2022-23 Regular Season

[jbk1234]

If the goal is to trade him, then signing him for his market value is very important, otherwise it's more about his projected value to the Cavs and if the difference between the two sides is small (and I'm not sure that it is) I have no problem with the Cavs finding a way to up their offer a bit.

But there are some very basic questions with our glut of SG's like is having Collin on the roster better than having someone we might have to dump, or losing a pick/cash in that dump, or starting the luxury tax timer early, or locking up money we could spend next off-season, etc, etc.

All of these are relevant considerations, but you shouldn't be deliberately signing players to contracts that will be difficult to move. Planning and projecting accurately are important skills for a front office, but if a guy like Jaylen Brown becomes available after turning down an extension offer, Sexton will either have trade value on his next deal, or he won't.

The reality is that bringing Sexton back may not work out. There are good reasons to be worried on that front. He might not accept a smaller role once he's on the court. He may continue to prove resistant to coaching. He may struggle participating in offensive sets that are more complex than a basic high PNR. His defensive limitations may prove irreparable. He may lose Bickerstaff's trust in late-game moments. He may end up strictly as a sixth man.

Yes, there are all sorts of risks for the Cavs to consider, and the most important thing is their plan/strategy for Collin and his interest in accepting it; but it's their job to sort through that.

But if Collin doesn't wreck his value, a small over-pay should not be a hindrance when his value in the first place is being depressed by his RFA status / the uncertainty of his injury, and then consider the salary cap is expected to increase significantly over the course of his new contract.

However, if the Cavs are only signing him to turn around and trade him ASAP, then it's very important not to pay above market.

Otoh, if we're big game hunting, what we really need is for a non-core player to greatly increase their value such that our trade partner would even consider them as a significant asset in the deal. If that's Collin, then paying him a higher salary only makes it easier to match an incoming star. If he's just playing the role of cap space, hey ... we could just hold on to our cap space.

I think the Cavs could've declined to tender the Q.O. and Sexton's market would be roughly the same. One thing that concerns me is that all of Rubio, Love, and Rondo were very complimentary about how unselfish the Cavs were as a team last season and how great the chemistry was. I can see Sexton as a sixth man working out well. I could also see it not working out so well. Players have a say in how things turn out, see KPJ and Drummond, and that should inform the Cavs offer.

[JonFromVA]

All of these are relevant considerations, but you shouldn't be deliberately signing players to contracts that will be difficult to move. Planning and projecting accurately are important skills for a front office, but if a guy like Jaylen Brown becomes available after turning down an extension offer, Sexton will either have trade value on his next deal, or he won't.

The reality is that bringing Sexton back may not work out. There are good reasons to be worried on that front. He might not accept a smaller role once he's on the court. He may continue to prove resistant to coaching. He may struggle participating in offensive sets that are more complex than a basic high PNR. His defensive limitations may prove irreparable. He may lose Bickerstaff's trust in late-game moments. He may end up strictly as a sixth man.

Yes, there are all sorts of risks for the Cavs to consider, and the most important thing is their plan/strategy for Collin and his interest in accepting it; but it's their job to sort through that.

But if Collin doesn't wreck his value, a small over-pay should not be a hindrance when his value in the first place is being depressed by his RFA status / the uncertainty of his injury, and then consider the salary cap is expected to increase significantly over the course of his new contract.

However, if the Cavs are only signing him to turn around and trade him ASAP, then it's very important not to pay above market.

Otoh, if we're big game hunting, what we really need is for a non-core player to greatly increase their value such that our trade partner would even consider them as a significant asset in the deal. If that's Collin, then paying him a higher salary only makes it easier to match an incoming star. If he's just playing the role of cap space, hey ... we could just hold on to our cap space.

I think the Cavs could've declined to tender the Q.O. and Sexton's market would be roughly the same. One thing that concerns me is that all of Rubio, Love, and Rondo were very complimentary about how unselfish the Cavs were as a team last season and how great the chemistry was. I can see Sexton as a sixth man working out well. I could also see it not working out so well. Players have a say in how things turn out, see KPJ and Drummond, and that should inform the Cavs offer.

Teams aren't even going to offer Collin something like $17M/yr because they know the Cavs will match it, they sure don't want to pay more AND give up assets in a S&T. What that means is it's very hard for Collin to establish any value.

