Cavs fans Big Board

[jbk1234]

Agbaji has a notable volume lead, but Sexton has a better career NBA 3p% than Agbaji does in college, over the same timespan.

I don't disagree that if you're correct that if the Cavs need exactly the skills you think they need at the 2 (which I disagree with), AND Agbaji's shooting and defense translate, that he'd be a fine pick, but never a home run where he turns into an elite two-way guy. But plenty of 4-year guys have had their shooting and defense not translate all the way.

Put another way: the upside on a 4-year guy whose main/only skills are 3 and D translate right away is Malcolm Brogdon. You could trade much less than the #14 pick to get Malcolm Brogdon right now.

I guess it really comes down to how good you think Allen, Mobley and Garland are. Either you think that with time they'll be enough, with the right commentary pieces around them, or not. But my fear with guys like LeVert and Sexton is that they'll take the ball out of the hands of those three, and the result will be worse, not better in terms of overall team efficiency.

It's not just the made threes, but the ability of Allen, Mobley, and Garland not to have to play through double teams if they're surrounded by good shooters that I'd really like to see. I think that type of spacing is probably going to be necessary for Mobley to develop into the player we want him to be.

In terms of Agbaji, he's probably the best three point shooter of the two players in this draft, and if you compare his shooting numbers with Sexton's college numbers, or even his rookie numbers, it's not close. But again, he'll be gone and we don't have that Houston 2nd to try to jump a team like the Hornets. There's just too many win now teams picking ahead of us for a 4-year player to fall that far IMO.

There's no evidence that 4-year players in the college spotlight are any better at helping you win now than younger guys. Otherwise they would've been drafted earlier. What did Davion Mitchell do? Plus shooter in college his senior year, shot 31% his first year in the NBA. What did Korey Kispert do? Plus shooter all four years in college, shot 35% from 3 in the NBA. Let's win now, guys!

All you really know is that they have less time to hit their ceiling.

There are counter examples as well, but my point is that the Knicks, Hornets, Spurs, and Pelicans, etc. aren't necessarily wanting to wait three years on a player to develop either.

[JonFromVA]

I mean there's a reason the NBA requires their teams to post their players true measurements now. There's reason that the combine and private workouts became a thing. You don't want to punish honesty, which is what you're doing if you assume every team is adding 2-3 inches.

If I remember right there wasn't a combine that season, so the measurements being thrown around for Isaac are harder to source. Maybe from Auburn, Nike, TeamUSA, who knows ... but they could have been in shoes.

He's listed at 6'5" at nba.com which could still mean he's 6'4.5", but that's all consistent with a 6'6" in shoes measurement.

I mean are we upset that Allen is only 6'10" and Mobley/Markkenan are only 6'11" ?

No, because all three of those guys can still play their positions at their listed heights and you know this.

There's a big difference between a SF who is 6'8" and one who is 6'6" in terms of who he can switch onto and who he can cause a matchup problem for on the other side. There's a big difference between a wing who's 6'4" and 6'6" in terms what positions he can defend at a high level.

You either get your hand up in the shooter's view of the rim or you don't. That's how defense is played on the perimeter and that's why I refuse to write off Isaac as a SF.

Of course it wouldn't hurt if Isaac had more length, a bigger standing reach, wingspan, etc, but he can overcome all that through footwork, technique, scouting, reputation, and mostly experience.

[toooskies]

I guess it really comes down to how good you think Allen, Mobley and Garland are. Either you think that with time they'll be enough, with the right commentary pieces around them, or not. But my fear with guys like LeVert and Sexton is that they'll take the ball out of the hands of those three, and the result will be worse, not better in terms of overall team efficiency.

It's not just the made threes, but the ability of Allen, Mobley, and Garland not to have to play through double teams if they're surrounded by good shooters that I'd really like to see. I think that type of spacing is probably going to be necessary for Mobley to develop into the player we want him to be.

