2020 NBA Draft

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

The Human Q-Tip

Alright you primitive screwheads, listen up!
Moderator
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
26,537
Reaction score
39,489
Points
148
Let me know when that happens.

Sincerely,

Bruno Sundov, Jiri Welsch, J.R. Bremer, Kendrick Brown, Eric Williams, Milt Palacio, Jae Crowder, Ante Zizic, and Isaiah Thomas's hip.
It already did.

We can't count Sexton, but we can count Crowder, Zizic and IT?
 

Cavatt

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Sep 7, 2008
Messages
21,511
Reaction score
22,473
Points
135
I have seen a lot of people say that Haliburton is not a playmaker. I am a little confused about this. People compare him to Lonzon and say, "he's not a playmaker either". Lonzo is 15th in the NBA behind Jokic.

Can someone explain to me how a guy averaging 6.6 assists in college, who plays as the lead guard isn't a playmaker on winning team? When I watch his tape, he looks like one of the best decision makers I have ever seen at the college level. Like he knows exactly whether to pass or shoot. He moves the defense with head fakes, shot fakes, pass fakes, is great at no look passes, and he has eyes in the back of his head while being large enough to pass over the defense to hit guys in the corner.

He is the THE most efficient guard in decades and while not a Lonzo Ball style maestro, he seems like he has such a feel for the game. What am I missing here? Why do people say he would be a secondary playmaker? He seems to have the best feel in the draft, and I am trying to think of a guy with that elite feel that hasn't been a great success. If he was 6' I might understand, but he has length and height and long strides.

I would be all in for Haliburton if we didn't have Garland and it has made me go back and re-evaluate him, and I think he has star potential. I think people are worried about his slow release, and his athleticism. He has a high shot, which i think will help, and his athleticism is actually pretty good. Long strides in a Shai sort of way, and while he doesn't beat his man without a screen with a first step, he can get 2 defenders to commit with his in out dribble and then hit the open man. He seems to get where he wants to go with his lateral dribble instead of quickness.

Can someone help me? I am just not getting it. This is like when people were saying Porter Jr wasn't special last year and it didn't fit with the tape I was seeing.
 

Vipra

Rookie
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
62
Reaction score
46
Points
18
I have seen a lot of people say that Haliburton is not a playmaker. I am a little confused about this. People compare him to Lonzon and say, "he's not a playmaker either". Lonzo is 15th in the NBA behind Jokic.

Can someone explain to me how a guy averaging 6.6 assists in college, who plays as the lead guard isn't a playmaker on winning team? When I watch his tape, he looks like one of the best decision makers I have ever seen at the college level. Like he knows exactly whether to pass or shoot. He moves the defense with head fakes, shot fakes, pass fakes, is great at no look passes, and he has eyes in the back of his head while being large enough to pass over the defense to hit guys in the corner.

He is the THE most efficient guard in decades and while not a Lonzo Ball style maestro, he seems like he has such a feel for the game. What am I missing here? Why do people say he would be a secondary playmaker? He seems to have the best feel in the draft, and I am trying to think of a guy with that elite feel that hasn't been a great success. If he was 6' I might understand, but he has length and height and long strides.

I would be all in for Haliburton if we didn't have Garland and it has made me go back and re-evaluate him, and I think he has star potential. I think people are worried about his slow release, and his athleticism. He has a high shot, which i think will help, and his athleticism is actually pretty good. Long strides in a Shai sort of way, and while he doesn't beat his man without a screen with a first step, he can get 2 defenders to commit with his in out dribble and then hit the open man. He seems to get where he wants to go with his lateral dribble instead of quickness.

