ImageImageImage

A Drummond extension?

Moderator: jbk1234

jbk1234
Forum Mod - Cavs
Forum Mod - Cavs
Posts: 38,633
And1: 22,312
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
   

A Drummond extension? 

Post#1 » by jbk1234 » Tue Aug 18, 2020 4:49 pm

So I simply refused to believe that this was a real thing and then I saw it was being nationally reported by Forbes.

https://kingjamesgospel.com/2020/06/27/cleveland-cavaliers-andre-drummond-reportedly-shown-interest-extension-far-from-certain/

My faith in Koby Altman is pretty shaken at this point. An unnecessary extension before the cap and market have adjusted to a Covid reality, and you've had a full year of Drummond suiting up for your team, is just too stupid for words. Add to this the appearance that the Cavs F.O. really doesn't seem to have a good gauge on what the contract market value is for guys like Love and Drummond, and concerned doesn't begin to cover it. These are the moves that wreck mid market teams for longer than the current GM stays employed.

I cut them some slack on Love, even if it was a $5-10M per overpay, due to the fact that we had just lost both Kyrie and LBJ within 12 months and you've got to hit the salary floor anyway. But this would be too indefensible in terms of risk management. The Cavs can always pay him next summer if they can't find a better use for their cap space.
It is highly unlikely that the Cavs will agree with your Kevin Love evaluation for the purpose of a trade.
Revenged25
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,666
And1: 573
Joined: Jun 05, 2018
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#2 » by Revenged25 » Tue Aug 18, 2020 5:18 pm

Look at when that article was written and when they were discussing a potential extension. A lot of the talk was before the lockdown and it seemed like it was going to be based on how the team looked with him on it. I actually don't mind the idea of a Drummond extension depending on who is taken in the draft, how the team looks with Drummond over a longer period than 8 games, and what it would cost to actually resign him to an extension.

If in the draft Wiseman/Okongwu are not the selections, a Drummond extension moves to the next check point.
If the Cavs look good with a Drummond/Love front court up to the trade deadline, a Drummond extension moves to the next check point.
If the Cavs don't get a great trade offer providing multiple young players/assets at the trade deadline, a Drummond extension moves to the next check point.
If the extension is around 15-20 mil/yr, then extension gets signed, if not they should look for something elsewhere.
jbk1234
Forum Mod - Cavs
Forum Mod - Cavs
Posts: 38,633
And1: 22,312
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#3 » by jbk1234 » Tue Aug 18, 2020 5:52 pm

Revenged25 wrote:Look at when that article was written and when they were discussing a potential extension. A lot of the talk was before the lockdown and it seemed like it was going to be based on how the team looked with him on it. I actually don't mind the idea of a Drummond extension depending on who is taken in the draft, how the team looks with Drummond over a longer period than 8 games, and what it would cost to actually resign him to an extension.

If in the draft Wiseman/Okongwu are not the selections, a Drummond extension moves to the next check point.
If the Cavs look good with a Drummond/Love front court up to the trade deadline, a Drummond extension moves to the next check point.
If the Cavs don't get a great trade offer providing multiple young players/assets at the trade deadline, a Drummond extension moves to the next check point.
If the extension is around 15-20 mil/yr, then extension gets signed, if not they should look for something elsewhere.


I mean the article was only a month old. That was not pre-anything really. Cap space is going to be at a premium in the summer of 2021 so it would be my hope that the Cavs would allow Drummond to come off the books, see what they could get for it, and then make a decision on re-signing him. He's 27 and has had motor issues since he entered the league. I don't think any team is going to offer him much more than $10M per next summer. Durant basically made the Nets offer DAJ a contract for just under $10M per. What contract was DAJ signing if that wasn't the case?
It is highly unlikely that the Cavs will agree with your Kevin Love evaluation for the purpose of a trade.
Revenged25
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,666
And1: 573
Joined: Jun 05, 2018
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#4 » by Revenged25 » Tue Aug 18, 2020 6:20 pm

jbk1234 wrote:
Revenged25 wrote:Look at when that article was written and when they were discussing a potential extension. A lot of the talk was before the lockdown and it seemed like it was going to be based on how the team looked with him on it. I actually don't mind the idea of a Drummond extension depending on who is taken in the draft, how the team looks with Drummond over a longer period than 8 games, and what it would cost to actually resign him to an extension.

If in the draft Wiseman/Okongwu are not the selections, a Drummond extension moves to the next check point.
If the Cavs look good with a Drummond/Love front court up to the trade deadline, a Drummond extension moves to the next check point.
If the Cavs don't get a great trade offer providing multiple young players/assets at the trade deadline, a Drummond extension moves to the next check point.
If the extension is around 15-20 mil/yr, then extension gets signed, if not they should look for something elsewhere.


