Will they resign sexton?

[JonFromVA]

One quibble, we can trade Sexton if plays on the Q.O., he just has to agree, and because players lose their Bird Rights in that scenario, they usually don't agree. But if he's traded to a team with space, the Bird Rights become less important. I actually think the chances of Sexton playing on the Q.O. are close to nil.

No. It would be like giving him a no trade clause for the season and the Cavs also lose his bird rights. That might be the worst case scenario since the Cavs hold the leverage here and shouldn't be handing out a huge contract. The best case is usually to extend the asset on a reasonable, tradeable contract. Koby has worked with Klutch in the past and Sexton hired them before the season after CAA couldn't get a deal done for him. I believe Collin is worth something between Gary Trent Jr and Lonzo Ball type money. Lonzo and GTJ were also Klutch clients. The other option is s&t but the return has been pretty bad for guards/wings such as Lonzo and Derozan for the trading team in the s&t market. Add in Sexton's injury last season and I would think the Cavs would be trading him at his absolute lowest market at this point.

From what I heard CAA isn't giving any discounts at this point on a LeVert extension despite his spotty play and injury after
he got traded to the Cavs. One thing to keep in mind is that one of Koby's main jobs, in addition to adding to the core, is to extend the timeline of his assets.

They're only *assets* if the rest of the league views them as such on those extensions. The fact that fans are using two-way players as comps for Sexton, when he clearly is not one, doesn't inspire me with confidence that the faithful have a good idea as to what his market is. Sexton is a RFA. The Cavs can match any offer. They need not guess nor bid against themselves here.

If a bottom-3 team like the Pistons, that desperately needs scoring and that has a guy like Cade on the roster to run the offense, doesn't view him as a $20M starter, then he's not one and that's not his market value.

As far as LeVert, the Cavs can extend him at any point next season. Again, if there's a way to make him work as a starter on the Cavs roster, then they'll find out. If there's not, then they'll find that out as well. But LeVert may prove to have far more trade value on an expiring contract at the deadline than an extension if the rest of the NBA also views him as a sixth man.

The reality is that neither Sexton nor LeVert are good fits as starters on a team whose core is Allen, Mobley, and Garland, yet they're both publicly insisting they want to stay. One read of that dynamic is there's a pretty significant delta between their market values league wide and their current contract expectations. If they're not extended, then that delta is their problem. If they are extended, then that delta becomes the Cavs problem.

I'm just hoping once the posturing is over that both sides settle this all quickly and quietly, whether that's by trade, extension, or some sort of prove it deal.

Spencer Dinwiddie signed for 3/54 after a S&T ... that's the market give or take the length or a few million.

[jbk1234]

No. It would be like giving him a no trade clause for the season and the Cavs also lose his bird rights. That might be the worst case scenario since the Cavs hold the leverage here and shouldn't be handing out a huge contract. The best case is usually to extend the asset on a reasonable, tradeable contract. Koby has worked with Klutch in the past and Sexton hired them before the season after CAA couldn't get a deal done for him. I believe Collin is worth something between Gary Trent Jr and Lonzo Ball type money. Lonzo and GTJ were also Klutch clients. The other option is s&t but the return has been pretty bad for guards/wings such as Lonzo and Derozan for the trading team in the s&t market. Add in Sexton's injury last season and I would think the Cavs would be trading him at his absolute lowest market at this point.

From what I heard CAA isn't giving any discounts at this point on a LeVert extension despite his spotty play and injury after
he got traded to the Cavs. One thing to keep in mind is that one of Koby's main jobs, in addition to adding to the core, is to extend the timeline of his assets.

They're only *assets* if the rest of the league views them as such on those extensions. The fact that fans are using two-way players as comps for Sexton, when he clearly is not one, doesn't inspire me with confidence that the faithful have a good idea as to what his market is. Sexton is a RFA. The Cavs can match any offer. They need not guess nor bid against themselves here.

If a bottom-3 team like the Pistons, that desperately needs scoring and that has a guy like Cade on the roster to run the offense, doesn't view him as a $20M starter, then he's not one and that's not his market value.

As far as LeVert, the Cavs can extend him at any point next season. Again, if there's a way to make him work as a starter on the Cavs roster, then they'll find out. If there's not, then they'll find that out as well. But LeVert may prove to have far more trade value on an expiring contract at the deadline than an extension if the rest of the NBA also views him as a sixth man.

