrees-to-two-year-deal-with-boston-celtics-sources-say.html

Quote
The Celtics will sign Thompson using the full mid-level exception -- an offer that came in higher than Cleveland’s, sources say.


It really came down to money.  I don't think the Cavs thought anyone would be dumb enough to offer Thompson 9 million a year.  But to get Thompson to leave Cleveland and forego more likely championship teams (like the Clippers) the Celtics had to offer the full MLE and overpay for him wildly.  Much like Charlotte had to overpay for Hayward.

Moranis, you literally just made a lot of noise here that has nothing to do with the post I made. As I shared, There were significant reports that Thompson wanted to play for a contender last year. I'll ask you again,  do you think those reporters were completely false/made up?

Also a team saying they want a guy back is very common and fairly irrelevant (no matter if you try to share the same quote from 5 different sources). There is literally no upside to being like "yeah we think it has run its course with this guy, he is definitely gone." He was also a fairly key player on their one championship team so they are going to certainly be extra nice to him with the press and speak highly of him.

Lastly, you realize living near a spot is completely irrelevant for how much you can follow a team in 2021 right? This isn't the 1970's were we relied on having access to the local newspaper in hand to follow beat reporters. I was able to get more info on the Celtics living in both California and Colorado cause of the ol internet we are communicating on this very moment.
I'm sure he probably did prefer to play for a contender as the Cavs are rebuilding, but at the end of the day he signed for the largest contract offer he received and rejected the Clippers a team that is clearly much closer to a title than the Celtics are.  So clearly it wasn't about winning championships for him, it was cash.  And if Boston had signed Millsap, Thompson would still be a Cav. 

And you obviously didn't read all of those articles, because they all say the feeling was mutual, that Thompson likes Cleveland, and would have been interested in returning if the money was right (here is another one from a Cavs beat writer https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/07/tristan-thompson-showed-why-he-wouldnt-be-easy-to-replace-cleveland-cavaliers-season-review.html).  Thompson made a financial decision and Boston gave him more money than anyone else.  And we have more evidence that that was truly his driving force because of all of the reports that Thompson wouldn't accept a buy out.  He wasn't willing to give any money back to go to a contender last year.  Thompson is a financial mercenary.  Period.  He just wants to be paid.  Had Cleveland given him more than the C's, he would still be a Cav, but Cleveland knew he wasn't worth 9 million a year.

I know you love to do this Celtics were never a contender routine, but we were in game 6 of the ECF last year with two young ascending stars. Believe it or not we actually made it farther then the vaunted clippers. So saying the Clippers were some big contender and we were not is... bizarre. His buyout thing seemed to be more tied to his agency who is against doing it. Also why are you acting like 9 million was some insane offer. It didn't even make any big lists of bad signings in the offseason. He has obviously been disappointing but acting like this was some massive overpay is a strange narrative.

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #34 on: March 08, 2021, 07:53:42 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.

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 didn’t want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? That’s 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)

“Thompson, meanwhile, made it known to the Cavaliers that he would prefer to be moved to a contender leading up to this year’s trade deadline, according to league sources,”

https://cavaliersnation.com/2020/05/29/report-cleveland-had-multiple-trade-offers-tristan-thompson/
Or I'm in the Cleveland area and get far more Cavs news than you do.  There were countless articles from those well connected to the Cavs that stated both sides had a desire for Thompson to return. 

https://the6man.com/tristan-thompson-and-cleveland-cavaliers-have-a-mutual-interest/

Quote
“I think it’s fair to say that there is certainly a mutual interest,” said general manager Koby Altman of the opportunity to re-sign Thompson. “He’s been with this franchise his entire career since we designed it. He won a championship here. Of course, he means a lot to the players on the team right now, but it has to make sense. There are some things coming up – drafting a free one Agency – which we have to see if it makes sense to him. He deserves the right to be a full free agent and at this point in his career to look for opportunities.

https://www.basketballnews.com/stories/nba-cleveland-cavaliers-team-workouts-jb-bickerstaff-collin-sexton-darius-garland

Quote
It is important to note that the franchise does hold Tristan Thompson’s Bird rights, meaning if the Cavaliers decide to bring him back into the fold, they can go over the salary cap to sign him and still have their MLE. With that said, they’re likely not going to spend a ton of money to the point of dipping back into the luxury tax, especially since they did all that work to clear up their cap sheet in the previous two years. At this stage, it’s about hitting singles and adding those positives up -- Alfonzo McKinnie and his team-friendly contract is a perfect example of that.