I mean the article was only a month old. That was not pre-anything really. Cap space is going to be at a premium in the summer of 2021 so it would be my hope that the Cavs would allow Drummond to come off the books, see what they could get for it, and then make a decision on re-signing him. He's 27 and has had motor issues since he entered the league. I don't think any team is going to offer him much more than $10M per next summer. Durant basically made the Nets offer DAJ a contract for just under $10M per. What contract was DAJ signing if that wasn't the case?


I didn't think we'd actually have any cap space available even if we didn't resign Drummond, apparently we will. So yeah, unless we actually make the playoffs with a Love/Drummond front court, waiting to resign him till after the '21 FA starts to happen and teams needing to make room for the top tier guys makes sense.
Stillwater
RealGM
Posts: 12,855
And1: 3,244
Joined: Jun 15, 2017
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#5 » by Stillwater » Wed Aug 19, 2020 1:42 am

makes no sense at all to pass on a high ceiling big even if they are stupid enough to sign Dre to an extention early.
I have not had a lot of faith in the scouting dept since the Garland pick, but they sort of kept me hopeful after getting gifted KPJ.
Part of me hopes we dont pick 1st and NY picks Ball at 1.
Thanks to isolation and becoming one with the darkness of self I have
now harnessed a semi- permanent hypnagogic state of consciousness
where the painted dream of the wayward soul is false reality bliss-
There's Mud in the moonshine- Stillwater
jbk1234
Forum Mod - Cavs
Forum Mod - Cavs
Posts: 38,633
And1: 22,312
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#6 » by jbk1234 » Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:09 am

Stillwater wrote:makes no sense at all to pass on a high ceiling big even if they are stupid enough to sign Dre to an extention early.
I have not had a lot of faith in the scouting dept since the Garland pick, but they sort of kept me hopeful after getting gifted KPJ.
Part of me hopes we dont pick 1st and NY picks Ball at 1.
It's important to remember that Hunter was the guy we wanted. Also, it's really unfair to judge Garland when he was forced to start next to Sexton. That was a stupid idea from the start.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app
It is highly unlikely that the Cavs will agree with your Kevin Love evaluation for the purpose of a trade.
Stillwater
RealGM
Posts: 12,855
And1: 3,244
Joined: Jun 15, 2017
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#7 » by Stillwater » Wed Aug 19, 2020 3:11 am

jbk1234 wrote:
Stillwater wrote:makes no sense at all to pass on a high ceiling big even if they are stupid enough to sign Dre to an extention early.
I have not had a lot of faith in the scouting dept since the Garland pick, but they sort of kept me hopeful after getting gifted KPJ.
Part of me hopes we dont pick 1st and NY picks Ball at 1.
It's important to remember that Hunter was the guy we wanted. Also, it's really unfair to judge Garland when he was forced to start next to Sexton. That was a stupid idea from the start.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

I mean that makes sense from a scarcity of archtypes like Hunter that he would have been the main target after Barrett but
even if that is true just taking a bpa guard that doesn't at least fit with the player they picked the draft before in the lottery was pretty weak I mean its not like he should have been considered so much more the bpa than some others who they could have picked.
Time will tell I guess because he hasnt shown me anything to be confident this org wont just pick another guard
Thanks to isolation and becoming one with the darkness of self I have
now harnessed a semi- permanent hypnagogic state of consciousness
where the painted dream of the wayward soul is false reality bliss-
There's Mud in the moonshine- Stillwater
JonFromVA
Head Coach
Posts: 6,223
And1: 1,966
Joined: Dec 08, 2009
     

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#8 » by JonFromVA » Wed Aug 19, 2020 7:50 pm

Stillwater wrote:
jbk1234 wrote:
Stillwater wrote:makes no sense at all to pass on a high ceiling big even if they are stupid enough to sign Dre to an extention early.
I have not had a lot of faith in the scouting dept since the Garland pick, but they sort of kept me hopeful after getting gifted KPJ.
Part of me hopes we dont pick 1st and NY picks Ball at 1.
It's important to remember that Hunter was the guy we wanted. Also, it's really unfair to judge Garland when he was forced to start next to Sexton. That was a stupid idea from the start.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

I mean that makes sense from a scarcity of archtypes like Hunter that he would have been the main target after Barrett but
even if that is true just taking a bpa guard that doesn't at least fit with the player they picked the draft before in the lottery was pretty weak I mean its not like he should have been considered so much more the bpa than some others who they could have picked.
Time will tell I guess because he hasnt shown me anything to be confident this org wont just pick another guard


Taking a shot at drafting the next Damian Lillard doesn't look like an entirely bad idea at the moment and no matter who you draft (short of a can't miss) you have to invest a lot to ever possibly realize their upside.

Fit is something you can wait to sort out when the lack of it is keeping you from contending.

And keep in mind Hunter was gone, and the media consensus would have had us draft Culver. What would we be complaining about then?