In terms of Agbaji, he's probably the best three point shooter of the two players in this draft, and if you compare his shooting numbers with Sexton's college numbers, or even his rookie numbers, it's not close. But again, he'll be gone and we don't have that Houston 2nd to try to jump a team like the Hornets. There's just too many win now teams picking ahead of us for a 4-year player to fall that far IMO.

There's no evidence that 4-year players in the college spotlight are any better at helping you win now than younger guys. Otherwise they would've been drafted earlier. What did Davion Mitchell do? Plus shooter in college his senior year, shot 31% his first year in the NBA. What did Korey Kispert do? Plus shooter all four years in college, shot 35% from 3 in the NBA. Let's win now, guys!

All you really know is that they have less time to hit their ceiling.

There are counter examples as well, but my point is that the Knicks, Hornets, Spurs, and Pelicans, etc. aren't necessarily wanting to wait three years on a player to develop either.

Which is entirely the wrong way to approach the draft. (So the Knicks fit, but I think the Hornets, Spurs, and Pelicans know better.) Most players are replacement-level their first year. Picks 9 through 15 this year all had a negative VORP, some didn't play at all. Sexton, Garland, Okoro were all terrible their first year, with Garland and Sexton not being really good until year 3.

You don't draft to be better this year, you draft to be better in 3-5 years. If you're lucky, you might find the guy who can play immediately, but the odds of that guy being available when you pick at the position you need is pretty low.

When Agbaji is up for his second contract, he'll be 26 years old. He'll want you to project future growth the same you'd do with a 23 year-old. Except he'll already be at or beyond his physical peak. That's how you end up with Buddy Hield contracts.

[JonFromVA]

Agbaji has a notable volume lead, but Sexton has a better career NBA 3p% than Agbaji does in college, over the same timespan.

I don't disagree that if you're correct that if the Cavs need exactly the skills you think they need at the 2 (which I disagree with), AND Agbaji's shooting and defense translate, that he'd be a fine pick, but never a home run where he turns into an elite two-way guy. But plenty of 4-year guys have had their shooting and defense not translate all the way.

Put another way: the upside on a 4-year guy whose main/only skills are 3 and D translate right away is Malcolm Brogdon. You could trade much less than the #14 pick to get Malcolm Brogdon right now.

I guess it really comes down to how good you think Allen, Mobley and Garland are. Either you think that with time they'll be enough, with the right commentary pieces around them, or not. But my fear with guys like LeVert and Sexton is that they'll take the ball out of the hands of those three, and the result will be worse, not better in terms of overall team efficiency.

It's not just the made threes, but the ability of Allen, Mobley, and Garland not to have to play through double teams if they're surrounded by good shooters that I'd really like to see. I think that type of spacing is probably going to be necessary for Mobley to develop into the player we want him to be.

In terms of Agbaji, he's probably the best three point shooter of the two players in this draft, and if you compare his shooting numbers with Sexton's college numbers, or even his rookie numbers, it's not close. But again, he'll be gone and we don't have that Houston 2nd to try to jump a team like the Hornets. There's just too many win now teams picking ahead of us for a 4-year player to fall that far IMO.

There's no evidence that 4-year players in the college spotlight are any better at helping you win now than younger guys. Otherwise they would've been drafted earlier. What did Davion Mitchell do? Plus shooter in college his senior year, shot 31% his first year in the NBA. What did Korey Kispert do? Plus shooter all four years in college, shot 35% from 3 in the NBA. Let's win now, guys!

All you really know is that they have less time to hit their ceiling.

Personally, I try not to give a guy too much credit for sticking around in the NCAA. If you want to compare Kispert to an 18 year old freshman, then go look at what Kispert did as an 18 year old (< 7/3/1). If that holds up to your 18 year old, then you can eliminate some risk by grabbing the guy who developed rather than potentially stagnated.

[jbk1234]

If I remember right there wasn't a combine that season, so the measurements being thrown around for Isaac are harder to source. Maybe from Auburn, Nike, TeamUSA, who knows ... but they could have been in shoes.

