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

Anthony Edwards Scouting: Discuss

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Can we draft Anthony Edwards and then give his body to Collin Sexton? I see his potential, but I would be surprised if he lived up to the hype, he might prove me wrong. Seems like a high volume scorer that doesn't really help you win all that much. I think he would be a really interesting fit on the Warriors. I think they have the infrastructure to take on a player like Edwards, he could just play a role, let his game develop and learn how to win.

Edit: I've been watching a little bit more, he might be decent. He does have some defensive upside and rebounds pretty well for a guard, seems to compete. I might not hate him on the Cavs, I think we might have to trade one of our other guards if we were to take him.
 
Last edited:
Can we draft Anthony Edwards and then give his body to Collin Sexton? I see his potential, but I would be surprised if he lived up to the hype, he might prove me wrong. Seems like a high volume scorer that doesn't really help you win all that much. I think he would be a really interesting fit on the Warriors. I think they have the infrastructure to take on a player like Edwards, he could just play a role, let his game develop and learn how to win.

Edit: I've been watching a little bit more, he might be decent. He does have some defensive upside and rebounds pretty well for a guard, seems to compete. I might not hate him on the Cavs, I think we might have to trade one of our other guards if we were to take him.

Yeah if Sexton had his frame....

I do see a good fit on the Warriors. They need another guy that can get his shot. His inefficiency might be really mitigated by all the other threats on the floor, but it won't make the ball go in the basket.

I don't think he is bust or anything, but his numbers are worse than Sexton's and Sexton learned to shoot quickly. He really doesn't fit on our team. I'd prefer Wiseman or Okongwu over him, and those aren't my choice for #1. I think whoever takes Edwards needs to do their homework on his work ethic. The fact that he is in the convo and he started playing serious basketball at 16 is also like Sexton in that he really made something out of himself quickly and took himself from unknown to top guy in just a couple of years. That shouldn't be overlooked.
 
Yeah if Sexton had his frame....

I do see a good fit on the Warriors. They need another guy that can get his shot. His inefficiency might be really mitigated by all the other threats on the floor, but it won't make the ball go in the basket.

I don't think he is bust or anything, but his numbers are worse than Sexton's and Sexton learned to shoot quickly. He really doesn't fit on our team. I'd prefer Wiseman or Okongwu over him, and those aren't my choice for #1. I think whoever takes Edwards needs to do their homework on his work ethic. The fact that he is in the convo and he started playing serious basketball at 16 is also like Sexton in that he really made something out of himself quickly and took himself from unknown to top guy in just a couple of years. That shouldn't be overlooked.

I think I said this in the draft thread but the scouts I still stay in contact with say the guy is a dog. He's always in the gym. He's always shooting. He takes training seriously, etc. and they really just have little reservation he won't work enough.

A good portion of his inefficiency comes from his shot selection.........so that is always tough to decipher. I think he is coachable and I have yet to see anyone intimate he is not......so there seems to be room for immediate improvement, if he just does a better job deciding when to take a tough shot and when to defer or reset.....but an unknown for sure.

Edwards seems like a guy who will see that steep tick upward in a wider, more open game. He's really strong with the ball, nice touch, nice finishing metrics, free throw rate and bounce. Certainly he experienced some higher than average congestion on that Georgia team but was still really effective inside the arc and paint.

Most of my concern with Edwards is on defense in all honesty.......he tends to be really disengaged on that end.......and it is tough to know if that is individual focus, team dynamic, etc......for someone with his physical gifts, there's no reason he shouldn't be a quality defender, so it is concerning that play to play you see so much variation.

With that said, I just take him in a heartbeat though. He has a ton of tools and sounds like a worker, who is receptive to coaching. Tough to find those types, even if things like his effort on defense make you uneasy.
 
I think I said this in the draft thread but the scouts I still stay in contact with say the guy is a dog. He's always in the gym. He's always shooting. He takes training seriously, etc. and they really just have little reservation he won't work enough.

A good portion of his inefficiency comes from his shot selection.........so that is always tough to decipher. I think he is coachable and I have yet to see anyone intimate he is not......so there seems to be room for immediate improvement, if he just does a better job deciding when to take a tough shot and when to defer or reset.....but an unknown for sure.

Edwards seems like a guy who will see that steep tick upward in a wider, more open game. He's really strong with the ball, nice touch, nice finishing metrics, free throw rate and bounce. Certainly he experienced some higher than average congestion on that Georgia team but was still really effective inside the arc and paint.

