Will they resign sexton?

[ijspeelman]

Pacers: https://8points9seconds.com/2022/06/02/indiana-pacers-collin-sexton-interest-2/

Spurs: https://airalamo.com/posts/san-antonio-spurs-rumors-collin-sexton-interest

Pistons: https://pistonpowered.com/2022/04/21/pros-cons-collin-sexton-detroit-pistons/

These are all fan opinions. Noone knows what these FO's are truly going to do. Maybe the draft clears things up a little bit. Cav fans mostly hate Sexton so I expect opposing fans feel the same and don't want to overpay. That Detroit dude was comparing Sexton to Frank Jackson.

Most Cavs fans, myself included, don't hate Collin Sexton. I'd be very happy to have him as a sixth man. I hate the idea of him as a starter on this roster, and think the time for the Cavs building the type of roster around Sexton as a main guy has passed. I absolutely hate the idea of breaking up Allen, Mobley, and Garland in order to try to thread that needle, and there are Cavs fans who would do so.

You need a Ball, Simmons, or Cade type on the roster to start him on a team that's going to be any good at all. There are going to be times where you're going to need to take the ball out of his hands in order to be able to run an offense and make sure other players get to eat. You're going to need to be able to hide him on defense, so whoever runs the offense in those circumstances, needs to have size. Even in that scenario, you need big men who can space the floor for him.

Assuming you set all of that up around him, he still has areas of his game that he has to work on. It is unfortunate for both Collin and the Cavs that he got injured last season because a lot of things the organization was hoping to see, that he didn't show in his first three years, he didn't have a chance to show them last year either.

He's a gamble. There are reasons to be hopeful and real reasons to be skeptical as well. I very much want the Cavs to hedge here.

If we do sign Sexton (and don't trade LeVert), I am both excited and frightened by the Sexton LeVert minutes. One of those guys is going to really need to learn how to get in scoring positions without the ball (based on what I have seen, I don't think either is a positive in this area).

If Sexton can learn to play off-ball, I think he could be a pretty decent piece next to a taller playmaker like LeVert. LeVert's strength is finding his way into the lane so having movement around him expands his playmaking options and Sexton is good at finding pathways to the rim to finish so having him cut off-ball could help lead to high value offense.

I don't buy either player becoming good movement 3 pt shooters (within the last 2 years on 3 point shots where the player dribbled at all before the shot Sexton shot 30.6% and Caris shot 29.4%) so while I agree that Sexton should shoot more catch-and-shoots (37.3% last 2 years), I think people assume he should be generating his own 3 pointers and I don't think that is a realistic option the Cavs should explore.

[toooskies]

LaVine has averaged 7.5 attempts his last three years. Booker has averaged over 7. About 40% of their shots come from range. Multiple coaching staffs have asked Sexton to shoot more from outside.

You're far more confident that Sexton can maintain his efficiency after the rule change, and after his FGAs are reduced, than I.

LeVert was traded with 1.5 years left on his current deal which represents prime value to a playoff team as you can get two postseason runs out of the player while only being on the hook for a single season of salary. That flexibility is part of the trade value. Also, we overpaid for LeVert. I'm not convinced that Sexton at LeVert's trade value last deadline is worst case scenario at all.

People suffer from a lack of imagination in terms of the number of ways it go bad for the Cavs if they pay Sexton more than his current market.

Sexton's shooting efficiency inside the 3-point line last year was actually up from the years before. His free throw attempts were slightly down and his turnovers up, hinting at the points of emphasis affecting him.

But by all accounts the NBA points of emphasis about contact were entirely phased out by the end of the season. We have no reason to believe they will be re-emphasized next season. The rules never actually changed and the refs got tired of the high-profile complaining. It's not just anecdotal-- Trae Young's FTAs were down year-over-year this year but had the same number of attempts in his last 20 games as he did in all games last year, going from 5.5 in his first 20 games to 8.3 in his last 20. Harden started slow, then maintained a high FTA rate afterwards despite his usage going down post-trade. Lillard and Beal both recovered their FTA rates after particularly slow starts from the line due to the points of emphasis, despite missing the end of the season. Garland made it to the line significantly more towards the end of the season than in October and November.

