Cleveland Cavaliers Summer League 2019

[Ozone]

Nope. It’s just straight up unreasonable.

based on what your ignorance? Nobody is safe in this business and players get picked and flipped every single year. Wake up

 

[sailfish]

Even if they do trade one of them at one point, why does it have to be Garland?

It points more toward Sexton than anyone.

Not so fast, my friend.

Here’s a fun fact- did you know that Collin Sexton averaged more assists per 40 minutes during his freshman year at Alabama than Garland did in the 5 games that he played at Vanderbilt?

Haters gonna hate, but I wouldn’t be so quick to write off that kid, especially with his insane work ethic and developing outside shot.

 

[NMCav]

based on what your ignorance? Nobody is safe in this business and players get picked and flipped every single year. Wake up

Name the last player to be a lotto pick then flipped after the draft within the next year that wasn't part of a traded agreed to at the draft. Andrew Wiggins is the last one I can think of. I don't know why you hate Garland so much and are so opposed to these two playing together in a tanking year but your gonna be pretty bummed when both start the year in Cleveland.

 

[dark2332]

based on what your ignorance? Nobody is safe in this business and players get picked and flipped every single year. Wake up

This is entirely the wrong thread for this discussion, for starters.

He’s already been introduced; he’s not being flipped.

In fact, since the draft, our insiders and multiple connected members have confirmed Garland as being coveted by our front office. There have been numerous pieces revealing the details of the draft lead-up. He was highly coveted by John Beilein.

I’m not being ignorant; I’m being practical and taking yes for an answer.

Additionally, personal attacks aren’t the way to hang around RCF for long.

You can be critical and express opinions without doing so.

I understand the frustration with taking another scoring guard, but I assure you, they truly believe he’s going to be a great player. That’s why they took him—not to flip him 3 weeks after introducing him.

I’m challenging you to be better. Bring more to these boards. This area of Cavs talk needs more intelligent dialogue.

You’re capable of it. Don’t stoop.

 

[dark2332]

Not so fast, my friend.

Here’s a fun fact- did you know that Collin Sexton averaged more assists per 40 minutes during his freshman year at Alabama than Garland did in the 5 games that he played at Vanderbilt?

I wouldn’t be so quick to write off Sexton, especially with his work ethic and developing outside shot.

I’ve been defending Sexton since the moment we drafted him last season.

I’ve written no one off. If you’ve followed my posting history, you’d see a Sexton supporter.

I’m not in favor of dealing him—I’m merely raising the counter argument to a user who is so clearly convinced that Garland is still being dealt.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

I don't need your play $ but thanks for the offer!!!
Look at it this way: nobody takes a ball dominant pg 2 years in a row without getting rid of one of them unless one of them is big enough to play off ball full time. Neither are. You do the math

The bet is $100. Loser donates $100 to RCF. Where does your "play money" comment come from?

Look at it this way: your statement is complete conjecture.

Neither is singular. "Neither is" would be correct.

The math's been done. I'm confident in mine, hence the willingness to donate to RCF based on it. Can you say the same?

 

[Ozone]

Name the last player to be a lotto pick then flipped after the draft within the next year that wasn't part of a traded agreed to at the draft. Andrew Wiggins is the last one I can think of. I don't know why you hate Garland so much and are so opposed to these two playing together in a tanking year but your gonna be pretty bummed when both start the year in Cleveland.

point taken, but name the last team that drafted a ball dominant undersized scoring pg that is not a good floor general and doesn't play defense 2 years in a row? If you find any, I'd bet one was moved soon after because it doesn't work.

 

[Ozone]

The bet is $100. Loser donates $100 to RCF. Where does your "play money" comment come from?

Look at it this way: your statement is complete conjecture.

Neither is singular. "Neither is" would be correct.

