I am a bit surprised that people are acting like Bledsoe isn't a significant step down from Irving. I agree that Irving may be a little overrated and perhaps Bledsoe a little underrated cause of defense. That withstanding though Irving has basically been an all-star every single year in the league and Bledsoe has never made one. They are definitely on a slightly different level from each other and of the two Irving is the only one with a truly elite skill (two actually ball handling and finishing at the rim). Is this normal to think a perennial all-star and a guy that has never made one are the same player? I feel like this would be us saying Bradley was as good a player as Derozen the last few years cause Bradley was elite defensively...
Bledsoe is a step down, which is obvious from the way the poll has gone, but I don't think he is as much a step down as you are indicating. Bledsoe is a better passer, better rebounder, much better defender, gets to the line a lot more, and is generally a more well rounded player than Irving. Irving is a much better shooter and better individual shot creator, and is a better player, but the Cavs don't really need much of what Irving provides. They already have one of the best ISO creators ever, they don't need a second one, and could use the more well rounded player that isn't quite as good overall.
And it isn't like Bledsoe has been a scrub. He has averaged over 20 ppg in each of the prior two seasons and has been over 6 apg in each of the last three along with nearly 5 rpg (last year). And because Bledsoe gets to the line a lot, his TS% last year was 56.3 while Irving's was 58% so there isn't a huge drop off there.
Isn't it a little more meaningful that Irving's numbers are coming on one of the best teams in the league while Bledsoe puts up numbers on one of the worst. As you have pointed out before, how much does Bledsoe being a better rebounder matter playing with Thompson, Lebron and Love? I think going from a perrennial all star to an average to slightly above average starter is a death kneel for the Cavs already extremely slim title odds.
I've never bought into the notion that good stats on great teams are always better than good stats on bad teams. Sure sometimes players just put up numbers because of shots, opportunities, etc., that they get because they are on a bad team, but similarly sometimes players are far more efficient and thus have better stats because of their superior teammates on good teams. I'd expect, Irving's efficiency to decrease a bit and Bledsoe's efficiency to increase a bit if they swapped teams, just by the nature of the team (Irving is better and a better shooter so he will likely have better offensive stats in both situations, but I'm just saying I wouldn't expect to see Bledsoe tank and Irving to skyrocket).
And don't get me wrong, the Cavs are better with Irving then they are with Bledsoe and Jackson, but I don't think they are that much better with Irving and they might have a bit more cohesiveness overall (with the better defender, passer, and rebounder that is Bledsoe and the younger defensive oriented wing on the bench). So yeah, their slim title chances are probably lessened, but they would still be the heavy favorite to come out of the East (Scalabrine was moaning about that this morning, that unless the Cavs just give Irving away for future considerations, that the Cavs will still beat the Celtics because of James).
Yes let us all use Scalabrine moaning as a basis for what will happen.
Probably 50 times over the last year you have tried to use the argument that the Cavs had the best and second best and probably 5th best players against the Celtics in a Series. Now all of a sudden the Celtics will have the second and third best and 5th best with the Cavs having best, 4th and 6th (with a big droppoff to the 7th spots that get into role players like Smart, Thompson, Crowder, Korver, Rose and Morris)
Barring a really unexpected return to form by Rose (he has lost so much athleticism I don't see it happening) the Cavs are not going to be heavy favorites to win east over Boston if they make that trade.
The thing that you never seem to comprehend, is that James is still significantly better than any one else in that series. And while we can argue in what order to put Hayward, Thomas, and Love, they are all on virtually the same tier of player, and that tier is way below James. Lebron James has been to 7 straight finals, and 8 overall, for a reason. He is just that good. You can say whatever you want about the quality of his teammates, but let's not forget neither Love nor Irving had even been to the playoffs before playing with James (they are both probably better players overall now, and that the fact that Love was a 26/12.5, 2nd Team All NBA player before ever landing in Cleveland isn't lost on me in that statement).
Boston just doesn't have one of those players that you could build a title team around (not counting Brown or Tatum, since they aren't at that level yet, even if they someday might get there). Those are the players that win you playoff series and ultimately championships. In a special season, a team without one of those players, can put it all together and win, but those are rare special seasons where a lot of luck happens (even the 04 Pistons had one of the best rebounding and defending big men in league history, along with 3 other all star level players and a lot of depth).
The Warriors have 2 of those players and two other All NBA level players, which sets them apart from everyone else and makes them a nearly unbeatable team barring injuries.