He's listed at 6'5" at nba.com which could still mean he's 6'4.5", but that's all consistent with a 6'6" in shoes measurement.

I mean are we upset that Allen is only 6'10" and Mobley/Markkenan are only 6'11" ?

No, because all three of those guys can still play their positions at their listed heights and you know this.

There's a big difference between a SF who is 6'8" and one who is 6'6" in terms of who he can switch onto and who he can cause a matchup problem for on the other side. There's a big difference between a wing who's 6'4" and 6'6" in terms what positions he can defend at a high level.

You either get your hand up in the shooter's view of the rim or you don't. That's how defense is played on the perimeter and that's why I refuse to write off Isaac as a SF.

Of course it wouldn't hurt if Isaac had more length, a bigger standing reach, wingspan, etc, but he can overcome all that through footwork, technique, scouting, reputation, and mostly experience.

It helps if you're a threat to actually touch the ball when you get your hand up. Once a guy has figured out he can just shoot over you, he's going to keep shooting over you.

I like Isaac. He seems like a hard worker, he plays the right way, and he's a no-drama type of guy. I'm not yet ready to write him off or trade him in a lateral move like a lot of Cavs fans. Having said all of that, his ability to lock up guys 1-3 was oversold, and if the Cavs really knew that he was 6'4 when they drafted him, then they should've known he'd struggle to defend SFs in the NBA. I have him as almost exclusively a 2 guard as a starter against most teams.

I always prefer to give 19-year old players, especially ones who you know are a project on one end of the court, three full seasons. But Isaac probably needs to show more offensively next season if he's going to continue to start or be more than a high-end role player off the bench.

[JonFromVA]

No, because all three of those guys can still play their positions at their listed heights and you know this.

There's a big difference between a SF who is 6'8" and one who is 6'6" in terms of who he can switch onto and who he can cause a matchup problem for on the other side. There's a big difference between a wing who's 6'4" and 6'6" in terms what positions he can defend at a high level.

You either get your hand up in the shooter's view of the rim or you don't. That's how defense is played on the perimeter and that's why I refuse to write off Isaac as a SF.

Of course it wouldn't hurt if Isaac had more length, a bigger standing reach, wingspan, etc, but he can overcome all that through footwork, technique, scouting, reputation, and mostly experience.

It helps if you're a threat to actually touch the ball when you get your hand up. Once a guy has figured out he can just shoot over you, he's going to keep shooting over you.

I like Isaac. He seems like a hard worker, he plays the right way, and he's a no-drama type of guy. I'm not yet ready to write him off or trade him in a lateral move like a lot of Cavs fans. Having said all of that, his ability to lock up guys 1-3 was oversold, and if the Cavs really knew that he was 6'4 when they drafted him, then they should've known he'd struggle to defend SFs in the NBA. I have him as almost exclusively a 2 guard as a starter against most teams.

I always prefer to give 19-year old players, especially ones who you know are a project on one end of the court, three full seasons. But Isaac probably needs to show more offensively next season if he's going to continue to start or be more than a high-end role player off the bench.

Isaac is 6'5" in socks (why do you keep shrinking him?) and he just has to continue to help us win games. Knox and Reddish have all the measureables you might want and Thibs refused to play them. Isaac barely makes a dent in the box score, and it probably hurts JBB's brain to even consider sitting him down because he's already that happy with Isaac's defense like he's a 21 year old reincarnation of prime Tony Allen.

How many players have become 1-3 lockdown defenders at the age of 21 and what makes you think that was the Cavs expectation for him?

[jbk1234]

You either get your hand up in the shooter's view of the rim or you don't. That's how defense is played on the perimeter and that's why I refuse to write off Isaac as a SF.

Of course it wouldn't hurt if Isaac had more length, a bigger standing reach, wingspan, etc, but he can overcome all that through footwork, technique, scouting, reputation, and mostly experience.

