• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Grade the Cavaliers 2019 Draft

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Grade it.


  • Total voters
    191
You can tell that from the five games that Garland played in college? You do know that Sexton averaged more assists per 40 minutes than Garland did during their freshman seasons? Just sayin’....
I said "he looks" not that he definitely was or will be. Garland looks far more natural with ball in hand and in control handling the ball with his change of pace creating opportunities for himself, cutters and shooters. Sexton is a twitchier athlete and imo is better suited to seeing an opening/option and attacking it than surveying the defense. You claim I can't see this from 5 games of college when there is plenty of other film on Garland also, and then you use those 5 games to compare with Sexton's per 40 over his entire freshman season? Odd.
 
You can tell that from the five games that Garland played in college? You do know that Sexton averaged more assists per 40 minutes than Garland did during their freshman seasons? Just sayin’....

Yeah but going back to his HS days Garlands coaches even say he’s a high level passer. He didn’t get to show it much in his very short time at Vandy because they asked him to play the role
he played. But everything about Garland scrim his HS days shows a guy with really respectable vision. Can make all the passes.

Just a heads up, natural feel to his game that Sexton doesn’t have despite being an excellent scorer in his own right

Garland is an excellent pick and roll player whereas that is a real weakness for Sexton.


I think people are going to be wowed by everything Garland does on the court. He’s a really good kid, he is super truly happy to be here.

Also, for whoever posted about the JR contract earlier, I definitely think they should use it to acquire future assets, but KPJ was their guy they were taking a swing on and they were able to get him at 30. He’s a guy they would have gone and got if they thought he was in danger of getting taken once the draft was ongoing. So I actually am glad they didn’t take the 17th pick deal from the Nets, But I know there has to be some future draft compensation out there and they need to find it. While they may let it expire now to just fully reset the repeater tax easily, I think there’s at least a decent chance they will be involved in I’m thinking maybe helping a team clear money this summer for FA or for tax purposes if the future compensation is right. Yea


Shit, I could be wrong about them turning 17 down at the deadline...it was a rumor that I considered on decent footing but it could still be wrong. The Nets ended up getting a young wing they value in that deal for a future first they believe will be in the 20s and they traded into straight cap space instead of having JRs 3.8m partial on their books, so it’s possible they knew of and waited for a better deal. Nonetheless, the Cavs got the guy they felt was worth swinging on as they felt his background and Intel stuff along with medicals were much more likely to make him successful in comparison to a guy like Bol who Doctors flagged for his weight issues , despite his foot being healed
And who came back much worse than KPJ in terms of inmaturity, attitude, and had no one really step up and vouch for him.
 
Yeah but going back to his HS days Garlands coaches even say he’s a high level passer. He didn’t get to show it much in his very short time at Vandy because they asked him to play the role
he played. But everything about Garland scrim his HS days shows a guy with really respectable vision. Can make all the passes.

Just a heads up, natural feel to his game that Sexton doesn’t have despite being an excellent scorer in his own right

Garland is an excellent pick and roll player whereas that is a real weakness for Sexton.


I think people are going to be wowed by everything Garland does on the court. He’s a really good kid, he is super truly happy to be here.

Also, for whoever posted about the JR contract earlier, I definitely think they should use it to acquire future assets, but KPJ was their guy they were taking a swing on and they were able to get him at 30. He’s a guy they would have gone and got if they thought he was in danger of getting taken once the draft was ongoing. So I actually am glad they didn’t take the 17th pick deal from the Nets, But I know there has to be some future draft compensation out there and they need to find it. While they may let it expire now to just fully reset the repeater tax easily, I think there’s at least a decent chance they will be involved in I’m thinking maybe helping a team clear money this summer for FA or for tax purposes if the future compensation is right. Yea


Shit, I could be wrong about them turning 17 down at the deadline...it was a rumor that I considered on decent footing but it could still be wrong. The Nets ended up getting a young wing they value in that deal for a future first they believe will be in the 20s and they traded into straight cap space instead of having JRs 3.8m partial on their books, so it’s possible they knew of and waited for a better deal. Nonetheless, the Cavs got the guy they felt was worth swinging on as they felt his background and Intel stuff along with medicals were much more likely to make him successful in comparison to a guy like Bol who Doctors flagged for his weight issues , despite his foot being healed
And who came back much worse than KPJ in terms of inmaturity, attitude, and had no one really step up and vouch for him.

Sexton was always a score-first PG, but he wasn't a bad passer coming out of high school. He started at PG and had a game-high 7 assists in the McDonalds All-American game, and came off the bench with a game-high 8 assists at the Nike hoop summit.


