Do we really know that? I mean, Garland's impact on winning was questionable prior to this season, and there were so many other significant changes to this roster during the offseason that I'm not sure how much of that can be attributed specifically to Garland.
If you flipped Morant and Garland, would this team be winning fewer games? Advanced stats seem to favor Morant in terms of his impact on winning.
He has played limited amount of minutes thus far in the season. I'm not sure he is going to sustain such numbers.
Grizzlies are doing very well without him. For starters, I think his defence is really, really bad. Worse than Garland. It's a mixture of low effort and bad defensive skills. Garland doesn't have Morant's tools on the defensive end, but at least he tries. The issue with Garland defensively is still his strength somewhat and the fact that he allows too much dribble penetration. I think some of it can be attributed to how easily he gets called for fouls as well. He is not being reffed correctly on that end. The amount of bs fouls he got in that Wiz game.. god damn.. so annoying.
Why I like Garland more besides my bias as a Cavs fan is that I believe his type of archetype is easier to build around and has proven to achieve more success., in the long term.
I don't know if he would have won fewer games, I really don't. I know that this team wouldn't be nearly as good without Garland. IT's a night and day difference on the offensive end. He brings the best out of Allen and he is the catalyst for our ball movement...because we can't create any rotations without proper screening(which we don't have), so we are so, so dependant on his dribble penetration. His ability to turn a corner and his array of hesitation moves and timing is remarkable. You can also see that slowly, but surely he is learning how to be a master of his craft. I also love the dynamic and relationship that he has with everyone. That's also a receipt to build long term success. He is starting to realise how good he can be and he is doing that without any ego involved.
I will not disparage how reliant he is on a good roll man. It's a huge part of his game. Allen is a big part of his success and vice versa. However, on the other side of the coin, he is also missing a good screener to take his game to the next level as a scorer. He is able to get open looks because of how good he is as a ball handler and his sneaky quickness. Wait till he makes it even easier with a good screener to open up his game off the ball, at least. Right now he doesn't get any separation when the Cavs run any off-ball action for him. HE is also so good when he sets his feet before a shot, so once we are able to free up easily at the top of the break with plenty of time to set his feet... game over. IT shouldn't be that hard.
I just think it's debatable between the two. I'm honestly just happy to see him grow as I was really high on him and nearly sold his stock. Basketball is such a complex game as far as putting your best ability on the floor and gaining that trust and confidence. Some good talent can be washed out of the league for the smallest things. I'm just happy that Darius is starting to figure it out because it was mental with him, more than anything. The Sexton injury was a blessing in disguise for him and the organisation.
I feel bad that Sexton god injured. It must be hella tough for him to watch the team from the sidelines. I just hope he becomes a smarter player after this and finds a way to contribute to what the Cavs are trying to do right now. And if not, I hope he has enough value around the league.