Cavaliers Fantasy Trade Thread: 2020 Draft

[Nathan S]

I just posted this in another thread, but how is Haliburton worse than Garland in any way? Shoots better, rebounds better, big enough to pair with Sexton, defends better, has the intangibles, has the numbers.

My comparison to Delly wasn't meant to say Haliburton is him, more like what if you put Delly in an NBA body with a 7 foot wingspan that can shoot? You have to admit that is a good player has upside.

I don't get how Garland can possibly be as good a prospect as Haliburton. His knock is that he doesn't get to the basket. Darius doesn't do that, and finishes worse when he does. He definitely isn't a 2 way player like Haliburton, and he averaged 2.6 assists. Haliburton averages 6.6.

I don't understand people saying Haliburton is a seconday playmaker, but Darius is our lead guard?

Yeah, complaining about Haliburton's finishing given the context of the point guards currently on our roster (0 career dunks combined between them!) is crazy to me. He's not Derrick Rose or John Wall, but if he was, he wouldn't be on the board at #5 anyway.

 

[Randolphkeys]

I just posted this in another thread, but how is Haliburton worse than Garland in any way? Shoots better, rebounds better, big enough to pair with Sexton, defends better, has the intangibles, has the numbers.

My comparison to Delly wasn't meant to say Haliburton is him, more like what if you put Delly in an NBA body with a 7 foot wingspan that can shoot? You have to admit that is a good player has upside.

I don't get how Garland can possibly be as good a prospect as Haliburton. His knock is that he doesn't get to the basket. Darius doesn't do that, and finishes worse when he does. He definitely isn't a 2 way player like Haliburton, and he averaged 2.6 assists. Haliburton averages 6.6.

I don't understand people saying Haliburton is a seconday playmaker, but Darius is our lead guard?

Well there is a lot going on here. Firstly it looks like you used every argument anyone has made towards Haliburton rather than the ones I brought up. I mean, go ahead, but I'd be more interested in a discussion if you just stuck to the ones I brought up.

Seven foot wingspan? A quick search said 6'7.5. It's still a solid guard wingspan, but let's stay accurate.

I believe the Cavs should give Garland another season to show how he improves. He wasn't my favorite pick, but the Delorian got crushed by a train and we have to maximize his value now.

When the Cavs say over and over they aren't looking at guards in this draft, I am going to go ahead and believe they have a plan in place, whether I like the plan or not.

 

[Nathan S]

When the Cavs say over and over they aren't looking at guards in this draft, I am going to go ahead and believe they have a plan in place, whether I like the plan or not.

Source(s)? I haven't been following what the Cavs are saying too closely, but I'm surprised I haven't noticed this if they really said it "over and over."

EDIT: and also, I don't think there are any known measurements of his wingspan so everyone's just guessing right? If so, I don't see how you can confidently claim that one person's guess is more "accurate" than another.

 

[Cavatt]

Source(s)? I haven't been following what the Cavs are saying too closely, but I'm surprised I haven't noticed this if they really said it "over and over."

EDIT: and also, I don't think there are any known measurements of his wingspan so everyone's just guessing right? If so, I don't see how you can confidently claim that one person's guess is more "accurate" than another.

Chris Fedor said this, while also saying they are going to get BPA which is sort of contradictory.

His arms look long and I read this probably on Reddit, so I could be totally wrong on 7 feet, but they look longer than Sexton who has a 6'8" wingspan.

I admit that I have come around on Haliburton big time. I started watching tape after buying the low ceiling, poor athleticism. I don't think I agree with either point now. He is smooth, and can get where he wants with his in out dribble. He is undoubtedly the better passer than Garland and see over the D and pass over guys all around the court.

 

[daddywags]

If the Cavs have Wiseman as their number 1 guy and he falls to 3 would 5 + Bucks '22 pick do the trick? Too much? Too little? I'm not high on Wiseman, but if they are it seems fair to me.

 

[Cavatt]

Well there is a lot going on here. Firstly it looks like you used every argument anyone has made towards Haliburton rather than the ones I brought up. I mean, go ahead, but I'd be more interested in a discussion if you just stuck to the ones I brought up.