The team source said that there’s “a lot of mutual interest” between Cleveland and Thompson. In a sense, who the team drafts could play a significant role in that free-agency decision. Would it make sense for Thompson to return if Onyeka Okongwu is the selection at five? Though unlikely, if James Wiseman were to surprisingly slide to the Cavaliers and they nabbed him, re-signing Thompson may no longer be a priority.

https://www.si.com/nba/cavaliers/nba/cavaliers/nba-amico/kevin-love-larry-nance-tristan-thompson-cleveland

Quote
Word is, they would love to have him back and he apparently is more than open to a return.

But as is always the case, it will all come down to numbers. Or more specifically, the next contract offer.

https://sportsrants.com/2020/11/tristan-thompson-not-happy-about-cavs-initial-offer/

Quote
“I am confident that Tristan Thompson has the framework that he can return to the Cavs, but as of right now, that framework isn’t at the level of compensation that he wants it,” Windhorst said, during an appearance on WKNR’s Really Big Show (h/t Nick Dudukovoch of Fansided).


https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/11/tristan-thompson-agrees-to-two-year-deal-with-boston-celtics-sources-say.html

Quote
The Celtics will sign Thompson using the full mid-level exception -- an offer that came in higher than Cleveland’s, sources say.


It really came down to money.  I don't think the Cavs thought anyone would be dumb enough to offer Thompson 9 million a year.  But to get Thompson to leave Cleveland and forego more likely championship teams (like the Clippers) the Celtics had to offer the full MLE and overpay for him wildly.  Much like Charlotte had to overpay for Hayward.

Moranis, you literally just made a lot of noise here that has nothing to do with the post I made. As I shared, There were significant reports that Thompson wanted to play for a contender last year. I'll ask you again,  do you think those reporters were completely false/made up?

Also a team saying they want a guy back is very common and fairly irrelevant (no matter if you try to share the same quote from 5 different sources). There is literally no upside to being like "yeah we think it has run its course with this guy, he is definitely gone." He was also a fairly key player on their one championship team so they are going to certainly be extra nice to him with the press and speak highly of him.

Lastly, you realize living near a spot is completely irrelevant for how much you can follow a team in 2021 right? This isn't the 1970's were we relied on having access to the local newspaper in hand to follow beat reporters. I was able to get more info on the Celtics living in both California and Colorado cause of the ol internet we are communicating on this very moment.
I'm sure he probably did prefer to play for a contender as the Cavs are rebuilding, but at the end of the day he signed for the largest contract offer he received and rejected the Clippers a team that is clearly much closer to a title than the Celtics are.  So clearly it wasn't about winning championships for him, it was cash.  And if Boston had signed Millsap, Thompson would still be a Cav. 

And you obviously didn't read all of those articles, because they all say the feeling was mutual, that Thompson likes Cleveland, and would have been interested in returning if the money was right (here is another one from a Cavs beat writer https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/07/tristan-thompson-showed-why-he-wouldnt-be-easy-to-replace-cleveland-cavaliers-season-review.html).  Thompson made a financial decision and Boston gave him more money than anyone else.  And we have more evidence that that was truly his driving force because of all of the reports that Thompson wouldn't accept a buy out.  He wasn't willing to give any money back to go to a contender last year.  Thompson is a financial mercenary.  Period.  He just wants to be paid.  Had Cleveland given him more than the C's, he would still be a Cav, but Cleveland knew he wasn't worth 9 million a year.

I know you love to do this Celtics were never a contender routine, but we were in game 6 of the ECF last year with two young ascending stars. Believe it or not we actually made it farther then the vaunted clippers. So saying the Clippers were some big contender and we were not is... bizarre. His buyout thing seemed to be more tied to his agency who is against doing it. Also why are you acting like 9 million was some insane offer. It didn't even make any big lists of bad signings in the offseason. He has obviously been disappointing but acting like this was some massive overpay is a strange narrative.
He signed for 2 years it isn't like he is around awhile, but Thompson is not worth 9 million a year and never was.  There is a reason the Cavs didn't offer him even that.  As I said, guys like Hollinger rated Thompson as a minimum contract player this past free agency (Windhorst also agreed with that assessment).  Below is a link that talks about it.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2020/11/cavs-rumors-thompson-free-agents-drummond-no-5-pick.html

So the C's paid 9.5 million for a guy that was estimated to be worth around 1.5 million and whose own team didn't want him at the price Boston offered.  It is 2 years so it can easily be moved, but Boston clearly overpaid for Thompson, making that a bad contract.

