Darius Kinnard Garland

[Futuredome]

If anyone thinks it is unreasonable for the FO to be reconsidering our core 4 after this year....they aren't paying attention.

You either hope they figure it out or you move on, but you've gotta have the rosiest of glasses to be optimistic of the core 4 based on this year, or at LEAST the core 4 with this coach.

I would argue it's the core 3+Mitchell. He is soon to be FA. May force a trade.

 

[Boobie4Three]

Garland has 2/4 necessary PG skills. I think he needs 3/4 to be a max player. We dropped the ball on our evaluation. You need to be able to: shoot 3s, have superior ball handling skills, make intelligent on court decisions during highly important times, and have durability/athleticism. His lack of intelligent decision making as well as durability and lack of athleticism issues make this a no for the organization. He's not fast, he's just crafty and quick with a hitch that Kyrie relies on to create separation but other than that, he's easily defended. 2/4 isn't good enough for a max player or for a #2 on a contender.

 

[Smooth]

 

[Omar The Horse]

Heavy Burden ……Heavy Contract


Figure it out kiddo

 

[Pierre Pan]

I guess all we need/needed is/was a coaching change mid-season. Having LeBron might help, too.

Certainly some parallels to the ”situations”: neither being that traditional facilitator, pass-first PG, both having another star on the court that likes the ball in their hands. Of course, Kyrie has an incredible handle, never had trouble beating pressure up the court and was and is an incredible finisher at the rim and actually jumps when he shoots a jumper; as opposed to DG who struggles to get the ball up court under pressure, when he’s able to get to the rim, the ball gets eviscerated and basically needs a lot of room to get a set shot off. Also, DG’s turnovers per game are .5 PG higher than Kyrie’s over that same period.

I guess statistics don’t always tell the story either. Moreover, perhaps injuries to DG and concomitant injuries to other Cavs have skewed his eye test performance of late because I never had such disdain for his game in prior seasons. Additionally, the fact that the team performed so well earlier this season without him has not only heightened the scrutiny on his performance but assuredly has put additional pressure on him directly

 

[red.]

 

[Smooth]

I guess all we need/needed is/was a coaching change mid-season. Having LeBron might help, too.

Certainly some parallels to the ”situations”: neither being that traditional facilitator, pass-first PG, both having another star on the court that likes the ball in their hands. Of course, Kyrie has an incredible handle, never had trouble beating pressure up the court and was and is an incredible finisher at the rim and actually jumps when he shoots a jumper; as opposed to DG who struggles to get the ball up court under pressure, when he’s able to get to the rim, the ball gets eviscerated and basically needs a lot of room to get a set shot off. Also, DG’s turnovers per game are .5 PG higher than Kyrie’s over that same period.

I guess statistics don’t always tell the story either. Moreover, perhaps injuries to DG and concomitant injuries to other Cavs have skewed his eye test performance of late because I never had such disdain for his game in prior seasons. Additionally, the fact that the team performed so well earlier this season without him has not only heightened the scrutiny on his performance but assuredly has put additional pressure on him directly

We got Donovan Mitchell, now Koby knows what he has to do next..

The comparison was more so meant to bring some perspective to the Garland conversation... With how some people talk about Garland, you would think we're debating Jeff McInnis..

Through his first five years, Garland is right in line with one of the greatest Cavalier point guards of all-time -- that should mean something... Kyrie was facing many of the same questions Garland is now.. Kyrie had more All-Star appearances at that time but ironically his fifth season was a real down year and his sixth season is when he really took off..

There's no doubt Garland deserves criticism and has avenues he must improve upon to take the next step... There's also no doubt if Orlando wants to offer Franz Wagner or Brooklyn wants to offer Mikal Bridges then you have those conversations... But absent of those unlikely scenario, the Cavs still have a very talented guard on their hands who is still young... My beef is often people see talent, especially young talent in a small market team like Cleveland, as disposable.. Instead of just throwing the baby out with the bath water, the FO needs to reevaluate this off-season how to get the best out of Mobley and Garland... It would be a setback to move on from Garland and Mobley.. Criticism aside, the Cavs would be best positioned moving forward if they can get the best out of those two -- there's no doubt... So instead of moving on, the focus should be on how they can improve their standing..

