Real housewives of the NBA Cavs version

[Roy H.]

Since LeBron James returned to the lineup in mid-January, Cleveland is 27-7 while averaging 112.1 points per 100 possessions. That's tops in the league in both categories

http://espn.go.com/nba/powerrankings/_/year/2015/week/21

It is a nice stat but doesn't really amount to anything... the warriors and hawks have had similar stretches this year.

Sure.  It doesn't mean a lot, other than that the Cavs are playing extremely good basketball right now.  I think they're 39-9 in the last 48 games they've played with Lebron (and that includes losses in the game before his injury and a loss his first game back).  That's a 81%+ winning percentage, which would put the Cavs on pace for 67 wins.

Once the Cavs got through their initial gelling time, they've been absolutely elite.

What do you think the Cavs record would be if they played 70% of those games against teams in the West? They are 18-15 on the year against teams that are over .500. I am not saying they haven't been playing really good ball, but to say they are playing better than the teams out West seems like an unfair comparison.

Well, during that stretch they're 5-1 against the Clippers (twice), Spurs, Grizzlies, Rockets, and Warriors.  They haven't played a ton of games against the elite Western teams lately, but they've played well in those games (including crushing the Warriors).  Their only loss in those games was without Love.

[celticsclay]

Since LeBron James returned to the lineup in mid-January, Cleveland is 27-7 while averaging 112.1 points per 100 possessions. That's tops in the league in both categories

http://espn.go.com/nba/powerrankings/_/year/2015/week/21

It is a nice stat but doesn't really amount to anything... the warriors and hawks have had similar stretches this year.

Sure.  It doesn't mean a lot, other than that the Cavs are playing extremely good basketball right now.  I think they're 39-9 in the last 48 games they've played with Lebron (and that includes losses in the game before his injury and a loss his first game back).  That's a 81%+ winning percentage, which would put the Cavs on pace for 67 wins.

Once the Cavs got through their initial gelling time, they've been absolutely elite.

What do you think the Cavs record would be if they played 70% of those games against teams in the West? They are 18-15 on the year against teams that are over .500. I am not saying they haven't been playing really good ball, but to say they are playing better than the teams out West seems like an unfair comparison.

Well, during that stretch they're 5-1 against the Clippers (twice), Spurs, Grizzlies, Rockets, and Warriors.  They haven't played a ton of games against the elite Western teams lately, but they've played well in those games (including crushing the Warriors).  Their only loss in those games was without Love.

I mean this is kind of cherry picking stats at its' finest. We don't include the beginning of the season cause it doesn't fit the narrative? We don't include the games Lebron didn't play cause that doesn't fit the narrative (not to mention other team's are all healthy). We don't count that they got crushed in golden state, but do get to count them crushing golden st at home cause it was later. Same thing with the Spurs. Not to mention its a 6 game sample size.   

[Roy H.]

Since LeBron James returned to the lineup in mid-January, Cleveland is 27-7 while averaging 112.1 points per 100 possessions. That's tops in the league in both categories

http://espn.go.com/nba/powerrankings/_/year/2015/week/21

It is a nice stat but doesn't really amount to anything... the warriors and hawks have had similar stretches this year.

Sure.  It doesn't mean a lot, other than that the Cavs are playing extremely good basketball right now.  I think they're 39-9 in the last 48 games they've played with Lebron (and that includes losses in the game before his injury and a loss his first game back).  That's a 81%+ winning percentage, which would put the Cavs on pace for 67 wins.

Once the Cavs got through their initial gelling time, they've been absolutely elite.

What do you think the Cavs record would be if they played 70% of those games against teams in the West? They are 18-15 on the year against teams that are over .500. I am not saying they haven't been playing really good ball, but to say they are playing better than the teams out West seems like an unfair comparison.

Well, during that stretch they're 5-1 against the Clippers (twice), Spurs, Grizzlies, Rockets, and Warriors.  They haven't played a ton of games against the elite Western teams lately, but they've played well in those games (including crushing the Warriors).  Their only loss in those games was without Love.

I mean this is kind of cherry picking stats at its' finest. We don't include the beginning of the season cause it doesn't fit the narrative? We don't include the games Lebron didn't play cause that doesn't fit the narrative (not to mention other team's are all healthy). We don't count that they got crushed in golden state, but do get to count them crushing golden st at home cause it was later. Same thing with the Spurs. Not to mention its a 6 game sample size.

The point is that for the last several months, the Cavs have been an elite team with Lebron in the lineup.  How is that cherry-picking?  You mentioned that the Cavs would be worse if they played the Western Conference, and I pointed out the games they've played against the elite teams in the West.

Early in the season, the Cavs were definitely a work in progress.  Without Lebron, they're a mediocre team.  With Lebron, though, the Cavs are an excellent team.  There's no real way to deny that.

