Collin Sexton | The Young Bull

[red.]

Sexton with a new hairstyle.

 

[ansatsusha80]

Sexton with a new hairstyle.

This is the second time seeing Sexton with braids....

 

[ryanf]

Why trade collin for zingas? I'd rather trade love or S&T allen + cedi/prince to make it happen.

 

[Ozone]

I actually will be shocked if they trade anyone they picked in the top 10. It is too difficult to find highly motivated individuals, which all three apparently are,& that never stop working, let alone one's that want to stay in CLE which at least so far appears to be all of them. Especially Sexton.

 

[weepinwillow]

Why trade collin for zingas? I'd rather trade love or S&T allen + cedi/prince to make it happen.

I know many aren't in the same place I am on Sexton, and I get the arguments why. I just don't think the Cavs can win with him as a primary decision maker in the offense. So IMO, my proposed zinger is that I get rid of Love (and you need to get rid of Love) for a guy who plays a similar role as Love but maybe a little better and who's timeline is a better fit, and (again, IMO) Cavs get some addition by subtraction in moving Collin as well as an upgrade on the back-up 1 spot (also desperately needed since forever).
I also believe you are at Sexton's absolute peak in terms of value as an asset, I think he turns into a negative asset as soon as he's given an extension.

 

[Cavatt]

Love to trade a guy who is never hurt and is effective for a guy who is always hurt and ineffective.

 

[ansatsusha80]

I know many aren't in the same place I am on Sexton, and I get the arguments why. I just don't think the Cavs can win with him as a primary decision maker in the offense. So IMO, my proposed zinger is that I get rid of Love (and you need to get rid of Love) for a guy who plays a similar role as Love but maybe a little better and who's timeline is a better fit, and (again, IMO) Cavs get some addition by subtraction in moving Collin as well as an upgrade on the back-up 1 spot (also desperately needed since forever).
I also believe you are at Sexton's absolute peak in terms of value as an asset, I think he turns into a negative asset as soon as he's given an extension.

You want to trade an injured prone player for another injured prone player,makes sense to me.

 

[daytripper]

No to Porzingis. The Cavs would need compensation to take on that extra year on KP's contract. Love is owed 2/$60 mil while Porzingis is still owed 3/$95 mil. It would also financially handicap them in resigning any of their young players due for an extension.

 

[Ozone]

I know many aren't in the same place I am on Sexton, and I get the arguments why. I just don't think the Cavs can win with him as a primary decision maker in the offense. So IMO, my proposed zinger is that I get rid of Love (and you need to get rid of Love) for a guy who plays a similar role as Love but maybe a little better and who's timeline is a better fit, and (again, IMO) Cavs get some addition by subtraction in moving Collin as well as an upgrade on the back-up 1 spot (also desperately needed since forever).
I also believe you are at Sexton's absolute peak in terms of value as an asset, I think he turns into a negative asset as soon as he's given an extension.

Saying they cannot win with him as a primary decision maker, does not make much sense with Garland as the point guard.
Sexton either tells them to clear out when he brings it up,and hoops the way he can, or he moves the ball same as everyone else within the play being run. Sure he calls em out too, but it is not like most of the time they fail because of him, or something. Usually what Sexton detractors are frustrated with, is ball stoppage when he tells them to clear out and goes and gets some instead of dribbling around like a wild man like Garland often does. I mean if Sexton is your best scorer that will never change, and it will be the same with other exceptional scorers going forward. Even if "better ball movement" looks better, it is not helping them win either, if open shots are passed up or missed regularly, like they have been hence the reason for Sexton taking over when he can.
I bet there are not 6 or 7 other players in the NBA that were doubled as much as Sexton was this season either, and he still got buckets. Change your mindset ,change your view.

 

[ryanf]

I know many aren't in the same place I am on Sexton, and I get the arguments why. I just don't think the Cavs can win with him as a primary decision maker in the offense. So IMO, my proposed zinger is that I get rid of Love (and you need to get rid of Love) for a guy who plays a similar role as Love but maybe a little better and who's timeline is a better fit, and (again, IMO) Cavs get some addition by subtraction in moving Collin as well as an upgrade on the back-up 1 spot (also desperately needed since forever).
I also believe you are at Sexton's absolute peak in terms of value as an asset, I think he turns into a negative asset as soon as he's given an extension.

I want you to read your argument again and compare them to ground truths.

Get rid of love? Why? Is he preventing us from signing any free agents? Will getting porzingis change that? No, right? Will porzingis be a "better" veteran leader than love? Have you read all the articles of porzingis being unhappy in dallas because luka is the focal point? A sentiment that he cannot even back up by having very poor games and even having 0-5 from 3 pt land nights in the clippers series. Will porzingis be more available than love? Maybe. But he also missed a ton of time even during his knicks days and he's several years younger than love. So basically, you are trading for a younger player with a longer injury history than love.

So in your head, you trade love for a slightly less problematic version of love, and is willing to give up the team's best player to do it? Man... sorry for ranting on you, but that doesn't make sense!