Seven foot wingspan? A quick search said 6'7.5. It's still a solid guard wingspan, but let's stay accurate.

I believe the Cavs should give Garland another season to show how he improves. He wasn't my favorite pick, but the Delorian got crushed by a train and we have to maximize his value now.

When the Cavs say over and over they aren't looking at guards in this draft, I am going to go ahead and believe they have a plan in place, whether I like the plan or not.

Ok, so your argument was let Garland develop and Haliburton is not twitchy? Sorry to throw the kitchen sink at you , but I just can't see how Garland is higher upside. What is there to base that on?

You were also a big Shai proponent last year and their stats are eerily similar along with the build. Would you take Garland over Shai?


Seriously watch this video as if you don't know anything about him. Does he look like he is at a disadvantage athetically? I'm not seeing top tier athleticism, but I would say 2 steps above Garland. He can dunk, he is fast with ball, and he extends well when finishing. He has long strides and when he steals the ball he is way ahead of everyone.

When I watch him, he has that quality against college guys where he looks like he knows what is going to happen before it does, and that is always a predictor of success at the next level.

I really like Deni, Vassell and Okoro. They all seem like they could be very good. Haliburton looks to me like he could be THE fit with Sexton and would allow our team to play as a unit.

People are going to say, "Wow this Haliburton guy is good. How could we have known just because he was the best leader in the country, had incredibly efficient stats, and played both ends while everyone raved about his intangibles?"

I think people are overthinking him but I can't tell why. He went from being an ok wing to the best pg in the NCAA when given more opportunity? When a guy ups his usage like that while preserving his efficiency, isn't that exactly what you want? Isn't that why Vassell jumped up?

 

[Nathan S]

Ok, so your argument was let Garland develop and Haliburton is not twitchy? Sorry to throw the kitchen sink at you , but I just can't see how Garland is higher upside. What is there to base that on?

You were also a big Shai proponent last year and their stats are eerily similar along with the build. Would you take Garland over Shai?


Seriously watch this video as if you don't know anything about him. Does he look like he is at a disadvantage athetically? I'm not seeing top tier athleticism, but I would say 2 steps above Garland. He can dunk, he is fast with ball, and he extends well when finishing. He has long strides and when he steals the ball he is way ahead of everyone.

When I watch him, he has that quality against college guys where he looks like he knows what is going to happen before it does, and that is always a predictor of success at the next level.

I really like Deni, Vassell and Okoro. They all seem like they could be very good. Haliburton looks to me like he could be THE fit with Sexton and would allow our team to play as a unit.

People are going to say, "Wow this Haliburton guy is good. How could we have known just because he was the best leader in the country, had incredibly efficient stats, and played both ends while everyone raved about his intangibles?"

I think people are overthinking him but I can't tell why. He went from being an ok wing to the best pg in the NCAA when given more opportunity? When a guy ups his usage like that while preserving his efficiency, isn't that exactly what you want? Isn't that why Vassell jumped up?

Yeah...when's the last time Garland made a play like this? (sorry for low quality)

Again...I'll readily admit that he's no John Wall or Derrick Rose. But he still has a pretty nice combination of length and athleticism for a PG. If he was any taller or bouncier, people would be talking about him at #1 not #5.

 

[Randolphkeys]

Ok, so your argument was let Garland develop and Haliburton is not twitchy? Sorry to throw the kitchen sink at you , but I just can't see how Garland is higher upside. What is there to base that on?

They drafted Garland and we can't go back in time. So drafting a project that high compounds it's short-sightedness because of the pandemic. Is Garland a bust? He was coming around in March and through the limits Covid-19 we were a team left out of the bubble.

The same paradox exists with Porter. He was making strides, then was shut down. Is he a player who can give you starting quality play at SG? We might have known without Covid-19, but we don't.

So is Haliburton a rare talent? Is he someone you can lump into such a crowded backcourt when the team clearly suffers from ignoring forwards as long as they have? In other words, let's say Porter and Garland both disappoint... will the Cavs have a shot to have the chance at a guy like Haliburton again?

I don't believe he is so rare. Again, perfect world they don't spend a decade overdrafting combo guards, but the past is the past. I think they will have a shot at Haliburton type guys because the college game produces them every year.