Most of my concern with Edwards is on defense in all honesty.......he tends to be really disengaged on that end.......and it is tough to know if that is individual focus, team dynamic, etc......for someone with his physical gifts, there's no reason he shouldn't be a quality defender, so it is concerning that play to play you see so much variation.

With that said, I just take him in a heartbeat though. He has a ton of tools and sounds like a worker, who is receptive to coaching. Tough to find those types, even if things like his effort on defense make you uneasy.

I'd be much more open to him if we didn't have KPJ and Sexton, but this would be like all those guys plus Clarkson. Just too many scoring guards.
 
I don't think Edwards has more upside than Porter Jr. Altman should pass on this & draft Wiseman.
 
I think I said this in the draft thread but the scouts I still stay in contact with say the guy is a dog. He's always in the gym. He's always shooting. He takes training seriously, etc. and they really just have little reservation he won't work enough.

A good portion of his inefficiency comes from his shot selection.........so that is always tough to decipher. I think he is coachable and I have yet to see anyone intimate he is not......so there seems to be room for immediate improvement, if he just does a better job deciding when to take a tough shot and when to defer or reset.....but an unknown for sure.

Edwards seems like a guy who will see that steep tick upward in a wider, more open game. He's really strong with the ball, nice touch, nice finishing metrics, free throw rate and bounce. Certainly he experienced some higher than average congestion on that Georgia team but was still really effective inside the arc and paint.

Most of my concern with Edwards is on defense in all honesty.......he tends to be really disengaged on that end.......and it is tough to know if that is individual focus, team dynamic, etc......for someone with his physical gifts, there's no reason he shouldn't be a quality defender, so it is concerning that play to play you see so much variation.

With that said, I just take him in a heartbeat though. He has a ton of tools and sounds like a worker, who is receptive to coaching. Tough to find those types, even if things like his effort on defense make you uneasy.

But could the fact that he works so hard and still isn't good at many things indicate that for whatever reason he can't translate that effort to the court? Because his athletic ability isn't going to improve and he doesn't figure to get enough taller at this point that it will matter in his performance. So if his hard work in the gym has been insufficient in high school and college, why won't it continue to be insufficient in the NBA?
 
But could the fact that he works so hard and still isn't good at many things indicate that for whatever reason he can't translate that effort to the court? Because his athletic ability isn't going to improve and he doesn't figure to get enough taller at this point that it will matter in his performance. So if his hard work in the gym has been insufficient in high school and college, why won't it continue to be insufficient in the NBA?

It hasn't been. This man is a top 5 pick.
 
I'd be much more open to him if we didn't have KPJ and Sexton, but this would be like all those guys plus Clarkson. Just too many scoring guards.

I try not to shit on this FO too much because I think they already get too much grief for how they dealt with the awful and pretty unprecedented position that Kyrie (and LeBron) put them in post-championship, but this guard situation going into this draft is almost unforgivable, in my opinion.

No matter how strong an argument can be made for going best available, I don't see how the FO can take a guard at the top of this draft. Period. Perhaps if there were some transcendent LeBron-level guard prospect head and shoulders above everyone else and we were picking first, but that's about the only way I could get behind it. Otherwise, with the crapshoot that it is already, you just can't do it--not just due to any belief in the guys already on the roster, but more because this is the absolute ANTITHESIS of the kind of situation that would even allow for any of the young guys to develop and thrive. Like, it could be the case that a guy like Edwards WOULD be the best player out of this draft for most teams, but the Cavs putting him in this situation with a bunch of young guards fighting for the ball and fighting for minutes ends up messing up all of their careers.

Hell, we're already in that situation with Garland and Sexton. Sexton obviously thrived, and it's likely because he's psychotic about basketball, but Garland will probably never really get a chance to develop here unless Sexton gets traded (which I don't want, either).
 
I'd be much more open to him if we didn't have KPJ and Sexton, but this would be like all those guys plus Clarkson. Just too many scoring guards.

Honestly, my opinion on all of those guys is only Sexton is even worth considering at this point......because I think he is the only guard on our roster who has shown skills that certainly have a place on a good team (reserve scoring guard / 6th man) moving forward.

If our scouts view Edwards as a player who could potentially be the engine of an NBA offense and we pass on him because of Garland and KPJ, then we are in a lot of trouble.

With Edwards specifically, I lean a lot on people I trust in the scouting world and honestly just defer to their personal opinions. He's been one of the more surprising guys to me, in terms of of much good front offices seem to like him.

There are a few players I wouldn't mind passing on him for but the list is short. He just has so much potential as a 3 level scorer at the NBA level. It is tough to see the Cavs pass on someone like that because we have a few moderately promising young guards.
 