But nearly all of Sexton's drop in TS% was due to a 3-point shooting slump, mostly off of catch-and-shoot situations. All indications are it was just a shooting slump, possibly affected by his preseason shoulder injury.

But despite being in a long-distance shooting slump, he took more 3s per shot, per 36 minutes, and per 100 possessions than ever last year. Progress in the right direction, if you think he needs to stretch the floor more.

You are simply more willing to dismiss legitimate causes for concern about Sexton than I am. I'm not motivated to engage in mental gymnastics to get best case scenario on every one of these issues. I'm not going to hand waive away his advanced numbers, or his defensive limitations, or his fit with our best players, or the fact he never really attempted to work on flaws, that hurt overall teams performance, until he was well down the road on his rookie deal and the extension he was imagining appeared in jeopardy. I find the idea that there are fans who would trade away our best players to make the roster work better for Sexton to be wildly misguided.

Absent injury, the Cavs should not plan on starting him next to Garland again. If he's not okay with that, he should move on and the Cavs should let him. If he is okay with that, but he still wants to be compensated in the starting range, there's a basis for a conversation.

The points of emphasis aren't going to be a factor going forward. Literally every player I checked who was affected by it early in the season was unaffected by the end of the season, so unless you have a reason Sexton is going to be particularly troubled when no one else is I'd love to hear it.

There are eye-test examples and statistical evidence contradicting you on his increase in outside shooting and improvement on defense. He won't ever be elite at either, but he's moving in the right direction.

I agree that there are plenty of legitimate reasons to be concerned about Sexton's place on the team. You just seem to think it's the end of the world if we sign him and it doesn't work out, whereas a bad contract can just be the pathway to getting better. See Golden State turning DLo into Wiggins, or Dallas turning Porzingis into Dinwiddie and Bertans. I'd rather have a bad salary I want to trade than no salaries I want to trade.

But I do think a healthy Sexton is a better starting SG on this team than LeVert or Okoro for as long as we play Allen and Mobley. He's the best shooter we have at that spot and probably the best we can get without giving up major assets. He is a far more active and threatening presence on offense that commanded the other team's best defender before his injury. LeVert and Okoro work better in the second unit when we have shooting at the 4.

[mg]

Sexton's shooting efficiency inside the 3-point line last year was actually up from the years before. His free throw attempts were slightly down and his turnovers up, hinting at the points of emphasis affecting him.

But by all accounts the NBA points of emphasis about contact were entirely phased out by the end of the season. We have no reason to believe they will be re-emphasized next season. The rules never actually changed and the refs got tired of the high-profile complaining. It's not just anecdotal-- Trae Young's FTAs were down year-over-year this year but had the same number of attempts in his last 20 games as he did in all games last year, going from 5.5 in his first 20 games to 8.3 in his last 20. Harden started slow, then maintained a high FTA rate afterwards despite his usage going down post-trade. Lillard and Beal both recovered their FTA rates after particularly slow starts from the line due to the points of emphasis, despite missing the end of the season. Garland made it to the line significantly more towards the end of the season than in October and November.

But nearly all of Sexton's drop in TS% was due to a 3-point shooting slump, mostly off of catch-and-shoot situations. All indications are it was just a shooting slump, possibly affected by his preseason shoulder injury.

But despite being in a long-distance shooting slump, he took more 3s per shot, per 36 minutes, and per 100 possessions than ever last year. Progress in the right direction, if you think he needs to stretch the floor more.

You are simply more willing to dismiss legitimate causes for concern about Sexton than I am. I'm not motivated to engage in mental gymnastics to get best case scenario on every one of these issues. I'm not going to hand waive away his advanced numbers, or his defensive limitations, or his fit with our best players, or the fact he never really attempted to work on flaws, that hurt overall teams performance, until he was well down the road on his rookie deal and the extension he was imagining appeared in jeopardy. I find the idea that there are fans who would trade away our best players to make the roster work better for Sexton to be wildly misguided.

Absent injury, the Cavs should not plan on starting him next to Garland again. If he's not okay with that, he should move on and the Cavs should let him. If he is okay with that, but he still wants to be compensated in the starting range, there's a basis for a conversation.

The points of emphasis aren't going to be a factor going forward. Literally every player I checked who was affected by it early in the season was unaffected by the end of the season, so unless you have a reason Sexton is going to be particularly troubled when no one else is I'd love to hear it.

