₦airaland Forum

SmooshCHN:
Well they are the oldest but that's a weak excuse for their poor defense. They are just poor as a team when it comes to defense. Poor transition defense, little or no communication, lack of effort, poor help defense (LeBron and Jr Smith are regular offenders), inability to read and adjust to opposition offense and just sheer laziness to hustle. Gone are the days when they had Kyrie with crazy offense and everyone would try to outscore the opponent. Age isn't an excuse. They are just that bad on defense.


29th in defense last year after the all star games. If they fix they're defense, Warrior in 6

Eruditor:
Not every one that criticises the Cavs is a Warriors fan. I need to put it out there.

Assembler in Chief

Roland17:
Whose fault is it that the Cavs have the oldest roster in league?

Dan Gilbert? Coach Lue or the Assembler in Chief?

WeissBarlow:
Did you hear the cavs complaining about being old? We're good, if the spurs did it we can too. We have issues yes, but we'll fix them.

By assembler in chief do you mean koby altman?

BTW, adding a 35 year old is sure to push your squad average age, but this is a 35 year old you'd be foolish to reject, heck even the warriors tried to make a play on him did they not?

WeissBarlow:
Exactly why i said you dont know when you're saying, since when did average age become directly proportional to your defense.

Do you know who the second oldest team in the league are? The spurs! The third oldest? This is where it gets interesting, The Golden state warriors!

Do you see either of them playing doodie defense?

Cavs defensive issues comes down to tactics and communication plus attitude.


Ohhh hey, Kyries best friend is in the house providing insight never known before, what else did kyrie tell you?

Roland17:
That is not the impression I am reading from this page, in-fact, a table with the average age of each team is on this page, in a bid to buttress their poor defense and results to the age of this roster.

I don't need to spell out who the Assembler in Chief is, do I? You are smart enough to know this. Suddenly, the Cavs and the Assembler in Chief just realized Wade is 35 and unable to move? Remember, they even guaranteed him a starting place ahead of JR Smith whom the Assembler in Chief gave a contract alongside TT and his goons?

AndrewFarms:
check the stats below and see where your beloved cavs and warriors rank

SmooshCHN:
Well they are the oldest but that's a weak excuse for their poor defense. They are just poor as a team when it comes to defense. Poor transition defense, little or no communication, lack of effort, poor help defense (LeBron and Jr Smith are regular offenders), inability to read and adjust to opposition offense and just sheer laziness to hustle. Gone are the days when they had Kyrie with crazy offense and everyone would try to outscore the opponent. Age isn't an excuse. They are just that bad on defense.


29th in defense last year after the all star games. If they fix they're defense, Warrior in 6

WeissBarlow:
I reiterate, you don't know what you're saying, period.

I'm done responding to you.

WeissBarlow:
Who cares about the sh itty as- celtics, we want to win a championship.

You just keep contradicting yourself, first the cavs are the favorites, then even adding boogie wont guarantee them a win and then he switches back again! Classic signs of a hater, speaking from both sides of his mouth.

Give us KD and Klay, we'll take them. If jordan bullied the nba with the second best team of all time why not lebron! We want to win, all that matters, if that rubs off on you the wrong way thats your business

WeissBarlow:
LMAO, A40 knows better than the bookies and analysts. Thinks cavs have the better squad. Hes so smart this guy!

WeissBarlow:
[s]All lebron haters are warriors bandwagoners, one way or another[/s].

Fact!

Decale:
I agree. Even Tristan Thompson...

WeissBarlow:
TT and JR used to play well until they decided to become bums. One of them stu pidly fell prey to an age old curse everyone warned him about.

AndrewFarms:
bros apart from OKC and Spurs which have an average age of 27.4 and 28.9, the rest of the top ten defensive team so far this season 26.9 years and below....
the no 2 on the list, Boston Celtics has an average age of 25.1 years, the no 5 on the list, Portland trailblazers are 24.9years, the no 6, toronoto raptors are 25.5yrs, the no 8, LA Clippers are 26.8, while the no 9 and 10, Pistons and Bobcats are 26.1 and 26.0 years old respectively.....