RFA is working even better than intended from the owner's POV thanks to some soft-collusion, but the players are not happy with it. I could see them pushing for salary arbitration in the next CBA.

[ijspeelman]

This is outside the scope our off-season conversation, but does anyone of a good source for learning about CBA, salary cap, soft-hard caps. luxury tax, contracts, etc, etc. I try looking these things up as I am not very knowledgeable, but never find great sources for all info.

[jbk1234]

Yes, there are all sorts of risks for the Cavs to consider, and the most important thing is their plan/strategy for Collin and his interest in accepting it; but it's their job to sort through that.

But if Collin doesn't wreck his value, a small over-pay should not be a hindrance when his value in the first place is being depressed by his RFA status / the uncertainty of his injury, and then consider the salary cap is expected to increase significantly over the course of his new contract.

However, if the Cavs are only signing him to turn around and trade him ASAP, then it's very important not to pay above market.

Otoh, if we're big game hunting, what we really need is for a non-core player to greatly increase their value such that our trade partner would even consider them as a significant asset in the deal. If that's Collin, then paying him a higher salary only makes it easier to match an incoming star. If he's just playing the role of cap space, hey ... we could just hold on to our cap space.

I think the Cavs could've declined to tender the Q.O. and Sexton's market would be roughly the same. One thing that concerns me is that all of Rubio, Love, and Rondo were very complimentary about how unselfish the Cavs were as a team last season and how great the chemistry was. I can see Sexton as a sixth man working out well. I could also see it not working out so well. Players have a say in how things turn out, see KPJ and Drummond, and that should inform the Cavs offer.

Teams aren't even going to offer Collin something like $17M/yr because they know the Cavs will match it, they sure don't want to pay more AND give up assets in a S&T. What that means is it's very hard for Collin to establish any value.

RFA is working even better than intended from the owner's POV thanks to some soft-collusion, but the players are not happy with it. I could see them pushing for salary arbitration in the next CBA.

You say this as though it's a certainty rather than an open question as to whether he's worth it. Very few good players even enter the RFA market because most of them sign rather generous extensions with their teams. There's a delta involving perceived value if a player becomes a RFA and it's not always going to be the team who is mistaken.

[jbk1234]

This is outside the scope our off-season conversation, but does anyone of a good source for learning about CBA, salary cap, soft-hard caps. luxury tax, contracts, etc, etc. I try looking these things up as I am not very knowledgeable, but never find great sources for all info.

Smitty is really good

viewforum.php?f=4

[JujitsuFlip]

This is outside the scope our off-season conversation, but does anyone of a good source for learning about CBA, salary cap, soft-hard caps. luxury tax, contracts, etc, etc. I try looking these things up as I am not very knowledgeable, but never find great sources for all info.

Cbafaq.com can look up literally almost anything

[toooskies]

That's the thing. As far as I'm aware, everyone on the roster is fully guaranteed for this season. Have you seen something that indicates otherwise?

Wade and Stevens are non-guaranteed according to: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cleveland-cavaliers/cap/

Each make slightly less than $2m each.

I'd rather see Sexton play on Q.O., or in Europe, than deliberately pay him more than his market value because of hurt feelings. We're already 24 hours past the point where teams can officially sign players.

We know you don't like Sexton. But the QO is probably the worst-case scenario for the Cavs. There has to be a S&T offer from somewhere-- probably Dallas-- that gives us something, but every QO pathway leads us to getting nothing.

Which means the Cavs need to avoid Sexton taking the QO.

The question is what is "market value". The significantly limited free agent environment this offseason has produced, that happened to correspond with a draft that had a surprising surplus of talent at Sexton's position that fell to the specific teams he could've signed with?

The market the Cavs really need to evaluate, as long as there aren't a series of KD/Ayton/Mitchell dominoes that are holding up offers for Sexton, is QO + next year's free agency. 2023 is looking like a fairly liquid market, with lots of teams having cap space and not a lot of great players hitting free agency. Does Sexton get $20m/year next year? By his own projections, definitely. $25m/year? Maybe. Those numbers over three years equate to a $16-20m contract this year. That's the range where a QO is better than taking a contract. (I don't think it's in either party's interest to discuss shorter contracts.)