Can someone help me? I am just not getting it. This is like when people were saying Porter Jr wasn't special last year and it didn't fit with the tape I was seeing.
I had started replying to your Garland post in another thread, and then jumped here. But, first, let me say that I do agree with your points. Now here is what I wanted to add:

1. We can have Haliburton and Garland both. I know Sexton-Garland backcourt experiment didn't go well - but that has something to do with their height (besides a lot of other factors). Haliburton is a taller guard. I can see Haliburton-Sexton playing at 1 and 2 as starters, and Garland-KPJ coming off the bench. As you've pointed out, Haliburton is a good playmaker/distributor, and the Cavs should consider him seriously. I would probably go in this order in the draft for Cavs - Ball (improbable), Avdija, Haliburton.

2. I have seen people being high on Coby White, and writing off Garland. But they performed almost at the same level, with Garland being slightly more efficient scorer. I do believe that Garland will perform a lot better in the coming season.
 
Last edited:

inliner311

All-Star
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
8,222
Reaction score
7,287
Points
113
I have seen a lot of people say that Haliburton is not a playmaker. I am a little confused about this. People compare him to Lonzon and say, "he's not a playmaker either". Lonzo is 15th in the NBA behind Jokic.

Can someone explain to me how a guy averaging 6.6 assists in college, who plays as the lead guard isn't a playmaker on winning team? When I watch his tape, he looks like one of the best decision makers I have ever seen at the college level. Like he knows exactly whether to pass or shoot. He moves the defense with head fakes, shot fakes, pass fakes, is great at no look passes, and he has eyes in the back of his head while being large enough to pass over the defense to hit guys in the corner.

He is the THE most efficient guard in decades and while not a Lonzo Ball style maestro, he seems like he has such a feel for the game. What am I missing here? Why do people say he would be a secondary playmaker? He seems to have the best feel in the draft, and I am trying to think of a guy with that elite feel that hasn't been a great success. If he was 6' I might understand, but he has length and height and long strides.

I would be all in for Haliburton if we didn't have Garland and it has made me go back and re-evaluate him, and I think he has star potential. I think people are worried about his slow release, and his athleticism. He has a high shot, which i think will help, and his athleticism is actually pretty good. Long strides in a Shai sort of way, and while he doesn't beat his man without a screen with a first step, he can get 2 defenders to commit with his in out dribble and then hit the open man. He seems to get where he wants to go with his lateral dribble instead of quickness.

Can someone help me? I am just not getting it. This is like when people were saying Porter Jr wasn't special last year and it didn't fit with the tape I was seeing.
I personally really like Haliburton. Garland wouldn't play into my decision making to take him or not. Sexton and Haliburton would be a real good pairing. Maybe it's not the ideal pick for this team but I think you might be giving up talent for a position of need for another pick at #5.

My top 5 for the Cavs are LeMelo, Edwards, Deni, Haliburton, and Obi Toppin. I think LeMelo and Deni are as good fits as possible for talent and position. Edwards is someone you take because he will be a tier above anyone else at #5 and figure out the rotation with him. I think Haliburton and Toppin are in the next tier of talent and they aren't real positions of need.

I personally wouldn't take Wiseman or Okongwu because I don't think the value to take a center top 5 is there. We have Drummond on the roster and I want to see how we evolve our scheme with him before investing further on a tradition big man. I basically see Okongwu as a TT replacement, I would just resign TT instead. I also think players at other positions will make a greater impact.
 

Goldin Brown

Sixth Man
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
2,029
Reaction score
1,535
Points
113
I have seen a lot of people say that Haliburton is not a playmaker. I am a little confused about this. People compare him to Lonzon and say, "he's not a playmaker either". Lonzo is 15th in the NBA behind Jokic.

Can someone explain to me how a guy averaging 6.6 assists in college, who plays as the lead guard isn't a playmaker on winning team? When I watch his tape, he looks like one of the best decision makers I have ever seen at the college level. Like he knows exactly whether to pass or shoot. He moves the defense with head fakes, shot fakes, pass fakes, is great at no look passes, and he has eyes in the back of his head while being large enough to pass over the defense to hit guys in the corner.