SmooshCHN:
If you're going by stats, don't mention young teams in efficiency and then exclude the Spurs and OKC just to support your argument. It's totally wrong. Your argument with Weissbarlow is about how the Cavs poor defense is as a result of Old Legs not nba teams age and Defense till you digressed. Do those stats explain to the relationship between top defensive teams like Warriors, Utah and Spurs and Age?? It only shows you average age and whatever hence you had to exclude OKC and the Spurs after leaving you in total confusion.

The Cavs have been lazy on defense no be today no be 2 years matter and it has nothing to do with how old LeBron, Kevin Love, Jr Smith, Kyle Korver, Derrick Rose and sometimes Tristan Thompson is (Notice how those guys have been average or poor defenders since they're rookie year) and if you watch the games from last season and this, Richard Jefferson plays better defense than all these guys and that dude is 37yrs old. So don't talk age when it comes to Cavs and Defense.. They are just lazy. Watch the games, or highlights at least, watch how they don't communicate, how they just makes mistakes on pick and roll, how two guys like Jr and Shumpert chase a non shooter, how LeBron refuses to help or guard his man, how Kevin Love just refuses to switch, how Rose and Korver are just garbage on defense and how they all play transition defense like children who got banned from lunch break but when it comes to scoring those guys move like flash and score like the Warriors and no signs of aging.

Forget all these #5naira stats from Google. You'll only end up shooting yourself in the foot like you did excluding OKC, Warriors and Spurs and looking like Tyron Lue after every defensive error when someone ignores you.

A40:
Why are you being intellectually dishonest? Who said anything about favorites or underdogs? I wrote in clear and legible English that the Cavs have enough in their roster to beat Golden State. That is the fact on ground

What's so complex about "Adding Boogie does not guarantee a win" Didn't Dirk Nowitzki lead a bunch of ragtag veterans past a prime Big Three in Miami?

Bruh you might as well ask for the Cavs to play the Warriors 5-3 on the court. All I know is you Bronsexuals are straight outta excuses this year

A40:
I have no care for what the bookies and analysts choose. Neither did I claim the Cavs were stronger or weaker all I said is that they have more than enough to beat Golden State. If you disagree that's your opinion! I have zero interest in changing that

WeissBarlow:
So you're the weaker team but you still have enough.

You know there's a reason certain wins are called upsets right?


And all I know is you currysexuals will piss your pants if boogie were to sign because then you know this would be more even. And the very thought of that frightens you.

A40:
The Cavs are not the Weaker team. How about that? If y'all win this year nobody would call it an upset

It's bleeding obvious from the players you're hustling for to be added to a roster already stacked with talent that nobody the Cavs add would suffice so you might as well make do with what you have! Boogie is not a top 10 player neither is he an elite defender. Signing him guarantees zilch!

WeissBarlow:
The warriors are 5-12 favourites to win, the Cavs are 4-1 yet somehow if the Cavs win it's not an upset scoring to you. LOL


Go and ask draymond why we want to add boogie. He knows.

May the better team win, and by that you mean the warriors right? Because they're clearly the better team. I say may the Cavs win. At least I'm more straight forward about my bias.

If the warriors lose itd be worse than blowing a 3-1 lead.

A40:
How is that an upset? Do you expect the Cavs and Warriors to have the exact same odds?

5-12 to 4/1 is relatively minimal. Patriots and Penguins started as favorites to win the Superbowl and Stanley Cup respectively when their season's began however if the Steelers or Blackhawks go on to win it nobody in their right minds would call it an upset..

Of course I'm rooting for the Warriors to send Bron to 3-6. I'm past the point of caring about who is perceived to be the better team. The rosters are there for any objective fan to compare and at least admit that Bron more than ever before has no excuses whatsoever. None! Zilch! Nada!

WeissBarlow:
Except losing to a much better team IS an excuse.


Try again.


And except you don't know how odds work. Those odds mean the warriors have a 70 percent chance of winning while the Cavs have 20 percent. How is they minimal?

A40:
If you put $100 on the Warriors and $100 on the Cavs what do you stand to win on each bet?

You guys have been making excuses since the Fall of Man. It won't really matter though! All I'd see is 3-6