Aren't you the guy that loves using odds?  Seems strange that you believe Boston is a more of a contender than the Clippers were or are given the odds have always said vastly different things.  Now I think using odds to determine championship likelihood is a bit silly since the odds are meant to drive bets and not be predictions, but the Clippers are clearly much closer to a championship than Boston is, because the Clippers have a top 5 player in the game and another top 10-15 player.  That is what historically yields champions.  If Thompson cared about winning a championship he would have gone to the Clippers.  Thompson wanted the cash, plain and simple.
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 #35 on: March 08, 2021, 10:18:49 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.
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 didn’t want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? That’s 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)

“Thompson, meanwhile, made it known to the Cavaliers that he would prefer to be moved to a contender leading up to this year’s trade deadline, according to league sources,”

https://cavaliersnation.com/2020/05/29/report-cleveland-had-multiple-trade-offers-tristan-thompson/
Or I'm in the Cleveland area and get far more Cavs news than you do.  There were countless articles from those well connected to the Cavs that stated both sides had a desire for Thompson to return. 

https://the6man.com/tristan-thompson-and-cleveland-cavaliers-have-a-mutual-interest/

Quote
“I think it’s fair to say that there is certainly a mutual interest,” said general manager Koby Altman of the opportunity to re-sign Thompson. “He’s been with this franchise his entire career since we designed it. He won a championship here. Of course, he means a lot to the players on the team right now, but it has to make sense. There are some things coming up – drafting a free one Agency – which we have to see if it makes sense to him. He deserves the right to be a full free agent and at this point in his career to look for opportunities.

https://www.basketballnews.com/stories/nba-cleveland-cavaliers-team-workouts-jb-bickerstaff-collin-sexton-darius-garland

Quote
It is important to note that the franchise does hold Tristan Thompson’s Bird rights, meaning if the Cavaliers decide to bring him back into the fold, they can go over the salary cap to sign him and still have their MLE. With that said, they’re likely not going to spend a ton of money to the point of dipping back into the luxury tax, especially since they did all that work to clear up their cap sheet in the previous two years. At this stage, it’s about hitting singles and adding those positives up -- Alfonzo McKinnie and his team-friendly contract is a perfect example of that.

The team source said that there’s “a lot of mutual interest” between Cleveland and Thompson. In a sense, who the team drafts could play a significant role in that free-agency decision. Would it make sense for Thompson to return if Onyeka Okongwu is the selection at five? Though unlikely, if James Wiseman were to surprisingly slide to the Cavaliers and they nabbed him, re-signing Thompson may no longer be a priority.

https://www.si.com/nba/cavaliers/nba/cavaliers/nba-amico/kevin-love-larry-nance-tristan-thompson-cleveland

Quote
Word is, they would love to have him back and he apparently is more than open to a return.

But as is always the case, it will all come down to numbers. Or more specifically, the next contract offer.

https://sportsrants.com/2020/11/tristan-thompson-not-happy-about-cavs-initial-offer/

Quote
“I am confident that Tristan Thompson has the framework that he can return to the Cavs, but as of right now, that framework isn’t at the level of compensation that he wants it,” Windhorst said, during an appearance on WKNR’s Really Big Show (h/t Nick Dudukovoch of Fansided).


https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/11/tristan-thompson-agrees-to-two-year-deal-with-boston-celtics-sources-say.html

Quote
The Celtics will sign Thompson using the full mid-level exception -- an offer that came in higher than Cleveland’s, sources say.


It really came down to money.  I don't think the Cavs thought anyone would be dumb enough to offer Thompson 9 million a year.  But to get Thompson to leave Cleveland and forego more likely championship teams (like the Clippers) the Celtics had to offer the full MLE and overpay for him wildly.  Much like Charlotte had to overpay for Hayward.

Moranis, you literally just made a lot of noise here that has nothing to do with the post I made. As I shared, There were significant reports that Thompson wanted to play for a contender last year. I'll ask you again,  do you think those reporters were completely false/made up?

