The Sexland Experiment

[mhi]

We really didn't though.

Good call, my perception was off there.

I do think what @Douglar quoted is the biggest takeaway from the article. Should we be concerned that neither of these guys project out as elite passers given their other attributes (positive and negative)?

 

[ice cream man]

If Sexton can guard 2's, that'd be great. But too bad switches happen like every possession so having 2 little guys instead of 1 is most likely going to make our defense a disaster.

 

[Douglar]

This upcoming season?

• Altman will be selling vets like groceries two days away from expiration.
• Players will be featured on the floor for reasons that have nothing to do with wining games.
• Beilein will have to play rookies like he's in a league where participation awards are a real thing.

Any of those things can kill the defense. Even if the coaches drill defense in practice like Mike Brown on meth, the defense is still going to suck.

But if the coaching staff can shape either Garland or Sexton into an NBA capable passer, I'll give Beilein a big "lift him off his feet" hug.
And if he can do it while maintaining some level of defense accountability in the locker room, he also gets a giant smooch on the cheek.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

But he did make good defenders look bad. Both Nance and George Hill were better before. And Hill's rating also improved after.

I agree we didn't have any DPOY candidates, but the few defensive players we did have, also had terrible defensive numbers which immediately changed on different teams.

Agreed -- but getting rid of bad coaches who made bad defenders historically bad still leaves you with bad defenders.

Admittedly, there's been some variant of this exact discussion going around since the draft, and it hasn't really changed much. Some posters believe you can teach anyone to play good defense, and some don't. There's also the "you can make up for bad backcourt defenders by having good defenders elsewhere" claim, and again, others disagree.

I don't think either of those arguments is ever going to be truly resolved in the abstract, so the best we can do is just see how this current group pans out.

 

[Cavatt]

Agreed -- but getting rid of bad coaches who made bad defenders historically bad still leaves you with bad defenders.

Admittedly, there's been some variant of this exact discussion going around since the draft, and it hasn't really changed much. Some posters believe you can teach anyone to play good defense, and some don't. There's also the "you can make up for bad backcourt defenders by having good defenders elsewhere" claim, and again, others disagree.

I don't think either of those arguments is ever going to be truly resolved in the abstract, so the best we can do is just see how this current group pans out.

I agree that historically bad requires failures in multiple areas, not just coaching. I just think it is tough to blame a rookie and make such a big deal out of how bad he was defensively when it was a train wreck all the way around.

I really think Bickerstaff is light years ahead of Longabardi, so i am pretty optimistic that they can improve substantially. I have a hard time buying that the players are inherently flawed compared to the other guys in the league.

I'm not even looking for a 180 on defense. They likely won't be good again, but as long as they are not one of the worst ever, I will view that as progress.

 

[Ozone]

Getting annoying bro.

yeah nobody wants to hear it, I get it.
he does not look 100% to me yet with his movements and will take awhile longer before he gets any explosiveness back etc. his shot is there as expected, and his moves don't look slow, just not Garland's normal elite level pre injury.
For what is worth at this point I am more interested in seeing if him and Sexton can play together than whatever they can get for him via trade, but nothing has been stated as fact by anyone that contradicts my original views on his being picked as trade bait. If I am wrong which it appears at this point it will look like as they will never admit it if he stays , then that means this org thought he was above and beyond anyone else who was available which seems to me like they might have overvalued him given he does not play defense at all.

 

[Lee]

Just thought about George Hill and how he is known as a good or even great defender. On our team in 2018 he had a -2.6 DPM which is below replacement level defense. In Milwaukee, the same year +.4 which is above average.

What more do you need to know? The bad defense was the worst in the league by 2 points per 100 possession, and George Hill was 3 points per 100 possessions worse on the Cavs than on the Bucks. That's coaching/scheme. I don't think the new staff is going to go from the worst to the best defense, but it will be better.

Wow, that says allot especially since I think Sexton has the ability to defend with athletic ability and a decent standing reach of 8'3 (both CJ and Dame are 8'0 even)

 

[Lee]

If Sexton can guard 2's, that'd be great. But too bad switches happen like every possession so having 2 little guys instead of 1 is most likely going to make our defense a disaster.

