CSL Tonite - Is the Chemistry gone?

Loooooooooooooooooooooooooooove it. VC takes it, MAKES IT. Half man - half amazing.

*Like always, no offense. Just a try to take a deeper look. This time we take a look at the NOP - CLE trade. Its inspired by Tim's NLL Jackson Ayorinde Articles. Obviously Im not such a Mastermind Mr. Moungey is, though I want to bring some great NLL stuff over to the CSL. Sure, this league will never be as active as the NLL.. Its just not possible.. Got up 30 minutes ago, during that time 3 wiretaps and 2 dailys were posted. Crazy.
Anyway. Maybe there are some holes in my analysis, but at least I should be able to compare numbers.

Guide
To get a better comparison I used the 2013/2014 numbers. Its a bigger sample size and should allow a more detailed look. Wont take a look why its a great trade for New Orleans, because everybody can see why it it is. Just tying to explain why it is not a good one for Clevelend.
Also please remember Jinx played heavy zone defense. So the numbers are a bit biased. Steals are extremely low, rebounds higher, etc.
Watching Jordans, Calderons, Waiters Vid isnt mandatory to get my point.

The Trade
New Orleans sends:
Eric Gordon
Ryan Anderson
Caron Butler

Cleveland sends:
Jose Calderon
Dion Waiters
DeAndre Jordan

The Numbers
What Cleveland did well (2013/2014)
Points allowed 96.8 (4.)
Rebounds 52.7 (1.)
Blocks 6.2 (12.)
Turnovers 13.4 (11.)
Assists 23.9 (2.)
FG% .46% (7.)
3p% .39% (4.)

What Cleveland didnt do well (2013/2014)
Steals 2.6 (30.)
Turnover forced 9.1 (30.)

Flashback
Offense
If you take a look at this numbers there is only one question, "Why do a trade?". This team was well rounded and did fit perfectly together and a pretty active GM would have made a deep playoff run already last year. But Jinx was pretty much inactive and missed to make some lineup changes. For example Bullock didnt see a lot minutes (10.3) during playoffs while he should have been starting over AK47. Also he just missed to change his heavy zone defense as SS abused it with Williams and Kobe. Jordan running the pick and roll, Calderon creating open shots for Irving/Jordan while hitting open three after three due to the space Kyries drives forced, Bullock/Waiters sitting in the corner waiting to knock down corner threes. The offense was so well rounded and it resulted in high FG% (7.), open threes (4.), a lot open shots and assists (2.) and only a few turnovers (11.) due to Calderons/Waiters great handling.



Defense
Jordan was the anchor in the middle. Stopping 70% of drives he faced, allowing 0.7 p/sf, grabbing 7.3 defensive rebounds while adding nearly 3 blocks per game. Compared to guys like Hibbert Jordan was even able to stay on the court as he averaged only 2.5 fouls per game. Waiters instead wasnt living up to his potentials as Cleveland played heavy zone defense. With switching to full curt pressure he should be a ballhawk a la Rubio as he got the potentials for it (87def, 89 stl), still Dion forced 1.5 TO per and allowed only 0.9 per shot faced. Calderon wasnt/isnt able to stop drives, but thats where DeAndre3000 stepped in and took over driving guards. Still Jose also just allowed 0.9 per.

The New Guys
Eric Gordon - 21 points, 3.6 rebounds, 3.9 assists, 3.3 Turnover, 34%3P, 43%stp, 33% usage, 2.5 TOFC, 0.9 /sf
Ryan Anderson - 14.5 points, 7.6 rebounds, 43%3P, 67%stp, 2.1 TOFC, 0.9 /sf

While I can see the fit of Anderson to clear the driving path for Kyrie, I absolutely cant see the fit of Gordon. Ryan will be great as another player will camp in the corner to wait for kickouts from Irving. Anderson should be able to knock open threes down on a solid level as he shot already 43% from beyond the arc last year. On top he's a great defender as he stops 67%, allows 0.9 and forces 2.1 TO per game.
On the other side the addition of Gordon just destroys the chemistry! It looks like a trade for names. Dont get me wrong, Gordon is great if he's in the right place at the right time. But he wont fit next to Irving. Both are no extraordinary ballhandler and will struggle with turnovers (Irving: 3.2 - Gordon: 3.1) , both need the ball (Irving: 72.5 Touches, 37%usage - Gordon: 69 Touches, 33%usage), both are slasher (Irving: 80% drive, 12.7 FGIA of 23 FGA - Gordon 80% drive, 9 FGIA of 17 FGA), both are a burden on the other end of the court (Irving: 54.5%STP - Gordon: take a look above).