I mean we've got KPJ who had some moments and may be as good of a prospect as any of these guys, but his rookie season was pretty rough too.

And then there's Windler who might be really good as a 3&D wing, but we saw nothing.
Stillwater
RealGM
Posts: 12,855
And1: 3,244
Joined: Jun 15, 2017
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#9 » by Stillwater » Wed Aug 19, 2020 8:13 pm

JonFromVA wrote:
Stillwater wrote:
jbk1234 wrote:It's important to remember that Hunter was the guy we wanted. Also, it's really unfair to judge Garland when he was forced to start next to Sexton. That was a stupid idea from the start.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

I mean that makes sense from a scarcity of archtypes like Hunter that he would have been the main target after Barrett but
even if that is true just taking a bpa guard that doesn't at least fit with the player they picked the draft before in the lottery was pretty weak I mean its not like he should have been considered so much more the bpa than some others who they could have picked.
Time will tell I guess because he hasnt shown me anything to be confident this org wont just pick another guard


Taking a shot at drafting the next Damian Lillard doesn't look like an entirely bad idea at the moment and no matter who you draft (short of a can't miss) you have to invest a lot to ever possibly realize their upside.

Fit is something you can wait to sort out when the lack of it is keeping you from contending.

And keep in mind Hunter was gone, and the media consensus would have had us draft Culver. What would we be complaining about then?

I mean we've got KPJ who had some moments and may be as good of a prospect as any of these guys, but his rookie season was pretty rough too.

And then there's Windler who might be really good as a 3&D wing, but we saw nothing.

I understand the argument for another guard in this draft is not only based on our guard cores struggles to play together or size issues defensively but because neither are true point guards in the traditional sense.
Looking at what we really need now is difficult since Garland could play like Steph by year 3, or could get hurt again.
Sexton could regress or could become a allstar scorer.
KPJ could become a 1st option or get outshined by a Edwards pick and float in the shadows until he is traded to the team that unleashes him.
Windler could be an elite Korver cutting and shooting off ball dynamo or he could be another injury plagued prospect that never sees the floor on this roster before getting cut.
2 combo guards who cant defend well outside of other 1 guards
1 swing man who has elite iso ability but a long ways to go to play team ball and up his defense.
1 rotation level shooting specialist who hasnt seen the floor in a Cavs Jersey yet.
and a mixed bag of vets.
We are picking 1 of Okongwu or Wiseman imo unless the lottery fs us at least if this org has any clue what they are doing...
I mean taking a more traditional pg makes sense too if that is the bpa at the end of the day I dont think it would be.
I think Vassell and Okongwu are the best fits and best options for this current state of a rebuild. But if they want to ignore what they have and just keep piling potential like they did with Garland until a fit is created instead of constructing a machine with the right parts the rebuild is more like fishing in the dark with no bait
Thanks to isolation and becoming one with the darkness of self I have
now harnessed a semi- permanent hypnagogic state of consciousness
where the painted dream of the wayward soul is false reality bliss-
There's Mud in the moonshine- Stillwater
JonFromVA
Head Coach
Posts: 6,223
And1: 1,966
Joined: Dec 08, 2009
     

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#10 » by JonFromVA » Wed Aug 19, 2020 9:56 pm

Stillwater wrote:
JonFromVA wrote:
Stillwater wrote:I mean that makes sense from a scarcity of archtypes like Hunter that he would have been the main target after Barrett but
even if that is true just taking a bpa guard that doesn't at least fit with the player they picked the draft before in the lottery was pretty weak I mean its not like he should have been considered so much more the bpa than some others who they could have picked.
Time will tell I guess because he hasnt shown me anything to be confident this org wont just pick another guard


Taking a shot at drafting the next Damian Lillard doesn't look like an entirely bad idea at the moment and no matter who you draft (short of a can't miss) you have to invest a lot to ever possibly realize their upside.

Fit is something you can wait to sort out when the lack of it is keeping you from contending.

And keep in mind Hunter was gone, and the media consensus would have had us draft Culver. What would we be complaining about then?

I mean we've got KPJ who had some moments and may be as good of a prospect as any of these guys, but his rookie season was pretty rough too.

And then there's Windler who might be really good as a 3&D wing, but we saw nothing.