He is the THE most efficient guard in decades and while not a Lonzo Ball style maestro, he seems like he has such a feel for the game. What am I missing here? Why do people say he would be a secondary playmaker? He seems to have the best feel in the draft, and I am trying to think of a guy with that elite feel that hasn't been a great success. If he was 6' I might understand, but he has length and height and long strides.

I would be all in for Haliburton if we didn't have Garland and it has made me go back and re-evaluate him, and I think he has star potential. I think people are worried about his slow release, and his athleticism. He has a high shot, which i think will help, and his athleticism is actually pretty good. Long strides in a Shai sort of way, and while he doesn't beat his man without a screen with a first step, he can get 2 defenders to commit with his in out dribble and then hit the open man. He seems to get where he wants to go with his lateral dribble instead of quickness.

Can someone help me? I am just not getting it. This is like when people were saying Porter Jr wasn't special last year and it didn't fit with the tape I was seeing.
The glaring weaknesses in his game, to me, are that he doesn't finish in traffic, he doesn't get to the free throw line and he seems to be more of a spot up shooter at the moment. With that said, he'd be excellent next to Collin, but I think we've already invested too heavily in guard to seriously consider drafting him. I think he's going to be good, but I don't really think he's as good as SGA. I think SGA is more threatening offensively, Haliburton seems to avoid contact, that might limit his scoring potential. He seems more like a spot up shooter and less like an off the bounce type guy, this might also limit his upside, although I can see him getting better here. If he improves his shot making off the bounce, he could be a star player.

That's just what I've seen, but I honestly haven't watched him a ton. He seems like he'd be great next to an attacking guard like Collin or somebody like Donovan Mitchell. I think he can be a starting PG, but he kinda looks like he'll be a sub 15 ppg type of guy to me. I could see him averaging 13 ppg 7+ assts, something like that.
 
Last edited:

inliner311

All-Star
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
8,222
Reaction score
7,287
Points
113
The glaring weaknesses in his game, to me, are that he doesn't finish in traffic, he doesn't get to the free throw line and he seems to be more of a spot up shooter at the moment. With that said, he'd be excellent next to Collin, but I think we've already invested too heavily in guard to seriously consider drafting him. I think he's going to be good, but I don't really think he's as good as SGA. I think SGA is more threatening offensively, Haliburton seems to avoid contact, that might limit his scoring potential. He seems more like a spot up shooter and less like an off the bounce type guy, this might also limit his upside, although I can see him getting better here. If he improves his shot making off the bounce, he could be a star player.

That's just what I've seen, but I honestly haven't watched him a ton. He seems like he'd be great next to an attacking guard like Collin or somebody like Donovan Mitchell. I think he can be a starting PG, but he kinda looks like he'll be a sub 15 ppg type of guy to me. I could see him averaging 13 ppg 7+ assts, something like that.
I wonder after a couple seasons of NBA strength and conditioning if he fills out and him avoiding contact becomes less of an issue. Even in his highlights, you can see he seems to be filling out as the season went on.
I do think he has the potential to be an extremely good pairing with Sexton.
 

bleachkit

Towel Waver
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
76
Reaction score
102
Points
33
I still feel like you are pushing the discussion towards results of the trade, when I'm saying "This franchise will do whatever it takes to make you cave to their demands." If the phone rings and it's Danny Ainge, I don't even want to pick it up. The system is rigged in their favor because of how they manipulate back channels.

It's crazy to look at their history in trades and free agency. They have only missed the playoffs ten times since 1980. In a system that is built towards forcing franchises to rebuild, theirs never lasts more than a season or two.

