JonFromVA wrote:jbk1234 wrote:JonFromVA wrote:
Not to go around in circles on this, but there are plenty of reasons to continue with the Garland/Sexton backcourt at least for the short-term and I'm pretty sure I've gone over them already.
The main thing is we have to continue to get our young players minutes - it's the only significant thing we will be doing this year. We should sort out when those minutes are happening, but they still need to happen and it's not going to always be pretty.
I have no problem with either Garland or Sexton getting heavy minutes off the bench. But some holes are too deep to climb out of and that impacts the overall team. None of what Sexton does compliments what Garland does. Very little of what Garland does compliments Sexton. Their liabilities only exacerbate one another. Even with both of them reaching their defensive ceilings, the team you'd have to build around them just to be competitive on the defensive end wouldn't be very good overall.
Moreover, basketball that is so bad that no possession really matters isn't good development IMO. I really like KPJ and thought he was a bit of a silver lining last season. That said, the low point for me was him flexing after a dunk against when Philly when the team was down by 30 points. It reminded me of the Ricky Davis led teams pre-LBJ. Team culture can be an oversold concept, but in the extremes, it matters quite a bit.
They have not complimented each other on the court, but they most certainly do have complimentary offensive skills.
You and Still have basically called the future situation based on what happened last season, whereas I'm happy to see where they're at this season under a new coach with a bunch of time off, giving them a fair shake, and evaluating the alternatives before deciding what to do.
We have some interesting pieces, but IMO, if we start Sexton without Garland we have to pair him with Delly. Exum would be worth considering, but I'm not convinced he knows how to run an offense. If we start Garland without Sexton, we probably have to pair him with Okoro, and he's just an unknown at this point.
KPJ is an interesting talent worth developing if he doesn't end up in jail, but I'm not convinced he compliments either of our guards thanks to his Harden-esque skill set. That too needs re-evaluating. Plus he actually played very few positive minutes with the exception of our bench bunch before Clarkson was dealt.
So unless we're going to flush out the kids and play vets (who the heck wants that?) in my book, we just have a lot of question marks all around that can only be sorted out over time.
With respect to starting the two of them together last season and the possibility it can better, in my estimation the amount it would have to get better by, just in order to get to a replacement level backcourt, is astronomical. I remember SVG was covering the Cavs v. Thunder blowout before the trade deadline in LBJ's last year here and he said *some of this bad defense is effort, but not all of it.* The Cavs then offloaded Rose, IT, Frye, Wade, Shump, Crowder, et. al. At some point, you have to ask yourself what best case scenario is, with the personnel you're putting out there, and whether you can continue to play that personnel together.
One of the reasons I'm so convinced of this is that neither Garland nor Sexton looked anywhere near THAT bad when they played separately.
In terms of whether Sexton can run an offense as a starter, if the answer is no, then it's no. In that case, Sexton is only starting on a team that has Lonzo Ball, Ben Simmons, Durant, LBJ, or someone like that. Go trade for Ball, move Sexton to the bench, or trade him if you're worried about him bucking. Maybe even give Okoro a shot at running an offense. But if starting Sexton means you have to start Delly, in year three of the rebuild, then Sexton can't start. FWIW, I'm not 100% sure Sexton can't run an offense. It looked like maybe it starting clicking for him in the last ten games or so.
In terms of flushing out the kids, no one is saying that. But there's a pretty big distinction between just gifting young guys minutes and burying them on the bench. On teams like the Celtics, Heat and Spurs, their young guys have expectations beyond shoot because it fills good placed upon them along with those minutes. If they meet those expectation, then they're rewarded with additional opportunity and an expanded role. If they don't, then they're not. I don't think it's coincidence that those organizations manage to get the most out of their prospects.