It helps if you're a threat to actually touch the ball when you get your hand up. Once a guy has figured out he can just shoot over you, he's going to keep shooting over you.

I like Isaac. He seems like a hard worker, he plays the right way, and he's a no-drama type of guy. I'm not yet ready to write him off or trade him in a lateral move like a lot of Cavs fans. Having said all of that, his ability to lock up guys 1-3 was oversold, and if the Cavs really knew that he was 6'4 when they drafted him, then they should've known he'd struggle to defend SFs in the NBA. I have him as almost exclusively a 2 guard as a starter against most teams.

I always prefer to give 19-year old players, especially ones who you know are a project on one end of the court, three full seasons. But Isaac probably needs to show more offensively next season if he's going to continue to start or be more than a high-end role player off the bench.

Isaac is 6'5" in socks (why do you keep shrinking him?) and he just has to continue to help us win games. Knox and Reddish have all the measureables you might want and Thibs refused to play them. Isaac barely makes a dent in the box score, and it probably hurts JBB's brain to even consider sitting him down because he's already that happy with Isaac's defense like he's a 21 year old reincarnation of prime Tony Allen.

How many players have become 1-3 lockdown defenders at the age of 21 and what makes you think that was the Cavs expectation for him?

I think Isaac is going to have to leave his feet to truly contest against most SFs, and in a league where one out of every three players engages in pretty egregious ref baiting, I think that will forever be a disadvantage for him. If the Cavs saw him as an answer at SF despite his height, then that only leads me to ask more questions.

[JonFromVA]

It helps if you're a threat to actually touch the ball when you get your hand up. Once a guy has figured out he can just shoot over you, he's going to keep shooting over you.

I like Isaac. He seems like a hard worker, he plays the right way, and he's a no-drama type of guy. I'm not yet ready to write him off or trade him in a lateral move like a lot of Cavs fans. Having said all of that, his ability to lock up guys 1-3 was oversold, and if the Cavs really knew that he was 6'4 when they drafted him, then they should've known he'd struggle to defend SFs in the NBA. I have him as almost exclusively a 2 guard as a starter against most teams.

I always prefer to give 19-year old players, especially ones who you know are a project on one end of the court, three full seasons. But Isaac probably needs to show more offensively next season if he's going to continue to start or be more than a high-end role player off the bench.

Isaac is 6'5" in socks (why do you keep shrinking him?) and he just has to continue to help us win games. Knox and Reddish have all the measureables you might want and Thibs refused to play them. Isaac barely makes a dent in the box score, and it probably hurts JBB's brain to even consider sitting him down because he's already that happy with Isaac's defense like he's a 21 year old reincarnation of prime Tony Allen.

How many players have become 1-3 lockdown defenders at the age of 21 and what makes you think that was the Cavs expectation for him?

I think Isaac is going to have to leave his feet to truly contest against most SFs, and in a league where one out of every three players engages in pretty egregious ref baiting, I think that will forever be a disadvantage for him. If the Cavs saw him as an answer at SF despite his height, then that only leads me to ask more questions.

That shouldn't be necessary unless he's late on a close out - which admittedly happens quite a bit since we over help in the paint.

I mean, I love the fact Mobley can play pretty far off a shooter and still with his length get a hand up to contest and occasionally block a shot ... but the only thing Isaac *has* to do is stay close, play as physical as the refs will allow that game, use his footwork to prevent getting beat off the dribble, and put his hand up.

Easier said than done, but all it takes with Isaac's ability is dedication, watching tape, and experience.

And of course there's an art to jumping to contest a shot without fouling that isn't really all that difficult to master. If the defender jumps to the side of the shooter the refs won't grant the shooter a foul for leaning left/right in to the defender anymore.

