2020 NBA Draft

[Nathan S]

Ball or Toppin makes no sense for NYK with Thibs coaching them. Toppin would drive him nuts.

So you're saying the Knicks are gonna do whatever it takes to get Ball or Toppin

 

[sailfish]

Wojo said over the weekend that NY wants Toppin bad and is trying trade up far enough to get him!

I heard the same. I guess Toppin is rep’d by CAA, which is the agency that Leon Rose was at before leaving for the Knicks. I think NY would love Ball or Toppin. Every NBA coach thinks they can coach a guy up and teach him to play better defense

 

[Smooth]

But what is equal talent to Darius Garland though? In a vacuum that's all well and good but we can't really answer that question definitively right now. And that's my point-- it's very much unknown.

I'm not really interested in making this a Sexton vs. Garland debate because I don't think it's an either/or situation.... at least it shouldn't be at this juncture. Every team needs multiple PG's and ball handlers, right? I don't see why the Cavs can't develop both guys with some overlap in their playing time.

I don't love the pairing either and I certainly don't see it working long term but why are people wanting the Cavs to make a decision now? This team has no business making a playoff run right now and thus the W-L record should be taking a backseat to player development. I like both guys but, simply put, the Cavs can't afford to choose to keep the wrong guy and I don't think we know what each guy is capable of at this level yet. And that's what it boils down to for me.

I think this needs to be repeated...

It doesn't make much sense for the Cavs to sell low on an asset and even less so when I wouldn't say there's anyone at his position that is completely head-and-shoulders above Garland as a talent... Fit? Sure.. But I think you can find a Haliburton or Hayes in another draft..

Garland played 5 games in college, had a season ending injury, barely had a pre-season, played on a crappy team with a head coach who was fired halfway through the year, all while during a pandemic shortened year... How can anyone definitely say what we have in Garland?

We saw the type of jump Sexton took from his first to second year and went from being a guy many wanted to get rid of, to now someone people want to build around..

I wasn't a fan of the Garland pick, and still don't think Garland-Sexton will work, but I think you have to at least see how it plays out for one more year and let the players make that decision before you make it preemptively with limited knowledge...

Regardless of who the Cavs take, (Okoro, Avdija, Vassell, Toppin) there's a pathway to them working with either Sexton or Garland moving forward... Now if you want someone who works with both, you're more limited but either way, the Cavs need to address their wing position most and are in a position to do so...

 

[ansatsusha80]

I think this needs to be repeated...

It doesn't make much sense for the Cavs to sell low on an asset and even less so when I wouldn't say there's anyone at his position that is completely head-and-shoulders above Garland as a talent... Fit? Sure.. But I think you can find a Haliburton or Hayes in another draft..

Garland played 5 games in college, had a season ending injury, barely had a pre-season, played on a crappy team with a head coach who was fired halfway through the year, all while during a pandemic shortened year... How can anyone definitely say what we have in Garland?

We saw the type of jump Sexton took from his first to second year and went from being a guy many wanted to get rid of, to now someone people want to build around..

I wasn't a fan of the Garland pick, and still don't think Garland-Sexton will work, but I think you have to at least see how it plays out for one more year and let the players make that decision before you make it preemptively with limited knowledge...

Regardless of who the Cavs take, (Okoro, Avdija, Vassell, Toppin) there's a pathway to them working with either Sexton or Garland moving forward... Now if you want someone who works with both, you're more limited but either way, the Cavs need to address their wing position most and are in a position to do so...

This is,why Beilin should have never started Garland at the beginning of the season...Beilin should have started Dellavedova so Garland can get in game shape slowly. It was obvious Garland was out of shape because he would look extremely tired every time the cameras was on him in the first quarter. On top of that,you can tell he felt overwhelmed by the learning curve of being a point guard in the league.

Beilin did Garland no justice starting him.Garland should have sat the bench and then started around game 40 of the season.....imo

 

[Nathan S]

I think this needs to be repeated...

It doesn't make much sense for the Cavs to sell low on an asset and even less so when I wouldn't say there's anyone at his position that is completely head-and-shoulders above Garland as a talent... Fit? Sure.. But I think you can find a Haliburton or Hayes in another draft..

Garland played 5 games in college, had a season ending injury, barely had a pre-season, played on a crappy team with a head coach who was fired halfway through the year, all while during a pandemic shortened year... How can anyone definitely say what we have in Garland?

We saw the type of jump Sexton took from his first to second year and went from being a guy many wanted to get rid of, to now someone people want to build around..

I wasn't a fan of the Garland pick, and still don't think Garland-Sexton will work, but I think you have to at least see how it plays out for one more year and let the players make that decision before you make it preemptively with limited knowledge...

Regardless of who the Cavs take, (Okoro, Avdija, Vassell, Toppin) there's a pathway to them working with either Sexton or Garland moving forward... Now if you want someone who works with both, you're more limited but either way, the Cavs need to address their wing position most and are in a position to do so...

Is it really *that* easy to find PGs with legit SG size like Haliburton and Hayes? In a typical draft there's maybe one such player, and he's usually a top-3 pick. This draft is the anomaly.