But could the fact that he works so hard and still isn't good at many things indicate that for whatever reason he can't translate that effort to the court? Because his athletic ability isn't going to improve and he doesn't figure to get enough taller at this point that it will matter in his performance. So if his hard work in the gym has been insufficient in high school and college, why won't it continue to be insufficient in the NBA?

The guy is incredibly young. He turned 18 just before his Freshman year in college. There's few examples of guys his age who put up substantial scoring / rebounding numbers as guards.

According to SportsRef, only 9 other players have posted 19/5 or better as freshman guards and that list included..... Markelle Fultz, DAngelo Russell, Michael Redd, Jamal Murray, Larry Hughes and CJ McCollum....it is a pretty good list, outcome wise.

Performance wise, he does a lot of things you like out of a young scoring guard.....he has touch, he has range, he's strong, he can finish over length, with either hand, he can take and make tough shots, he can shoot off the dribble........and just as a general comment, it is pretty tough to find young perimeter prospects that have both power and touch.

He needs to improve in certain areas, for sure......but he just seems like a player, relative to his strengths, that will thrive in the more open, faster NBA game.
 
I imagine Garland's player agency would take a dim view of the Cavs drafting another guard with a high pick. I just can't see an Edwards/Sexton/Porter/Garland rotation ever being an option.
 
Like, it could be the case that a guy like Edwards WOULD be the best player out of this draft for most teams, but the Cavs putting him in this situation with a bunch of young guards fighting for the ball and fighting for minutes ends up messing up all of their careers.

The Blazers drafted McCollum with Lillard, Barton, Wes Mathews and Batum already on their roster.....all promising and accomplished players....and had Aldridge eating usage. It's not like that team was ripe for shots or development but they took McCollum anyway because they felt he was the best player. Not only that but they ALSO added Crabbe that season.....leaving them with 6 players at the 1, 2 and 3 that were 25 or younger and a serious logjam at SG specifically.

Too much consideration is being given to guys like KPJ and Garland IMO. Don't overthink it here. The Blazers were just cramming guards and wings in to their roster and it didn't stunt the development of either of the two players who came out of the wash. It isn't high school......the best guys will bubble up in professional basketball IMO.
 
The Blazers drafted McCollum with Lillard, Barton, Wes Mathews and Batum already on their roster.....all promising and accomplished players....and had Aldridge eating usage. It's not like that team was ripe for shots or development but they took McCollum anyway because they felt he was the best player. Not only that but they ALSO added Crabbe that season.....leaving them with 6 players at the 1, 2 and 3 that were 25 or younger and a serious logjam at SG specifically.

Too much consideration is being given to guys like KPJ and Garland IMO. Don't overthink it here. The Blazers were just cramming guards and wings in to their roster and it didn't stunt the development of either of the two players who came out of the wash. It isn't high school......the best guys will bubble up in professional basketball IMO.

They took McCollum at 10 which is a bit different. If we were in it and Edwards was there at 10 I would take him too.

Edwards is 2 inches taller than Sexton, but with similar but worse college numbers. People said the path for Sexton to be a good player, it would take unbelievable improvement, which I guess he defied the odds a bit. His weaknesses are remarkably similar, can't pass, can't shoot efficiently, terrible shot selection, needs the ball in his hands, off ball game sucks.

Fine to think KPJ and Garland aren't worth considering, but even then you have 2 guards that are your best prospects that fit worse than Garland and Sexton. I disagree on Porter though, I think he is a better player than Edwards. I do think Edwards fits the grind culture that Sexton exemplifies, and I think they have similar trajectories where they work on their weaknesses their whole career. Personally, I would take Haliburton over him. I think it would make the team fit better and function better.
 
They took McCollum at 10 which is a bit different. If we were in it and Edwards was there at 10 I would take him too.

Why is it different? Isn't this a discussion on BPA? And how needs, draft picks or rostered players should or should not effect that? Isn't Edwards a value as high as 3-4 in a draft like this? If that is where you are headed here?

Edwards is 2 inches taller than Sexton, but with similar but worse college numbers. People said the path for Sexton to be a good player, it would take unbelievable improvement, which I guess he defied the odds a bit. His weaknesses are remarkably similar, can't pass, can't shoot efficiently, terrible shot selection, needs the ball in his hands, off ball game sucks.

Let's set aside the height thing as it is a guess at this point. We'll assume he's only 2 inches taller..... that pegs him at 6'3" with no shoes. At 225 LBS, that is a MASSIVE size gap. IMO, It is a different tier of athlete when factoring size, weight and Edwards being more vertically explosive than Sexton is.