I still think he's the best long-term option as the starting 2 that we have, unless we get a huge amount of playmaking out of Mobley (in the very near future) or <SF not on the roster> and can run a pure 3-and-D guy there like Okoro or Agbaji. At worst a contract giving him $18m a year will be easy to liquidate in a year-- look at the Knicks clearing $30m of cap space of neutral-to-negative contracts for what amounts to 2nd rounders.

[jbk1234]

That's the thing. As far as I'm aware, everyone on the roster is fully guaranteed for this season. Have you seen something that indicates otherwise?

Wade and Stevens are non-guaranteed according to: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cleveland-cavaliers/cap/

Each make slightly less than $2m each.

I'd rather see Sexton play on Q.O., or in Europe, than deliberately pay him more than his market value because of hurt feelings. We're already 24 hours past the point where teams can officially sign players.

We know you don't like Sexton. But the QO is probably the worst-case scenario for the Cavs. There has to be a S&T offer from somewhere-- probably Dallas-- that gives us something, but every QO pathway leads us to getting nothing.

Which means the Cavs need to avoid Sexton taking the QO.

The question is what is "market value". The significantly limited free agent environment this offseason has produced, that happened to correspond with a draft that had a surprising surplus of talent at Sexton's position that fell to the specific teams he could've signed with?

The market the Cavs really need to evaluate, as long as there aren't a series of KD/Ayton/Mitchell dominoes that are holding up offers for Sexton, is QO + next year's free agency. 2023 is looking like a fairly liquid market, with lots of teams having cap space and not a lot of great players hitting free agency. Does Sexton get $20m/year next year? By his own projections, definitely. $25m/year? Maybe. Those numbers over three years equate to a $16-20m contract this year. That's the range where a QO is better than taking a contract. (I don't think it's in either party's interest to discuss shorter contracts.)

I still think he's the best long-term option as the starting 2 that we have, unless we get a huge amount of playmaking out of Mobley (in the very near future) or <SF not on the roster> and can run a pure 3-and-D guy there like Okoro or Agbaji. At worst a contract giving him $18m a year will be easy to liquidate in a year-- look at the Knicks clearing $30m of cap space of neutral-to-negative contracts for what amounts to 2nd rounders.

It's not difficult to imagine a scenario worse than the Sexton playing on the Q.O. if you allow for the possibility that Sexton doesn't start and is unhappy about it, especially if he's on a contract that potential trade partners view as bad.

Sexton can still be traded on the Q.O., he just has to agree, and if we traded him to a team that had cap space in 2023, and where he'd have an opportunity to start, he probably would agree.

You're really underselling what the Knicks paid to get off three expiring contracts, one of which was Burks, and all of which were about 50-60% of what you're talking about paying Sexton. There's a reason the Pistons ended up with the draft rights to Duran (who most mocks had as a top 10 pick).

Yes, things didn't line up well this summer for Sexton in terms of free agency, but it's not a lock that the money he's looking for will be there next summer either. The NBA is a more sophisticated league and players like Sexton aren't as valued as they use to be. Ayton had similar issues regarding the draft, team needs and available space all aligning ahead of free agency, and yet, the Pacers appear ready to present him with a big offer sheet and that's despite already having Turner on the roster.

It sure looks to me like the league evaluates Sexton as a good sixth man, and while you're free to disagree with that evaluation, there's no guarantee it will change. It's not even safe to say it will probably change.

[JonFromVA]

I think the Cavs could've declined to tender the Q.O. and Sexton's market would be roughly the same. One thing that concerns me is that all of Rubio, Love, and Rondo were very complimentary about how unselfish the Cavs were as a team last season and how great the chemistry was. I can see Sexton as a sixth man working out well. I could also see it not working out so well. Players have a say in how things turn out, see KPJ and Drummond, and that should inform the Cavs offer.

Teams aren't even going to offer Collin something like $17M/yr because they know the Cavs will match it, they sure don't want to pay more AND give up assets in a S&T. What that means is it's very hard for Collin to establish any value.

RFA is working even better than intended from the owner's POV thanks to some soft-collusion, but the players are not happy with it. I could see them pushing for salary arbitration in the next CBA.

You say this as though it's a certainty rather than an open question as to whether he's worth it. Very few good players even enter the RFA market because most of them sign rather generous extensions with their teams. There's a delta involving perceived value if a player becomes a RFA and it's not always going to be the team who is mistaken.