The reality is that neither Sexton nor LeVert are good fits as starters on a team whose core is Allen, Mobley, and Garland, yet they're both publicly insisting they want to stay. One read of that dynamic is there's a pretty significant delta between their market values league wide and their current contract expectations. If they're not extended, then that delta is their problem. If they are extended, then that delta becomes the Cavs problem.

I'm just hoping once the posturing is over that both sides settle this all quickly and quietly, whether that's by trade, extension, or some sort of prove it deal.

Spencer Dinwiddie signed for 3/54 after a S&T ... that's the market give or take the length or a few million.

Most teams had Dinwiddie as negative value on that contract, but the Wizards were basically the only team willing to take back KP.

[JonFromVA]

They're only *assets* if the rest of the league views them as such on those extensions. The fact that fans are using two-way players as comps for Sexton, when he clearly is not one, doesn't inspire me with confidence that the faithful have a good idea as to what his market is. Sexton is a RFA. The Cavs can match any offer. They need not guess nor bid against themselves here.

If a bottom-3 team like the Pistons, that desperately needs scoring and that has a guy like Cade on the roster to run the offense, doesn't view him as a $20M starter, then he's not one and that's not his market value.

As far as LeVert, the Cavs can extend him at any point next season. Again, if there's a way to make him work as a starter on the Cavs roster, then they'll find out. If there's not, then they'll find that out as well. But LeVert may prove to have far more trade value on an expiring contract at the deadline than an extension if the rest of the NBA also views him as a sixth man.

The reality is that neither Sexton nor LeVert are good fits as starters on a team whose core is Allen, Mobley, and Garland, yet they're both publicly insisting they want to stay. One read of that dynamic is there's a pretty significant delta between their market values league wide and their current contract expectations. If they're not extended, then that delta is their problem. If they are extended, then that delta becomes the Cavs problem.

I'm just hoping once the posturing is over that both sides settle this all quickly and quietly, whether that's by trade, extension, or some sort of prove it deal.

Spencer Dinwiddie signed for 3/54 after a S&T ... that's the market give or take the length or a few million.

Most teams had Dinwiddie as negative value on that contract, but the Wizards were basically the only team willing to take back KP.

We don't need to get side-tracked on Spencer, lol, but like I keep saying what the Cavs have to do first and foremost is get their own evaluation right. We should have had more data on both LeVert and Sexton, but we should have enough to decide what we want to pay them.

We just can't make them accept it, and we also hopefully realize that LeVert isn't going to enjoy being treated as a contingency plan anymore than Andre Drummond did.

So it seems our contingencies need contingencies ... and perhaps LeBron's impending free-agency in 2023 could be just that. If the Cavs are already considering LeReturn II then they either need to carve out the cap space, or some S&T fodder the Lakers will accept.

[jbk1234]

I'm just hoping once the posturing is over that both sides settle this all quickly and quietly, whether that's by trade, extension, or some sort of prove it deal.

Spencer Dinwiddie signed for 3/54 after a S&T ... that's the market give or take the length or a few million.

Most teams had Dinwiddie as negative value on that contract, but the Wizards were basically the only team willing to take back KP.

We don't need to get side-tracked on Spencer, lol, but like I keep saying what the Cavs have to do first and foremost is get their own evaluation right. We should have had more data on both LeVert and Sexton, but we should have enough to decide what we want to pay them.

We just can't make them accept it, and we also hopefully realize that LeVert isn't going to enjoy being treated as a contingency plan anymore than Andre Drummond did.

So it seems our contingencies need contingencies ... and perhaps LeBron's impending free-agency in 2023 could be just that. If the Cavs are already considering LeReturn II then they either need to carve out the cap space, or some S&T fodder the Lakers will accept.

We can't make them accept an offer we deem reasonable and they can't manifest an offer they deem reasonable from a third team. A third team has to actually agree with their evaluation. Drummond has played on the league minimum since the Cavs bought him out. NBA front offices are more sophisticated than in decades prior and they know when handing a specific type of a player a big contract is going to be a problem down the road. There's also far more moneyball in the NBA now in terms of evaluating non-max players.

[JonFromVA]

Most teams had Dinwiddie as negative value on that contract, but the Wizards were basically the only team willing to take back KP.

We don't need to get side-tracked on Spencer, lol, but like I keep saying what the Cavs have to do first and foremost is get their own evaluation right. We should have had more data on both LeVert and Sexton, but we should have enough to decide what we want to pay them.