I understand the argument for another guard in this draft is not only based on our guard cores struggles to play together or size issues defensively but because neither are true point guards in the traditional sense.
Looking at what we really need now is difficult since Garland could play like Steph by year 3, or could get hurt again.
Sexton could regress or could become a allstar scorer.
KPJ could become a 1st option or get outshined by a Edwards pick and float in the shadows until he is traded to the team that unleashes him.
Windler could be an elite Korver cutting and shooting off ball dynamo or he could be another injury plagued prospect that never sees the floor on this roster before getting cut.
2 combo guards who cant defend well outside of other 1 guards
1 swing man who has elite iso ability but a long ways to go to play team ball and up his defense.
1 rotation level shooting specialist who hasnt seen the floor in a Cavs Jersey yet.
and a mixed bag of vets.
We are picking 1 of Okongwu or Wiseman imo unless the lottery fs us at least if this org has any clue what they are doing...
I mean taking a more traditional pg makes sense too if that is the bpa at the end of the day I dont think it would be.
I think Vassell and Okongwu are the best fits and best options for this current state of a rebuild. But if they want to ignore what they have and just keep piling potential like they did with Garland until a fit is created instead of constructing a machine with the right parts the rebuild is more like fishing in the dark with no bait


The draft doesn't guarantee that if you draft for fit you'll get it, but if you snag a valuable player and develop him you can trade for fit.

And to be clear, I was referring to Garland still having Lillard potential.
Stillwater
RealGM
Posts: 12,855
And1: 3,244
Joined: Jun 15, 2017
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#11 » by Stillwater » Thu Aug 20, 2020 1:34 am

JonFromVA wrote:
Stillwater wrote:
JonFromVA wrote:
Taking a shot at drafting the next Damian Lillard doesn't look like an entirely bad idea at the moment and no matter who you draft (short of a can't miss) you have to invest a lot to ever possibly realize their upside.

Fit is something you can wait to sort out when the lack of it is keeping you from contending.

And keep in mind Hunter was gone, and the media consensus would have had us draft Culver. What would we be complaining about then?

I mean we've got KPJ who had some moments and may be as good of a prospect as any of these guys, but his rookie season was pretty rough too.

And then there's Windler who might be really good as a 3&D wing, but we saw nothing.

I understand the argument for another guard in this draft is not only based on our guard cores struggles to play together or size issues defensively but because neither are true point guards in the traditional sense.
Looking at what we really need now is difficult since Garland could play like Steph by year 3, or could get hurt again.
Sexton could regress or could become a allstar scorer.
KPJ could become a 1st option or get outshined by a Edwards pick and float in the shadows until he is traded to the team that unleashes him.
Windler could be an elite Korver cutting and shooting off ball dynamo or he could be another injury plagued prospect that never sees the floor on this roster before getting cut.
2 combo guards who cant defend well outside of other 1 guards
1 swing man who has elite iso ability but a long ways to go to play team ball and up his defense.
1 rotation level shooting specialist who hasnt seen the floor in a Cavs Jersey yet.
and a mixed bag of vets.
We are picking 1 of Okongwu or Wiseman imo unless the lottery fs us at least if this org has any clue what they are doing...
I mean taking a more traditional pg makes sense too if that is the bpa at the end of the day I dont think it would be.
I think Vassell and Okongwu are the best fits and best options for this current state of a rebuild. But if they want to ignore what they have and just keep piling potential like they did with Garland until a fit is created instead of constructing a machine with the right parts the rebuild is more like fishing in the dark with no bait


The draft doesn't guarantee that if you draft for fit you'll get it, but if you snag a valuable player and develop him you can trade for fit.

And to be clear, I was referring to Garland still having Lillard potential.

I for one dont think Garland has Dame potential, but I definitely thought it was stupid to take another small guard unless he was a signifcantly better player already as opposed to developing 2 scoring guards neither of which have the size to defend at a high level.
I mean it really was the epitome of a BPA situation where imo their scouts failed to put in enough effort in scouting his medicals and seeing if his flaws were repairable but instead they seemed content with taking Klutch advice
Thanks to isolation and becoming one with the darkness of self I have
now harnessed a semi- permanent hypnagogic state of consciousness
where the painted dream of the wayward soul is false reality bliss-
There's Mud in the moonshine- Stillwater
JonFromVA
Head Coach
Posts: 6,223
And1: 1,966
Joined: Dec 08, 2009
     

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#12 » by JonFromVA » Thu Aug 20, 2020 3:34 pm

Stillwater wrote:
JonFromVA wrote:
Stillwater wrote:I understand the argument for another guard in this draft is not only based on our guard cores struggles to play together or size issues defensively but because neither are true point guards in the traditional sense.
Looking at what we really need now is difficult since Garland could play like Steph by year 3, or could get hurt again.
Sexton could regress or could become a allstar scorer.
KPJ could become a 1st option or get outshined by a Edwards pick and float in the shadows until he is traded to the team that unleashes him.
Windler could be an elite Korver cutting and shooting off ball dynamo or he could be another injury plagued prospect that never sees the floor on this roster before getting cut.
2 combo guards who cant defend well outside of other 1 guards
1 swing man who has elite iso ability but a long ways to go to play team ball and up his defense.
1 rotation level shooting specialist who hasnt seen the floor in a Cavs Jersey yet.
and a mixed bag of vets.
We are picking 1 of Okongwu or Wiseman imo unless the lottery fs us at least if this org has any clue what they are doing...
I mean taking a more traditional pg makes sense too if that is the bpa at the end of the day I dont think it would be.
I think Vassell and Okongwu are the best fits and best options for this current state of a rebuild. But if they want to ignore what they have and just keep piling potential like they did with Garland until a fit is created instead of constructing a machine with the right parts the rebuild is more like fishing in the dark with no bait


The draft doesn't guarantee that if you draft for fit you'll get it, but if you snag a valuable player and develop him you can trade for fit.