*What Gordon does


*What Kyrie does

No doubt, with instructions Cleveland could train Irving to take more threes or jumper, but that will take time and his efficiency will suffer. Irving is a great 3 point shooter with 40% from the 3 point line last year, though he still has to prove he's able to knock them down while shooting a bigger volume as he only shot 2.3 3PA per game last year. On top he shoots a pretty bad 38FGJ%. In my opinion Kyrie doesnt live or die with his drives, but he will struggle a lot if he isnt able to drive. This trade was a big step back for Cleveland as they just traded for the name Eric Gordon and didnt care about any tactical aspects. I predict it will be very hard to make the Playoffs this year. As daprable, jamal, Jestor are always praying, think about the tactic you want to play first and trade for the players that fit after.
Another point Im really confused about is how Gordon and Irving are going to share the ball. Like listed above both are high usage players, both are players that need the ball, both need a clear driving path. They are just clones. Like I cant see the OKC or MIN team fit together its the same here. They will struggle as there is just no clear gameplan and not enough touches available.

What Cleveland lost

Calderon

• a guy able to find open guys
  
• a guy able to find the slashing SG (Ellis = Irving)
  
• a guy able to hit open threes (44.5%)
  
• 13.4 A/TO
  
• 0.7 TO, 0.010 TO/TCH, 0.132 A/TCH
  

You have to expect that Clevelands assist per game will decrease and turnovers will increase. Gordon even wont be better at defense as he stopped 43% and Calderon 22%. Because of the Zone Cleveland played Jose's STP% nearly didnt matter anyway as he faced only 5 drives per game.

DeAndre Jordan

• 11 rebounds per
  
• 3 blocks per
  
• .52%FG
  
• 0.7 PA
  
• 70%STP
  

Dion Waiters

• a ballhawk, 89 steal
  
• great defender, 87 def, 0.9 PA
  
• decent jumpshooter 44%, decent 3pshooter 35%
  
• creates well off the dribble with terrfific ballhandling, 81HDL
  
• great drive, 61% FGI
  

"Sum up"
Gordon (24) + Anderson (25): 35.9 points, 10.2 rebounds, 5.1 assists, 2.7 steals, 0.8 blocks
Jordan (24) + Calderon (31) + Waiters (21): 37.5 points, 21 rebounds, 14.3 assists, 1 steal, 3 blocks

I know summing up is no great way to analyze, but I just wanted to find a reason why Cleveland split 3 of their starters into 2 guys. Anyway looking at talent it looks the following for me, Waiters = Gordon = Jordan > Calderon = Anderson. Really looked at it from every point of view, but I cant find a reason. Its a rip-off, isnt it?

I could write down so much more, but for now its enough as I believe if I write more nobody would read it. If you want me to add more thoughts Im always open for it.
IMO this trade makes zero sense for Cleveland. They are even not getting younger.

A final speech

A question at the commishs..
I know we had the discussion already at the last board. We talked about mentors and stuff like that. I really believe it would help new guys to settle. I believe its not only me and Rizzo who try to get pretty lopsided trades if a new player joins. Not saying I want to be a mentor, hell not, Im not able to.. But guys like jamal are perfect for it. I would have loved if I would have had a mentor when I joined the league, because I would have never done the Rondo trade. But we got GM's able to talk guys into trades. I believe I did the same in the Sap - Vuc trade, Lukc did it in the #19 - Vuc trade, etc. etc. If you are new you want to get something done as it seems, so it would be nice if a guy like Jamal could help you analyzing the trade offered.
No offense at all. Just a hint.