We just can't make them accept it, and we also hopefully realize that LeVert isn't going to enjoy being treated as a contingency plan anymore than Andre Drummond did.

So it seems our contingencies need contingencies ... and perhaps LeBron's impending free-agency in 2023 could be just that. If the Cavs are already considering LeReturn II then they either need to carve out the cap space, or some S&T fodder the Lakers will accept.

We can't make them accept an offer we deem reasonable and they can't manifest an offer they deem reasonable from a third team. A third team has to actually agree with their evaluation. Drummond has played on the league minimum since the Cavs bought him out. NBA front offices are more sophisticated than in decades prior and they know when handing a specific type of a player a big contract is going to be a problem down the road. There's also far more moneyball in the NBA now in terms of evaluating non-max players.

I'm not sure I'd call the ability of teams on the coasts with superstars to sign former All-Star big men for the vet min - moneyball. It actually kind of fits, but it's sort of the opposite of what the term meant to Beane and Podesta.

Anyway, we're too far along in our rebuild to be playing games. We can make fair offers, hope the players/agents eventually realize it's fair, and/or try to flip them for something useful. Be ready to pivot, have contingencies, etc, but don't waste a season, don't hurt the chemistry of the team. If you're not willing to walk away, you're not really negotiating.

[jbk1234]

We don't need to get side-tracked on Spencer, lol, but like I keep saying what the Cavs have to do first and foremost is get their own evaluation right. We should have had more data on both LeVert and Sexton, but we should have enough to decide what we want to pay them.

We just can't make them accept it, and we also hopefully realize that LeVert isn't going to enjoy being treated as a contingency plan anymore than Andre Drummond did.

So it seems our contingencies need contingencies ... and perhaps LeBron's impending free-agency in 2023 could be just that. If the Cavs are already considering LeReturn II then they either need to carve out the cap space, or some S&T fodder the Lakers will accept.

We can't make them accept an offer we deem reasonable and they can't manifest an offer they deem reasonable from a third team. A third team has to actually agree with their evaluation. Drummond has played on the league minimum since the Cavs bought him out. NBA front offices are more sophisticated than in decades prior and they know when handing a specific type of a player a big contract is going to be a problem down the road. There's also far more moneyball in the NBA now in terms of evaluating non-max players.

I'm not sure I'd call the ability of teams on the coasts with superstars to sign former All-Star big men for the vet min - moneyball. It actually kind of fits, but it's sort of the opposite of what the term meant to Beane and Podesta.

Anyway, we're too far along in our rebuild to be playing games. We can make fair offers, hope the players/agents eventually realize it's fair, and/or try to flip them for something useful. Be ready to pivot, have contingencies, etc, but don't waste a season, don't hurt the chemistry of the team. If you're not willing to walk away, you're not really negotiating.

My point was that teams are beginning to recognize that if you can get 80% of what flawed players give you, for 30% of the money, you're better off saving the cap space for the guys who are less flawed.

[toooskies]

We can't make them accept an offer we deem reasonable and they can't manifest an offer they deem reasonable from a third team. A third team has to actually agree with their evaluation. Drummond has played on the league minimum since the Cavs bought him out. NBA front offices are more sophisticated than in decades prior and they know when handing a specific type of a player a big contract is going to be a problem down the road. There's also far more moneyball in the NBA now in terms of evaluating non-max players.

I'm not sure I'd call the ability of teams on the coasts with superstars to sign former All-Star big men for the vet min - moneyball. It actually kind of fits, but it's sort of the opposite of what the term meant to Beane and Podesta.

Anyway, we're too far along in our rebuild to be playing games. We can make fair offers, hope the players/agents eventually realize it's fair, and/or try to flip them for something useful. Be ready to pivot, have contingencies, etc, but don't waste a season, don't hurt the chemistry of the team. If you're not willing to walk away, you're not really negotiating.

My point was that teams are beginning to recognize that if you can get 80% of what flawed players give you, for 30% of the money, you're better off saving the cap space for the guys who are less flawed.

If you're only getting 80% of a flawed player then that guy probably isn't even playable in the playoffs.

[JonFromVA]

We can't make them accept an offer we deem reasonable and they can't manifest an offer they deem reasonable from a third team. A third team has to actually agree with their evaluation. Drummond has played on the league minimum since the Cavs bought him out. NBA front offices are more sophisticated than in decades prior and they know when handing a specific type of a player a big contract is going to be a problem down the road. There's also far more moneyball in the NBA now in terms of evaluating non-max players.