[toooskies]

We haven't seen all that much run of Okoro guarding 3s anyway because the majority of time that he's spent out there was with Garland and Sexton as the 1 and 2, and Okoro was taking the toughest defensive assignment. And then this year when he was mostly at the 2. The weakness there is not so much that Okoro can't play the 3, it's that Okoro and two shorter guys make it hard for Okoro to guard anyone else other than their SF-- and if the SF is the toughest defensive assignment, that guy is also often a PF-sized player who can handle the ball, so anyone on the current roster would have trouble.

[JonFromVA]

Lamar does ok with bigger players (including PF's) and he's only about an inch taller, and 5lbs heavier; but he's used to playing against bigger players and has been doing it for 3.5 more years ...

[jbk1234]

Lamar does ok with bigger players (including PF's) and he's only about an inch taller, and 5lbs heavier; but he's used to playing against bigger players and has been doing it for 3.5 more years ...

Yeah, if there's one player who I think Cavs fans constantly overrate it's Stevens. He doesn't have the lateral speed to stay in front of quicker wings. He's barely playable if the game is being called tight and couldn't play a starter's minutes without fouling out. Also, as as soon as he has a couple of good possessions offensively, it gets good to him, and find myself yelling stop at the TV as he starts forcing up bad shots.

He has a role when officials are letting things go, but I wouldn't want to pencil him in as any kind of starter.

[JonFromVA]

Lamar does ok with bigger players (including PF's) and he's only about an inch taller, and 5lbs heavier; but he's used to playing against bigger players and has been doing it for 3.5 more years ...

Yeah, if there's one player who I think Cavs fans constantly overrate it's Stevens. He doesn't have the lateral speed to stay in front of quicker wings. He's barely playable if the game is being called tight and couldn't play a starter's minutes without fouling out. Also, as as soon as he has a couple of good possessions offensively, it gets good to him, and find myself yelling stop at the TV as he starts forcing up bad shots.

He has a role when officials are letting things go, but I wouldn't want to pencil him in as any kind of starter.

Not sure who overrates Stevens, but fans do tend to judge an undrafted player differently than the 5th pick in the draft.

[toooskies]

Lamar does ok with bigger players (including PF's) and he's only about an inch taller, and 5lbs heavier; but he's used to playing against bigger players and has been doing it for 3.5 more years ...

Yeah, if there's one player who I think Cavs fans constantly overrate it's Stevens. He doesn't have the lateral speed to stay in front of quicker wings. He's barely playable if the game is being called tight and couldn't play a starter's minutes without fouling out. Also, as as soon as he has a couple of good possessions offensively, it gets good to him, and find myself yelling stop at the TV as he starts forcing up bad shots.

He has a role when officials are letting things go, but I wouldn't want to pencil him in as any kind of starter.

I don't think anyone is asking Stevens to frequently guard quicker wings, but he is probably the guy we want on the bigger ones if Lauri slides back to PF.

To your points, he fouls 3.8 times per 36 minutes. More like a flat 3 fouls in 28 minutes in his current rate. While he had a few memorable fouling streaks (I remember him drawing some quick ones against the Bulls on three straight possessions?), he fouls less per 36 than starters Jae'Sean Tate or Jaren Jackson Jr. or Patrick Beverly. Yes, that'll put him in foul trouble sometimes, it is above average. But it's not an unplayable rate for a starter-- JJJ is in the running for DPOY. (Not saying Lamar is in the category of JJJ or Beverly other than that his defense is his best skill.)

I also think he gets a lot of the calls that the refs make against the Cavs to try to seem unbiased, because most of the rest of the team is great at reducing foul rate.

His TS% is right around league average (great for a guy without a 3-point shot), and despite your protests, he was about as good a shooter from mid-range as anyone on the Cavs-- close to tied with Garland on 2s from 10 feet out.

[jbk1234]

Lamar does ok with bigger players (including PF's) and he's only about an inch taller, and 5lbs heavier; but he's used to playing against bigger players and has been doing it for 3.5 more years ...