Now, if he regresses next year then all bets are off but with where we stand Garland's standing to this point should mean something and Kyrie is an example of how young players can evolve and have ups and downs...

 

[guitarguy]

Wow Haliburton has stunk since break

 

[CavsKermit]

Garland has 2/4 necessary PG skills. I think he needs 3/4 to be a max player. We dropped the ball on our evaluation. You need to be able to: shoot 3s, have superior ball handling skills, make intelligent on court decisions during highly important times, and have durability/athleticism. His lack of intelligent decision making as well as durability and lack of athleticism issues make this a no for the organization. He's not fast, he's just crafty and quick with a hitch that Kyrie relies on to create separation but other than that, he's easily defended. 2/4 isn't good enough for a max player or for a #2 on a contender.

I don't know that I've ever disagreed with a post more than this one. He has the highest BBIQ on the team. It's the reason the opposing team tilts the defense towards him so hard when Mitchell isn't on the floor.

 

[CavsKermit]

Wow Haliburton has stunk since break

They also traded Buddy Heild who made it much harder to double Hali.

 

[CavsKermit]

If anyone thinks it is unreasonable for the FO to be reconsidering our core 4 after this year....they aren't paying attention.

You either hope they figure it out or you move on, but you've gotta have the rosiest of glasses to be optimistic of the core 4 based on this year, or at LEAST the core 4 with this coach.

I'll be concerned if Mobley doesn't come back from the summer with a decent mid range game, but how many games have all of our core four been on the court this season?

 

[CavsKermit]

The cope in this thread is the strongest stuff I've ever seen. Just huffing it.

He's gonna be better than he's shown.

But the question is now that you've seen him hit a low like this, what is his actual ceiling going forward. Individually? As a player next to Mitchell?

It's not what people thought it was a couple of years ago.

People get so defensive over these players. Like they're family. It's maddening.

By whatever metric you feel like using, he's a below average starting point guard this season.

1000% the Cavs expected more out of him year 5. There is no debating that point.

And in light of how the team has looked this season AND last season w/o Garland, it's completely reasonable for the FO to wonder if they wanna continue trying to make the pairing work.

If you're going to make that type of proclamation, I'd be curious as to who you consider to be the 16 starting PGs in front of him.

 

[Pierre Pan]

We got Donovan Mitchell, now Koby knows what he has to do next..

The comparison was more so meant to bring some perspective to the Garland conversation... With how some people talk about Garland, you would think we're debating Jeff McInnis..

Through his first five years, Garland is right in line with one of the greatest Cavalier point guards of all-time -- that should mean something... Kyrie was facing many of the same questions Garland is now.. Kyrie had more All-Star appearances at that time but ironically his fifth season was a real down year and his sixth season is when he really took off..

There's no doubt Garland deserves criticism and has avenues he must improve upon to take the next step... There's also no doubt if Orlando wants to offer Franz Wagner or Brooklyn wants to offer Mikal Bridges then you have those conversations... But absent of those unlikely scenario, the Cavs still have a very talented guard on their hands who is still young... My beef is often people see talent, especially young talent in a small market team like Cleveland, as disposable.. Instead of just throwing the baby out with the bath water, the FO needs to reevaluate this off-season how to get the best out of Mobley and Garland... It would be a setback to move on from Garland and Mobley.. Criticism aside, the Cavs would be best positioned moving forward if they can get the best out of those two -- there's no doubt... So instead of moving on, the focus should be on how they can improve their standing..

Now, if he regresses next year then all bets are off but with where we stand Garland's standing to this point should mean something and Kyrie is an example of how young players can evolve and have ups and downs...