In the meantime the college game is doing a terrible job developing forwards who can do anything else but score in transition and defend. If the Cavs beat writer and an agent leak that the Cavs are not likely to draft a guard this season, I support it. The draft isn't always BPA. If it is, you aren't thinking like a GM.

 

[Nathan S]

They drafted Garland and we can't go back in time. So drafting a project that high compounds it's short-sightedness because of the pandemic. Is Garland a bust? He was coming around in March and through the limits Covid-19 we were a team left out of the bubble.

The same paradox exists with Porter. He was making strides, then was shut down. Is he a player who can give you starting quality play at SG? We might have known without Covid-19, but we don't.

So is Haliburton a rare talent? Is he someone you can lump into such a crowded backcourt when the team clearly suffers from ignoring forwards as long as they have? In other words, let's say Porter and Garland both disappoint... will the Cavs have a shot to have the chance at a guy like Haliburton again?

I don't believe he is so rare. Again, perfect world they don't spend a decade overdrafting combo guards, but the past is the past. I think they will have a shot at Haliburton type guys because the college game produces them every year.

In the meantime the college game is doing a terrible job developing forwards who can do anything else but score in transition and defend. If the Cavs beat writer and an agent leak that the Cavs are not likely to draft a guard this season, I support it. The draft isn't always BPA. If it is, you aren't thinking like a GM.

To respond to a couple of your points...

-Why do you say the Cavs "clearly suffer" from ignoring forwards? It wouldn't hurt to get an upgrade over Cedi, but he's clearly a competent SF and was the least of the Cavs' problems last year as far as I could tell. With Windler (hopefully) ready to come off the bench for the remaining SF minutes, there doesn't seem to be any sort of crisis brewing. If there's anything the Cavs clearly suffered from, it would be poor playmaking and a lack of rim protection. They led the league in turnover rate and were last in the league in block rate, by wide margins in both cases.

-In what world are big point guards not rare? I can't imagine who you're thinking of when you say the college game produces guys like Haliburton every year...SGA is the popular comparison of course, but who else? There'll always be wing options on the board in the lottery, but you'll be out of luck most years if you're looking for a big PG, especially if you're drafting outside of the top-3.

 

[Cavatt]

They drafted Garland and we can't go back in time. So drafting a project that high compounds it's short-sightedness because of the pandemic. Is Garland a bust? He was coming around in March and through the limits Covid-19 we were a team left out of the bubble.

The same paradox exists with Porter. He was making strides, then was shut down. Is he a player who can give you starting quality play at SG? We might have known without Covid-19, but we don't.

So is Haliburton a rare talent? Is he someone you can lump into such a crowded backcourt when the team clearly suffers from ignoring forwards as long as they have? In other words, let's say Porter and Garland both disappoint... will the Cavs have a shot to have the chance at a guy like Haliburton again?

I don't believe he is so rare. Again, perfect world they don't spend a decade overdrafting combo guards, but the past is the past. I think they will have a shot at Haliburton type guys because the college game produces them every year.

In the meantime the college game is doing a terrible job developing forwards who can do anything else but score in transition and defend. If the Cavs beat writer and an agent leak that the Cavs are not likely to draft a guard this season, I support it. The draft isn't always BPA. If it is, you aren't thinking like a GM.

I got to a point last week watching Haliburton, and just asked what Darius could do better, what he projects to do better, and why his upside is higher than Haliburton's? Darius is better scorer maybe, but he doesn't generate as much total offense or defense. Darius is a better shooter off the dribble, and his ball handling might be??

I know Cavs say Porter is a 2, but I think he has more versatility than that. I saw him guard 4s in the post easily at times last year. He is strong, and I think he is bigger than 6'4". Porter is a guy you can do creative things with like start him at the 2 or 3, but then pull him early and allow him to handle the ball with the bench unit. Play a large backcourt with he and Haliburton etc. People point to his bad data with Sexton, but when Darius went out for the year, those two helped win games and they were awesome in Porter's last game against Utah(for the 1st quarter before he got his concussion).