Yeah, if there's one player who I think Cavs fans constantly overrate it's Stevens. He doesn't have the lateral speed to stay in front of quicker wings. He's barely playable if the game is being called tight and couldn't play a starter's minutes without fouling out. Also, as as soon as he has a couple of good possessions offensively, it gets good to him, and find myself yelling stop at the TV as he starts forcing up bad shots.

He has a role when officials are letting things go, but I wouldn't want to pencil him in as any kind of starter.

I don't think anyone is asking Stevens to frequently guard quicker wings, but he is probably the guy we want on the bigger ones if Lauri slides back to PF.

To your points, he fouls 3.8 times per 36 minutes. More like a flat 3 fouls in 28 minutes in his current rate. While he had a few memorable fouling streaks (I remember him drawing some quick ones against the Bulls on three straight possessions?), he fouls less per 36 than starters Jae'Sean Tate or Jaren Jackson Jr. or Patrick Beverly. Yes, that'll put him in foul trouble sometimes, it is above average. But it's not an unplayable rate for a starter-- JJJ is in the running for DPOY. (Not saying Lamar is in the category of JJJ or Beverly other than that his defense is his best skill.)

I also think he gets a lot of the calls that the refs make against the Cavs to try to seem unbiased, because most of the rest of the team is great at reducing foul rate.

His TS% is right around league average (great for a guy without a 3-point shot), and despite your protests, he was about as good a shooter from mid-range as anyone on the Cavs-- close to tied with Garland on 2s from 10 feet out.

Yeah, same problem as LeVert. Neither the 2 nor the 3 can be relying on 10 foot mid range shots with an Allen, Mobley, and Garland on the court. That space needs to be primarily reserved for those guys to go to work. He does a lot of unsuccessful foul baiting as well.

As far as his defense, it's just mad overrated. He can't handle getting switched onto smaller, faster players, and when teams target him like that, which was happening more often as he got scouted, it went south in a hurry.

[toooskies]

Yeah, if there's one player who I think Cavs fans constantly overrate it's Stevens. He doesn't have the lateral speed to stay in front of quicker wings. He's barely playable if the game is being called tight and couldn't play a starter's minutes without fouling out. Also, as as soon as he has a couple of good possessions offensively, it gets good to him, and find myself yelling stop at the TV as he starts forcing up bad shots.

He has a role when officials are letting things go, but I wouldn't want to pencil him in as any kind of starter.

I don't think anyone is asking Stevens to frequently guard quicker wings, but he is probably the guy we want on the bigger ones if Lauri slides back to PF.

To your points, he fouls 3.8 times per 36 minutes. More like a flat 3 fouls in 28 minutes in his current rate. While he had a few memorable fouling streaks (I remember him drawing some quick ones against the Bulls on three straight possessions?), he fouls less per 36 than starters Jae'Sean Tate or Jaren Jackson Jr. or Patrick Beverly. Yes, that'll put him in foul trouble sometimes, it is above average. But it's not an unplayable rate for a starter-- JJJ is in the running for DPOY. (Not saying Lamar is in the category of JJJ or Beverly other than that his defense is his best skill.)

I also think he gets a lot of the calls that the refs make against the Cavs to try to seem unbiased, because most of the rest of the team is great at reducing foul rate.

His TS% is right around league average (great for a guy without a 3-point shot), and despite your protests, he was about as good a shooter from mid-range as anyone on the Cavs-- close to tied with Garland on 2s from 10 feet out.

Yeah, same problem as LeVert. Neither the 2 nor the 3 can be relying on 10 foot mid range shots with an Allen, Mobley, and Garland on the court. That space needs to be primarily reserved for those guys to go to work. He does a lot of unsuccessful foul baiting as well.

As far as his defense, it's just mad overrated. He can't handle getting switched onto smaller, faster players, and when teams target him like that, which was happening more often as he got scouted, it went south in a hurry.

I know you want to run a Garland heliocentric offense with Mobley as the secondary creator, but neither guy really succeeded at those roles this year. Garland's efficiency went down post-All Star break and Mobley, while flashing some of those skills, didn't really do any better at the end of the year than he did at the beginning in that regard. I was surprised and enjoyed Stevens' shot-making and creation, making the worst defender on the other team defend.