Worth it? That's a subjective term. However, it's a fact that RFA status suppresses contract offers for the reasons I've already mentioned and probably ones we've discussed in the past.

[jbk1234]

Teams aren't even going to offer Collin something like $17M/yr because they know the Cavs will match it, they sure don't want to pay more AND give up assets in a S&T. What that means is it's very hard for Collin to establish any value.

RFA is working even better than intended from the owner's POV thanks to some soft-collusion, but the players are not happy with it. I could see them pushing for salary arbitration in the next CBA.

You say this as though it's a certainty rather than an open question as to whether he's worth it. Very few good players even enter the RFA market because most of them sign rather generous extensions with their teams. There's a delta involving perceived value if a player becomes a RFA and it's not always going to be the team who is mistaken.

Worth it? That's a subjective term. However, it's a fact that RFA status suppresses contract offers for the reasons I've already mentioned and probably ones we've discussed in the past.

What's the best offer Sexton gets this summer if he's an unrestricted free agent? In my view, the majority of extension offers coming off rookie deals are as good or better than what those players would get if they tested the market, even if they weren't restricted. Given that the team is assuming the risk of injury a year early, they're usually more than fair.

There are subjective differences in how teams evaluate players, and need can lead a team to increasing its offer beyond the median team's evaluation, but the law of supply and demand don't cease functioning altogether in the NBA due to restricted free agency.

The undersized, high-usage, one-way SG archetype isn't in high demand. There are real questions as to the net benefit of those players and there are cheaper options available at 80% of Sexton's production. Sexton is capable of scoring 24 ppg but you have to want him to taking the 18.4 FGA (which is actually higher due to FTA) to get there. If you think Sexton's best use is off the bench taking 2/3 of those shots, then that's what you're willing to pay for. Put differently, if there was a team that though Sexton was worth building around as the guy, then the money would be there. Ayton faced all of the same restricted free agency challenges, but the Pacers have an offer sheet he's willing to sign.

[JonFromVA]

You say this as though it's a certainty rather than an open question as to whether he's worth it. Very few good players even enter the RFA market because most of them sign rather generous extensions with their teams. There's a delta involving perceived value if a player becomes a RFA and it's not always going to be the team who is mistaken.

Worth it? That's a subjective term. However, it's a fact that RFA status suppresses contract offers for the reasons I've already mentioned and probably ones we've discussed in the past.

What's the best offer Sexton gets this summer if he's an unrestricted free agent? In my view, the majority of extension offers coming off rookie deals are as good or better than what those players would get if they tested the market, even if they weren't restricted. Given that the team is assuming the risk of injury a year early, they're usually more than fair.

There are subjective differences in how teams evaluate players, and need can lead a team to increasing its offer beyond the median team's evaluation, but the law of supply and demand don't cease functioning altogether in the NBA due to restricted free agency.

The undersized, high-usage, one-way SG archetype isn't in high demand. There are real questions as to the net benefit of those players and there are cheaper options available at 80% of Sexton's production. Sexton is capable of scoring 24 ppg but you have to want him to taking the 18.4 FGA (which is actually higher due to FTA) to get there. If you think Sexton's best use is off the bench taking 2/3 of those shots, then that's what you're willing to pay for. Put differently, if there was a team that though Sexton was worth building around as the guy, then the money would be there. Ayton faced all of the same restricted free agency challenges, but the Pacers have an offer sheet he's willing to sign.

RFA status (especially involving a team who has an owner who isn't a cheapskate) warps the supply-demand curve.

Teams that might have planned to have cap space to pursue a player, won't even bother and will simply move on to their next candidate - and even if Collin was willing to take a low-ball offer because he thought he'd have a better a chance to start, there's no point because everyone knows the Cavs would just match.

Anfernee Simons (who also just completed his 4th season) got the $25M offer that Collin wanted coming off a season statistically similar to Collin's rookie year (thanks to CJ being traded).

He's 2" taller and 9lbs lighter ... but he's getting paid why? Is it because Portland has a big hole at SG without him? Certainly it's not the 27 wins. BBR has his +/- on-off at -2.2 this season. His BPM was just -1.0, so it's not like he's stuffing the stat sheet better than Collin.