Also a team saying they want a guy back is very common and fairly irrelevant (no matter if you try to share the same quote from 5 different sources). There is literally no upside to being like "yeah we think it has run its course with this guy, he is definitely gone." He was also a fairly key player on their one championship team so they are going to certainly be extra nice to him with the press and speak highly of him.

Lastly, you realize living near a spot is completely irrelevant for how much you can follow a team in 2021 right? This isn't the 1970's were we relied on having access to the local newspaper in hand to follow beat reporters. I was able to get more info on the Celtics living in both California and Colorado cause of the ol internet we are communicating on this very moment.
I'm sure he probably did prefer to play for a contender as the Cavs are rebuilding, but at the end of the day he signed for the largest contract offer he received and rejected the Clippers a team that is clearly much closer to a title than the Celtics are.  So clearly it wasn't about winning championships for him, it was cash.  And if Boston had signed Millsap, Thompson would still be a Cav. 

And you obviously didn't read all of those articles, because they all say the feeling was mutual, that Thompson likes Cleveland, and would have been interested in returning if the money was right (here is another one from a Cavs beat writer https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/07/tristan-thompson-showed-why-he-wouldnt-be-easy-to-replace-cleveland-cavaliers-season-review.html).  Thompson made a financial decision and Boston gave him more money than anyone else.  And we have more evidence that that was truly his driving force because of all of the reports that Thompson wouldn't accept a buy out.  He wasn't willing to give any money back to go to a contender last year.  Thompson is a financial mercenary.  Period.  He just wants to be paid.  Had Cleveland given him more than the C's, he would still be a Cav, but Cleveland knew he wasn't worth 9 million a year.

I know you love to do this Celtics were never a contender routine, but we were in game 6 of the ECF last year with two young ascending stars. Believe it or not we actually made it farther then the vaunted clippers. So saying the Clippers were some big contender and we were not is... bizarre. His buyout thing seemed to be more tied to his agency who is against doing it. Also why are you acting like 9 million was some insane offer. It didn't even make any big lists of bad signings in the offseason. He has obviously been disappointing but acting like this was some massive overpay is a strange narrative.
He signed for 2 years it isn't like he is around awhile, but Thompson is not worth 9 million a year and never was.  There is a reason the Cavs didn't offer him even that.  As I said, guys like Hollinger rated Thompson as a minimum contract player this past free agency (Windhorst also agreed with that assessment).  Below is a link that talks about it.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2020/11/cavs-rumors-thompson-free-agents-drummond-no-5-pick.html

So the C's paid 9.5 million for a guy that was estimated to be worth around 1.5 million and whose own team didn't want him at the price Boston offered.  It is 2 years so it can easily be moved, but Boston clearly overpaid for Thompson, making that a bad contract.

Aren't you the guy that loves using odds?  Seems strange that you believe Boston is a more of a contender than the Clippers were or are given the odds have always said vastly different things.  Now I think using odds to determine championship likelihood is a bit silly since the odds are meant to drive bets and not be predictions, but the Clippers are clearly much closer to a championship than Boston is, because the Clippers have a top 5 player in the game and another top 10-15 player.  That is what historically yields champions.  If Thompson cared about winning a championship he would have gone to the Clippers.  Thompson wanted the cash, plain and simple.

You are really now claiming that Thompson, coming off a season in which he averaged a double double at 28 and with a reputation as a reasonable switchable defender (he obviously played a relatively important role on the Cavs title team) is a minimum level player because of a throwaway line on a blog? And that the Celtics outbid the rest of the nba by 7x his market value cause Danny has a reputation over overpaying free agents right? Come on man... this is literally just nonsense and a waste of my time.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2021, 11:12:36 PM by celticsclay »

Re: Larry Nance Jr
« Reply #36 on: March 08, 2021, 11:55:42 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.