I also think the way you describe his weaknesses are a bit of hyperbole. :chuckle: Shot selection, absolutely.......it needs to improve but that is coachable. His shooting efficiency is drug down by long mid range shooting as well. That is something the NBA will wring out of him. It was one of Collin's flaws too and it went away pretty quickly with some coaching.

Players like Edwards just flat out need to learn how to play off the ball. He's been the best player on the court his whole life.......those kinds of guys generally don't find themselves off the ball very often. He has a smooth shot with good lift and he's a good FT shooter.......I'm sure he will be fine. I'd imagine you can turn him in to a plus cutter off the ball too, given his size and athleticism.

Edwards is more project than most traditional guard projects but I think his flaws, to this point, are very coachable......or will simply get better with reps / age.

Fine to think KPJ and Garland aren't worth considering, but even then you have 2 guards that are your best prospects that fit worse than Garland and Sexton. I disagree on Porter though, I think he is a better player than Edwards. I do think Edwards fits the grind culture that Sexton exemplifies, and I think they have similar trajectories where they work on their weaknesses their whole career. Personally, I would take Haliburton over him. I think it would make the team fit better and function better.

I'd wager a lot of money that KPJ won't be a better NBA player than Edwards.......but can revisit that in a few years. For now, we can agree to disagree there.

I like Haliburton a lot, I just don't understand why we would be in favor of drafting Haliburton but not Edwards. I think offensively, both provide so much more value with the ball in their hands. Do they do different things with those possessions? Sure.......but if we are giving them to Haliburton, I'm trying to understand why we would not additionally give them to Edwards? Edwards is a near 1.00 PPP player in isolation. Relative to his volume, that puts him right in the middle of what guys do at the NBA level who are impact scorers. Haliburton is more ready made off the ball, relative to how he has evolved as a player and shooter......but I think that is a waste of his talent, if the argument is he can be stuck off the ball and provide value. At that point, just bypass him too for a better rostered fit if you don't plan on carving out a role that will maximize his playmaking talent.
 
Last edited:
The Blazers drafted McCollum with Lillard, Barton, Wes Mathews and Batum already on their roster.....all promising and accomplished players....and had Aldridge eating usage. It's not like that team was ripe for shots or development but they took McCollum anyway because they felt he was the best player. Not only that but they ALSO added Crabbe that season.....leaving them with 6 players at the 1, 2 and 3 that were 25 or younger and a serious logjam at SG specifically.

Too much consideration is being given to guys like KPJ and Garland IMO. Don't overthink it here. The Blazers were just cramming guards and wings in to their roster and it didn't stunt the development of either of the two players who came out of the wash. It isn't high school......the best guys will bubble up in professional basketball IMO.

I usually love your takes, but this isn't one of them, and not just because you're in disagreement with my post haha.

First, this Blazers comparison not only continues to be the equivalent of using Tom Brady's draft position or Drew Brees' height to dismiss NFL QB prospect concerns, but it's also a year late. We are talking about drafting another guy who's strictly a guard (and a ball-dominant one) after using top 10 picks on strictly guards the past TWO drafts, not just the one. The Blazers example MIGHT have worked last year for Garland if Garland were 2 inches taller like CJ and if Sexton had already cemented himself as a true lead guard and budding star like Dame.

Second, Wes Matthews was 26 when they drafted CJ, played some SF, and his "upside" was pretty much realized. Barton was a 22 year old former second round pick who hadn't done much of anything. And Batum is 6'9. We're not talking about guards and wings; we're talking about guards. The Blazers example also already assumes the answer to the very issue that forms the basis of my problem: this "young talent" on the Blazers' roster turned out to be replacement-level at best; we don't know if that will be the case yet for Garland or KPJ, but drafting another guard certainly won't help their chances.

Finally, it seems ESPECIALLY weird to bring up CJ in this conversation. They drafted a 6'3 SG at 10 that year with Giannis going just 5 picks later.

I'm not really even letting myself think about Edwards as a draft target because it is too messy. Same goes for Hayes and Haliburton. I don't love Ball as a prospect anyway so there's no major conflict there, but same would go for him. And this is EXACTLY why I hate what the FO put us in this position. I firmly believe that there is no plausible way that both Garland and Sexton end up thriving on the Cavs together, which is a situation that will need to be dealt with (hopefully before trade value is gone). I am also higher on KPJ than you, i know. But I don't see how we can add another guard to the equation without dealing with the current problem.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top