Yeah, sure, maybe "the market" is evaluating Collin right and Simons wrong, but rest assured that's not how Collin sees it. He's just wondering who's preventing him from getting "his bag" and how many more shots he has to put up per day to get it.

[toooskies]

You say this as though it's a certainty rather than an open question as to whether he's worth it. Very few good players even enter the RFA market because most of them sign rather generous extensions with their teams. There's a delta involving perceived value if a player becomes a RFA and it's not always going to be the team who is mistaken.

Worth it? That's a subjective term. However, it's a fact that RFA status suppresses contract offers for the reasons I've already mentioned and probably ones we've discussed in the past.

What's the best offer Sexton gets this summer if he's an unrestricted free agent? In my view, the majority of extension offers coming off rookie deals are as good or better than what those players would get if they tested the market, even if they weren't restricted. Given that the team is assuming the risk of injury a year early, they're usually more than fair.

There are subjective differences in how teams evaluate players, and need can lead a team to increasing its offer beyond the median team's evaluation, but the law of supply and demand don't cease functioning altogether in the NBA due to restricted free agency.

The undersized, high-usage, one-way SG archetype isn't in high demand. There are real questions as to the net benefit of those players and there are cheaper options available at 80% of Sexton's production. Sexton is capable of scoring 24 ppg but you have to want him to taking the 18.4 FGA (which is actually higher due to FTA) to get there. If you think Sexton's best use is off the bench taking 2/3 of those shots, then that's what you're willing to pay for. Put differently, if there was a team that though Sexton was worth building around as the guy, then the money would be there. Ayton faced all of the same restricted free agency challenges, but the Pacers have an offer sheet he's willing to sign.

Sexton's TS% two years ago is nearly identical to Garland's last year. It was very much above average for a guard.

[jbk1234]

First off, I think paying Anfernee Simons that much was a mistake and I'm not convinced he's going to have positive trade value on that deal. But if he does, it will be because he continues to average 40% from 3 on 7.8 attempts per game.

Darius Garland averaged 8.6 assists per game last year to go with his 21.7 ppg. Those are all star numbers. He also averaged 38% from 3 on 6.7 attempts per game.

These are not valid comps for a player who routinely drives into the heart of the defense to get his points. Aside from raw scoring totals, there just isn't anything about Sexton's game that helps his team out. I promise you guys there's no league-wide conspiracy to get Sexton a low contract. Teams are questioning the net value he adds and his best role on a good team.

[JujitsuFlip]

Don't extend LeVert or Sexton, they're both very meh, imo.

[toooskies]

First off, I think paying Anfernee Simons that much was a mistake and I'm not convinced he's going to have positive trade value on that deal. But if he does, it will be because he continues to average 40% from 3 on 7.8 attempts per game.

Darius Garland averaged 8.6 assists per game last year to go with his 21.7 ppg. Those are all star numbers. He also averaged 38% from 3 on 6.7 attempts per game.

These are not valid comps for a player who routinely drives into the heart of the defense to get his points. Aside from raw scoring totals, there just isn't anything about Sexton's game that helps his team out. I promise you guys there's no league-wide conspiracy to get Sexton a low contract. Teams are questioning the net value he adds and his best role on a good team.

Is Garland a comp? No. But if you're crapping on Sexton's scoring efficiency you're also crapping on Garland's.

Zach LaVine off his rookie deal is a perfect comp, down to the injury before free agency. He made $19.5m a year off his bad short season and injury. LaVine still hasn't had a positive plus-minus over the course of a season and got a supermax with a player option.

Terry Rozier is a fine comp and still isn't a better player than Sexton. He's gotten two contracts that were bigger offers than what's reported for Sexton.

Beal coming off a worse year than Sexton's and has a very spotty career record of leading his team to wins. Despite the Wizards being 42 games under .500 for his career, he just got a supermax with a no-trade clause.

Please don't tell me the league isn't paying score-first guards, or guards with questions about leading a winning team.

The reason no other team paid Sexton is because the teams with cap space to sign him had developmental SGs and aren't all that interested in spending anyway. So far just one player has switched teams for more money than what Sexton is seeking, and that's because his godfather pulled strings to get him there. There's no sign of the league getting smarter, there's just very little cap space.