Even more insane: the Celtics have been around for nearly 75 years and they only missed the playoffs 17 times! We all know tampering through back channels happens a lot in the NBA, and we know a handful of franchises have done it for years without penalty... why deal with a franchise like that when you can deal with another smaller market where the tampering element will not be in play?
Give Ainge credit though, he's done a good job. Their two cornerstones, Brown and Tatum were both drafted, in fact he traded back to get Tatum. Their glue guy Smart was also drafted by Ainge. He struck out with Kyrie, but it didn't set them back much. Hawyard has been solid, but hurt about half the time. They wisely let Horford walk. Walker was likely an overpay, but they don't care about that really. But they have also found quality role players. I dont see a vast conspiracy here.
 

bleachkit

Towel Waver
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
76
Reaction score
102
Points
33
I have seen a lot of people say that Haliburton is not a playmaker. I am a little confused about this. People compare him to Lonzon and say, "he's not a playmaker either". Lonzo is 15th in the NBA behind Jokic.

Can someone explain to me how a guy averaging 6.6 assists in college, who plays as the lead guard isn't a playmaker on winning team? When I watch his tape, he looks like one of the best decision makers I have ever seen at the college level. Like he knows exactly whether to pass or shoot. He moves the defense with head fakes, shot fakes, pass fakes, is great at no look passes, and he has eyes in the back of his head while being large enough to pass over the defense to hit guys in the corner.

He is the THE most efficient guard in decades and while not a Lonzo Ball style maestro, he seems like he has such a feel for the game. What am I missing here? Why do people say he would be a secondary playmaker? He seems to have the best feel in the draft, and I am trying to think of a guy with that elite feel that hasn't been a great success. If he was 6' I might understand, but he has length and height and long strides.

I would be all in for Haliburton if we didn't have Garland and it has made me go back and re-evaluate him, and I think he has star potential. I think people are worried about his slow release, and his athleticism. He has a high shot, which i think will help, and his athleticism is actually pretty good. Long strides in a Shai sort of way, and while he doesn't beat his man without a screen with a first step, he can get 2 defenders to commit with his in out dribble and then hit the open man. He seems to get where he wants to go with his lateral dribble instead of quickness.

Can someone help me? I am just not getting it. This is like when people were saying Porter Jr wasn't special last year and it didn't fit with the tape I was seeing.
He's a good player for sure, but Cavs cant take another guard.
 

inliner311

All-Star
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
8,222
Reaction score
7,287
Points
113
He's a good player for sure, but Cavs cant take another guard.
I think the Cavs can't take another small guard. I would say Haliburton in a big guard. 6'5 and 7 foot wingspan should allow him to guard SGs right away and when he fills out he should be able to spend time guarding SFs when needed.

LeMelo is the size of a SF. Edwards is 6'5 and looks real strong already. Hayes is listed at 6'5 and also looks pretty strong, he might not be as tall as listed though. All these guys are much bigger than Sexton and Garland. They are all about the size of Kevin Porter Jr or bigger.
 

Nathan S

33 is the new 23
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
12,367
Reaction score
16,861
Points
123
I think the Cavs can't take another small guard. I would say Haliburton in a big guard. 6'5 and 7 foot wingspan should allow him to guard SGs right away and when he fills out he should be able to spend time guarding SFs when needed.

LeMelo is the size of a SF. Edwards is 6'5 and looks real strong already. Hayes is listed at 6'5 and also looks pretty strong, he might not be as tall as listed though. All these guys are much bigger than Sexton and Garland. They are all about the size of Kevin Porter Jr or bigger.
Hayes measured 6'5.5" (in shoes) two years ago at age 16, so I wouldn't worry about him there. Sad that he's not really in the mix for the Cavs.
 

inliner311

All-Star
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
8,222
Reaction score
7,287
Points
113
Hayes measured 6'5.5" (in shoes) two years ago at age 16, so I wouldn't worry about him there. Sad that he's not really in the mix for the Cavs.
That's good to know. From watching videos of him, he just doesn't look that big. I would have estimated 6'3.5 to 6'4
 

Nathan S

33 is the new 23
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
12,367
Reaction score
16,861
Points
123
That's good to know. From watching videos of him, he just doesn't look that big. I would have estimated 6'3.5 to 6'4
Here he is next to Josh Green, who's listed at 6'6". Part of it might just be that European teams are taller than typical NCAA teams by an inch or two.

 
Top