I'm not sure I'd call the ability of teams on the coasts with superstars to sign former All-Star big men for the vet min - moneyball. It actually kind of fits, but it's sort of the opposite of what the term meant to Beane and Podesta.

Anyway, we're too far along in our rebuild to be playing games. We can make fair offers, hope the players/agents eventually realize it's fair, and/or try to flip them for something useful. Be ready to pivot, have contingencies, etc, but don't waste a season, don't hurt the chemistry of the team. If you're not willing to walk away, you're not really negotiating.

My point was that teams are beginning to recognize that if you can get 80% of what flawed players give you, for 30% of the money, you're better off saving the cap space for the guys who are less flawed.

Isn't that how the Knicks and Cletics ended up with Elfrid Payton and Dennis Schroeder as their starting PG's?

At least the cost to dump them is cheaper ...

[jbk1234]

I'm not sure I'd call the ability of teams on the coasts with superstars to sign former All-Star big men for the vet min - moneyball. It actually kind of fits, but it's sort of the opposite of what the term meant to Beane and Podesta.

Anyway, we're too far along in our rebuild to be playing games. We can make fair offers, hope the players/agents eventually realize it's fair, and/or try to flip them for something useful. Be ready to pivot, have contingencies, etc, but don't waste a season, don't hurt the chemistry of the team. If you're not willing to walk away, you're not really negotiating.

My point was that teams are beginning to recognize that if you can get 80% of what flawed players give you, for 30% of the money, you're better off saving the cap space for the guys who are less flawed.

Isn't that how the Knicks and Cletics ended up with Elfrid Payton and Dennis Schroeder as their starting PG's?

At least the cost to dump them is cheaper ...

I don't think Schroder started for the Celtics, but the Knicks handing out gobs of money to Rose and Kemba hurt a lot more than paying Payton 25% of that when they ended up in the lottery anyway.

[JonFromVA]

My point was that teams are beginning to recognize that if you can get 80% of what flawed players give you, for 30% of the money, you're better off saving the cap space for the guys who are less flawed.

Isn't that how the Knicks and Cletics ended up with Elfrid Payton and Dennis Schroeder as their starting PG's?

At least the cost to dump them is cheaper ...

I don't think Schroder started for the Celtics, but the Knicks handing out gobs of money to Rose and Kemba hurt a lot more than paying Payton 25% of that when they ended up in the lottery anyway.

Schroeder started 25 games for the Celtics ... they were searching for a solution, but unlike the Knicks didn't stick with a bad one.

As for salary, Rose 3/43M and Walker 2/17.9M were relatively cheap ... but I'd personally rather put their combined $22M towards paying a young player with a lot more mileage (left) on the tires and promise like Collin.

[jbk1234]

Isn't that how the Knicks and Cletics ended up with Elfrid Payton and Dennis Schroeder as their starting PG's?

At least the cost to dump them is cheaper ...

I don't think Schroder started for the Celtics, but the Knicks handing out gobs of money to Rose and Kemba hurt a lot more than paying Payton 25% of that when they ended up in the lottery anyway.

Schroeder started 25 games for the Celtics ... they were searching for a solution, but unlike the Knicks didn't stick with a bad one.

As for salary, Rose 3/43M and Walker 2/17.9M were relatively cheap ... but I'd personally rather put their combined $22M towards paying a young player with a lot more mileage on the tires and promise like Collin.

I think it will be interesting to see what DLo's market is like now that Minny has him on the block. Also, Sheppard just publicly stated he wants a more traditional PG who can actually run an offense. But really, I think the league has discounted the value of high usage guards who are undersized and can't defend their position. Unless they're just fire from 3-point range, there not that hard to come by and there's a real question as to how much of a net benefit they provide.

[toooskies]

My point was that teams are beginning to recognize that if you can get 80% of what flawed players give you, for 30% of the money, you're better off saving the cap space for the guys who are less flawed.

Isn't that how the Knicks and Cletics ended up with Elfrid Payton and Dennis Schroeder as their starting PG's?

At least the cost to dump them is cheaper ...

I don't think Schroder started for the Celtics, but the Knicks handing out gobs of money to Rose and Kemba hurt a lot more than paying Payton 25% of that when they ended up in the lottery anyway.