Marcus Smart is considered a very good combo guard who can defend very well the 1-3 and he has a standing reach of 8'3 like Sexton. No Sexton is 35lbs lighter which is a big deal, but if Sexton can take on some muscle to his frame and fill out he can be taught to defend. A couple things gym rats can do is add weigh in the weight room and be pesky assholes on defense like Marcus Smart or Patrick Beverly.

 

[Cavatt]

Marcus Smart is considered a very good combo guard who can defend very well the 1-3 and he has a standing reach of 8'3 like Sexton. No Sexton is 35lbs lighter which is a big deal, but if Sexton can take on some muscle to his frame and fill out he can be taught to defend. A couple things gym rats can do is add weigh in the weight room and be pesky assholes on defense like Marcus Smart or Patrick Beverly.

And Marcus Smart is one of the better defenders in the league. We need Sexton to be above average if possible.

 

[wuck]

nothing has been stated as fact by anyone that contradicts my original views on his being picked as trade bait.

right...

I think Garland was picked because his initials are the same as Dan Gilbert. Who can say otherwise? Must be the case.

 

[Derek]

yeah nobody wants to hear it, I get it.
he does not look 100% to me yet with his movements and will take awhile longer before he gets any explosiveness back etc. his shot is there as expected, and his moves don't look slow, just not Garland's normal elite level pre injury.
For what is worth at this point I am more interested in seeing if him and Sexton can play together than whatever they can get for him via trade, but nothing has been stated as fact by anyone that contradicts my original views on his being picked as trade bait. If I am wrong which it appears at this point it will look like as they will never admit it if he stays , then that means this org thought he was above and beyond anyone else who was available which seems to me like they might have overvalued him given he does not play defense at all.

How many people do you have on ignore?

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

For what is worth at this point I am more interested in seeing if him and Sexton can play together than whatever they can get for him via trade, but nothing has been stated as fact by anyone that contradicts my original views on his being picked as trade bait.

Well, it is fact that the Cavs knew before they picked him exactly what teams were willing to offer for the rights to draft him. They even said that they listened to offers but they weren't enough. So under your theory, they drafted a guy as trade bait that they knew they wouldn't trade. Doesn't make a lot of sense.

Now, perhaps they drafted him with the idea that they might trade either him or Sexton down the road, but of course there's always the possibility that you'll trade any drafted player down the road if you get good enough offers. So that's kind of meaningless.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Marcus Smart is considered a very good combo guard who can defend very well the 1-3 and he has a standing reach of 8'3 like Sexton. No Sexton is 35lbs lighter which is a big deal, but if Sexton can take on some muscle to his frame and fill out he can be taught to defend. A couple things gym rats can do is add weigh in the weight room and be pesky assholes on defense like Marcus Smart or Patrick Beverly.

The thing that concerns me about Sexton defensively is that it is very apparent that he doesn't like making contact defensively. Doesn't like bumping, bodying up, etc....he defends with his hands only. I personally believe that is kind of a built-in characteristic -- there are some guys who really enjoy playing physical defense, and some who don't. And it seems to be something you either have or don't when you enter the league.

I suppose it's possible that some pretty intense weight training, and the addition of a lot of strength/mass, may alter his mental makeup in that regard. But I really have my doubts, and I'm someone who really likes him otherwise.

 

[InBoobieWeTrust]

right...

I think Garland was picked because his initials are the same as Dan Gilbert. Who can say otherwise? Must be the case.

God damnit Wuck...

I really really liked you...we've been friends for a long time...

but you went and posted this...PUBLICLY TO BOOT! In GEN-POP.

Ben, Keys and the rest want you to know...at one point, we loved you like a brother...


*raises handgun with a slight tear in my eye...*

 

[Futuredome]

We will find Sexton a good home. Pretty clear they just liked Garland better and this team is at the bottom of the barrel of rebuilding.