Point Guard situation: reprinted from the Disappointment Zone

As for the Cavaliers point guard situation, I commend the brass for apparently thinking outside the box. They seem to have decided to abandon traditional positional philosophy and focus more on collections of skills and matchups on the floor at any given moment. They obviously feel that they have enough players who can handle the ball (read: Lebron, occassionally Hughes) even when their true point, Snow, is not on the floor (which is likely to be more often this season). The drafting of Shannon Brown and the aquisition of Wesley gives them something they did not have last year: a viable DEFENSIVE replacement for Snow. They always knew they could have Lebron or Hughes handle the ball for extended stretches, but when Snow was off the floor the team was very vulnerable defensively against quicker backcourts.

Perhaps the now fitter Damon Jones will be able to log more time on the floor with Hughes handling the ball, but I think Jones will again be the odd man out more often than not. He will be used in very specific situations when his long distance abilities are needed (think Steve Kerr).

Of course, we shouldn’t give the Cavs too much credit for adopting this outlook — what choice did they have? The free agent market at the point position has been sparse for two seasons running and for at least one more to come. The 2006 draft was deep at the point position, but without standouts (not that they would have gotten a hypothetical standout with the 25th pick anyway). This leaves the trade market, which, barring a blockbuster deal, wouldn’t be likely to land us a significant improvement. And we haven’t even mentioned our impossible cap situation yet, have we?

Luke & Wally - Together at Last

I don't think we need another 3. Supposedly Hughes can play the 3, although I have serious doubts about that. I think we have ways of playing without a traditional 3, just as we have ways of playing without a traditional point guard. Imagine a big lineup of Snow, Hughes, Gooden, Marshall and Z. Or even a bit bigger with Snow, Hughes, Gooden (3), Pollard (4), Z. OR Snow, Hughes, Marshall (3), Pollard (4), Z. OR Snow, Hughes, Gooden (3), Marshall (4), Pollard (5). Did I mention Varejao?

The overall team concept was to get longer and more athletic, while maintaining the ability to shoot. It is assumed that athleticism increases the ability to play defense, and allows for more flexibility in terms of substitutions and matchups. Whether Mike Brown knows how to exploit this is up for debate. Big Z kind of throws a wrench in this strategy, and Marshall's conditioning was also problematic last year, but now we could potentially field an all athletic lineup of Hughes, Brown, Lebron, Gooden, and your pick of Varejao or Pollard. That lineup wouldn't be huge up front, but overall would be bigger and faster that any lineup another team could put on the floor. The only spot wanting there would be a more athletic
center. Perhaps that's why they are looking at this Jones guy, although the improved Marshall, or the scrappy Pollard might be just the right fit.

Back to the question of resting Lebron though: I think that the main issue when we take Lebron out is not worrying about replacing his ball handling, but rather his athleticism and energy. So I say you make sure that when Lebron is rested, Hughes and Gooden must both be on the floor. So my small, non-Lebron lineup might be Snow, Brown, Hughes, Gooden, and Varejao. And my big non-Lebron lineup would be Hughes, Brown, Gooden, Varejao, and Z. The small lineup features ball handling and athleticism. The second lineup sacrifices some ball handling but replaces it with size AND scoring. I don't see why we can't manage to play ten minutes of basketball with one of these lineups.