 

[J_J]

I think there are more players today that have PG abilities with Sg/Sf size. We see more versatility with upcoming youth and prepare to see more.

 

[Nathan S]

I think there are more players today that have PG abilities with Sg/Sf size. We see more versatility with upcoming youth and prepare to see more.

Convince me... who are some players we could draft next year?

 

[J_J]

Convince me... who are some players we could draft next year?

To name a few: Cade Cunningham, Jalen Suggs who will be playing for Gonzaga, and I remember a guy from Australia or somewhere in Europe.

 

[Smooth]

Is it really *that* easy to find PGs with legit SG size like Haliburton and Hayes? In a typical draft there's maybe one such player, and he's usually a top-3 pick. This draft is the anomaly.

I'd say finding a premium wing should take presidence over finding a "fit" player for Sexton/Garland.. While I do see Haliburton or Hayes being good role players, I don't see them being premium players you should pass on a starting level wing player for.. I mean, guys like Van Vleet, Kris Dunn, De'Anthony Melton, Michael Carter-Williams are available in free agency this year, Frank Nitilikina, Spencer Dinwiddie, Derrick White and Landry Shamet hit free agency next year..

I just don't see the value in taking a guy like Haliburton/Hayes when, to me, there's a higher value/harder time finding a good wing, neither Haliburton/Hayes scream high end player to me, the Cavs are better out finding out if they want to move forward with Garland or Sexton starting, and then go about finding a fit for the player they choose...

The interesting thing with this draft is if the Cavs are able to acquire another top-10 pick, and say it's with Garland, I'd take Haliburton at #5 and see which wing drops to the back end of the lotto, because there's a chance it's Okoro and at the very least Vassell is likely..

 

[Cavatt]

How many guys larger than 6'3" are legit playmakers in the league? It really isn't many. The ones that spring to mind are stars.

 

[kookoo]

How many guys larger than 6'3" are legit playmakers in the league? It really isn't many. The ones that spring to mind are stars.

Considering it's a new thing for positionless basketball in North America, I'd say there are quite a few. Lets not discuss the obvious LeBron, Jokic, Doncic, Simmons, ect. A lot of point guards are also over 6'3 now. Malcom Brogden, Lonzo Ball, ect. Then you got James Harden who is technically an SG. Jimmy Butler, Giannis, Booker, Joe Ingles.... Out of the top 30 assist leaders in the NBA, 13 of them are over 6'3". And quite a few point guards are listed at 6'3 but it looks like they're taller. Russell Westbrook for example. And you go out of the top 30, you're met with Bam, Murray, Sabonis, Kawhi, Smart. Even if you were to just use the position as opposed to the height, there are A LOT of quality passing players in other positions. Sure, you could say there are more legit playmakers as point guards vs players in each individual position. But outside of PGs we have more quality passing playmakers than ever before, and it's going to continue to grow. Much like every other career now, we're at a time when you're expected to do things that weren't expected 20 years ago.

 

[Cavatt]

Considering it's a new thing for positionless basketball in North America, I'd say there are quite a few. Lets not discuss the obvious LeBron, Jokic, Doncic, Simmons, ect. A lot of point guards are also over 6'3 now. Malcom Brogden, Lonzo Ball, ect. Then you got James Harden who is technically an SG. Jimmy Butler, Giannis, Booker, Joe Ingles.... Out of the top 30 assist leaders in the NBA, 13 of them are over 6'3". And quite a few point guards are listed at 6'3 but it looks like they're taller. Russell Westbrook for example. And you go out of the top 30, you're met with Bam, Murray, Sabonis, Kawhi, Smart. Even if you were to just use the position as opposed to the height, there are A LOT of quality passing players in other positions. Sure, you could say there are more legit playmakers as point guards vs players in each individual position. But outside of PGs we have more quality passing playmakers than ever before, and it's going to continue to grow. Much like every other career now, we're at a time when you're expected to do things that weren't expected 20 years ago.

But your list just makes me want to draft large pgs. I don't think it means they aren't valuable??? Seems like they are the most valuable players in the league??

 

[Ohioplayer00]

If there’s a trade to be made for Garland I would do it and then without hesitation draft Haliburton at #5

 

[benchplayer]

If there’s a trade to be made for Garland I would do it and then without hesitation draft Haliburton at #5

IMO, it's waaaaaay too early to give up on Garland. Since he only played 5 games as a freshman, you can basically say he's coming into the NBA straight from high school. It's gonna take some time/yrs to see what he truly is, but that doesn't matter because we are nowhere near competing.

 

[kookoo]

But your list just makes me want to draft large pgs. I don't think it means they aren't valuable??? Seems like they are the most valuable players in the league??

That wasn't the point I was trying to make when I responded to you. You said how many guys above 6'3" are playmakers... I gave you a decent list. I'd even argue most of the best playmakers in the league right now are 6'5" or taller...

Sure, you can take it however you want. Draft a big PG. Draft a tiny PG. But again, we're in a point of evolution for the roles of players where the smallest guy on the team doesn't need to be the best passer anymore and taller players are focusing on their handling as well as their passing. I don't think pass first point guards aren't valuable, but you can't necessarily assume just because someone is tall that they can't play make, especially where we are now.