[jbk1234]

First off, I think paying Anfernee Simons that much was a mistake and I'm not convinced he's going to have positive trade value on that deal. But if he does, it will be because he continues to average 40% from 3 on 7.8 attempts per game.

Darius Garland averaged 8.6 assists per game last year to go with his 21.7 ppg. Those are all star numbers. He also averaged 38% from 3 on 6.7 attempts per game.

These are not valid comps for a player who routinely drives into the heart of the defense to get his points. Aside from raw scoring totals, there just isn't anything about Sexton's game that helps his team out. I promise you guys there's no league-wide conspiracy to get Sexton a low contract. Teams are questioning the net value he adds and his best role on a good team.

Is Garland a comp? No. But if you're crapping on Sexton's scoring efficiency you're also crapping on Garland's.

Zach LaVine off his rookie deal is a perfect comp, down to the injury before free agency. He made $19.5m a year off his bad short season and injury. LaVine still hasn't had a positive plus-minus over the course of a season and got a supermax with a player option.

Terry Rozier is a fine comp and still isn't a better player than Sexton. He's gotten two contracts that were bigger offers than what's reported for Sexton.

Beal coming off a worse year than Sexton's and has a very spotty career record of leading his team to wins. Despite the Wizards being 42 games under .500 for his career, he just got a supermax with a no-trade clause.

Please don't tell me the league isn't paying score-first guards, or guards with questions about leading a winning team.

The reason no other team paid Sexton is because the teams with cap space to sign him had developmental SGs and aren't all that interested in spending anyway. So far just one player has switched teams for more money than what Sexton is seeking, and that's because his godfather pulled strings to get him there. There's no sign of the league getting smarter, there's just very little cap space.

LaVine has averaged around 8 3 point attempts at 39% over the last three years.

Rozier is at about 7.5 attempts at 39% (he's a better defender and can run an offense).

Beal has a comparable number of 3 point attempts at somewhat lower percentages (and Beal is a better defender).

The spacing these players provide is valuable apart from the points their conversions result in. Sexton presents just the opposite dynamic in that he drags extra defenders into the paint. Teams don't want guards and wings making it easier for opposing teams to collapse into the painted area by taking 14+ attempts from within the arc.

Again, these are flawed comps, but even if we dismiss that how many people think the LaVine and Beal contracts were good ideas? Those are, to put it mildly, controversial decisions. No one thinks either the Bulls or the Wizards are going to construct a contending roster having committed that much space to those players.

Sexton's fans really are overly dismissive of just how bad his defense has been and how that's impacting his market. Putting up 24ppg and not posting positive advanced numbers is a huge red flag for front offices.

[ijspeelman]

Don't extend LeVert or Sexton, they're both very meh, imo.

I know I am becoming the LeVert-defending guy, but I don't think LeVert was given a fair shake last season. He came in mid-season and spent the whole time on an injury-ridden roster. Not to mention, he did not get the opportunities to learn the Cavs system as well as the Cavs coaching staff not getting a chance to account for him in the system over a long period of time.

I will personally reserve judging LeVert for next season.

[JonFromVA]

First off, I think paying Anfernee Simons that much was a mistake and I'm not convinced he's going to have positive trade value on that deal. But if he does, it will be because he continues to average 40% from 3 on 7.8 attempts per game.

Darius Garland averaged 8.6 assists per game last year to go with his 21.7 ppg. Those are all star numbers. He also averaged 38% from 3 on 6.7 attempts per game.

These are not valid comps for a player who routinely drives into the heart of the defense to get his points. Aside from raw scoring totals, there just isn't anything about Sexton's game that helps his team out. I promise you guys there's no league-wide conspiracy to get Sexton a low contract. Teams are questioning the net value he adds and his best role on a good team.

It may very well have been a mistake to pay Simons that much, but the point is what he brings was in demand for Portland who wants to move forward with the player and see how he continues to develop and improve as his role expands. You pay for projected performance, not past performance.

Collin's 3pt shooting was improved from non-existent to good in just his rookie season. It's not hard to imagine given how hard he works and the endless hours he spends in the gym that it will continue to improve, but that's not why someone invests in Collin and the fact he has specific strengths and weakness at 6'2" doesn't mean there isn't a market for him ... it just means it's limited.