I don't think I overrate his defense, he doesn't make us significantly better on that end other than being strong enough to defend bigger 3s, which is entirely the role we're discussing now. Yeah, he's not great when switched onto quicker guys, but that's what Okoro is for.

[jbk1234]

I don't think anyone is asking Stevens to frequently guard quicker wings, but he is probably the guy we want on the bigger ones if Lauri slides back to PF.

To your points, he fouls 3.8 times per 36 minutes. More like a flat 3 fouls in 28 minutes in his current rate. While he had a few memorable fouling streaks (I remember him drawing some quick ones against the Bulls on three straight possessions?), he fouls less per 36 than starters Jae'Sean Tate or Jaren Jackson Jr. or Patrick Beverly. Yes, that'll put him in foul trouble sometimes, it is above average. But it's not an unplayable rate for a starter-- JJJ is in the running for DPOY. (Not saying Lamar is in the category of JJJ or Beverly other than that his defense is his best skill.)

I also think he gets a lot of the calls that the refs make against the Cavs to try to seem unbiased, because most of the rest of the team is great at reducing foul rate.

His TS% is right around league average (great for a guy without a 3-point shot), and despite your protests, he was about as good a shooter from mid-range as anyone on the Cavs-- close to tied with Garland on 2s from 10 feet out.

Yeah, same problem as LeVert. Neither the 2 nor the 3 can be relying on 10 foot mid range shots with an Allen, Mobley, and Garland on the court. That space needs to be primarily reserved for those guys to go to work. He does a lot of unsuccessful foul baiting as well.

As far as his defense, it's just mad overrated. He can't handle getting switched onto smaller, faster players, and when teams target him like that, which was happening more often as he got scouted, it went south in a hurry.

I know you want to run a Garland heliocentric offense with Mobley as the secondary creator, but neither guy really succeeded at those roles this year. Garland's efficiency went down post-All Star break and Mobley, while flashing some of those skills, didn't really do any better at the end of the year than he did at the beginning in that regard. I was surprised and enjoyed Stevens' shot-making and creation, making the worst defender on the other team defend.

I don't think I overrate his defense, he doesn't make us significantly better on that end other than being strong enough to defend bigger 3s, which is entirely the role we're discussing now. Yeah, he's not great when switched onto quicker guys, but that's what Okoro is for.

You have to be able to beat a box and one type defense and you can't do it with five guys who want to shoot from within the box.

[toooskies]

Yeah, same problem as LeVert. Neither the 2 nor the 3 can be relying on 10 foot mid range shots with an Allen, Mobley, and Garland on the court. That space needs to be primarily reserved for those guys to go to work. He does a lot of unsuccessful foul baiting as well.

As far as his defense, it's just mad overrated. He can't handle getting switched onto smaller, faster players, and when teams target him like that, which was happening more often as he got scouted, it went south in a hurry.

I know you want to run a Garland heliocentric offense with Mobley as the secondary creator, but neither guy really succeeded at those roles this year. Garland's efficiency went down post-All Star break and Mobley, while flashing some of those skills, didn't really do any better at the end of the year than he did at the beginning in that regard. I was surprised and enjoyed Stevens' shot-making and creation, making the worst defender on the other team defend.

I don't think I overrate his defense, he doesn't make us significantly better on that end other than being strong enough to defend bigger 3s, which is entirely the role we're discussing now. Yeah, he's not great when switched onto quicker guys, but that's what Okoro is for.

You have to be able to beat a box and one type defense and you can't do it with five guys who want to shoot from within the box.

Yes you can. The box and one zone is older than the three point line. As long as the other team is still emphasizing guarding the rim, there will be big holes in the zone in the midrange.