There are eye-test examples and statistical evidence contradicting you on his increase in outside shooting and improvement on defense. He won't ever be elite at either, but he's moving in the right direction.

I agree that there are plenty of legitimate reasons to be concerned about Sexton's place on the team. You just seem to think it's the end of the world if we sign him and it doesn't work out, whereas a bad contract can just be the pathway to getting better. See Golden State turning DLo into Wiggins, or Dallas turning Porzingis into Dinwiddie and Bertans. I'd rather have a bad salary I want to trade than no salaries I want to trade.

But I do think a healthy Sexton is a better starting SG on this team than LeVert or Okoro for as long as we play Allen and Mobley. He's the best shooter we have at that spot and probably the best we can get without giving up major assets. He is a far more active and threatening presence on offense that commanded the other team's best defender before his injury. LeVert and Okoro work better in the second unit when we have shooting at the 4.

There's no arguing with some people. Their minds are made up about Sexton even if they have to use data that might not be applicable. Alot of Cavs fans just aren't going to accept Sexton on the team with Garland and I get it. There's a salary cap. Gilbert has proven he will pay the tax there are still flexibility issues with going way over the LT in term of being hard capped, etc. The team still has needs at the wing to address. I do believe Sexton offers a blend of speed and scoring the team needs at this point whether it's starting on/off the bench. If he shows he can play more off the ball, which he was trying to do last season before the experiment got cut short, he becomes even more valuable although his best fit is on a team with a bigger playmaker than Garland. Now if the Cavs had Haliburton instead of DG he would be a better fit. From what I heard he was still a leader in the lockerroom so the other players on the team do like and respect Collin. I'm still going to be rooting for the kid whether he plays in Cleveland or not but do believe his best role would be playing the Brunson archetype for a team with a big guard. Sexton should be fine defending PG's but you run into an issue with the two 6'-1" guards getting the bulk of the minutes in the backcourt. I think their minutes could be staggered to fix some of the issue but Bickerstaff isn't exactly a savant when it comes to that type of game management. JBB is a good leader in the lockerroom for a young team but not going to win any X and O's battles on the court. He likes to have a set substitution pattern every game so having pieces that fit are probably more important for the Cavs.

[jbk1234]

You are simply more willing to dismiss legitimate causes for concern about Sexton than I am. I'm not motivated to engage in mental gymnastics to get best case scenario on every one of these issues. I'm not going to hand waive away his advanced numbers, or his defensive limitations, or his fit with our best players, or the fact he never really attempted to work on flaws, that hurt overall teams performance, until he was well down the road on his rookie deal and the extension he was imagining appeared in jeopardy. I find the idea that there are fans who would trade away our best players to make the roster work better for Sexton to be wildly misguided.

Absent injury, the Cavs should not plan on starting him next to Garland again. If he's not okay with that, he should move on and the Cavs should let him. If he is okay with that, but he still wants to be compensated in the starting range, there's a basis for a conversation.

The points of emphasis aren't going to be a factor going forward. Literally every player I checked who was affected by it early in the season was unaffected by the end of the season, so unless you have a reason Sexton is going to be particularly troubled when no one else is I'd love to hear it.

There are eye-test examples and statistical evidence contradicting you on his increase in outside shooting and improvement on defense. He won't ever be elite at either, but he's moving in the right direction.

I agree that there are plenty of legitimate reasons to be concerned about Sexton's place on the team. You just seem to think it's the end of the world if we sign him and it doesn't work out, whereas a bad contract can just be the pathway to getting better. See Golden State turning DLo into Wiggins, or Dallas turning Porzingis into Dinwiddie and Bertans. I'd rather have a bad salary I want to trade than no salaries I want to trade.

But I do think a healthy Sexton is a better starting SG on this team than LeVert or Okoro for as long as we play Allen and Mobley. He's the best shooter we have at that spot and probably the best we can get without giving up major assets. He is a far more active and threatening presence on offense that commanded the other team's best defender before his injury. LeVert and Okoro work better in the second unit when we have shooting at the 4.