Great analysis IMO.
I also think Cleveland is losing A LOT here. I would not even compare Waiters and Gordon because Dion can help a lot on both ends while Gordon is only a scoring machine.
I'd say Ryan Anderson could have the same impact for CLE that DJ had. They already have Gortat manning the middle and Ryan plays almost at the same level of personal defense than DJ. Of course he's not a rim protector nor he's gonna average 10RPG, but he can play acceptable D and he won't be a liability at the boards. And what he brings to the table is an amazing 3pt shoot that will help spacing for Kyrie and Gordon. He, combined with Gortat, can do really well.
Still, I'd say:
Waiters > Gordon
DeAndre = Anderson

So if I was running Cavs show, I'd not include Calderon and would have asked for a 1st with Gordon and Anderson.
Kudos on Arizona for finding a good trade like that.

Marcos_Beck (OKC) wrote:Great analysis IMO.
I also think Cleveland is losing A LOT here. I would not even compare Waiters and Gordon because Dion can help a lot on both ends while Gordon is only a scoring machine.
I'd say Ryan Anderson could have the same impact for CLE that DJ had. They already have Gortat manning the middle and Ryan plays almost at the same level of personal defense than DJ. Of course he's not a rim protector nor he's gonna average 10RPG, but he can play acceptable D and he won't be a liability at the boards. And what he brings to the table is an amazing 3pt shoot that will help spacing for Kyrie and Gordon. He, combined with Gortat, can do really well.
Still, I'd say:
Waiters > Gordon
DeAndre = Anderson

So if I was running Cavs show, I'd not include Calderon and would have asked for a 1st with Gordon and Anderson.

I don't think Waiters will ever average 20 ppg like Gordon did and with Gortat already in town it seemed like Jordan was expendable. We are going to miss Anderson's ability to shoot the rock but it was too tempting to pass up on pairing Jordan with Davis.

Marcos_Beck (OKC) wrote:Kudos on Arizona for finding a good trade like that.

We are from New Orleans.  

First off, these are the kind of articles I enjoy reading. Lot of thought put into it and a great read. I always look at trades as, who is the top player.

In this case it's DeAndre Jordan.

So right away I'm going to lean towards the Pelicans getting the better end of the deal here. Add to that fact that I feel Waiters is better than Anderson also.

Hey, you always try to get the most out of your trades, it's human nature. I will say though that Cleveland will suffer greatly because of these moves. The Pelicans swooped in and got the best end of this trade no matter how you cut it up.

More importantly though is kudos to Dennis for putting together such a great article.

-

Rizzo (NO) wrote:

Marcos_Beck (OKC) wrote:Kudos on Arizona for finding a good trade like that.

We are from New Orleans.  

Sorry man!
iPhone's auto-corrector
It was meant to be Rizzo!

DennisJ (BOS) wrote:My point is, this trade has to be denied and reworked so its a fair one.
The new GM will feel bad for this earlier than later.

I must say I'm completely against denying trades. I think we must have the freedom to do whatever we want with our team, barring something like LeBron or Durant for the 60th pick of a bad draft hahaha.
I feel like denying trades takes away from our responsibilities as GM. Just before I came here I had 2 trade denied and decided to leave another sim league I was playing. Not because of denying or not trades, but because just after my trades were denied, another ones were accepted for the same players, and I really don't think the trades that were accepted were better than mine. I put a lot of work on finding trades just to have them denied and see worse ones being accepted. Well, that was really really bad.
Take a look.
My offer was Klay Thompson + Batum + Asik + 1st pick that would be close to the 10th spot for LeBron. (Lebron was expiring and would not renew with his team, vecause they were dead least in the league and had nothing outside of James). It was denied.
2 hours after, that one was accepted:
LeBron + Bennet for Ibaka + 7th pick in the same draft.