Is he a rare talent? I guess it depends. I think he has a better chance of being a star than Darius. Darius has the least versatility of anyone on the roster. His size and athleticism limit him more than Collin. He can definitely affect the game in many more ways. I have a real problem with the fact that it never looked like Garland's team out there this year. Haliburton is that guy that just finds you and runs the team and wins. Intangibles + elite stat profile seems like a no brainer to me. Like Nathan said, if Haliburton had Tatum's body, he'd go #1 for sure.

I just think Haliburton, Sexton, Porter gives you much better defense, versatility, and playmaking than Darius, Sexton, Porter. You get Oubre, you get bigger, and perimeter defense changes overnight. Then you have a chance at a guy like Bey potentially at 10.

The more I look at this draft, I suspect we can get a better player at 5 than we could have last year. 1 and 2 aren't as good.

 

[Randolphkeys]

To respond to a couple of your points...

-Why do you say the Cavs "clearly suffer" from ignoring forwards? It wouldn't hurt to get an upgrade over Cedi, but he's clearly a competent SF and was the least of the Cavs' problems last year as far as I could tell. With Windler (hopefully) ready to come off the bench for the remaining SF minutes, there doesn't seem to be any sort of crisis brewing. If there's anything the Cavs clearly suffered from, it would be poor playmaking and a lack of rim protection. They led the league in turnover rate and were last in the league in block rate, by wide margins in both cases.

First of all, thanks to sticking to the points I actually made. If you check my posting history in the draft threads, I actually like Haliburton quite a bit as a player and he should definitely go in the top ten in my book. So when every criticism anyone has made about his game gets looped in with my opinion, it is very off-putting. Throwing comments in like "Even if I haven't watch Haliburton" become off-putting. Frankly, it might be why you aren't seeing as many discussions around here.

Your assessment of Cavs forwards does not match mine. Teams that are winning do so with multiple players who can defend multiple positions. I have the Western Conference Final game on and both teams have four small forwards playing big minutes, and that's with one of the few really skilled centers on the court. I would argue that through trades and the draft, the franchise has acquired several mediocre playmakers and rim protectors while ignoring forwards who can do a little of everything.

This process culminated in a season where Alphonzo McKinnie was forced into a bigger role than he should have and Cedi finished second in total minutes played with very inefficient results. Point a finger at Windler's injury, but the really good teams have four. We might have two.

I'm hopeful Nance plays more at small forward and on the perimeter without being exposed. I don't know if his minutes at the three are for real since he never did it before, only did it a short time, and did it out of desperation.

-In what world are big point guards not rare? I can't imagine who you're thinking of when you say the college game produces guys like Haliburton every year...SGA is the popular comparison of course, but who else? There'll always be wing options on the board in the lottery, but you'll be out of luck most years if you're looking for a big PG, especially if you're drafting outside of the top-3.

Again, I do like Haliburton if the Cavs were picking somewhere lower, maybe 6-12. I even had some interest in Ball before the lottery. Why are a few spots a big deal? They really aren't, but he is a year and a half older than some of these other choices, and his body still needs a year or two of development. The Cavs aren't sure if they are thin at guard, and this guy is really too thin to do much more than be a guard only until he fills out, there are a few players I like more than him. That's it.

And again, how did this conversation really begin? I wasn't high on a trade package that sells low on Garland to bring in Oubre, who isn't that great after five years in the league. I thought we would talk more about that.

 

[Nathan S]

First of all, thanks to sticking to the points I actually made. If you check my posting history in the draft threads, I actually like Haliburton quite a bit as a player and he should definitely go in the top ten in my book. So when every criticism anyone has made about his game gets looped in with my opinion, it is very off-putting. Throwing comments in like "Even if I haven't watch Haliburton" become off-putting. Frankly, it might be why you aren't seeing as many discussions around here.

Just so we're clear, I never said anything like "Even if I haven't watch Haliburton." Maybe you didn't explicitly knock his physical tools, but that was certainly implicit when you compared him to Delly. I don't find that line of criticism very compelling...he has long strides in the open court and regularly makes plays above the rim. He may not be elite by NBA standards, but he's a far, far better athlete than anyone we've had at PG lately.