It would be pretty silly, IMO, to give up developing his PG skills after one season. It makes sense that his scoring translated first, but I think there's at least a chance his passing gets to a respectable level too if the Cavs push his development in that direction.
 
Sexton was always a score-first PG, but he wasn't a bad passer coming out of high school. He started at PG and had a game-high 7 assists in the McDonalds All-American game, and came off the bench with a game-high 8 assists at the Nike hoop summit.


It would be pretty silly, IMO, to give up developing his PG skills after one season. It makes sense that his scoring translated first, but I think there's at least a chance his passing gets to a respectable level too if the Cavs push his development in that direction.
It’s weird, but he seemed much more explosive as a high riser in high school than he did as a rookie.
 
I’d imagine he’s put on weight in college and NBA since high school and he plays against stronger more athletic competition than in high school.
 
I gave the draft a B-, and I'm not sure that's fair, because I don't think there's a pick they could have made that would have made me rate it higher.

If Garland becomes a borderline All-Star or better, and Windler or Porter Jr becomes a rotation player, this becomes an A draft.
 
Kevin O'Connor's article at The Ringer is a big reason why I am "meh" about the Cavs' draft. Yes, they drafted three high upside guys, but unlike the Hawks, Grizzlies, and Pelicans, Altman and co. seemed to really not care about fit. It looks like we're running around like a chicken with it's head cut off.




Again, I actually like all three players the team drafted. To me, they all have the potential to be all-stars or high-level role players. But the fit is so questionable that I wonder if they can actually reach that potential. I give the draft a B-.

This is a faux-contrarian and popular take, though honestly not a super insightful one, so pretty much the sweet spot for O'Connor. It's where we are on the BPA vs fit debate cycle. It'll pass. But also should have no bearing no how you grade the Cavs' draft.

The idea of Hunter and Reddish are great theoretical fits for the Hawks. But one guy is a classic tournament riser pick and the other one brings a scouting report shrouded in red flags. Yeah, maybe they earned themselves some cred with how Collins, Young and Huerter developed and how Pierce looked as a young coach. I think they are probably a playoff team next year, if they want to be. But if they end up having whiffed on those two? If Hunter turns out half a step too slow and an inch too short for the NBA? If Reddish turns out too lazy and too injured to realize his potential? The cycle can swing right back at you hard and quick.

Anyway, I don't want to belabor the point about where the Cavs are in their rebuild and how they can't really worry about fit at this point. Just mostly wanted to point out how much of dork O'Connor is.
 
Sexton was always a score-first PG, but he wasn't a bad passer coming out of high school. He started at PG and had a game-high 7 assists in the McDonalds All-American game, and came off the bench with a game-high 8 assists at the Nike hoop summit.


It would be pretty silly, IMO, to give up developing his PG skills after one season. It makes sense that his scoring translated first, but I think there's at least a chance his passing gets to a respectable level too if the Cavs push his development in that direction.
some of these passes...
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOFdwKl5R8c
 
This is a faux-contrarian and popular take, though honestly not a super insightful one, so pretty much the sweet spot for O'Connor. It's where we are on the BPA vs fit debate cycle. It'll pass. But also should have no bearing no how you grade the Cavs' draft.
I do not think it is faux-contrarian. Almost no national writer or analyst graded the Cavs' draft all that strongly. The team is drafting BPA, but the team has taken three (or maybe four depending on where you think Windler players, though I imagine he's a 3/4) guards with their first picks over the past two drafts. At some point it becomes difficult to even figure out which players hit when they are all taking minutes from each other. Ask the Orlando Magic.

Sure, and if you are contending the Cavs are at least three years away from making the playoffs, then disregarding fit makes sense. As I noted multiple times, I like all three selections the Cavs made this year, but let's not pretend they all fit together. And that's totally fine! But if Garland turns out to be a star, then the Cavs are at least still two full draft cycles away from having a team he can take to the playoffs.

The idea of Hunter and Reddish are great theoretical fits for the Hawks. But one guy is a classic tournament riser pick and the other one brings a scouting report shrouded in red flags. Yeah, maybe they earned themselves some cred with how Collins, Young and Huerter developed and how Pierce looked as a young coach. I think they are probably a playoff team next year, if they want to be. But if they end up having whiffed on those two? If Hunter turns out half a step too slow and an inch too short for the NBA? If Reddish turns out too lazy and too injured to realize his potential? The cycle can swing right back at you hard and quick.
I agree with all of these points, but they also apply to the Cavs' selections. Garland is a guy where we can all see his skill, but do not have hard evidence of it translating; Windler is probably going to be a solid NBA player but never anything that special; and KPJ is a huge question mark.