I'm sure Rizzo is trying to do the best for his team, same for CLE GM.
No one can say that trade is balanced. But I'm against denying trades for something not related to financial reasons (only when it is a confirmed case of cheating)

Marcos_Beck (OKC) wrote:

DennisJ (BOS) wrote:My point is, this trade has to be denied and reworked so its a fair one.
The new GM will feel bad for this earlier than later.

I must say I'm completely against denying trades. I think we must have the freedom to do whatever we want with our team, barring something like LeBron or Durant for the 60th pick of a bad draft hahaha.
I feel like denying trades takes away from our responsibilities as GM. Just before I came here I had 2 trade denied and decided to leave another sim league I was playing. Not because of denying or not trades, but because just after my trades were denied, another ones were accepted for the same players, and I really don't think the trades that were accepted were better than mine. I put a lot of work on finding trades just to have them denied and see worse ones being accepted. Well, that was really really bad.
Take a look.
My offer was Klay Thompson + Batum + Asik + 1st pick that would be close to the 10th spot for LeBron. (Lebron was expiring and would not renew with his team, vecause they were dead least in the league and had nothing outside of James). It was denied.
2 hours after, that one was accepted:
LeBron + Bennet for Ibaka + 7th pick in the same draft.

I'm sure Rizzo is trying to do the best for his team, same for CLE GM.
No one can say that trade is balanced. But I'm against denying trades for something not related to financial reasons (only when it is a confirmed case of cheating)

Again you didnt get my point.

This guy joined ~2 weeks ago, didnt post any comments or articles, nor does he know the engine as it seems. Still he makes a move that changes everything for NO and CLE. If its a fair trade.. no problem. But after that trade NO looks like the new Miami and made Cleveland a Lottery team, maybe Im wrong... If proven GMs do bad trades its okay. Its their responsibility.
But if a guy who just joined (and you dont know how long he stays) makes a move that changes the entire leagues power balance it has to be questioned..
But like Jeff already said, you always try to get the most out of your trades, it's human nature.

You have a point here.

I can't help that the trade looks bad. You can't say that I swooped in to take advantage of a new GM if you have no idea how the negotiations went. I have been searching for a defensive big for a while. I heard Waiters was available so I shot the GM a PM and opened up discussions. I was offered a deal that was appealing to me. I actually didn't even want Calderon but he had to be added because of salary. I didn't process the trade  and if the mod team wants us to rework the deal or to veto it, I wouldn't put up a fight at all.

Rizzo (NO) wrote:I can't help that the trade looks bad. You can't say that I swooped in to take advantage of a new GM if you have no idea how the negotiations went. I have been searching for a defensive big for a while. I heard Waiters was available so I shot the GM a PM and opened up discussions. I was offered a deal that was appealing to me. I actually didn't even want Calderon but he had to be added because of salary. I didn't process the trade  and if the mod team wants us to rework the deal or to veto it, I wouldn't put up a fight at all.

No offense man. And I didnt say you swooped in. I just wanted to say you could have told him something like my article or did you tell him its (maybe) a bad trade for him? Like said its nature you want to get the most out of a trade and you as a Mod should be allowed to try the same, thats why Im asking for Mentors. Because no other GM in this League would have accepted this trade. And a mentor could give advice why not.

Disagree here.

In my opinion this is about fit for both teams. Both teams come out of this with substantially better rotations. In my opinion, the value here isn't as off as implied.

CLE wanted to dump Calderon, so he viewed it as negative value. Jordan is > Anderson, but both are better fits on their new teams. In my opinion, Gordon = Waiters due to injury. So if Calderon balances out the Jordan/Anderson portion, we're all good.

Yeah, I'll admit, it sucks when other GMs pull of good trades. But we all need to be careful about accusations. Not needed and thus trade if far from franchise ruining.

It might be a good idea to think about mentors for people new to ddspb3, but I think its absurd to block this trade. A veto should only be used on the most extreme, team destroying circumstances. Is this trade lopsided? Yes. Is it team breaking or extreme? No.

Its the GM's decision to do what they see fit for their team. The league doesn't have any right to step in unless its an absolutely absurd circumstance.