Your assessment of Cavs forwards does not match mine. Teams that are winning do so with multiple players who can defend multiple positions. I have the Western Conference Final game on and both teams have four small forwards playing big minutes, and that's with one of the few really skilled centers on the court. I would argue that through trades and the draft, the franchise has acquired several mediocre playmakers and rim protectors while ignoring forwards who can do a little of everything.

I don't entirely disagree with this. Improving defensive versatility is a must. Haliburton isn't the best option there, but he's pretty good. He should be able to guard both backcourt positions right away, with the potential to guard 1-3 down the road. As for acquiring several mediocre playmakers and rim protectors...well...sunk cost fallacy, right? Those are still big needs for us regardless of how we spent past picks, and we'd see major on-court performance if we actually manage to fill one or both of those holes.

This process culminated in a season where Alphonzo McKinnie was forced into a bigger role than he should have and Cedi finished second in total minutes played with very inefficient results. Point a finger at Windler's injury, but the really good teams have four. We might have two.

I'm hopeful Nance plays more at small forward and on the perimeter without being exposed. I don't know if his minutes at the three are for real since he never did it before, only did it a short time, and did it out of desperation.

I agree that McKinnie's gotta go, but disagree about Cedi being "very inefficient." By what measure? Unspectacular, sure, but he knocked down his 3's and maintained his usual tidy AST:TO ratio. If we want to contend then yeah we need a whole lot more quality depth there, but we have to take a step out of the basement first, and that means solving more urgent problems.

Again, I do like Haliburton if the Cavs were picking somewhere lower, maybe 6-12. I even had some interest in Ball before the lottery. Why are a few spots a big deal? They really aren't, but he is a year and a half older than some of these other choices, and his body still needs a year or two of development. The Cavs aren't sure if they are thin at guard, and this guy is really too thin to do much more than be a guard only until he fills out, there are a few players I like more than him. That's it.

The youngest wing on the table is Okoro, who's a whole 11 months younger than Haliburton...not quite negligible, but not a huge difference either. And while he's not yet a finished product physically, that doesn't mean that he won't be effective right away. As I've mentioned before, SGA came into the league with a nearly identical physique and his defense translated pretty much immediately.

I also don't think the logjam on the perimeter is as extreme as it's made out to be. Assuming KPJ (once again) plays about half his minutes at SF, you have 5 men (Sexton, Haliburton, Garland, KPJ, Cedi) in the regular rotation on the perimeter. That's pretty standard. Of course, you could replace Haliburton with a wing, lose some playmaking and add some defensive versatility. But if Haliburton is the bigger talent, then that's not an enticing tradeoff in my mind.

And again, how did this conversation really begin? I wasn't high on a trade package that sells low on Garland to bring in Oubre, who isn't that great after five years in the league. I thought we would talk more about that.

Sorry, I admittedly got hung up on the Delly comparison, which I strongly disagree with. I'm not super keen on moving Garland even if we do draft a PG, as we do need a PG to come off the bench and why not role the dice on a young guy with potential to improve? I just don't think Garland should start again this season. Having a subpar PG in the starting lineup holds everyone back.

 

[Randolphkeys]

Just so we're clear, I never said anything like "Even if I haven't watch Haliburton." Maybe you didn't explicitly knock his physical tools, but that was certainly implicit when you compared him to Delly. I don't find that line of criticism very compelling...he has long strides in the open court and regularly makes plays above the rim. He may not be elite by NBA standards, but he's a far, far better athlete than anyone we've had at PG lately.

I was following up with a conversation Cavatt and I had months ago where he asked me if I see some of Delly's traits in Haliburton. I see a very efficient half court player, one who in my opinion became a pure playmaker and point guard, with the length to switch. I also see a player who passes on too many open shots that he needs to start taking, and has a slower release.

Is that ALL I see in Haliburton? No, but there are some similarities that we previously discussed. Like I had said a while ago, I never thought Delly was a lottery pick in 2013, but I thought he was useful. Haliburton is useful and a top ten talent... there's a difference.

