the nba: it's faaantastic
- Sep 1, 2009
- Reaction score
I have issues with Garland. I have aired those grievances in the appropriate thread.Also, Darius Garland is the primary ball handler and decision maker. He has both more time possessing the ball per game than Sexton and also holds it longer each time he touches it.
I still think these two probably need to be broken up. I'd lean on dealing Garland because it feels like Sexton will ultimately figure it out.
I would love to try and get Lonzo here, though now that seems like it ain't happening. I'd also like Slo-Mo out of Memphis.. those kind of guys next to Collin could really push him and everyone else up.I don't disagree with a lot of the specific criticisms of Sexton's game in here. The hyperbole is a bit much, and pigeonholing the guy into a bench role when he is the young player that has showed the most improvement of anyone during the rebuild doesn't make sense to me.
As good as he is off the ball, I would love to see him playing with Delly again, or even someone like Lonzo Ball. They don't have either of those guys though. Put a lineup of Ball, Sexton, Windler, Nance, and Allen out there and you have lots of space to score on offense. Swap Windler for Okoro (with more experience under his belt) and you can lock down almost anyone.
Honestly, Garland probably makes more sense as a 6th man. He could come off the bench and hit a few step backs and set up the reserves while hopefully the opponents backup point guard isn't good enough to kill him defensively. He could be a better shooting Delly that plays no defense. Putting Sexton out there with four bench scrubs is just going to force him to take bad shots and clog up his driving lanes.
But we're not in a position to bring either of them off the bench, and they're still young enough that they could develop enough to work just fine starting together. No one here knows what these young players are going to end up being, and they're going to struggle at times as they develop and learn how to play.
I'm not trying to pigeonhole the kid, I'm just seeing an archetype for his size and skill set that typically does well off the bench, especially if he doesn't add somewhat better than average court vision and better defense. Actually, it's not even really court vision, as much as it is understanding how and when the ball needs to keep moving etc.. like I said, it's often times the last thing a guy learns.
As for hyperbole: If I can't make sweeping claims that are either somewhat absurd, mildly funny or painfully truthful but completely overstated and over the top.. what else do I have?