I agree with Jake.
Yes for Mentors.
No for denying trades for basketball reasons. Unless it's cheating or something absurd.
I will always stand for no denying no matter what. Kudos for the GMs who puts the work in and find good trades for their teams. That's part of being a GM.

The worst thing about newcomers making bad trades is not only that their team gets worse. Worst thing is when they leave the league soon after because they're bad and leave the team in a bad situation for some years to come, making the job less appealing for new GMs.
I'm OK with making errors and learning from them. It's the best way to learn. The problem comes when the GM gets offended after reading that it's trade is bad and they leave, or when realize that they suck and the same happens.
Not saying this will happen with the Cavs. I hope it doesn't, as we wan't him here long term for sure.

As for the trade, I obviously like it much more for the Pelicans, although not sure it's veto material. Gordon tends to shoot a lot, and although he's scoring at a decent rate for a SG, with 80 scoring he keeps the ball away from other more efficient scorers, demanding too many touches. And he's just awful defensively. Not a player I personally like, but not bad too. Reminds me of JR Smith, but without the 3 point shot, which is even worse for a SG.
As for Anderson, he's a great 3PT shooter, but nothing more. Not good shooter for a PF, and not good defender too.
But again, this is just my personal opinion.

Anyway I don't like vetoing trades per rule, even if I do like this much more for the Pelicans, and I think it will make the Cavs worse. I mean, this Cavs squad was second best record in the east last year with this exact same team. Pelicans didn't make the playoffs in the west. Yeah, this years NOP are better, but because of ADs and Smarts upgrade this offseason mainly, not because of Gordon and Anderson.
As I mentioned, the only problem I see is if Cavs GM leaves because his team starts to suck or whatever, so this type of trades are a bit of delicate for newcomers, just because it's important to know the engine and get familiar with it.

And for DennisJs comments, I'm ok answering or giving advice to newcomers if needed. I don't have the truth, just my opinion, but I agree that it's useful for newcomers to contact various more experienced (in terms of this engine) GM for advice. I'm OK answering back questions or giving my point of view, so I encourage anyone, specially a newcomer, asking for advice to other GMs on anything game/sim related. At least you can ask me if you feel like, and I'll try helping out the best way I can. Better asking 2 or 3 than just one. But you learn with the explanation, so it's not about saying yes or no to a trade, it's about understanding what you're getting/giving up IMO. I've tryied to help other GMs in the past when asked for advice, but never said don't do this or do the other thing. Just tried to let them now they now every player is about or able to in this engine, so that they can decide if that's what they need or want.

Its no problem for me if other GMs are making good moves. Already said at the trade chatter it was good work by rizzo and I love it for NO. And I dont really want to get it denied. It was a try to defend rookie GMs as I know how they feel as soon as they notice their trade was bad.
I posted that "denied stuff" as answer to Marcos post, because I posted this article, was gone for hours, came back and saw it had ~70 clicks but nobody except of him answered something. So I wanted to gain more attention by writing a harsh comment.
We discussed all this before and it seems nothing changed. I believe I made my point and will be quite now. Just if I compare different leagues I ask myself why it works in leagues like the NLL and here it seems it doesnt. That was my final speech. Next up Golden State bouncing back against LA:)!

Edit:

Jamal wrote:The worst thing about newcomers making bad trades is not only that their team gets worse. Worst thing is when they leave the league soon after because they're bad and leave the team in a bad situation for some years to come, making the job less appealing for new GMs.
I'm OK with making errors and learning from them. It's the best way to learn. The problem comes when the GM gets offended after reading that it's trade is bad and they leave, or when realize that they suck and the same happens.
Not saying this will happen with the Cavs. I hope it doesn't, as we wan't him here long term for sure.

As for the trade, I obviously like it much more for the Pelicans, although not sure it's veto material. Gordon tends to shoot a lot, and although he's scoring at a decent rate for a SG, with 80 scoring he keeps the ball away from other more efficient scorers, demanding too many touches. And he's just awful defensively. Not a player I personally like, but not bad too. Reminds me of JR Smith, but without the 3 point shot, which is even worse for a SG.
As for Anderson, he's a great 3PT shooter, but nothing more. Not good shooter for a PF, and not good defender too.
But again, this is just my personal opinion.