There's no arguing with some people. Their minds are made up about Sexton even if they have to use data that might not be applicable. Alot of Cavs fans just aren't going to accept Sexton on the team with Garland and I get it. There's a salary cap. Gilbert has proven he will pay the tax there are still flexibility issues with going way over the LT in term of being hard capped, etc. The team still has needs at the wing to address. I do believe Sexton offers a blend of speed and scoring the team needs at this point whether it's starting on/off the bench. If he shows he can play more off the ball, which he was trying to do last season before the experiment got cut short, he becomes even more valuable although his best fit is on a team with a bigger playmaker than Garland. Now if the Cavs had Haliburton instead of DG he would be a better fit. From what I heard he was still a leader in the lockerroom so the other players on the team do like and respect Collin. I'm still going to be rooting for the kid whether he plays in Cleveland or not but do believe his best role would be playing the Brunson archetype for a team with a big guard. Sexton should be fine defending PG's but you run into an issue with the two 6'-1" guards getting the bulk of the minutes in the backcourt. I think their minutes could be staggered to fix some of the issue but Bickerstaff isn't exactly a savant when it comes to that type of game management. JBB is a good leader in the lockerroom for a young team but not going to win any X and O's battles on the court. He likes to have a set substitution pattern every game so having pieces that fit are probably more important for the Cavs.

The bolded is exactly what I'm talking about in terms of motivated reasoning.

[toooskies]

The points of emphasis aren't going to be a factor going forward. Literally every player I checked who was affected by it early in the season was unaffected by the end of the season, so unless you have a reason Sexton is going to be particularly troubled when no one else is I'd love to hear it.

There are eye-test examples and statistical evidence contradicting you on his increase in outside shooting and improvement on defense. He won't ever be elite at either, but he's moving in the right direction.

I agree that there are plenty of legitimate reasons to be concerned about Sexton's place on the team. You just seem to think it's the end of the world if we sign him and it doesn't work out, whereas a bad contract can just be the pathway to getting better. See Golden State turning DLo into Wiggins, or Dallas turning Porzingis into Dinwiddie and Bertans. I'd rather have a bad salary I want to trade than no salaries I want to trade.

But I do think a healthy Sexton is a better starting SG on this team than LeVert or Okoro for as long as we play Allen and Mobley. He's the best shooter we have at that spot and probably the best we can get without giving up major assets. He is a far more active and threatening presence on offense that commanded the other team's best defender before his injury. LeVert and Okoro work better in the second unit when we have shooting at the 4.

There's no arguing with some people. Their minds are made up about Sexton even if they have to use data that might not be applicable. Alot of Cavs fans just aren't going to accept Sexton on the team with Garland and I get it. There's a salary cap. Gilbert has proven he will pay the tax there are still flexibility issues with going way over the LT in term of being hard capped, etc. The team still has needs at the wing to address. I do believe Sexton offers a blend of speed and scoring the team needs at this point whether it's starting on/off the bench. If he shows he can play more off the ball, which he was trying to do last season before the experiment got cut short, he becomes even more valuable although his best fit is on a team with a bigger playmaker than Garland. Now if the Cavs had Haliburton instead of DG he would be a better fit. From what I heard he was still a leader in the lockerroom so the other players on the team do like and respect Collin. I'm still going to be rooting for the kid whether he plays in Cleveland or not but do believe his best role would be playing the Brunson archetype for a team with a big guard. Sexton should be fine defending PG's but you run into an issue with the two 6'-1" guards getting the bulk of the minutes in the backcourt. I think their minutes could be staggered to fix some of the issue but Bickerstaff isn't exactly a savant when it comes to that type of game management. JBB is a good leader in the lockerroom for a young team but not going to win any X and O's battles on the court. He likes to have a set substitution pattern every game so having pieces that fit are probably more important for the Cavs.

The bolded is exactly what I'm talking about in terms of motivated reasoning.

Depends on your definition of "fine". If you mean that to be "good" or "average", maybe not. But "less of a negative than his offense is positive" is definitely achievable if you project any defensive improvement for a third-year NBA player, and Sexton's on-ball defense is generally more positively regarded than his off-ball defense.

[ijspeelman]

But I do think a healthy Sexton is a better starting SG on this team than LeVert or Okoro for as long as we play Allen and Mobley. He's the best shooter we have at that spot and probably the best we can get without giving up major assets. He is a far more active and threatening presence on offense that commanded the other team's best defender before his injury. LeVert and Okoro work better in the second unit when we have shooting at the 4.