And to be clear, I was referring to Garland still having Lillard potential.

I for one dont think Garland has Dame potential, but I definitely thought it was stupid to take another small guard unless he was a signifcantly better player already as opposed to developing 2 scoring guards neither of which have the size to defend at a high level.
I mean it really was the epitome of a BPA situation where imo their scouts failed to put in enough effort in scouting his medicals and seeing if his flaws were repairable but instead they seemed content with taking Klutch advice


We drafted Garland because Sexton didn't look like he knew how to pass the ball let alone run an offense. He's still not where he needs to be, but did show improvement.

Garland did demonstrate more point abilities and I don't think they're doubting his abilities there. His weakness at the moment is literally weakness. His dribbling, shooting, and passing are all promising. He's struggling to score inside and defend which should improve as he develops more strength.

BPA in the current league are the players who can create and score followed by shoot. I get why we keep looking for a player who can do those things at a high level with our lottery picks and it wouldn't surprise me if we tried again.
Stillwater
RealGM
Posts: 12,855
And1: 3,244
Joined: Jun 15, 2017
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#13 » by Stillwater » Thu Aug 20, 2020 7:10 pm

JonFromVA wrote:
Stillwater wrote:
JonFromVA wrote:
The draft doesn't guarantee that if you draft for fit you'll get it, but if you snag a valuable player and develop him you can trade for fit.

And to be clear, I was referring to Garland still having Lillard potential.

I for one dont think Garland has Dame potential, but I definitely thought it was stupid to take another small guard unless he was a signifcantly better player already as opposed to developing 2 scoring guards neither of which have the size to defend at a high level.
I mean it really was the epitome of a BPA situation where imo their scouts failed to put in enough effort in scouting his medicals and seeing if his flaws were repairable but instead they seemed content with taking Klutch advice


We drafted Garland because Sexton didn't look like he knew how to pass the ball let alone run an offense. He's still not where he needs to be, but did show improvement.

Garland did demonstrate more point abilities and I don't think they're doubting his abilities there. His weakness at the moment is literally weakness. His dribbling, shooting, and passing are all promising. He's struggling to score inside and defend which should improve as he develops more strength.

BPA in the current league are the players who can create and score followed by shoot. I get why we keep looking for a player who can do those things at a high level with our lottery picks and it wouldn't surprise me if we tried again.

So Garland wasnt the BPA he was the Sexton replacement? which is it?or are you saying it was supposed to be both but obviously now realize he was neither?
I think he was picked based on 1 workout in LA set up by Klutch where Garland showcased his one on none shooting ability(which never transfered) and pairing that with his ability to break down highschool defenses and find cutters or kick it out when the middle collapsed on him etc. I mean its ovbvious DG has the egg to run an offense but lacks the physical chops to be a star in the league.

Sexton did not show enough to be considered a pass first point guard and obviously the tunnel vision indicated that he would ever be a pass first type , so you can say his status was the catalyst for the DG selection, I can live with that.

But imo it was based on flawed intel since DG clearly is nothing more than a less athletic scoring guard that can only be considered a better option at this point in time as a pg based on highschool tape since he didnt get it done on any level in the pros as a rook anyway. I mean the only positive data proving he at least reads defenses well and can make the right pass still remains his predraft highscool tape which we already are seeing becoming a reality from Sexton in his 2nd season and he is doing it against pros.

So even if they did draft him to be the pg of the future and not because they thought he was the bpa, or worse they did it thinking he was both of those things, I say right now at this point in time he isnt better as a passer or floor general than Sexton at all and given that aint saying much since neither are pass first true pg types it really should come as no surprise if Edwards ( the new Klutch poster child) is gone they will definitely be valuing a pass first type guard or later at some point in this draft if they are smart enough to go big or high upside 2 way wing early.
Thanks to isolation and becoming one with the darkness of self I have
now harnessed a semi- permanent hypnagogic state of consciousness
where the painted dream of the wayward soul is false reality bliss-
There's Mud in the moonshine- Stillwater
JonFromVA
Head Coach
Posts: 6,223
And1: 1,966
Joined: Dec 08, 2009
     

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#14 » by JonFromVA » Thu Aug 20, 2020 11:33 pm

Stillwater wrote:
JonFromVA wrote:
Stillwater wrote:I for one dont think Garland has Dame potential, but I definitely thought it was stupid to take another small guard unless he was a signifcantly better player already as opposed to developing 2 scoring guards neither of which have the size to defend at a high level.
I mean it really was the epitome of a BPA situation where imo their scouts failed to put in enough effort in scouting his medicals and seeing if his flaws were repairable but instead they seemed content with taking Klutch advice


We drafted Garland because Sexton didn't look like he knew how to pass the ball let alone run an offense. He's still not where he needs to be, but did show improvement.

