Simmons compares the Cavs to MJ's Bulls

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/051130

Gotta' love Simmons -- he combines knowledge with a great sense of humor. You need both if you are going to follow the NBA. Its funny stuff.

Regarding Cleveland, Simmons got some things right and some things wrong. He is right that in the Indiana game, combined with the San Antonio loss, we do have the beginnings of a disturbing trend. But would we feel any better if we had gotten blown out by a lousy team? Indiana did just that, getting hammered at Charlotte. Then they lost at home to Atlanta! Those are the two worst teams in the league. But Simmons overstates the Cavaliers situation. The Indiana game, embarrassing as it was, was just one game -- just one bad game, on the road, against what many people think could be the top Eastern team. And Hughes was sick. As I saw it, we were flat that night, and shot poorly, while Indiana hit everything. Indiana is a tough match up for us anyway, what with Artest being able to guard our all-world player. Lebron did not handle it well. He was trying to post Artest up all game, instead of attacking the basket and PASSING. And the Cavs have to get the ball to Z when we are forced into half-court sets. That's why we have him. Its part of what will eventually make the team great.

Simmons's comparison to the late-80's Bulls is very interesting, but just a bit flawed. This is actually a much better team now than the Bulls had in '88, but with much less playoff experience. The result, however, might end up being the same. From 1985-1987, MJ's first three years in the league, the Bulls made the playoffs three times, despite never winning more than 40 games (so I don't want to hear about how bad the league is, Doc. Remember, the NBA has always thrived on dynasties come playoff time, and never had anything resembling parity during the season. If anything, the Association as a whole is more competitive this year than ever before). In 1988, the Bulls finally won 50 games, and handed the Cavs a first round exit before losing to Detroit in the conference semis. In 1989, the Bulls slipped to 47 wins, but still beat out the Cavs (the better team at the time), then Knicks, finally losing to eventual champion Detroit. A 55 win season (89-90) led to the same result in 1990. The Bulls then went on to win three championships from 1991-1993.

What did the Bulls do to improve over that span? Not as much as you might think. Basically from 1985-1987, they had MJ and a collection of old stiffs. They didn't have a winning record in any of those years, despite playing against terrible talent. Despite having the best young player in the league, this was a bad team, making the playoffs one year with a 32-50 record.

In 1988, they were a bit better team and actually won 50 games. They had gotten rid of some of the old guys and had acquired two first round draft picks, Horace Grant (5) and Scottie Pippen (10). Pippen played some significant minutes, but only averaged about 8 points a game. Grant sat the pine behind Charles Oakley and averaged about 7 points. They beat the up and coming Cavaliers in round one, just after the Nance trade.

1989 saw the emergence of Pippen and Grant, and Oakley was gone. Also, the Bulls acquired veteran center Bill Cartwright from the Knicks, relegating stiff David Corzine to the bench. Cartwright, for some reason, has received credit as a defense difference-maker on that Bulls team despite the fact that he was never a significant shot blocker and was only an average rebounder. During his best years he actually put up some pretty good offensive numbers, averaging 15-17 ppg as a Knick. Mainly, though, he was an upgrade over Corzine, and wasn't quite as likely to get abused on the defensive end against the likes of Ewing and Daugherty. That year the Bulls dropped to 47 wins, but made it into the conference semi's before losing to the Pistons.

1990 the Bulls made little changes, save for newcomer Stacey King. They also had a rookie named B.J. Armstrong who looked promising, but played little. The team got a little better as Grant and Pippen continued to improve and the teamed learned to play together. The Bulls won 55 games and lost again to the Pistons in the conference finals.

The 1991 team finally beat the Pistons and went on to beat an ailing Lakers team in the finals. The biggest change the Bulls saw that year was the development of Armstrong as a key player, relegating the likes of Craig Hodges and John Paxson to the bench. Ditto for 1992-1993 championship years. Cartwright continued to fade, but newcomers like Scott Williams picked up the slack.

So which Bulls team was Simmons referring to? The closest team I can see is that 47-win (1988-)1989 team just after they got Cartwright. That was their "big" free agent signing that year. The Cavs, though, already have a better center in Z and our "Pippen," Hughes, is farther along in his development than the actual Pippen was. Gooden looks a lot like Grant did -- a rebounder with nice offensive skills. The bench, once ours gets healthy, looks very similar. That Bulls team made it to the conference finals and lost to the eventual champions. I'd take that outcome, although I think we will will 50 games.

So, how did the Bulls finally win it all? It was simple. They developed young talent every year, and slowly pushed starters into bench roles as the talent got a little better. This allowed for a deep team, with 10-12 players able to play significant minutes. And they had Phil Jackson who knew how to use these players. The infusion of young talent also allowed for great defensive effort. The team knew who the scorers were, and everyone played defense. They made only a few timely free-agent signings, for role players. And then, the core spent a few years learning to play together. And of course, Michael Jordan got better every year too. People forget that Jordan was in his 7th year before he won a championship, his fourth year before he even played on a winning team. Clearly the Cavs are ahead of this curve, winning 42 games in LBJ's second year.

So, what are the keys for the Cavaliers to get to the next level? One could argue that it will be the development of players like Pavlovic, Jackson, and Varejao, along with drafting a point guard at some point in the very near future (he would be our Armstrong). We already have the rest in place. Damon Jones will be our Paxson, and Snow will be the backup point (Hodges?) in years 3-4. Marshall will come off the bench as a Livingston-type player, only better.

1) Draft a point guard. I am in favor of trading someone some package of bench players at the end of the year to move up a few notches in draft position.

2) Keep Gooden at the end of the year. Match any reasonable offer for this guy. He is still only 25 years old and getting better.

3) Don't forget to develop the youngsters. This was both Lenny Wilkins' and Fratello's fatal flaw.

4) Don't do too much (don't trade Ron Harper!). This has the makings of a very good team, potentially better than the Bulls ever were. Mainly they just need time for the core to learn to play together. By next year the Cavs should be serious championship contenders with a good chance to win it all in 2008.