Collin Sexton | The Young Bull

[Robbie Jay]

Sam Cassell

Give me his ceiling. What player do you think he'll emulate, not in terms of his skillset but impact on the game.

 

[Cavatt]

Sam Cassell

Huh? In his second year at 25! Sam Cassell was only better than Sexton in assists at 4 a game. How can a guy that is worse than you be your ceiling?

What is Casell's prime year. At 28 he has 2 more assists than Sexton and is worse in every other area.

Yeah Cassell was a heady vet, so I could believe he had more effect on winning, but if Sexton develops those intangibles, he has way more athletic ability and better shooting to become a star rather than a fringe one.

 

[Derek]

Huh? In his second year at 25! Sam Cassell was only better than Sexton in assists at 4 a game. How can a guy that is worse than you be your ceiling?

What is Casell's prime year. At 28 he has 2 more assists than Sexton and is worse in every other area.

Yeah Cassell was a heady vet, so I could believe he had more effect on winning, but if Sexton develops those intangibles, he has way more athletic ability and better shooting to become a star rather than a fringe one.

Sexton is not close to better than Cassell yet.

Cassell played during the slowest paced era ever, so looking at their averages is a fool's errand.

In 97-98, he averaged 29.8 points and 12.2 assists per 100 possessions as arguably the best player on a 43-39 Nets team.
In 03-04, he averaged 30.5 points and 11.3 assists per 100 possessions as the unquestionable second-best player on a 58-24 T-Wolves team that made the WCF.

He had a PER over 20 from 1997 through 2004. He had seven seasons with a BPM over two, and five seasons with a VORP of 2.9 or above. In summation, he was really really good for about a decade.

Sexton averaged 30.6 points and 4.4 assists per 100 possessions this year with a PER of 16.3, a BPM of -1.8, and a VORP of 0.1

 

[Cavatt]

Sexton is not close to better than Cassell yet.

Cassell played during the slowest paced era ever, so looking at their averages is a fool's errand.

In 97-98, he averaged 29.8 points and 12.2 assists per 100 possessions as arguably the best player on a 43-39 Nets team.
In 03-04, he averaged 30.5 points and 11.3 assists per 100 possessions as the unquestionable second-best player on a 58-24 T-Wolves team that made the WCF.

He had a PER over 20 from 1997 through 2004. He had seven seasons with a BPM over two, and five seasons with a VORP of 2.9 or above. In summation, he was really really good for about a decade.

Sexton averaged 30.6 points and 4.4 assists per 100 possessions this year with a PER of 16.3, a BPM of -1.8, and a VORP of 0.1

Making a big deal about possessions while comparing a 27 year old to a 21 year old. Interesting.

 

[Derek]

Making a big deal about possessions while comparing a 27 year old to a 21 year old. Interesting.

Well, I mean we're talking about where Sexton's impact might peak, right? Why wouldn't that be the comp?

You were the one that said, "how can a guy that's worse than you be your ceiling?"

I was simply showing that Sexton is not better than Cassell.

 

[Cavatt]

Well, I mean we're talking about where Sexton's impact might peak, right? Why wouldn't that be the comp?

You were the one that said, "how can a guy that's worse than you be your ceiling?"

I was simply showing that Sexton is not better than Cassell.

Wasn't the parameters of my post. You made that criteria and pretended it was mine.

At 24 Sam Cassell scored 19 pts per 100 poss and 21 at 25 his second year in the league. Sexton is at 33 at 21. It's not hard to figure out what I am saying, but you are purposely changing the standard. I said he was already better at this point in the NBA careers and I made that explicit.

 

[Derek]

Wasn't the parameters of my post. You made that criteria and pretended it was mine.

At 24 Sam Cassell scored 19 pts per 100 poss and 21 at 25 his second year in the league. Sexton is at 33 at 21. It's not hard to figure out what I am saying, but you are purposely changing the standard. I said he was already better at this point in the NBA careers and I made that explicit.

The conversation we're all having is what Sexton's peak is in terms of impact.

Well, @Robbie Jay sees Cassell's peak years as Sexton's ceiling. Where they were at similar ages or points in their respective careers is ultimately irrelevant.

You said this, "How can a guy that is worse than you be your ceiling?"

Due to your wording, it certainly seemed to me like you were in on the conversation, so I explained why that statement was factually incorrect.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Well, @Robbie Jay sees Cassell's peak years as Sexton's ceiling. Where they were at similar ages or points in their respective careers is ultimately irrelevant.

Why is that? I mean, I'd agree that it certainly isn't controlling/determinative, but it is certainly relevant. If you compare where Sexton is now with where Cassell was at the same point in his career, and Sexton is better, then the only way Cassell is Sexton's ceiling is if Sexton is certain to improve less than Cassell did. That just seems off to me. "Ceiling" implies best case scenario, and that's not it.