Garland did demonstrate more point abilities and I don't think they're doubting his abilities there. His weakness at the moment is literally weakness. His dribbling, shooting, and passing are all promising. He's struggling to score inside and defend which should improve as he develops more strength.

BPA in the current league are the players who can create and score followed by shoot. I get why we keep looking for a player who can do those things at a high level with our lottery picks and it wouldn't surprise me if we tried again.

So Garland wasnt the BPA he was the Sexton replacement? which is it?or are you saying it was supposed to be both but obviously now realize he was neither?
I think he was picked based on 1 workout in LA set up by Klutch where Garland showcased his one on none shooting ability(which never transfered) and pairing that with his ability to break down highschool defenses and find cutters or kick it out when the middle collapsed on him etc. I mean its ovbvious DG has the egg to run an offense but lacks the physical chops to be a star in the league.

Sexton did not show enough to be considered a pass first point guard and obviously the tunnel vision indicated that he would ever be a pass first type , so you can say his status was the catalyst for the DG selection, I can live with that.

But imo it was based on flawed intel since DG clearly is nothing more than a less athletic scoring guard that can only be considered a better option at this point in time as a pg based on highschool tape since he didnt get it done on any level in the pros as a rook anyway. I mean the only positive data proving he at least reads defenses well and can make the right pass still remains his predraft highscool tape which we already are seeing becoming a reality from Sexton in his 2nd season and he is doing it against pros.

So even if they did draft him to be the pg of the future and not because they thought he was the bpa, or worse they did it thinking he was both of those things, I say right now at this point in time he isnt better as a passer or floor general than Sexton at all and given that aint saying much since neither are pass first true pg types it really should come as no surprise if Edwards ( the new Klutch poster child) is gone they will definitely be valuing a pass first type guard or later at some point in this draft if they are smart enough to go big or high upside 2 way wing early.


My point was pretty clear... we want a star from the lottery and there is no position conflict until its clear we have one.

I think you have a bias against Garland, don't know why, but we've talked enough about him in the past that I won't waste my time trying to explain why you might be missing things about him.

I remain hopeful about all our prospects. They all have a lot to prove and with some luck some of them will.
Stillwater
RealGM
Posts: 12,855
And1: 3,244
Joined: Jun 15, 2017
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#15 » by Stillwater » Fri Aug 21, 2020 12:06 am

JonFromVA wrote:
Stillwater wrote:
JonFromVA wrote:
We drafted Garland because Sexton didn't look like he knew how to pass the ball let alone run an offense. He's still not where he needs to be, but did show improvement.

Garland did demonstrate more point abilities and I don't think they're doubting his abilities there. His weakness at the moment is literally weakness. His dribbling, shooting, and passing are all promising. He's struggling to score inside and defend which should improve as he develops more strength.

BPA in the current league are the players who can create and score followed by shoot. I get why we keep looking for a player who can do those things at a high level with our lottery picks and it wouldn't surprise me if we tried again.

So Garland wasnt the BPA he was the Sexton replacement? which is it?or are you saying it was supposed to be both but obviously now realize he was neither?
I think he was picked based on 1 workout in LA set up by Klutch where Garland showcased his one on none shooting ability(which never transfered) and pairing that with his ability to break down highschool defenses and find cutters or kick it out when the middle collapsed on him etc. I mean its ovbvious DG has the egg to run an offense but lacks the physical chops to be a star in the league.

Sexton did not show enough to be considered a pass first point guard and obviously the tunnel vision indicated that he would ever be a pass first type , so you can say his status was the catalyst for the DG selection, I can live with that.

But imo it was based on flawed intel since DG clearly is nothing more than a less athletic scoring guard that can only be considered a better option at this point in time as a pg based on highschool tape since he didnt get it done on any level in the pros as a rook anyway. I mean the only positive data proving he at least reads defenses well and can make the right pass still remains his predraft highscool tape which we already are seeing becoming a reality from Sexton in his 2nd season and he is doing it against pros.

So even if they did draft him to be the pg of the future and not because they thought he was the bpa, or worse they did it thinking he was both of those things, I say right now at this point in time he isnt better as a passer or floor general than Sexton at all and given that aint saying much since neither are pass first true pg types it really should come as no surprise if Edwards ( the new Klutch poster child) is gone they will definitely be valuing a pass first type guard or later at some point in this draft if they are smart enough to go big or high upside 2 way wing early.


My point was pretty clear... we want a star from the lottery and there is no position conflict until its clear we have one.