The math's been done. I'm confident in mine, hence the willingness to donate to RCF based on it. Can you say the same?

confidence in this org? hell no if you are right and they are keeping him. If I'm right maybe they can get a decent defender to put next to Sexton and actually build a contender instead of a fill the seats with wayward lovers of the long ball only to fall short of winning anything because they can't stop a train of ants with a shoe

 

[NMCav]

point taken, but name the last team that drafted a ball dominant undersized scoring pg that is not a good floor general and doesn't play defense 2 years in a row? If you find any, I'd bet one was moved soon after because it doesn't work.

Last time both were picked top 10? Damian Lillard and CJ McCollum. CJ by the way is still not a good defender, Oh and Lillard isn't either. And don't give me the CJ and Dame at 6-3. Collin is 6-2 has a longer standing reach and longer wingspan then McCollum who plays SG. When your tanking you take BPA and let it work itself out. Altman said the team felt their was a steep drop off after Garland. I was not in the draft room with them but if they had Garland and then a drop off they did the smart thing. We were not a player away we need high end talent period. They talked to Sexton before making the pick, even discussed with Garland when they had the predraft workout about playing with Sexton. You may not like the thought of Garland - Sexton forming the backcourt. Its a worrisome backcourt but try and see if it pans out. If not we can use one of them off the bench as a microwave off the bench.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

confidence in this org? hell no if you are right and they are keeping him. If I'm right maybe they can get a decent defender to put next to Sexton and actually build a contender instead of a fill the seats with wayward lovers of the long ball only to fall short of winning anything because they can't stop a train of ants with a shoe

So, what you're saying is you've now highjacked a thread about the summer league to go on your rant about how the Cavs are obviously trading Garland, despite not having a single piece of evidence to say that thought has even been entertained.

When every other person on the board challenges your baseless conjecture, it's obviously everyone else who's in the wrong.

When you have the opportunity to bet on your beliefs, you back down.

View: https://media.giphy.com/media/G4ZNYMQVMH6us/giphy.gif


I have a feeling you're operating under this assumption that any player on this team today has to "fit" into a championship roster down the road when we're ready to contend. But dude, that's just not how it works. The Cavs are in asset accumulation mode. We should be gathering the best assets we can because we're not ready to begin assembling what's a competitive team. Down the road, once we have enough talent to start seeing our path to contention, then we can start drafting and trading for fit.

But, it seems like you have this notion in your head that fit has to happen now, and you're projecting those thoughts onto the organization. "Oh, they drafted Garland, who might not be the best fit next to Sexton? Well, the only rational option is they drafted him to trade him!" However, what you should be doing is challenging your own preconceived notion that the organization is trying to build for fit right now. Because we aren't. Because we shouldn't be. We should be stockpiling the most valuable assets we can get our hands on--that's it. Fortunately, that just so happens to be what we're doing.

 

[Ozone]

^ Fair enough and I am a supporter of taking the BPA but in the end I don't agree the org was sold that the separation in upside between Garland , Doumbouya and Reddish was at all significant and the only way I buy them taking Garland as the BPA on their bb to employee in Cleveland was they only wanted somebody with less bust risk even at the expense of possibly passing on higher upside options.
To me taking Garland as the BPA only makes sense as the BPA for teams who need undersized score first shooters because he was not the highest ceiling player available and since the Cavs took an undersized score first guard in last years lottery everyone should easily deduct they didn't double down to get another one without intentions to flip.
Why is that so difficult to grasp? it's perfectly acceptable logic

 

[Joe Henderson]

I know it’s annoying af to have the inane argument hijack every single thread, but this has RCF HOF potential right here.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

I am a supporter of taking the BPA

Good, we have a decent starting point. We both realize that, at this beginning stage of the rebuild, taking the best player available is the correct path.

I don't agree the org was sold that the separation in upside between Garland , Doumbouya and Reddish was at all significant

First, it's a fact that the separation was significant--if it weren't, we wouldn't have picked him. We've also heard from everyone close to the organization that we had Garland first on our board after the top 3 picks. The next player on our board after Garland was Hunter. Therefore, it's interesting that the two players you compare Garland to are Doumbouya and Reddish.