When you pile that on top of RFA status, the few teams that might have targeted him simply moved on to other plans via the draft, trade, and free-agency and now the only team that might need him barely has anything to offer and no cap space to sign him.

I'm not saying RFA is the only factor in why Collin hasn't gotten a $25M offer, I'm just pushing back at your rejection that it's not a factor. Fortunately for the Cavs, Koby has made sure that Collin has very little leverage ... not so much for Collin.

[JonFromVA]

Don't extend LeVert or Sexton, they're both very meh, imo.

I know I am becoming the LeVert-defending guy, but I don't think LeVert was given a fair shake last season. He came in mid-season and spent the whole time on an injury-ridden roster. Not to mention, he did not get the opportunities to learn the Cavs system as well as the Cavs coaching staff not getting a chance to account for him in the system over a long period of time.

I will personally reserve judging LeVert for next season.

Yes, LeVert could be a very nice fit for us, but I'm not about to commit to that based on what little we've seen and his injury history is a concern.

When I keep talking about Okoro and how he should be treated as our incumbent SG going in to training camp, what I'm really getting at is the lack of positive evidence that anyone is better than him in that role thanks to injuries.

Actually a good case could be made for Ricky, but of course he has to recover from his ACL; and there are some solid reasons to bring him off the bench even though he's been more effective than Isaac.

[jbk1234]

First off, I think paying Anfernee Simons that much was a mistake and I'm not convinced he's going to have positive trade value on that deal. But if he does, it will be because he continues to average 40% from 3 on 7.8 attempts per game.

Darius Garland averaged 8.6 assists per game last year to go with his 21.7 ppg. Those are all star numbers. He also averaged 38% from 3 on 6.7 attempts per game.

These are not valid comps for a player who routinely drives into the heart of the defense to get his points. Aside from raw scoring totals, there just isn't anything about Sexton's game that helps his team out. I promise you guys there's no league-wide conspiracy to get Sexton a low contract. Teams are questioning the net value he adds and his best role on a good team.

It may very well have been a mistake to pay Simons that much, but the point is what he brings was in demand for Portland who wants to move forward with the player and see how he continues to develop and improve as his role expands. You pay for projected performance, not past performance.

Collin's 3pt shooting was improved from non-existent to good in just his rookie season. It's not hard to imagine given how hard he works and the endless hours he spends in the gym that it will continue to improve, but that's not why someone invests in Collin and the fact he has specific strengths and weakness at 6'2" doesn't mean there isn't a market for him ... it just means it's limited.

When you pile that on top of RFA status, the few teams that might have targeted him simply moved on to other plans via the draft, trade, and free-agency and now the only team that might need him barely has anything to offer and no cap space to sign him.

I'm not saying RFA is the only factor in why Collin hasn't gotten a $25M offer, I'm just pushing back at your rejection that it's not a factor. Fortunately for the Cavs, Koby has made sure that Collin has very little leverage ... not so much for Collin.

Sexton has been asked to increase the number of his three point attempts for years by multiple coaching staffs, and has declined to do so. If you're projecting he'll change his style of play cuz *reasons,* then that's a shame on you outcome if it doesn't happen.

More than that, there's a real question in my mind whether Sexton gets that the relationship with his teammates, while on the court, is reciprocal. They're not out there just to space the floor, get rebounds, and defend. The Cavs did not offer Love that extension so Sexton could use him as a $30M decoy (one that became less and less effective when no one in the arena believed Sexton would pass it to him). His meager assist totals mostly occurred around the rim. Once the ball went into to the paint, it didn't come back out, and all of that made the Cavs as a team easier to defend.

If teams thought Sexton was a good investment on a starter's contract, teams would trade contracts into existing cap space and make the offer the Cavs wouldn't match. A player's trade value ahead of free agency is usually a pretty good indication of that player's market. Drummond averaged 20 and 10 for years, he was traded for expiring contracts and a second round pick, and luckily for the Cavs, his agent didn't allow that to inform his decision during the extension conversations. We're coming up on his second season where he can't even get the MLE or the promise of a starting role.

Sexton's trade value last summer should've been an indication to his agents that it was time to start managing client expectations. Since then, he played poorly, got injured, and his team was not just better, but much better with him off the court. Is an objective evaluation of that outcome more complicated? Yes, but none of that helped his market and his market was already softer than his box numbers would project.