Sorry, I admittedly got hung up on the Delly comparison, which I strongly disagree with. I'm not super keen on moving Garland even if we do draft a PG, as we do need a PG to come off the bench and why not role the dice on a young guy with potential to improve? I just don't think Garland should start again this season. Having a subpar PG in the starting lineup holds everyone back.

Cost, in many senses of the word, holds us back from overloading backup point guard minutes. Garland makes almost 9 million in the 2022/2023 season, and his qualifying offer afterward starts at over 11 million. Salary slots are a major deterrent for high lottery picks who aren't making the jump.

Pulling the plug on Darius Garland the point guard now isn't great for his development. He wasn't in NBA shape last year after surgery. Taking one season next year to give him a legitimate chance to show what he can do could help be an 11 million a year player down the road.

It's a tough situation. He and Sexton are a puzzling one-two punch in back to back drafts, and it definitely reminds me of the Irving and Waiters drafts. Like you said, it's a sunk cost now.

I just want the front office to fully play out their vision, if they have one. Clamoring for a guard when indications show that's not what they want to do this draft seems like Dan Gilbert undercutting every GM he ever hired.

Let the plan for this past draft class play out for at least one full uninterrupted season.

 

[inliner311]

I was following up with a conversation Cavatt and I had months ago where he asked me if I see some of Delly's traits in Haliburton. I see a very efficient half court player, one who in my opinion became a pure playmaker and point guard, with the length to switch. I also see a player who passes on too many open shots that he needs to start taking, and has a slower release.

Is that ALL I see in Haliburton? No, but there are some similarities that we previously discussed. Like I had said a while ago, I never thought Delly was a lottery pick in 2013, but I thought he was useful. Haliburton is useful and a top ten talent... there's a difference.



Cost, in many senses of the word, holds us back from overloading backup point guard minutes. Garland makes almost 9 million in the 2022/2023 season, and his qualifying offer afterward starts at over 11 million. Salary slots are a major deterrent for high lottery picks who aren't making the jump.

Pulling the plug on Darius Garland the point guard now isn't great for his development. He wasn't in NBA shape last year after surgery. Taking one season next year to give him a legitimate chance to show what he can do could help be an 11 million a year player down the road.

It's a tough situation. He and Sexton are a puzzling one-two punch in back to back drafts, and it definitely reminds me of the Irving and Waiters drafts. Like you said, it's a sunk cost now.

I just want the front office to fully play out their vision, if they have one. Clamoring for a guard when indications show that's not what they want to do this draft seems like Dan Gilbert undercutting every GM he ever hired.

Let the plan for this past draft class play out for at least one full uninterrupted season.

I don't think drafting Haliburton is necessarily giving up on Garland. I would trade Garland if we got good value back but I don't think they have to trade Garland or give up on him.

Haliburton could easily play with Garland or Sexton. He played off the ball his freshman year. I know it's not the ideal fit but it does expand the versatility of the roster to add someone who can be a playmaking PG and have the size to guard SGs.

The NBA is getting more about versatility across the board in the roster to create matchups that the other team can't defend. Two small guards in Sexton and Garland is one end of the spectrum. Haliburton would give the ability to give different looks with a 6'5 and above lineup. When he fills out he might be able to go into a switch everything lineup. Sexton and Haliburton together could be a tradition lineup with some shared or flipped duties between them.

LeMelo would be ideal fit for this roster but we will most likely not get a chance to draft him. Deni would also be a nice addition and I would take him over Haliburton. At #5 Haliburton might be most talented player left and if we want a SF we will have to reach to the tier below. I could also see Toppin being the most talented player left and same decision will have to be made. I personally think it would be easier to fit Haliburton in over Toppin.

 

[Randolphkeys]

A Knicks blog just put out a mock draft where the Cavs trade #5 and I assume some combo of Exum and flotsom. We receive the #10, Kelly Oubre, and a 2022 second rounder from Phoenix.

Mock Draft: Running The Gamut Of The Top 40 NBA Picks | The Knicks Wall

With the Knicks possessing three top-40 picks in the 2020 NBA Draft, we looked at who could be available for the 'Bockers in our (now-annual) mock draft.

theknickswall.com

The irony of a Knicks blog calling the Cavs "relatable losers" should not be lost.