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 didn’t want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? That’s 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)

“Thompson, meanwhile, made it known to the Cavaliers that he would prefer to be moved to a contender leading up to this year’s trade deadline, according to league sources,”

https://cavaliersnation.com/2020/05/29/report-cleveland-had-multiple-trade-offers-tristan-thompson/
Or I'm in the Cleveland area and get far more Cavs news than you do.  There were countless articles from those well connected to the Cavs that stated both sides had a desire for Thompson to return. 

https://the6man.com/tristan-thompson-and-cleveland-cavaliers-have-a-mutual-interest/

Quote
“I think it’s fair to say that there is certainly a mutual interest,” said general manager Koby Altman of the opportunity to re-sign Thompson. “He’s been with this franchise his entire career since we designed it. He won a championship here. Of course, he means a lot to the players on the team right now, but it has to make sense. There are some things coming up – drafting a free one Agency – which we have to see if it makes sense to him. He deserves the right to be a full free agent and at this point in his career to look for opportunities.

https://www.basketballnews.com/stories/nba-cleveland-cavaliers-team-workouts-jb-bickerstaff-collin-sexton-darius-garland

Quote
It is important to note that the franchise does hold Tristan Thompson’s Bird rights, meaning if the Cavaliers decide to bring him back into the fold, they can go over the salary cap to sign him and still have their MLE. With that said, they’re likely not going to spend a ton of money to the point of dipping back into the luxury tax, especially since they did all that work to clear up their cap sheet in the previous two years. At this stage, it’s about hitting singles and adding those positives up -- Alfonzo McKinnie and his team-friendly contract is a perfect example of that.

The team source said that there’s “a lot of mutual interest” between Cleveland and Thompson. In a sense, who the team drafts could play a significant role in that free-agency decision. Would it make sense for Thompson to return if Onyeka Okongwu is the selection at five? Though unlikely, if James Wiseman were to surprisingly slide to the Cavaliers and they nabbed him, re-signing Thompson may no longer be a priority.

https://www.si.com/nba/cavaliers/nba/cavaliers/nba-amico/kevin-love-larry-nance-tristan-thompson-cleveland

Quote
Word is, they would love to have him back and he apparently is more than open to a return.

But as is always the case, it will all come down to numbers. Or more specifically, the next contract offer.

https://sportsrants.com/2020/11/tristan-thompson-not-happy-about-cavs-initial-offer/

Quote
“I am confident that Tristan Thompson has the framework that he can return to the Cavs, but as of right now, that framework isn’t at the level of compensation that he wants it,” Windhorst said, during an appearance on WKNR’s Really Big Show (h/t Nick Dudukovoch of Fansided).


https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/11/tristan-thompson-agrees-to-two-year-deal-with-boston-celtics-sources-say.html

Quote
The Celtics will sign Thompson using the full mid-level exception -- an offer that came in higher than Cleveland’s, sources say.


It really came down to money.  I don't think the Cavs thought anyone would be dumb enough to offer Thompson 9 million a year.  But to get Thompson to leave Cleveland and forego more likely championship teams (like the Clippers) the Celtics had to offer the full MLE and overpay for him wildly.  Much like Charlotte had to overpay for Hayward.

Moranis, you literally just made a lot of noise here that has nothing to do with the post I made. As I shared, There were significant reports that Thompson wanted to play for a contender last year. I'll ask you again,  do you think those reporters were completely false/made up?

Also a team saying they want a guy back is very common and fairly irrelevant (no matter if you try to share the same quote from 5 different sources). There is literally no upside to being like "yeah we think it has run its course with this guy, he is definitely gone." He was also a fairly key player on their one championship team so they are going to certainly be extra nice to him with the press and speak highly of him.

Lastly, you realize living near a spot is completely irrelevant for how much you can follow a team in 2021 right? This isn't the 1970's were we relied on having access to the local newspaper in hand to follow beat reporters. I was able to get more info on the Celtics living in both California and Colorado cause of the ol internet we are communicating on this very moment.
I'm sure he probably did prefer to play for a contender as the Cavs are rebuilding, but at the end of the day he signed for the largest contract offer he received and rejected the Clippers a team that is clearly much closer to a title than the Celtics are.  So clearly it wasn't about winning championships for him, it was cash.  And if Boston had signed Millsap, Thompson would still be a Cav. 

And you obviously didn't read all of those articles, because they all say the feeling was mutual, that Thompson likes Cleveland, and would have been interested in returning if the money was right (here is another one from a Cavs beat writer https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/07/tristan-thompson-showed-why-he-wouldnt-be-easy-to-replace-cleveland-cavaliers-season-review.html).  Thompson made a financial decision and Boston gave him more money than anyone else.  And we have more evidence that that was truly his driving force because of all of the reports that Thompson wouldn't accept a buy out.  He wasn't willing to give any money back to go to a contender last year.  Thompson is a financial mercenary.  Period.  He just wants to be paid.  Had Cleveland given him more than the C's, he would still be a Cav, but Cleveland knew he wasn't worth 9 million a year.