I personally would have LeVert start over Sexton at the moment. This is not meant to take away from what Sexton does do well, but LeVert brings additional size on defense and secondary passing ability to the line-up that desperately needs that skillset. Both shoot at similar efficiencies from catch-and-shoot triples (Sexton shoots 37.36% and LeVert shoots 36.84% on catch-and-shoot attempts for the past two years) so I don't believe Sexton's shooting boost is a huge positive as compared to LeVert.

But hey, I easily could be wrong. If we retain Sexton and LeVert, this will be our year to judge these players and find out their fit on this team. I would agree that I think the right move is keeping Sexton this off-season unless a sneaky good trade can be agreed on (doubt). Most teams do not need his abilities right now so his trade value is probably lower than his actual value on the court, but this season could create some openings for his talent and I would hate to lose him for nothing even if it was destined to not work out with this team.

[jbk1234]

There's no arguing with some people. Their minds are made up about Sexton even if they have to use data that might not be applicable. Alot of Cavs fans just aren't going to accept Sexton on the team with Garland and I get it. There's a salary cap. Gilbert has proven he will pay the tax there are still flexibility issues with going way over the LT in term of being hard capped, etc. The team still has needs at the wing to address. I do believe Sexton offers a blend of speed and scoring the team needs at this point whether it's starting on/off the bench. If he shows he can play more off the ball, which he was trying to do last season before the experiment got cut short, he becomes even more valuable although his best fit is on a team with a bigger playmaker than Garland. Now if the Cavs had Haliburton instead of DG he would be a better fit. From what I heard he was still a leader in the lockerroom so the other players on the team do like and respect Collin. I'm still going to be rooting for the kid whether he plays in Cleveland or not but do believe his best role would be playing the Brunson archetype for a team with a big guard. Sexton should be fine defending PG's but you run into an issue with the two 6'-1" guards getting the bulk of the minutes in the backcourt. I think their minutes could be staggered to fix some of the issue but Bickerstaff isn't exactly a savant when it comes to that type of game management. JBB is a good leader in the lockerroom for a young team but not going to win any X and O's battles on the court. He likes to have a set substitution pattern every game so having pieces that fit are probably more important for the Cavs.

The bolded is exactly what I'm talking about in terms of motivated reasoning.

Depends on your definition of "fine". If you mean that to be "good" or "average", maybe not. But "less of a negative than his offense is positive" is definitely achievable if you project any defensive improvement for a third-year NBA player, and Sexton's on-ball defense is generally more positively regarded than his off-ball defense.

Sexton is entering his 5th year in the NBA. Even if you give him a Mulligan on his fourth, we've already seen his third and it wasn't *fine* by any definition.

[toooskies]

But I do think a healthy Sexton is a better starting SG on this team than LeVert or Okoro for as long as we play Allen and Mobley. He's the best shooter we have at that spot and probably the best we can get without giving up major assets. He is a far more active and threatening presence on offense that commanded the other team's best defender before his injury. LeVert and Okoro work better in the second unit when we have shooting at the 4.

I personally would have LeVert start over Sexton at the moment. This is not meant to take away from what Sexton does do well, but LeVert brings additional size on defense and secondary passing ability to the line-up that desperately needs that skillset. Both shoot at similar efficiencies from catch-and-shoot triples (Sexton shoots 37.36% and LeVert shoots 36.84% on catch-and-shoot attempts for the past two years) so I don't believe Sexton's shooting boost is a huge positive as compared to LeVert.

But hey, I easily could be wrong. If we retain Sexton and LeVert, this will be our year to judge these players and find out their fit on this team. I would agree that I think the right move is keeping Sexton this off-season unless a sneaky good trade can be agreed on (doubt). Most teams do not need his abilities right now so his trade value is probably lower than his actual value on the court, but this season could create some openings for his talent and I would hate to lose him for nothing even if it was destined to not work out with this team.

Arguably the starting lineup doesn't need the secondary passing ability (at least beyond Sexton's capabilities) as much, it's when Garland sits or should be playing off-ball in bench units. But Garland should definitely be starting the game by setting the tone on-ball.

While Caris might shoot the same percentage on C&S threes as Sexton the past two years (although this year's 40% mark is an aberration for his career), he often passes up open C&S looks. And while Sexton has that problem too, it shows up in terms of volume where LeVert takes one fewer C&S attempt than Sexton per game.