Anyway, I don't want to belabor the point about where the Cavs are in their rebuild and how they can't really worry about fit at this point. Just mostly wanted to point out how much of dork O'Connor is.
I am not trying to call you out here, because you clearly read this article, but a lot of people listen to O'Connor on the podcasts without reading this articles, and the guy is legitimately an NBA junkie and good writer. He's not a Zach Lowe, but nobody really is, and I feel like O'Connor is in the third tier of basketball writers.
 
Kevin O'Connor's article at The Ringer is a big reason why I am "meh" about the Cavs' draft. Yes, they drafted three high upside guys, but unlike the Hawks, Grizzlies, and Pelicans, Altman and co. seemed to really not care about fit. It looks like we're running around like a chicken with it's head cut off.




Again, I actually like all three players the team drafted. To me, they all have the potential to be all-stars or high-level role players. But the fit is so questionable that I wonder if they can actually reach that potential. I give the draft a B-.

I don't get this argument at all. We won 19 games last year. We aren't 1 player away from a championship. We are in asset collection mode. The more high end players we can acquire the better off we are. There will be trades now and in the future. We will play Sexton and Garland together. We will play them apart. We will see what the best situation is but both have a ton of talent. If they are not going to work together, at least we have high end talent with upside to trade and not some mediocre talent that had a better fit for the roster as of June, 2019.

As far as the grade is concerned, who the hell knows. The philosophy was on point; draft high ceiling talent. We will know in 2 years if they made the right evaluations.
 
I don't get this argument at all. We won 19 games last year. We aren't 1 player away from a championship. We are in asset collection mode. The more high end players we can acquire the better off we are. There will be trades now and in the future. We will play Sexton and Garland together. We will play them apart. We will see what the best situation is but both have a ton of talent. If they are not going to work together, at least we have high end talent with upside to trade and not some mediocre talent that had a better fit for the roster as of June, 2019.

As far as the grade is concerned, who the hell knows. The philosophy was on point; draft high ceiling talent. We will know in 2 years if they made the right evaluations.

I think this argument hinges on the idea that fit is important not just when a team is contending but even when a team is developing. That is, fit does not just make for a better team; it makes for better individual development of players. It's reasonable to question whether this is correct, but it seems plausible.

The praise for teams like Hawks or the Grizzlies then is not simply that you can imagine a core of Young-Huerter-Reddish-Hunter-Collins working in the future as a team trying to win, but that playing together will help each of them realize their individual potential.

From the standpoint, it makes a draft pick like Hunter or Culver look more prudent than a pick like Garland when you already have Sexton. Not just because one day when you're trying to win, Cuvler and Sexton might mesh better, but because today, they might help each other grow into the players you want.

Obviously, even if you believed this to be the case, there comes a point where one prospect is sufficiently more promising than another that these concerns are simply outweighed. I hope that is the case with Garland: that he is simply better than Culver (and others) such that immaterial of fit, he will develop into a better player. I also hope that Sexton and Garland won't actually impede each others' development--and I think it's reasonable to think that they won't. But I think it's reasonable to think that both of these hopes are unlikely ones, which is what prompts this sort of critique.
 
I think that is a reasonable take if 2 prospects are close to each other. However if 1 player has all star potential while the “better fit” has starting level potential I don’t think it holds water. It all depends on how the players are graded. In a perfect world you take fit but I don’t think the cavs in their current situation are afforded that luxury.
 
I think this years Cavs will remind me of the 97-98 Cavs. That team finished 47-35. Coached by Mike Fratello.

But they were very fun to watch. Rookies on that team were Derek Anderson, Cedric Henderson, Brevin Knight OG, and Z. Other young players on that team included Bob Sura and Vitaly Potapenko.

The dominant players on this years team will be rookies too.
Lots of fun to watch those guys grow game by game.
 
I think this years Cavs will remind me of the 97-98 Cavs. That team finished 47-35. Coached by Mike Fratello.

But they were very fun to watch. Rookies on that team were Derek Anderson, Cedric Henderson, Brevin Knight OG, and Z. Other young players on that team included Bob Sura and Vitaly Potapenko.

The dominant players on this years team will be rookies too.
Lots of fun to watch those guys grow game by game.

There is no way in hell the Cavs are winning 47 games this year. That said, thanks for the throwback to that team. Forgot all about Cedric.

The Cavs are going to shoot a lot of threes, implement a new system, makes some trades at the deadline for assets, and finish with a high lottery pick. And maybe some lottery luck.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top