Well, part of the problem is that Garland has attained that All-Star status and as I mentioned above, the fact that the team performed so well without him exacerbates the issue. All along, I have believed that before personnel changes are made, a coaching change has to be made first . Moreover, I believe some of the frustration stems from the painful first round playoff loss to the Knicks and continued mounting poor play against the Knicks , in particular coupled with many recent losses to lower echelon and sub .500 teams

 

[Cassity14]

We got Donovan Mitchell, now Koby knows what he has to do next..

The comparison was more so meant to bring some perspective to the Garland conversation... With how some people talk about Garland, you would think we're debating Jeff McInnis..

Through his first five years, Garland is right in line with one of the greatest Cavalier point guards of all-time -- that should mean something... Kyrie was facing many of the same questions Garland is now.. Kyrie had more All-Star appearances at that time but ironically his fifth season was a real down year and his sixth season is when he really took off..

There's no doubt Garland deserves criticism and has avenues he must improve upon to take the next step... There's also no doubt if Orlando wants to offer Franz Wagner or Brooklyn wants to offer Mikal Bridges then you have those conversations... But absent of those unlikely scenario, the Cavs still have a very talented guard on their hands who is still young... My beef is often people see talent, especially young talent in a small market team like Cleveland, as disposable.. Instead of just throwing the baby out with the bath water, the FO needs to reevaluate this off-season how to get the best out of Mobley and Garland... It would be a setback to move on from Garland and Mobley.. Criticism aside, the Cavs would be best positioned moving forward if they can get the best out of those two -- there's no doubt... So instead of moving on, the focus should be on how they can improve their standing..

Now, if he regresses next year then all bets are off but with where we stand Garland's standing to this point should mean something and Kyrie is an example of how young players can evolve and have ups and downs...

The problem is that if Garland were playing at the same level as Kyrie 10 years ago, his stats would reflect the league-wide uptick in scoring and efficiency in that same period. They don’t.

I just don’t think the comparison is a good one to draw the conclusion that Garland is on a similar trajectory. His game and Kyrie’s game are also quite different. Garland is primarily a playmaker with a very nice outside shot; Irving was an isolation scorer. The whole reason Irving’s game was unlocked playing next to LeBron is because it allowed Kyrie to go from being a primary to a secondary playmaker and hunting his own shot first became less of an issue.

When we saw Kyrie play next to another ball dominant guard, things didn’t work out at all. Garland might be the Dion Waiters to Donovan Mitchell’s Irving. It’s probably moot though, because prime LeBron ain’t walking through that door.

 

[Smooth]

The problem is that if Garland were playing at the same level as Kyrie 10 years ago, his stats would reflect the league-wide uptick in scoring and efficiency in that same period. They don’t.

I just don’t think the comparison is a good one to draw the conclusion that Garland is on a similar trajectory. His game and Kyrie’s game are also quite different. Garland is primarily a playmaker with a very nice outside shot; Irving was an isolation scorer. The whole reason Irving’s game was unlocked playing next to LeBron is because it allowed Kyrie to go from being a primary to a secondary playmaker and hunting his own shot first became less of an issue.

When we saw Kyrie play next to another ball dominant guard, things didn’t work out at all. Garland might be the Dion Waiters to Donovan Mitchell’s Irving. It’s probably moot though, because prime LeBron ain’t walking through that door.

Never indicated Garland is on a similar trajectory or said they play comparable games..

The point was simple: For all that is levied against Garland, if we zoom out he's been as productive in his time as one of the Cavalier greats in his first five years with the team... Garland needs to improve and has had a down year but he's still in a good place and the talent has produced..

The other point was for all that questioned about Kyrie, it took him some time to breakthrough... Ironically enough, it was year three with LeBron and a full year with Lue for Irving to really answer those questions, and it's looking like what it might take for Garland to take the next step..

Irving was 23 in year five, Garland is 24 in year five... I don't anticipate Garland having the huge upward trajectory as Irving did but development is not linear for young players and sometimes it takes a step back to go a step forward..

It really ain't that deep...