I think you have a bias against Garland, don't know why, but we've talked enough about him in the past that I won't waste my time trying to explain why you might be missing things about him.

I remain hopeful about all our prospects. They all have a lot to prove and with some luck some of them will.

I dont like the front office decision tree when it is clearly governed by outside influences like Klutch.
Now my feeling was and remains that although Garland was considered a high value target most of the pre draft process it was always a gamble to take him without any more than what he had shown in a workout setting when a prospect like White was killing it all season for UNC . Granted I would not have taken a guard at all there because this draft was loaded with them and it made more sense to me to take the next best wing or even big like Sekou or KPJ or even Hayes would not have been a terrible choice the latter of whom could have been selected a few picks later in a trade down.
Garland had my eye based on his potential as a elite shooter,before his injury but I never saw proven ability in HS film and he really is just a high iq kid with the ability to run an offense against meh defenders that doesnt require him to be athletic or become a high % shot maker.
He could still become something special, but my guess is the definition of special will equate to something other than greatness.
He should not have been looked at as a potential star imo never saw that myself and still dont
Thanks to isolation and becoming one with the darkness of self I have
now harnessed a semi- permanent hypnagogic state of consciousness
where the painted dream of the wayward soul is false reality bliss-
There's Mud in the moonshine- Stillwater
User avatar
gflem
Veteran
Posts: 2,837
And1: 200
Joined: Sep 11, 2004

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#16 » by gflem » Fri Aug 21, 2020 12:15 am

As for a Drummond extension, I don't see why a two year extension with the second year a player/team option would necessarily be a bad thing if the money was ok. I mean, two years at a total of $32 mil, front loaded as much as is legal wouldn't be bad imo.
Even if we draft Wiseman he would not have the weight of being the savior of the franchise immediately, and if say Drummond's contract was something like 17 mil year one and 15 year two (not that he would definitely sign for that) he would be more tradeable going into year two with one year remaining either at this upcoming seasons deadline or after the season.
I just see him as a player that can bring back some assets at some point if the FO doesn't have to overpay to re-sign him. I feel the same about TT as well, though for me it is an either or situation. I really wouldn't want to see both players brought back. Now I wouldn't be heartbroken if neither is brought back but one or the other on a reasonable contract like I mentioned above (a bit less for TT than Drummond) could be a way to acquire some additional draft assets imo.
JonFromVA
Head Coach
Posts: 6,223
And1: 1,966
Joined: Dec 08, 2009
     

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#17 » by JonFromVA » Fri Aug 21, 2020 1:02 am

Stillwater wrote:
JonFromVA wrote:
Stillwater wrote:So Garland wasnt the BPA he was the Sexton replacement? which is it?or are you saying it was supposed to be both but obviously now realize he was neither?
I think he was picked based on 1 workout in LA set up by Klutch where Garland showcased his one on none shooting ability(which never transfered) and pairing that with his ability to break down highschool defenses and find cutters or kick it out when the middle collapsed on him etc. I mean its ovbvious DG has the egg to run an offense but lacks the physical chops to be a star in the league.

Sexton did not show enough to be considered a pass first point guard and obviously the tunnel vision indicated that he would ever be a pass first type , so you can say his status was the catalyst for the DG selection, I can live with that.

But imo it was based on flawed intel since DG clearly is nothing more than a less athletic scoring guard that can only be considered a better option at this point in time as a pg based on highschool tape since he didnt get it done on any level in the pros as a rook anyway. I mean the only positive data proving he at least reads defenses well and can make the right pass still remains his predraft highscool tape which we already are seeing becoming a reality from Sexton in his 2nd season and he is doing it against pros.

So even if they did draft him to be the pg of the future and not because they thought he was the bpa, or worse they did it thinking he was both of those things, I say right now at this point in time he isnt better as a passer or floor general than Sexton at all and given that aint saying much since neither are pass first true pg types it really should come as no surprise if Edwards ( the new Klutch poster child) is gone they will definitely be valuing a pass first type guard or later at some point in this draft if they are smart enough to go big or high upside 2 way wing early.


My point was pretty clear... we want a star from the lottery and there is no position conflict until its clear we have one.

I think you have a bias against Garland, don't know why, but we've talked enough about him in the past that I won't waste my time trying to explain why you might be missing things about him.

I remain hopeful about all our prospects. They all have a lot to prove and with some luck some of them will.

I dont like the front office decision tree when it is clearly governed by outside influences like Klutch.
Now my feeling was and remains that although Garland was considered a high value target most of the pre draft process it was always a gamble to take him without any more than what he had shown in a workout setting when a prospect like White was killing it all season for UNC . Granted I would not have taken a guard at all there because this draft was loaded with them and it made more sense to me to take the next best wing or even big like Sekou or KPJ or even Hayes would not have been a terrible choice the latter of whom could have been selected a few picks later in a trade down.
Garland had my eye based on his potential as a elite shooter,before his injury but I never saw proven ability in HS film and he really is just a high iq kid with the ability to run an offense against meh defenders that doesnt require him to be athletic or become a high % shot maker.
He could still become something special, but my guess is the definition of special will equate to something other than greatness.
He should not have been looked at as a potential star imo never saw that myself and still dont


There's more than just highschool tape on Garland.