Anyway I don't like vetoing trades per rule, even if I do like this much more for the Pelicans, and I think it will make the Cavs worse. I mean, this Cavs squad was second best record in the east last year with this exact same team. Pelicans didn't make the playoffs in the west. Yeah, this years NOP are better, but because of ADs and Smarts upgrade this offseason mainly, not because of Gordon and Anderson.
As I mentioned, the only problem I see is if Cavs GM leaves because his team starts to suck or whatever, so this type of trades are a bit of delicate for newcomers, just because it's important to know the engine and get familiar with it.

And for DennisJs comments, I'm ok answering or giving advice to newcomers if needed. I don't have the truth, just my opinion, but I agree that it's useful for newcomers to contact various more experienced (in terms of this engine) GM for advice. I'm OK answering back questions or giving my point of view, so I encourage anyone, specially a newcomer, asking for advice to other GMs on anything game/sim related. At least you can ask me if you feel like, and I'll try helping out the best way I can. Better asking 2 or 3 than just one. But you learn with the explanation, so it's not about saying yes or no to a trade, it's about understanding what you're getting/giving up IMO. I've tryied to help other GMs in the past when asked for advice, but never said don't do this or do the other thing. Just tried to let them now they now every player is about or able to in this engine, so that they can decide if that's what they need or want.

This!
Thanks for summing up what Im not able to. As it seems.

I like the article but I really dislike the comments and also think it's ironic coming from dennisj, a GM who has consistently gone back and forth with quitting or staying due to his team "sucking" (as he put it) due to some of the trades he's made then to call the Cavs GM reasoning "nonsense" is not cool.

As far as the trade who knows how these things turn out, (rhoxxy Clippers are the best example of this) but this is all moot for the time being as Caron Butler is a recently signed FA and can't be traded til Feb 1st. Rizzo you should know that and I'm surprised Jestor didn't catch it (or myself yesterday) as he is usually on top of all of these trades lol.

Small thing but this trade'll have to be reworked.

Also I definitely support gm's running their teams the way they see fit, for better or worse, it happens irl so why not here.

FWIW, since the Cavs GM just joined 2 weeks ago, I could see it as a New GM exception.

WillyJakkz (HOU) wrote:I like the article but I really dislike the comments and also think it's ironic coming from dennisj, a GM who has consistently gone back and forth with quitting or staying due to his team "sucking" (as he put it) due to some of the trades he's made then to call the Cavs GM reasoning "nonsense" is not cool.

As far as the trade who knows how these things turn out, (rhoxxy Clippers are the best example of this) but this is all moot for the time being as Caron Butler is a recently signed FA and can't be traded til Feb 1st. Rizzo you should know that and I'm surprised Jestor didn't catch it (or myself yesterday) as he is usually on top of all of these trades lol.

Small thing but this trade'll have to be reworked.

Also I definitely support gm's running their teams the way they see fit, or better or worse, it happens irl so why not here.

I agree. My first comment was over the Top. Im Sorry for that.
I will delete it as your are right. This shouldnt be written the way it is.
Just asking myself if its wrong that I just dont want him to do the same mistake like I did with Rondo?

Again, to be blunt, this trade isn't veto worthy.

Also, I know that CLE was talking to quite a few teams about Waiters, myself included. He had several offers on the table and picked what he thought was the best for his squad.

To agree with Jamal on one significant point:

LAC is a great example of why we need to wait at least half a season to judge trades. CHI this year is also a good example of it. Both looked terrible to begin with, but both teams have proven that face value means nothing.

I honestly believe this trade wins CLE more games - not joking.

PG - Irving (driving)
SG - Gordon (shooting)
SF - Turner (hopefully not shooting)
PF - Anderson (bombing threes)
C - Gortat (double-double stud)

Is a much better lineup that what they currently have Calderon/Irving/Turner/Gortat/Jordon. But that's my opinion.