Doumbouya went 15, so plenty of other NBA organizations didn't have him near the same level as Garland. But I hate that appeal to authority. I think Doumbouya has potential to be one of the better players in this draft. However, he's a huge gamble and I feel like he's a bit inflated currently because everyone wants to find the "next Giannis."

Cam Reddish? Well, I'm just happy another organization took him. @I'mWithDan has some good stats for you if you're looking for a historical perspective on Cam Reddish. Besides "looking the part" he has nothing else going for him. His production has been absolutely awful.

If you don't accept the fact that the organization (and most familiar with the NBA) had Garland ranked as the #4 prospect in this draft, and significantly ahead of Reddish and Doumbouya, you're rejecting reality.

but in the end and the only way I buy them taking Garland as the BPA on their bb to employee in Cleveland was they only wanted somebody with less bust risk even at the expense of possibly passing on higher upside options.

What happened to the beginning of your post, when you said you support BPA? Now you're saying that even if he was their BPA, he's a "less bust risk" without a high upside? Dude, the guy only played 5 games in college. He's about as risky as it gets. Your attempt at logic here is really starting to unravel.

To me taking Garland as the BPA only makes sense as the BPA for teams who need undersized score first shooters

@Ozone man, do you understand what "BPA" means? It means Best Player Available. You keep saying he's only BPA for certain teams under certain circumstances, and it's making my head hurt.

because he was not the highest ceiling player available

Your opinion, but not the opinion that others hold.

and since the Cavs took an undersized score first guard in last years lottery everyone should easily deduct they didn't double down to get another one without intentions to flip.

Wrong. They just picked the best player available.

Why is that so difficult to grasp? it's perfectly acceptable logic

It's difficult to grasp because you're being completely illogical.

 

[Ozone]

^ the way I see it Garland may have been considered the best player right now who also has a high upside so that's why he was taken regardless of fit etc but I don't agree he is the true best player long term if some of these riskier low floor picks reach their potentials. So did they really take the BPA? not necessarily.
I just think Garland makes a lot of sense for other teams who are lacking that type of player but to suggest his value was 4th by most orgs when Atlanta easily outbid said teams to get Hunter at 4 and then the Cavs took the guy everyone wanted at 4 one pick later and didn't shop him could only mean he really isn't the bpa at 4 or 5 or who knows unless they picked him to flip him and so if he isn't moved then his value isn't as high as you think not if he is.
Sekou and Reddish both have much higher ceilings defensively and so despite neither being as advanced offensively doesn't make them lesser options long term. Hell even Hayes with elite rim running ability could prove to be more valuable

 

[Lee]

^ Fair enough and I am a supporter of taking the BPA but in the end I don't agree the org was sold that the separation in upside between Garland , Doumbouya and Reddish was at all significant and the only way I buy them taking Garland as the BPA on their bb to employee in Cleveland was they only wanted somebody with less bust risk even at the expense of possibly passing on higher upside options.
To me taking Garland as the BPA only makes sense as the BPA for teams who need undersized score first shooters because he was not the highest ceiling player available and since the Cavs took an undersized score first guard in last years lottery everyone should easily deduct they didn't double down to get another one without intentions to flip.
Why is that so difficult to grasp? it's perfectly acceptable logic

Allot of us on here are draft junkies, myself included. This means we read a ton of opinions by professionals, scouts and GM's.

This draft was generally about the big 3. Zion was #1 on everyone's list, maybe the most consensus number 1 since Lebron.

With that said, I assure you that only 1 player frequently came up in professional opinion as a possible player better than Morant and/or Reddish and that is Garland.

Personally I am very high on Morant, so I don't agree, but a decent amount of pro scouts did. I am not saying Garland becomes an all star pg, but I am saying 100% he was the 4th highest ranked player in this draft if you take a poll of the pros.

The cavs went BPA regardless of fit. Do the research yourself. Not on his tape, just on opinion pre draft. Than do some research on Michigan basketball the last 10 years, Beilein loves a 2 pg system.

You are really making some crazy assumptions based on nothing. I am hoping this isn't you doing the slow troll, but at this point that is what it is looking like.