[tundraknight]

Supposedly the Cavaliers are very interesting in Dyson Daniels, but acknowledge he likely won’t last until the 14th pick.

https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2022/05/2022-nba-draft-cleveland-cavaliers-have-interest-in-dyson-daniels-but-will-he-be-available-at-no-14.html?outputType=amp

“It’s a tough one for me because I have such a unique game,’’ Daniels said when asked about his NBA comparison. “I have a very good offensive game but I’m a good defender. On the offensive end I play a little like Tyrese Haliburton, someone in control. I feel on the defensive end I’m like Lonzo Ball and Alex Caruso, people like that. I feel I have the frame once the game slows down for me I hope to develop into a Luka Doncic-type role.’’

Daniels measured over 6-foot-7 with a wingspan just under 6-foot-11 while weighing 195 pounds and having 4.9% body fat at the combine.

That unique frame, combined with his athleticism, vision, playmaking and defensive versatility, makes him a potential top 10 pick -- even with looming questions about the reliability of his outside shot. When taking into account both the Ignite Tour and the G league Showcase season, Daniels went 30-of-100 (30%) from 3-point range. One scout who has seen Daniels said the shot isn’t “broken,” but needs “tweaks.”

[JonFromVA]

Supposedly the Cavaliers are very interesting in Dyson Daniels, but acknowledge he likely won’t last until the 14th pick.

https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2022/05/2022-nba-draft-cleveland-cavaliers-have-interest-in-dyson-daniels-but-will-he-be-available-at-no-14.html?outputType=amp

“It’s a tough one for me because I have such a unique game,’’ Daniels said when asked about his NBA comparison. “I have a very good offensive game but I’m a good defender. On the offensive end I play a little like Tyrese Haliburton, someone in control. I feel on the defensive end I’m like Lonzo Ball and Alex Caruso, people like that. I feel I have the frame once the game slows down for me I hope to develop into a Luka Doncic-type role.’’

Daniels measured over 6-foot-7 with a wingspan just under 6-foot-11 while weighing 195 pounds and having 4.9% body fat at the combine.

That unique frame, combined with his athleticism, vision, playmaking and defensive versatility, makes him a potential top 10 pick -- even with looming questions about the reliability of his outside shot. When taking into account both the Ignite Tour and the G league Showcase season, Daniels went 30-of-100 (30%) from 3-point range. One scout who has seen Daniels said the shot isn’t “broken,” but needs “tweaks.”

At some point the Cavs will need to fake other teams out by actually drafting a player they reportedly like ...

[toooskies]

Supposedly the Cavaliers are very interesting in Dyson Daniels, but acknowledge he likely won’t last until the 14th pick.

https://www.cleveland.com/cavs/2022/05/2022-nba-draft-cleveland-cavaliers-have-interest-in-dyson-daniels-but-will-he-be-available-at-no-14.html?outputType=amp

“It’s a tough one for me because I have such a unique game,’’ Daniels said when asked about his NBA comparison. “I have a very good offensive game but I’m a good defender. On the offensive end I play a little like Tyrese Haliburton, someone in control. I feel on the defensive end I’m like Lonzo Ball and Alex Caruso, people like that. I feel I have the frame once the game slows down for me I hope to develop into a Luka Doncic-type role.’’

Daniels measured over 6-foot-7 with a wingspan just under 6-foot-11 while weighing 195 pounds and having 4.9% body fat at the combine.

That unique frame, combined with his athleticism, vision, playmaking and defensive versatility, makes him a potential top 10 pick -- even with looming questions about the reliability of his outside shot. When taking into account both the Ignite Tour and the G league Showcase season, Daniels went 30-of-100 (30%) from 3-point range. One scout who has seen Daniels said the shot isn’t “broken,” but needs “tweaks.”

At some point the Cavs will need to fake other teams out by actually drafting a player they reportedly like ...

Daniels would be fine, especially if we believe that the shot will come around, and especially if we're looking at him as more of a backup PG role (initially).

But if he's a ball-handling SG, it's hard to see how he climbs the depth chart until his shot comes around.