[JonFromVA]

fwiw, short of Ricky returning and being healthy game 1 - Okoro probably deserves to be treated as the incumbent starting SG until someone beats him out.

Most of our best lineups included Isaac at SG.

LeVert was part of some good lineups, but unless we want to entertain bringing Jarrett off the bench, those primarily had him at SF and Isaac at SG. So Caris should be competing for the SF, SG, and possibly the backup PG spots, and Collin for the SG and possibly backup PG spots.

[ijspeelman]

Arguably the starting lineup doesn't need the secondary passing ability (at least beyond Sexton's capabilities) as much, it's when Garland sits or should be playing off-ball in bench units. But Garland should definitely be starting the game by setting the tone on-ball.

While Caris might shoot the same percentage on C&S threes as Sexton the past two years (although this year's 40% mark is an aberration for his career), he often passes up open C&S looks. And while Sexton has that problem too, it shows up in terms of volume where LeVert takes one fewer C&S attempt than Sexton per game.

The volume concern is fair when comparing players, but I went to look at volume and in the last two years Sexton shoots 2.4 attempts per 36 minutes and LeVert is at 2.29 attempts per 36 minutes (I would normally do per 75 possessions stats, but I didn't feel like calculating all that right now so my one caveat is that the Pacers played at a higher pace than the Cavs so LeVert's numbers are inflated a bit. It is probably more like 2.25 attempts per 36 at the same pace as Sexton).

[toooskies]

fwiw, short of Ricky returning and being healthy game 1 - Okoro probably deserves to be treated as the incumbent starting SG until someone beats him out.

Most of our best lineups included Isaac at SG.

LeVert was part of some good lineups, but unless we want to entertain bringing Jarrett off the bench, those primarily had him at SF and Isaac at SG. So Caris should be competing for the SF, SG, and possibly the backup PG spots, and Collin for the SG and possibly backup PG spots.

Okoro was benched in the Atlanta play-in game to start LeVert and LeVert got more minutes in both play-in games. I think the pecking order is Sexton (if signed) > LeVert > Okoro entering camp, although it's close enough that any of them could emerge as the starter.

[Revenged25]

fwiw, short of Ricky returning and being healthy game 1 - Okoro probably deserves to be treated as the incumbent starting SG until someone beats him out.

Most of our best lineups included Isaac at SG.

LeVert was part of some good lineups, but unless we want to entertain bringing Jarrett off the bench, those primarily had him at SF and Isaac at SG. So Caris should be competing for the SF, SG, and possibly the backup PG spots, and Collin for the SG and possibly backup PG spots.

Okoro was benched in the Atlanta play-in game to start LeVert and LeVert got more minutes in both play-in games. I think the pecking order is Sexton (if signed) > LeVert > Okoro entering camp, although it's close enough that any of them could emerge as the starter.

With Mobley & Allen healthy, the need for the defense that Okoro provides is decreased quite a bit which is probably why LeVert got the nod over Okoro and why Sexton would get the nod over both. If Okoro takes a dramatic step forward offensively while Sexton stays the same defensively, then sure, but until then I think Sexton gets the nod.

[jbk1234]

fwiw, short of Ricky returning and being healthy game 1 - Okoro probably deserves to be treated as the incumbent starting SG until someone beats him out.

Most of our best lineups included Isaac at SG.

LeVert was part of some good lineups, but unless we want to entertain bringing Jarrett off the bench, those primarily had him at SF and Isaac at SG. So Caris should be competing for the SF, SG, and possibly the backup PG spots, and Collin for the SG and possibly backup PG spots.

Okoro was benched in the Atlanta play-in game to start LeVert and LeVert got more minutes in both play-in games. I think the pecking order is Sexton (if signed) > LeVert > Okoro entering camp, although it's close enough that any of them could emerge as the starter.

With Mobley & Allen healthy, the need for the defense that Okoro provides is decreased quite a bit which is probably why LeVert got the nod over Okoro and why Sexton would get the nod over both. If Okoro takes a dramatic step forward offensively while Sexton stays the same defensively, then sure, but until then I think Sexton gets the nod.

Pretty sure LeVert got the nod over Okoro so the Hawks couldn't hide Trae on defense. It worked really well in the first half too.