I was surprised to see so many people say that this trade is so lopsided. You guys are making it out to be like the trade was LeBron James for Klay Thompson straight up. It's not veto worthy at all. You're giving off the impression that Eric Gordon is absolute shit in this league and that DeAndre Jordan is the best center in the league.

I agree with SS, that lineup doesn't look bad at all. Not in the least bit.

Sun Scorched (CHA) wrote:Disagree here.

In my opinion this is about fit for both teams. Both teams come out of this with substantially better rotations. In my opinion, the value here isn't as off as implied.

CLE wanted to dump Calderon, so he viewed it as negative value. Jordan is > Anderson, but both are better fits on their new teams. In my opinion, Gordon = Waiters due to injury. So if Calderon balances out the Jordan/Anderson portion, we're all good.

Yeah, I'll admit, it sucks when other GMs pull of good trades. But we all need to be careful about accusations. Not needed and thus trade if far from franchise ruining.

I appreciate the support as it looks like most of the GMs are overreacting in my opinion. It seems that Gordon's 80 scoring and avg 20 points per game isn't getting much merit here. I based a lot of this trade off of the fact that Waiters is out 100 days! Also, Gordon is averaging 20 points on a team that also has a scoring point guard, and am confused as to the people who are implying that he and Kyrie can't "co-exist". Gordon and Smart are both averaging over 20 ppg, so if they are working well together, why not Kyrie and Gordon (Kyrie even has a much better passer rating than Smart). I believe Gordon>Waiters because of the 100 days and him being a more proven player thus far. When Waiters gets back I'd say it's about even. As for Jordan and Ryan Anderson, yes Deandre is better, but I also don't think I can resign him and Kyrie, and resigning Kyrie is my main concern. Jordan is also a 50 scorer rating while Ryan Anderson can space the floor and doesn't have as high of a contract. I want Tony Mitchell to be able to post up more with the spacing of Anderson being able to knock down the open Jumper along with Gordon/Kyrie driving and kicking it out to him. As for Calderon, I have no interest in paying him 7 mill a year when he is an atrocious scorer/defensive player. In addition, I want to give McCollum more minutes and that was being hampered by giving them to Calderon. This also allows me to have Bullock come off the bench, which is what I wanted for him instead of being in the starting lineup, which I had to do with Waiters.

Not loving the GMs getting called out on "not knowing what they're doing" when I won the now part of the trade (Waiters being out 100 days) and obtaining an elite scorer who was avg 20 ppg on an already good team, along with a solid big man, and I get I lost the future aspect of it (which I agree with, even though Gordon is only 25, and Anderson is 26). So I appreciate the support Bobcats GM, it appears you don't overreact. I wrote my reasons in the official trade thread, don't feel like arguing further, I'm here to make my team better, if you guys don't see that, then kick me out.

Let's all take a step back, breathe and relax.

Both teams have shown their reasoning for doing the trade, both were obviously valid and therefore the trade will go through.

We all have opinions on certain trades, and the Cavs GM being new, it's understandable that some may not like every trade you do. However, with both teams clear on what they want, why they are doing the trade, etc. there's no reason to veto any sort of deal.

There's no need to get mad, fight or argue with anyone over what their plan is. Each GM builds his team a different way than another, and there's no reason to fire at someone if you don't like what their opinion is. This is no shot at anyone specifically in any fashion, just simply saying that each and every GM makes their own decision.

It's great that everyone has an opinion and cares for the league so much. It's great that Dennis made a wonderful article to share his opinions, something strongly encouraged. However, there's no need for anyone to get aggressive or hostile over a trade that each GM has their reasoning for doing.

Mentors/helping new GMs is something we can look into doing more seriously if everyone thinks its a good idea. It will be discussed within the admin team and we'll draw up a plan as far as new GMs go.

So there it is, no need to get mad or aggressive, but sharing your opinions is perfectly fine.

Good read and whilst I don't think the trade was great for Cleveland, it's not franchise ruining. Thoughts on a trade come down to preference really. Some GM's prefer offense, some defense and some will like Gordon/Anderson, some won't. That's pretty much it really.