Rose and Kemba are not comparable situations to Sexton. Unless you're comparing to 2013-14 Rose, in which case there's no reason to believe that Sexton's injury was as severe.

[jbk1234]

Isn't that how the Knicks and Cletics ended up with Elfrid Payton and Dennis Schroeder as their starting PG's?

At least the cost to dump them is cheaper ...

I don't think Schroder started for the Celtics, but the Knicks handing out gobs of money to Rose and Kemba hurt a lot more than paying Payton 25% of that when they ended up in the lottery anyway.

Rose and Kemba are not comparable situations to Sexton. Unless you're comparing to 2013-14 Rose, in which case there's no reason to believe that Sexton's injury was as severe.

No one wants them on their contracts despite the fact they make half as much as Sexton wants and the Knicks F.O. really believed they were getting them on team-friendly deals last summer. The Celtics paid Schroder 20% of what Sexton wants, and people did think that was a good get for the Celtics last summer, and he wasn't coveted.

[Revenged25]

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the Knicks were interested in doing a S&T for Sexton. He's the exact type of guard Thibs likes to use in his offense and he could learn to play more like pre-injury Rose, which Sexton's skillset really is quite similar to just not as developed. An efficient attacking guard that can kick out when needed/learn to do so better.

[JonFromVA]

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the Knicks were interested in doing a S&T for Sexton. He's the exact type of guard Thibs likes to use in his offense and he could learn to play more like pre-injury Rose, which Sexton's skillset really is quite similar to just not as developed. An efficient attacking guard that can kick out when needed/learn to do so better.

And I'm sure that's why Collin hasn't just accepted a sub $20M/yr contract that would let him be our 6th man (if that's his best use on the team). As long as there might be another team who sees him as a starting PG, it's understandable he'd rather get moved to that team, somehow. And if he's going to take a "prove it" contract, yes, of course he'd prefer to "prove it" to a team that's willing to put him in position to earn a max.

The Knicks do have the 11th pick in the draft which isn't great, but it's not horrible either - but I think they'd have to be picking for us contingent on a S&T which sounds kind of dubious.

[toooskies]

I don't think Schroder started for the Celtics, but the Knicks handing out gobs of money to Rose and Kemba hurt a lot more than paying Payton 25% of that when they ended up in the lottery anyway.

Rose and Kemba are not comparable situations to Sexton. Unless you're comparing to 2013-14 Rose, in which case there's no reason to believe that Sexton's injury was as severe.

No one wants them on their contracts despite the fact they make half as much as Sexton wants and the Knicks F.O. really believed they were getting them on team-friendly deals last summer. The Celtics paid Schroder 20% of what Sexton wants, and people did think that was a good get for the Celtics last summer, and he wasn't coveted.

You're talking about guys in Kemba and Rose who are over 30 and no potential to outplay their contract. The team-friendliness is not really due to their salary but that they have team options in their last year, so they should be movable when teams give up on next season. Schroder is also past his peak but was offered $20m/year by the lakers not too long ago.

Sexton's upside is still at the all-star level, although less likely to reach it now than pre-injury. (Guard is stacked around the league, so maybe McCollum-level, top 40 NBA player is more accurate for his upside?)

[jbk1234]

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the Knicks were interested in doing a S&T for Sexton. He's the exact type of guard Thibs likes to use in his offense and he could learn to play more like pre-injury Rose, which Sexton's skillset really is quite similar to just not as developed. An efficient attacking guard that can kick out when needed/learn to do so better.

The key there is what they'd send back. Anything outside of Reddish with salary filler going to a third team won't work because of BYC, and they're probably going to have to attach some type of asset to the filler to get a team to eat the salary.

[jbk1234]

Rose and Kemba are not comparable situations to Sexton. Unless you're comparing to 2013-14 Rose, in which case there's no reason to believe that Sexton's injury was as severe.

No one wants them on their contracts despite the fact they make half as much as Sexton wants and the Knicks F.O. really believed they were getting them on team-friendly deals last summer. The Celtics paid Schroder 20% of what Sexton wants, and people did think that was a good get for the Celtics last summer, and he wasn't coveted.

You're talking about guys in Kemba and Rose who are over 30 and no potential to outplay their contract. The team-friendliness is not really due to their salary but that they have team options in their last year, so they should be movable when teams give up on next season. Schroder is also past his peak but was offered $20m/year by the lakers not too long ago.