All that being said, I think comparing offensive numbers alone doesn't tell the full story. Cassell was a significantly better defender in his first couple of years in the league than was Sexton, so Sexton would have to improve substantially on the defensive end. It's always possible that he'll do that, in which case he may well end up better than Cassell.

But I think talking about ceiling/potential isn't all that useful absent also talking about how likely someone is to reach it.

 

[Ozone]

kid will have westbrook level impact sooner than later. The improvement has never stopped from him. I cannot beleive the amount of hate this kid gets for not being a pass first guard or an elite under the basket finisher.

 

[Derek]

Why is that? I mean, I'd agree that it certainly isn't controlling/determinative, but it is certainly relevant. If you compare where Sexton is now with where Cassell was at the same point in his career, and Sexton is better, then the only way Cassell is Sexton's ceiling is if Sexton is certain to improve less than Cassell did. That just seems off to me. "Ceiling" implies best case scenario, and that's not it.

All that being said, I think comparing offensive numbers alone doesn't tell the full story. Cassell was a significantly better defender in his first couple of years in the league than was Sexton, so Sexton would have to improve substantially on the defensive end. It's always possible that he'll do that, in which case he may well end up better than Cassell.

But I think talking about ceiling/potential isn't all that useful absent also talking about how likely someone is to reach it.

I don't agree that it's relevant at all in the context of this conversation. Sexton isn't as good as Cassell was at his peak. It was proposed that maybe Sexton could reach a similar peak someday. You might not agree, which is fine, but the logic certainly holds up.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I don't agree that it's relevant at all in the context of this conversation. Sexton isn't as good as Cassell was at his peak.

You're right in that Sexton isn't as good right now as Cassell was at his peak. But Sexton is only 21 and we're not seeing his peak, so that's an unfair comparison in the context of discussing a young player's "ceiling". The question when discussing "ceiling" is how much he can improve from where he is right now. And if he is a better player right now than was Cassell at a similar age/stage of development, then that suggests there is at least a decent chance that Sexton ends up as the better player when he hits his peak.

If you think that's completely illogical or irrational, I suppose we just disagree.

 

[Derek]

You're right in that Sexton isn't as good right now as Cassell was at his peak. But Sexton is only 21 and we're not seeing his peak, so that's an unfair comparison in the context of discussing a young player's "ceiling". The question when discussing "ceiling" is how much he can improve from where he is right now. And if he is a better player right now than was Cassell at a similar age/stage of development, then that suggests there is at least a decent chance that Sexton ends up as the better player when he hits his peak.

If you think that's completely illogical or irrational, I suppose we just disagree.

I mean, this is the conversation.

Give me his ceiling. What player do you think he'll emulate, not in terms of his skillset but impact on the game.

Ben asked for opinions on Sexton's ceiling in terms of impact.

Sam Cassell

Robbie said Sam Cassell.

Huh? In his second year at 25! Sam Cassell was only better than Sexton in assists at 4 a game. How can a guy that is worse than you be your ceiling?

What is Casell's prime year. At 28 he has 2 more assists than Sexton and is worse in every other area.

Yeah Cassell was a heady vet, so I could believe he had more effect on winning, but if Sexton develops those intangibles, he has way more athletic ability and better shooting to become a star rather than a fringe one.

Cavatt said that can't be his ceiling because he's already better than him.

Then, I posted that no, Sexton is not better than Cassell yet. Therefore, Cassell could be his ceiling. That is literally all I have argued.

1) Sexton is not as good as Cassell was at his ceiling (and we're talking about ceilings so why would anything else matter)
2) Because he hasn't reached that level, it is possible that it could be his ceiling. (I'm not arguing that it's impossible that Robbie is wrong)

Those both seem pretty close to facts to me.

 

[Nathan S]

Sexton's not a better all-around player than peak Cassell, but you could certainly make the case that he's a better scorer. The fact that he's similar to peak Cassell as a scorer but so far behind as a passer suggests that they're not actually very similar players.

 

[Derek]

Sexton's not a better all-around player than peak Cassell, but you could certainly make the case that he's a better scorer. The fact that he's similar to peak Cassell as a scorer but so far behind as a passer suggests that they're not actually very similar players.

Nobody said they're similar. Ben asked for their ceiling in terms of impact. Playing styles were not taken into account.

 

[Nathan S]

Nobody said they're similar. Ben asked for their ceiling in terms of impact. Playing styles were not taken into account.

Ok, but the same point still holds right? I don't want to pick apart this ceiling comparison more than necessary...but how does it make sense to say Sexton's ceiling is that he improves leaps and bounds as a point guard but completely flatlines as a scorer? That seems like a bizarre outcome that's not a "ceiling" in any ordinary sense of the word.