Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.
I think Bob Dylan said that, or maybe it was Gandhi.
Anyway, the plan is happening as it was foretold. Put the best version of yourself on the floor that you can and try to hit on your draft picks.
Hard to have an obvious plan when you don't have an obvious player to build around. The last time they tried to do this without Lebron, they probably waited too long on Waiters (actually there's no "probably" about it). To that end, Cavs really need to decide if it's Sexton or Garland and trade one of them to compliment the other accordingly.
You can make the case for either, and you could make the case for neither.
The kind of player I'd go after if I was keeping Collin would be a Kyle Anderson type or Lonzo Ball.
If I'm keeping Garland, I'd be looking for a more dynamic scoring option who can play some defense at the 2.
Neither G looks like a #1 or #2 guy on a title team. Collin looks like he will have a role on a playoff team, Garland has to shore up a ton of things but he has some of the skill sets that you could see translating into a starting caliber PG.
The defense though.. man, 2 points away from giving Red Velvet a season high!!
I like this conversation, and the type of player you would get to compliment whichever stays long term has to have some impact on a potential future decision.
This was a common point with Tristan Thompson earlier in his career when he simply couldn't be a starting NBA center. Luckily for the Cavs and us, the league shifted into a mold that allowed him to do just that. At that time, the conversation was about how difficult it was to find a center to compliment Thompson's one-dimensional offensive game and lack of rim protection and that although Thompson had valuable skills, building a roster from the ground up with that type of power forward may not be worth the trouble, or feasible for the Cavs.
I see the same thing brewing here with Sexton. The type of players a team needs if it's going to start Collin Sexton at the 2, in order to be a really good team, are difficult to find. We're talking about getting both length AND ball distribution at the 1 and 3 spots. That's not easy to find. It was there with Haliburton last year as far as a guard goes, and I see it with Cunningham this year in a forward, but those archetypes aren't readily-available across the league, and when they are, they're going to come at a premium.
Garland, meanwhile, is pretty stock-standard when it comes to a point guard, and thus, is easier to fit into team composition. He also doesn't look as dynamic as Sexton as of right now.
I'm not going to fault the FO for the Garland pick because Sexton showed no reason to commit to drafting for fit alongside him as a rookie, and I'm not advocating for breaking up the pairing yet because I don't think there's enough data to make a confident, informed decision. However, I do think these are things to keep an eye on.