Sexton's upside is still at the all-star level, although less likely to reach it now than pre-injury. (Guard is stacked around the league, so maybe McCollum-level, top 40 NBA player is more accurate for his upside?)

Or, Sexton's upside might be that of Reggie Jackson, Schroder, and or D Lo, all of whom were putting up similar numbers around his age and had similar games. In addition to his 18.4 FGAs he averaged 6.4 FTAs, and if he has the same struggles as the rest of the smaller guard contingent with the adjustment the NBA made, his efficiency could take a hit. Sexton was top 30 in the entire NBA in usage the same season and I just don't see how that's going to be possible going forward.

My worry is that according to advanced stats, he's about break even on the court when he's scoring at that level on that usage, and due to his other limitations, he'll fall below break even if he's asked to allow the ball to move more. I'd pay him to be a sixth man and live with the risk. If another team is willing to pay him to be an all star, I'd shake his hand and wish him well.

[toooskies]

No one wants them on their contracts despite the fact they make half as much as Sexton wants and the Knicks F.O. really believed they were getting them on team-friendly deals last summer. The Celtics paid Schroder 20% of what Sexton wants, and people did think that was a good get for the Celtics last summer, and he wasn't coveted.

You're talking about guys in Kemba and Rose who are over 30 and no potential to outplay their contract. The team-friendliness is not really due to their salary but that they have team options in their last year, so they should be movable when teams give up on next season. Schroder is also past his peak but was offered $20m/year by the lakers not too long ago.

Sexton's upside is still at the all-star level, although less likely to reach it now than pre-injury. (Guard is stacked around the league, so maybe McCollum-level, top 40 NBA player is more accurate for his upside?)

Or, Sexton's upside might be that of Reggie Jackson, Schroder, and or D Lo, all of whom were putting up similar numbers around his age and had similar games. In addition to his 18.4 FGAs he averaged 6.4 FTAs, and if he has the same struggles as the rest of the smaller guard contingent with the adjustment the NBA made, his efficiency could take a hit. Sexton was top 30 in the entire NBA in usage the same season and I just don't see how that's going to be possible going forward.

My worry is that according to advanced stats, he's about break even on the court when he's scoring at that level on that usage, and due to his other limitations, he'll fall below break even if he's asked to allow the ball to move more. I'd pay him to be a sixth man and live with the risk. If another team is willing to pay him to be an all star, I'd shake his hand and wish him well.

Sexton was better at a younger age at scoring than all those guys, in both volume and efficiency. And DLo, the only one particularly close, was an all-star.

[JonFromVA]

You're talking about guys in Kemba and Rose who are over 30 and no potential to outplay their contract. The team-friendliness is not really due to their salary but that they have team options in their last year, so they should be movable when teams give up on next season. Schroder is also past his peak but was offered $20m/year by the lakers not too long ago.

Sexton's upside is still at the all-star level, although less likely to reach it now than pre-injury. (Guard is stacked around the league, so maybe McCollum-level, top 40 NBA player is more accurate for his upside?)

Or, Sexton's upside might be that of Reggie Jackson, Schroder, and or D Lo, all of whom were putting up similar numbers around his age and had similar games. In addition to his 18.4 FGAs he averaged 6.4 FTAs, and if he has the same struggles as the rest of the smaller guard contingent with the adjustment the NBA made, his efficiency could take a hit. Sexton was top 30 in the entire NBA in usage the same season and I just don't see how that's going to be possible going forward.

My worry is that according to advanced stats, he's about break even on the court when he's scoring at that level on that usage, and due to his other limitations, he'll fall below break even if he's asked to allow the ball to move more. I'd pay him to be a sixth man and live with the risk. If another team is willing to pay him to be an all star, I'd shake his hand and wish him well.

Sexton was better at a younger age at scoring than all those guys, in both volume and efficiency. And DLo, the only one particularly close, was an all-star.

If I counted right, those 3 players have like 2 seasons in total where any of them matched Collin's 57% TS he put up in just his 3rd season.

I also expect the Cavs will be very reluctant to just shake Sexton's hand and let him walk for nothing. Team's have been pretty "co-operative" about working out sign & trade's, but the value exchanged isn't all that great. So, short of someone offering Collin a max and/or a colluded plan to do something with 2023 cap space that signing Sexton would prevent rather than facilitate I continue to see letting him walk as very unlikely.