Their Kutch relationship got the Cavs invited to that workout, there's no reason with James gone for them to draft a Klutch client, though.

White was perceived as a taller Sexton. Drafting him would had been even more redundant. His rookie stats don't seem to dispel that notion.

Garland has leadership qualities in addition to court awareness that simply grants him a higher ceiling as a playmaker.

It would had been great to have had a full healthy College season from Garland, but consider how far off the radar Ja Morant was after his freshman year.

Our scouts may very well stink at their job or maybe Dan just doesn't listen to them, but only time will tell.
jbk1234
Forum Mod - Cavs
Forum Mod - Cavs
Posts: 38,633
And1: 22,312
Joined: Dec 22, 2010
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#18 » by jbk1234 » Fri Aug 28, 2020 5:37 pm

gflem wrote:As for a Drummond extension, I don't see why a two year extension with the second year a player/team option would necessarily be a bad thing if the money was ok. I mean, two years at a total of $32 mil, front loaded as much as is legal wouldn't be bad imo.
Even if we draft Wiseman he would not have the weight of being the savior of the franchise immediately, and if say Drummond's contract was something like 17 mil year one and 15 year two (not that he would definitely sign for that) he would be more tradeable going into year two with one year remaining either at this upcoming seasons deadline or after the season.
I just see him as a player that can bring back some assets at some point if the FO doesn't have to overpay to re-sign him. I feel the same about TT as well, though for me it is an either or situation. I really wouldn't want to see both players brought back. Now I wouldn't be heartbroken if neither is brought back but one or the other on a reasonable contract like I mentioned above (a bit less for TT than Drummond) could be a way to acquire some additional draft assets imo.
I don't see Drummond as being viewed as a positive asset on a contract at more than $8M per tbh. I think half the teams in the league have zero interest in starting a player like him at center night in and night out.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app
It is highly unlikely that the Cavs will agree with your Kevin Love evaluation for the purpose of a trade.
Revenged25
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,666
And1: 573
Joined: Jun 05, 2018
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#19 » by Revenged25 » Fri Aug 28, 2020 6:54 pm

jbk1234 wrote:
gflem wrote:As for a Drummond extension, I don't see why a two year extension with the second year a player/team option would necessarily be a bad thing if the money was ok. I mean, two years at a total of $32 mil, front loaded as much as is legal wouldn't be bad imo.
Even if we draft Wiseman he would not have the weight of being the savior of the franchise immediately, and if say Drummond's contract was something like 17 mil year one and 15 year two (not that he would definitely sign for that) he would be more tradeable going into year two with one year remaining either at this upcoming seasons deadline or after the season.
I just see him as a player that can bring back some assets at some point if the FO doesn't have to overpay to re-sign him. I feel the same about TT as well, though for me it is an either or situation. I really wouldn't want to see both players brought back. Now I wouldn't be heartbroken if neither is brought back but one or the other on a reasonable contract like I mentioned above (a bit less for TT than Drummond) could be a way to acquire some additional draft assets imo.
I don't see Drummond as being viewed as a positive asset on a contract at more than $8M per tbh. I think half the teams in the league have zero interest in starting a player like him at center night in and night out.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app


Considering the number of stretch 4's that can't play defense Drummond definitely has a place in the league and might get paid for what he does well which is rebound and alter/block shots in the paint. So I think a Love/Drummond front court is about the best pairing either could have in that instance. Though I definitely think TT is more of what the NBA is looking for as a big that can switch and play perimeter defense just his lack of shot blocking/altering hurts his overall value. Though the number of centers that can play perimeter defense/switch and alter/block shots well are what? 3 or 4 if that? Probably the biggest reason I'd be interested in Okongwu.
Stillwater
RealGM
Posts: 12,855
And1: 3,244
Joined: Jun 15, 2017
   

Re: A Drummond extension? 

Post#20 » by Stillwater » Sat Aug 29, 2020 12:24 am

After hearing Koby on 92.3 today I think he is nervous about potentially not having private workout settings after already having no tournament film to watch on prospects , he also when asked said there is mutual interest with TT but he wasnt getting into it do to him being a FA etc.
I would be surprised if any move they make with Dre will be long term unless they see it as easier to get assets in return if they move on at the deadline or next summer by extending sooner.
Thanks to isolation and becoming one with the darkness of self I have
now harnessed a semi- permanent hypnagogic state of consciousness
where the painted dream of the wayward soul is false reality bliss-
There's Mud in the moonshine- Stillwater

Return to Cleveland Cavaliers