[celticsclay]

Since LeBron James returned to the lineup in mid-January, Cleveland is 27-7 while averaging 112.1 points per 100 possessions. That's tops in the league in both categories

http://espn.go.com/nba/powerrankings/_/year/2015/week/21

It is a nice stat but doesn't really amount to anything... the warriors and hawks have had similar stretches this year.

Sure.  It doesn't mean a lot, other than that the Cavs are playing extremely good basketball right now.  I think they're 39-9 in the last 48 games they've played with Lebron (and that includes losses in the game before his injury and a loss his first game back).  That's a 81%+ winning percentage, which would put the Cavs on pace for 67 wins.

Once the Cavs got through their initial gelling time, they've been absolutely elite.

What do you think the Cavs record would be if they played 70% of those games against teams in the West? They are 18-15 on the year against teams that are over .500. I am not saying they haven't been playing really good ball, but to say they are playing better than the teams out West seems like an unfair comparison.

Well, during that stretch they're 5-1 against the Clippers (twice), Spurs, Grizzlies, Rockets, and Warriors.  They haven't played a ton of games against the elite Western teams lately, but they've played well in those games (including crushing the Warriors).  Their only loss in those games was without Love.

I mean this is kind of cherry picking stats at its' finest. We don't include the beginning of the season cause it doesn't fit the narrative? We don't include the games Lebron didn't play cause that doesn't fit the narrative (not to mention other team's are all healthy). We don't count that they got crushed in golden state, but do get to count them crushing golden st at home cause it was later. Same thing with the Spurs. Not to mention its a 6 game sample size.

The point is that for the last several months, the Cavs have been an elite team with Lebron in the lineup.  How is that cherry-picking?  You mentioned that the Cavs would be worse if they played the Western Conference, and I pointed out the games they've played against the elite teams in the West.

Early in the season, the Cavs were definitely a work in progress.  Without Lebron, they're a mediocre team.  With Lebron, though, the Cavs are an excellent team.  There's no real way to deny that.

Obviously the fact that you mentioned Love missing the game they lost but didn't bother to discuss injuries on any of the other teams is one form of bias. It is also a little weird that they have split with the spurs and the warriors, but you are choosing a date cut off that doesn't include their losses to either team, but does include their win.

I get they are playing really good ball for this last 50 game period that LeBron has played and definitely think they have gotten immensely better since adding mosgov and smith in particular (and losing waiters). However, I don't get how we would anoint them over the Warriors who have been playing this good all season long in a much tougher conference or over the defending champion Spurs who would have beaten Cleveland a week ago if not for last second three pointer heroics from Irving (they were up most of the game).

I don't think we really have a huge disagreement here, it just seems that people are in a bit of a rush to crown the Cavs when they haven't played a playoff series yet. In general this is a pet peeve of mine, similar to how it grinds my gears when people declare Embiid the next greatest thing based of 20 college games. If the Cavs breeze through the playoffs and knock off a western team I will definitely be surprised and will definitely give them their due. That would be an incredible accomplishment for their first year together as a team. 

[Monkhouse]

Since LeBron James returned to the lineup in mid-January, Cleveland is 27-7 while averaging 112.1 points per 100 possessions. That's tops in the league in both categories

http://espn.go.com/nba/powerrankings/_/year/2015/week/21

It is a nice stat but doesn't really amount to anything... the warriors and hawks have had similar stretches this year.

Sure.  It doesn't mean a lot, other than that the Cavs are playing extremely good basketball right now.  I think they're 39-9 in the last 48 games they've played with Lebron (and that includes losses in the game before his injury and a loss his first game back).  That's a 81%+ winning percentage, which would put the Cavs on pace for 67 wins.

Once the Cavs got through their initial gelling time, they've been absolutely elite.

What do you think the Cavs record would be if they played 70% of those games against teams in the West? They are 18-15 on the year against teams that are over .500. I am not saying they haven't been playing really good ball, but to say they are playing better than the teams out West seems like an unfair comparison.

Well, during that stretch they're 5-1 against the Clippers (twice), Spurs, Grizzlies, Rockets, and Warriors.  They haven't played a ton of games against the elite Western teams lately, but they've played well in those games (including crushing the Warriors).  Their only loss in those games was without Love.

I mean this is kind of cherry picking stats at its' finest. We don't include the beginning of the season cause it doesn't fit the narrative? We don't include the games Lebron didn't play cause that doesn't fit the narrative (not to mention other team's are all healthy). We don't count that they got crushed in golden state, but do get to count them crushing golden st at home cause it was later. Same thing with the Spurs. Not to mention its a 6 game sample size.

The point is that for the last several months, the Cavs have been an elite team with Lebron in the lineup.  How is that cherry-picking?  You mentioned that the Cavs would be worse if they played the Western Conference, and I pointed out the games they've played against the elite teams in the West.