 

[Cavatt]

I want you to read your argument again and compare them to ground truths.

Get rid of love? Why? Is he preventing us from signing any free agents? Will getting porzingis change that? No, right? Will porzingis be a "better" veteran leader than love? Have you read all the articles of porzingis being unhappy in dallas because luka is the focal point? A sentiment that he cannot even back up by having very poor games and even having 0-5 from 3 pt land nights in the clippers series. Will porzingis be more available than love? Maybe. But he also missed a ton of time even during his knicks days and he's several years younger than love. So basically, you are trading for a younger player with a longer injury history than love.

So in your head, you trade love for a slightly less problematic version of love, and is willing to give up the team's best player to do it? Man... sorry for ranting on you, but that doesn't make sense!

Yeah Imagine KP wanting the offense ran through him on this team. Ouch. He would not be happier here.

 

[Lee]

I

So in your head, you trade love for a slightly less problematic version of love, and is willing to give up the team's best player to do it? Man... sorry for ranting on you, but that doesn't make sense!

I have watched allot of South Park and there is only one answer, we should trade Love for Chewbacca

 

[weepinwillow]

I want you to read your argument again and compare them to ground truths.

Get rid of love? Why? Is he preventing us from signing any free agents? Will getting porzingis change that? No, right? Will porzingis be a "better" veteran leader than love? Have you read all the articles of porzingis being unhappy in dallas because luka is the focal point? A sentiment that he cannot even back up by having very poor games and even having 0-5 from 3 pt land nights in the clippers series. Will porzingis be more available than love? Maybe. But he also missed a ton of time even during his knicks days and he's several years younger than love. So basically, you are trading for a younger player with a longer injury history than love.

So in your head, you trade love for a slightly less problematic version of love, and is willing to give up the team's best player to do it? Man... sorry for ranting on you, but that doesn't make sense!

Yep, get rid of Love for a potentially similar, slightly more available younger version. Get rid of Love because he's a net negative for you since LeBron left (and while he James was here, Kevin was often times net neutral). Even when he's going he's pouting and disinterested. I think Zingas could be a buy low guy, too, if he finds himself playing in an offense that moves the ball well.
And I don't think Collin is actually your best player. I think he's your best scorer but at the cost of winning basketball. His presence keeps the team from being honest with themselves on actual needs: play makers who share the ball, play defense and hit the open 3 at the wing, perimeter shooting and scoring off the bench. I also don't think he's looked at around the league like the asset you think he is.
IMO, The Cavs are forcing us to sit through an offense based on Ben Gordon or Monte Ellis while we have D-Rose/Steph Curry out there. Ben and Monte are good, but they were ultimately incongruous w/Rose or Steph.
I know you all don't believe me. You can insist that we are about to see Collin turn into next-Donovan Mitchell next year. Personally I think we missed the boat not bringing him off the bench from the start, having him earn minutes via smart basketball plays vs scoring. But Cavs gotta Cav.

 

[Ozone]

lol I am guessing the previous poster is serious when comparing Garland to Steph ? Why do that to yourself ? He is not close to that level of shooter, and probably never will be in the same city, let alone the same ball park. I think if he was he would not be only taking wide open threes, but would be taking clutch contested shots, and making the other team guard him as an actual threat besides a passer.
https://www.basketballnews.com/stor...growth-supplementing-talent-to-take-next-step

 

[Rich]

Yep, get rid of Love for a potentially similar, slightly more available younger version. Get rid of Love because he's a net negative for you since LeBron left (and while he James was here, Kevin was often times net neutral). Even when he's going he's pouting and disinterested. I think Zingas could be a buy low guy, too, if he finds himself playing in an offense that moves the ball well.
And I don't think Collin is actually your best player. I think he's your best scorer but at the cost of winning basketball. His presence keeps the team from being honest with themselves on actual needs: play makers who share the ball, play defense and hit the open 3 at the wing, perimeter shooting and scoring off the bench. I also don't think he's looked at around the league like the asset you think he is.
IMO, The Cavs are forcing us to sit through an offense based on Ben Gordon or Monte Ellis while we have D-Rose/Steph Curry out there. Ben and Monte are good, but they were ultimately incongruous w/Rose or Steph.
I know you all don't believe me. You can insist that we are about to see Collin turn into next-Donovan Mitchell next year. Personally I think we missed the boat not bringing him off the bench from the start, having him earn minutes via smart basketball plays vs scoring. But Cavs gotta Cav.

Ya know it's not that I think Sexton is about to set the league on fire that I disagree with. I don't think he's gonna be Donovan Mitchell. He doesn't have the athleticism or ball handling skills.

It's this part.

while we have D-Rose/Steph Curry out there

No, we certainly don't.

And until that type of player arrives, I don't see why we'd limit someone like Sexton. We just suffered through a season of Isaac Okoro starting for god's sake.

Colin Sexton is WAY closer to a Donovan Mitchell level player than Garland is to Curry. Even going back to their early years....

I get that you think everyone else is seeing Sexton in to positive of a light and that is probably the case to a degree, but it's clouded by how drastically you're overrating Garland.