I know you love to do this Celtics were never a contender routine, but we were in game 6 of the ECF last year with two young ascending stars. Believe it or not we actually made it farther then the vaunted clippers. So saying the Clippers were some big contender and we were not is... bizarre. His buyout thing seemed to be more tied to his agency who is against doing it. Also why are you acting like 9 million was some insane offer. It didn't even make any big lists of bad signings in the offseason. He has obviously been disappointing but acting like this was some massive overpay is a strange narrative.
He signed for 2 years it isn't like he is around awhile, but Thompson is not worth 9 million a year and never was.  There is a reason the Cavs didn't offer him even that.  As I said, guys like Hollinger rated Thompson as a minimum contract player this past free agency (Windhorst also agreed with that assessment).  Below is a link that talks about it.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2020/11/cavs-rumors-thompson-free-agents-drummond-no-5-pick.html

So the C's paid 9.5 million for a guy that was estimated to be worth around 1.5 million and whose own team didn't want him at the price Boston offered.  It is 2 years so it can easily be moved, but Boston clearly overpaid for Thompson, making that a bad contract.

Aren't you the guy that loves using odds?  Seems strange that you believe Boston is a more of a contender than the Clippers were or are given the odds have always said vastly different things.  Now I think using odds to determine championship likelihood is a bit silly since the odds are meant to drive bets and not be predictions, but the Clippers are clearly much closer to a championship than Boston is, because the Clippers have a top 5 player in the game and another top 10-15 player.  That is what historically yields champions.  If Thompson cared about winning a championship he would have gone to the Clippers.  Thompson wanted the cash, plain and simple.

You are really now claiming that Thompson, coming off a season in which he averaged a double double at 28 and with a reputation as a reasonable switchable defender (he obviously played a relatively important role on the Cavs title team) is a minimum level player because of a throwaway line on a blog? And that the Celtics outbid the rest of the nba by 7x his market value cause Danny has a reputation over overpaying free agents right? Come on man... this is literally just nonsense and a waste of my time.
I don't have access to Hollinger at the Athletic or I would linked his article.  Hollinger is a very well respected basketball mind.  I mean ESPN still uses Holinger's analysis on their trade machine even though he hasn't worked for ESPN since 2012.  Hollinger's valuation was confirmed by
Windhorst, who obviously is a national NBA guy at ESPN (and grew up in Akron and is well connected to the Cavs). 

And here is the most important thing that confirms this.  Teams weren't knocking down Thompson's door.  He had very minimal interest across the league with basically just Cleveland, LAC, and Boston offering him contracts.  Cleveland's offer was for more than the minimum, but it was no where near what Boston ended up paying (at least by rumored reports).  The Clippers offer was never reported, but considering they gave Ibaka the full MLE, there wasn't exactly a lot of money left for a Thompson offer. 

You can spin this however you want to make you feel better, but Boston absolutely overpaid for Thompson.  Again it is a short contract that is easily tradeable, so it was a terrible contract, but Thompson is not worth 19 million over the next 2 years.  Not even close.  And he basically pulled a Mark Blount with putting up career highs nearly across the board in a walk year for a bad team.  There isn't anything that is going to convince me that a 8/8 guy with no range (at all), average defense, and horrid ball skills is worth 9.5 million a year.  That type of a player is a dime a dozen. 
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 #37 on: March 09, 2021, 10:44:27 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 didn’t want to be on a rebuilding team and stubbornly chose to not get any value for him and lose him for nothing? That’s 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)

“Thompson, meanwhile, made it known to the Cavaliers that he would prefer to be moved to a contender leading up to this year’s trade deadline, according to league sources,”

https://cavaliersnation.com/2020/05/29/report-cleveland-had-multiple-trade-offers-tristan-thompson/
Or I'm in the Cleveland area and get far more Cavs news than you do.  There were countless articles from those well connected to the Cavs that stated both sides had a desire for Thompson to return. 

https://the6man.com/tristan-thompson-and-cleveland-cavaliers-have-a-mutual-interest/

Quote
“I think it’s fair to say that there is certainly a mutual interest,” said general manager Koby Altman of the opportunity to re-sign Thompson. “He’s been with this franchise his entire career since we designed it. He won a championship here. Of course, he means a lot to the players on the team right now, but it has to make sense. There are some things coming up – drafting a free one Agency – which we have to see if it makes sense to him. He deserves the right to be a full free agent and at this point in his career to look for opportunities.