Early in the season, the Cavs were definitely a work in progress.  Without Lebron, they're a mediocre team.  With Lebron, though, the Cavs are an excellent team.  There's no real way to deny that.

Obviously the fact that you mentioned Love missing the game they lost but didn't bother to discuss injuries on any of the other teams is one form of bias. It is also a little weird that they have split with the spurs and the warriors, but you are choosing a date cut off that doesn't include their losses to either team, but does include their win.

I get they are playing really good ball for this last 50 game period that LeBron has played and definitely think they have gotten immensely better since adding mosgov and smith in particular (and losing waiters). However, I don't get how we would anoint them over the Warriors who have been playing this good all season long in a much tougher conference or over the defending champion Spurs who would have beaten Cleveland a week ago if not for last second three pointer heroics from Irving (they were up most of the game).

I don't think we really have a huge disagreement here, it just seems that people are in a bit of a rush to crown the Cavs when they haven't played a playoff series yet. In general this is a pet peeve of mine, similar to how it grinds my gears when people declare Embiid the next greatest thing based of 20 college games. If the Cavs breeze through the playoffs and knock off a western team I will definitely be surprised and will definitely give them their due. That would be an incredible accomplishment for their first year together as a team.

TP. Took the words out of my mouth.. How many times did ESPN anoint them champions despite a single game played? All I know is Love/Irving haven't ever experienced the grind of a playoff game.. Lets see if Lebron James can will that team into the Finals. GSW/Grizz/Hawks/Spurs, and Bulls could all give them fits.

[Roy H.]

Obviously the fact that you mentioned Love missing the game they lost but didn't bother to discuss injuries on any of the other teams is one form of bias.

I also didn't include a win over the Blazers, which fell during that time frame, because Lebron wasn't playing.  I also included that loss to Houston, both in the 5-1 record and the 37-7 record.  The Love injury is relevant information, but it's still counted as a loss.

It is also a little weird that they have split with the spurs and the warriors, but you are choosing a date cut off that doesn't include their losses to either team, but does include their win.

How relevant is the Warriors loss?  Lebron wasn't playing.  The Cavs without Lebron are pretty mediocre, and I think that we can all concede that.

The Spurs game was the 10th game of the Cavs season.  Yes, I'm giving them a pass for the first month of the season, when they were clearly figuring things out as a team.

[Roy H.]

So this is the picture that the NY Post is reporting might "break up the Cavs" and that Mike and Mike made a big deal about?


"Clique up"

Do we just ignore this one from two weeks ago?


"My crew"

The media just loves to stir the pot.

[TwinTower14]

All kidding aside, the GM for the Cavs did real nice job rebuilding the team within the season.  They will regret the Love trade because I think he leaves and Wiggins becomes a star but this year they have a legitimate shot at a title.  They will have a cake walk through the East...

[spikelovetheCelts]

All kidding aside, the GM for the Cavs did real nice job rebuilding the team within the season.  They will regret the Love trade because I think he leaves and Wiggins becomes a star but this year they have a legitimate shot at a title.  They will have a cake walk through the East...

It looks like the East is for them at the moment. Maybe Rose can come back and give them a fight and Atlanta can regroup as well. Hopefully they get the Heat in round one and Wade torches them to Make it 4-2.  I am in a way hoping they win for the city of Cleveland. The fans there have been Heartbroken enough.

[bdm860]

If anything, I'm more upset about the fact that Perk is now part of LeBron's clique/crew.

I mean it's like when Virgil/Vincent joined the NWO.  Sure he was pretty much irrelevant, didn't do much or contribute to their success at all, and was never much of a face to begin with anyway, but you still didn't like him joining up with the heels.

[D.o.s.]

Do people actually watch "professional wrestling??"

[Clench123]

Do people actually watch "professional wrestling??"

The company is worth over a billion dollars with decent weekly ratings and Wrestlemania pulling in ridiculous amount of money.  And it's been around for generations.  I would say yes yes and yes. 

[D.o.s.]

No accounting for taste, I suppose. 

[C-Green]

I was hoping for Love to join the C's via trade over the Summer but am really not sure I want him on a max deal, which I think he will command. He just doesn't seem to have a good attitude in general. I recall Rubio and others saying he is not a leader etc once he was traded and now we are seeing some issues with the Cavs. It is certainly hard to know from the outside but there seems to be some smoke with him which makes me think there may be fire.

Not for nothing, I have never heard much of any negativity about LeBron as a leader or teammate. Like him or not, he's a champion and one of the best to play the game. It is concerning that his resume/leadership isn't enough to convince Love to buy in (having never been anywhere near a championship contender until now).

We seem to have a great locker room and play with grit and energy. I am not convinced he would fit in and we would need a quality rim protector to compensate for his shameful defense (which often seems like a general lack of effort vs lack of skill).

For those reason, I would prefer to pass on Love should he opt out.

[wdleehi]

Do people actually watch "professional wrestling??"

A lot.