CLEVELAND, Ohio — When surveying the NBA’s conference finalists this season, Jimmy Watkins noticed something the Cavs conspicuously lack — something that might explain their playoff struggles despite regular season success.
“I think the one thing the Cavs seem to be lacking, and part of this is personnel, part of this is how they deploy their guys is positional size,” Watkins observed on a recent episode of the Wine and Gold Talk podcast.
As he surveyed the conference finalists, the pattern became clear: Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Jaylen Williams, Andrew Nembhard, Aaron Nesmith – nearly every team playing in late May features guards with significant size advantages over Cleveland’s backcourt.
The positional size question extends beyond just comparing heights.
It’s about how teams physically match up, particularly in playoff basketball where advantages get exploited mercilessly over a seven-game series.
While the Cavaliers were constructed to overwhelm opponents with skill, their lack of physical stature has become increasingly problematic when facing bigger, stronger teams.
This size disparity creates an interesting dilemma for the Cavs’ front office: should they attempt to get bigger at multiple positions, or should they double down on skill and attempt to overwhelm opponents the way the Warriors dynasty did? It’s a question without an easy answer.
The conversation inevitably turns to Evan Mobley and whether he should become the team’s full-time center.
Though many view this as the logical next step in the team’s evolution, Chris Fedor raised important concerns: “Does anyone else besides me wonder about Evan’s readiness to be a full time 5?”
Fedor’s skepticism centers on the physical toll Mobley would take as the primary rim protector: “My concerns are the minutes that he would spend going up against starter quality centers that are bigger, stronger and more physical than him. He’s going to spend a majority of his time against Ivica Zubac, Mitchell Robinson, Myles Turner, Domantas Sabonis.”
Moving Mobley to center full-time isn’t just about his physical readiness – it would fundamentally change his defensive responsibilities.
Currently, Mobley thrives as a help-side defender who can roam and disrupt. As the primary center, those opportunities would diminish.
The positional size issue also surfaces when discussing potential lineup configurations.
When Ethan Sands proposed a frontcourt featuring De’Andre Hunter at power forward with Mobley at center, Fedor bluntly responded: “A frontcourt of Evan Mobley at the five and De’Andre Hunter at the four is just asking for problems when it comes to rebounding and finishing defense possessions.”
Interestingly, the success of teams like Oklahoma City with Chet Holmgren paired with Isaiah Hartenstein suggests the NBA might be trending back toward two-big lineups rather than away from them. This could validate Cleveland’s approach with Allen and Mobley, though execution and complementary personnel remain critical factors.
As the Wine and Gold Talk hosts debated various lineup configurations, one thing became clear: there’s no simple solution to the positional size problem.
Every potential fix creates new complications elsewhere in the rotation.
The Cavaliers’ front office faces difficult questions about whether their current construction can ever overcome their size disadvantages in the playoffs, or if more drastic roster reconfiguration is necessary.
Here’s the podcast for this week:
_Note: Artificial intelligence was used to help generate this story from the Cleveland Wine and Gold Talk Podcast by cleveland.com. Visitors to cleveland.com have asked for more text stories based on website podcast discussions._