https://www.basketballnews.com/stories/nba-cleveland-cavaliers-team-workouts-jb-bickerstaff-collin-sexton-darius-garland

Quote
It is important to note that the franchise does hold Tristan Thompson’s Bird rights, meaning if the Cavaliers decide to bring him back into the fold, they can go over the salary cap to sign him and still have their MLE. With that said, they’re likely not going to spend a ton of money to the point of dipping back into the luxury tax, especially since they did all that work to clear up their cap sheet in the previous two years. At this stage, it’s about hitting singles and adding those positives up -- Alfonzo McKinnie and his team-friendly contract is a perfect example of that.

The team source said that there’s “a lot of mutual interest” between Cleveland and Thompson. In a sense, who the team drafts could play a significant role in that free-agency decision. Would it make sense for Thompson to return if Onyeka Okongwu is the selection at five? Though unlikely, if James Wiseman were to surprisingly slide to the Cavaliers and they nabbed him, re-signing Thompson may no longer be a priority.

https://www.si.com/nba/cavaliers/nba/cavaliers/nba-amico/kevin-love-larry-nance-tristan-thompson-cleveland

Quote
Word is, they would love to have him back and he apparently is more than open to a return.

But as is always the case, it will all come down to numbers. Or more specifically, the next contract offer.

https://sportsrants.com/2020/11/tristan-thompson-not-happy-about-cavs-initial-offer/

Quote
“I am confident that Tristan Thompson has the framework that he can return to the Cavs, but as of right now, that framework isn’t at the level of compensation that he wants it,” Windhorst said, during an appearance on WKNR’s Really Big Show (h/t Nick Dudukovoch of Fansided).


https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/11/tristan-thompson-agrees-to-two-year-deal-with-boston-celtics-sources-say.html

Quote
The Celtics will sign Thompson using the full mid-level exception -- an offer that came in higher than Cleveland’s, sources say.


It really came down to money.  I don't think the Cavs thought anyone would be dumb enough to offer Thompson 9 million a year.  But to get Thompson to leave Cleveland and forego more likely championship teams (like the Clippers) the Celtics had to offer the full MLE and overpay for him wildly.  Much like Charlotte had to overpay for Hayward.

Moranis, you literally just made a lot of noise here that has nothing to do with the post I made. As I shared, There were significant reports that Thompson wanted to play for a contender last year. I'll ask you again,  do you think those reporters were completely false/made up?

Also a team saying they want a guy back is very common and fairly irrelevant (no matter if you try to share the same quote from 5 different sources). There is literally no upside to being like "yeah we think it has run its course with this guy, he is definitely gone." He was also a fairly key player on their one championship team so they are going to certainly be extra nice to him with the press and speak highly of him.

Lastly, you realize living near a spot is completely irrelevant for how much you can follow a team in 2021 right? This isn't the 1970's were we relied on having access to the local newspaper in hand to follow beat reporters. I was able to get more info on the Celtics living in both California and Colorado cause of the ol internet we are communicating on this very moment.
I'm sure he probably did prefer to play for a contender as the Cavs are rebuilding, but at the end of the day he signed for the largest contract offer he received and rejected the Clippers a team that is clearly much closer to a title than the Celtics are.  So clearly it wasn't about winning championships for him, it was cash.  And if Boston had signed Millsap, Thompson would still be a Cav. 

And you obviously didn't read all of those articles, because they all say the feeling was mutual, that Thompson likes Cleveland, and would have been interested in returning if the money was right (here is another one from a Cavs beat writer https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2020/07/tristan-thompson-showed-why-he-wouldnt-be-easy-to-replace-cleveland-cavaliers-season-review.html).  Thompson made a financial decision and Boston gave him more money than anyone else.  And we have more evidence that that was truly his driving force because of all of the reports that Thompson wouldn't accept a buy out.  He wasn't willing to give any money back to go to a contender last year.  Thompson is a financial mercenary.  Period.  He just wants to be paid.  Had Cleveland given him more than the C's, he would still be a Cav, but Cleveland knew he wasn't worth 9 million a year.

I know you love to do this Celtics were never a contender routine, but we were in game 6 of the ECF last year with two young ascending stars. Believe it or not we actually made it farther then the vaunted clippers. So saying the Clippers were some big contender and we were not is... bizarre. His buyout thing seemed to be more tied to his agency who is against doing it. Also why are you acting like 9 million was some insane offer. It didn't even make any big lists of bad signings in the offseason. He has obviously been disappointing but acting like this was some massive overpay is a strange narrative.
He signed for 2 years it isn't like he is around awhile, but Thompson is not worth 9 million a year and never was.  There is a reason the Cavs didn't offer him even that.  As I said, guys like Hollinger rated Thompson as a minimum contract player this past free agency (Windhorst also agreed with that assessment).  Below is a link that talks about it.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2020/11/cavs-rumors-thompson-free-agents-drummond-no-5-pick.html

So the C's paid 9.5 million for a guy that was estimated to be worth around 1.5 million and whose own team didn't want him at the price Boston offered.  It is 2 years so it can easily be moved, but Boston clearly overpaid for Thompson, making that a bad contract.

Aren't you the guy that loves using odds?  Seems strange that you believe Boston is a more of a contender than the Clippers were or are given the odds have always said vastly different things.  Now I think using odds to determine championship likelihood is a bit silly since the odds are meant to drive bets and not be predictions, but the Clippers are clearly much closer to a championship than Boston is, because the Clippers have a top 5 player in the game and another top 10-15 player.  That is what historically yields champions.  If Thompson cared about winning a championship he would have gone to the Clippers.  Thompson wanted the cash, plain and simple.

You are really now claiming that Thompson, coming off a season in which he averaged a double double at 28 and with a reputation as a reasonable switchable defender (he obviously played a relatively important role on the Cavs title team) is a minimum level player because of a throwaway line on a blog? And that the Celtics outbid the rest of the nba by 7x his market value cause Danny has a reputation over overpaying free agents right? Come on man... this is literally just nonsense and a waste of my time.
I don't have access to Hollinger at the Athletic or I would linked his article.  Hollinger is a very well respected basketball mind.  I mean ESPN still uses Holinger's analysis on their trade machine even though he hasn't worked for ESPN since 2012.  Hollinger's valuation was confirmed by
Windhorst, who obviously is a national NBA guy at ESPN (and grew up in Akron and is well connected to the Cavs). 

And here is the most important thing that confirms this.  Teams weren't knocking down Thompson's door.  He had very minimal interest across the league with basically just Cleveland, LAC, and Boston offering him contracts.  Cleveland's offer was for more than the minimum, but it was no where near what Boston ended up paying (at least by rumored reports).  The Clippers offer was never reported, but considering they gave Ibaka the full MLE, there wasn't exactly a lot of money left for a Thompson offer. 

You can spin this however you want to make you feel better, but Boston absolutely overpaid for Thompson.  Again it is a short contract that is easily tradeable, so it was a terrible contract, but Thompson is not worth 19 million over the next 2 years.  Not even close.  And he basically pulled a Mark Blount with putting up career highs nearly across the board in a walk year for a bad team.  There isn't anything that is going to convince me that a 8/8 guy with no range (at all), average defense, and horrid ball skills is worth 9.5 million a year.  That type of a player is a dime a dozen.

Again, this is literally just nonsense. The Lakers were also interested in him. Three of the top 6 teams in the league publicly wanted him. He was sought after at a level much higher than the minimum. Also, he didn't just average a double double last year, he averaged one the year before that as well. He also played a key role on a team that repeatedly made deep finals runs and had important games on those teams. You realize Mark Blount literally never averaged a double double for a single season in his career? He was actually a horrible rebounding big averaging 4.6 for his career. He also never played a significant role on any team that made any sort of team playoff run. Look I don't know if you have some beef with Thompson for him leaving your home town or what, but making up and pushing the laughable agenda that he should have been had for the minimum just makes you look foolish and like you know less about basketball than I know you did. Go back to the thread when we signed him, there was not a single person saying they thought we should have got him for the minimum. Most thought it was a reasonable deal. He has certainly been a disappointment this year, but we can't retroactively act like a 29 year old coming off back to back double seasons with a playoff pedigree is a minimum player whether or not hollinger or someone through it out casually at some point. He is considered a good locker room and character guy, durable, switchable, a great rebound and in his prime with a strong playoff pedigree. You don't get players like that for the minimum at that age. Please just stop the nonsense.