[toooskies]

Okoro was benched in the Atlanta play-in game to start LeVert and LeVert got more minutes in both play-in games. I think the pecking order is Sexton (if signed) > LeVert > Okoro entering camp, although it's close enough that any of them could emerge as the starter.

With Mobley & Allen healthy, the need for the defense that Okoro provides is decreased quite a bit which is probably why LeVert got the nod over Okoro and why Sexton would get the nod over both. If Okoro takes a dramatic step forward offensively while Sexton stays the same defensively, then sure, but until then I think Sexton gets the nod.

Pretty sure LeVert got the nod over Okoro so the Hawks couldn't hide Trae on defense. It worked really well in the first half too.

Fedor reported it's the lineup they intended to play when they traded for LeVert in the first place. Okoro got fewer minutes in both play-in games combined than LeVert got in each.

[jbk1234]

With Mobley & Allen healthy, the need for the defense that Okoro provides is decreased quite a bit which is probably why LeVert got the nod over Okoro and why Sexton would get the nod over both. If Okoro takes a dramatic step forward offensively while Sexton stays the same defensively, then sure, but until then I think Sexton gets the nod.

Pretty sure LeVert got the nod over Okoro so the Hawks couldn't hide Trae on defense. It worked really well in the first half too.

Fedor reported it's the lineup they intended to play when they traded for LeVert in the first place. Okoro got fewer minutes in both play-in games combined than LeVert got in each.

I agreed with starting LeVert against the Hawks. You can't let Trae hide in a post season game. Again, it worked great in the first half.

I didn't have a problem starting Okoro against the Nets. I didn't have a problem with Okoro getting the hook early. Kyrie went into video game mode and you have to get something back when that happens.

I think it might be a mistake to read too much into that sequence though. We didn't have Allen in game 1 and he played one handed in game 2. In addition to the defensive boost, we could've really used a few of those 16ppg he averages.

[toooskies]

Pretty sure LeVert got the nod over Okoro so the Hawks couldn't hide Trae on defense. It worked really well in the first half too.

Fedor reported it's the lineup they intended to play when they traded for LeVert in the first place. Okoro got fewer minutes in both play-in games combined than LeVert got in each.

I agreed with starting LeVert against the Hawks. You can't let Trae hide in a post season game. Again, it worked great in the first half.

I didn't have a problem starting Okoro against the Nets. I didn't have a problem with Okoro getting the hook early. Kyrie went into video game mode and you have to get something back when that happens.

I think it might be a mistake to read too much into that sequence though. We didn't have Allen in game 1 and he played one handed in game 2. In addition to the defensive boost, we could've really used a few of those 16ppg he averages.

LeVert also got more court time over the nine games to end the regular season when they both started. You can say that's because LeVert has more ballhandling, but at the moment we don't have enough ballhandling either, it will be hard to add it through the draft, and Ricky Rubio isn't walking through that door (till midseason if at all).

I don't think it's outlandish to say that the Cavs have a higher opinion of LeVert than we do. I don't think I'd start LeVert over Okoro but I think the Cavs would. And I think if we bring Sexton back, it'll be at a salary number that dictates that he is at least considered for the starting job, if not given it until it's proven that it won't work.

[jbk1234]

Fedor reported it's the lineup they intended to play when they traded for LeVert in the first place. Okoro got fewer minutes in both play-in games combined than LeVert got in each.

I agreed with starting LeVert against the Hawks. You can't let Trae hide in a post season game. Again, it worked great in the first half.

I didn't have a problem starting Okoro against the Nets. I didn't have a problem with Okoro getting the hook early. Kyrie went into video game mode and you have to get something back when that happens.

I think it might be a mistake to read too much into that sequence though. We didn't have Allen in game 1 and he played one handed in game 2. In addition to the defensive boost, we could've really used a few of those 16ppg he averages.

LeVert also got more court time over the nine games to end the regular season when they both started. You can say that's because LeVert has more ballhandling, but at the moment we don't have enough ballhandling either, it will be hard to add it through the draft, and Ricky Rubio isn't walking through that door (till midseason if at all).

I don't think it's outlandish to say that the Cavs have a higher opinion of LeVert than we do. I don't think I'd start LeVert over Okoro but I think the Cavs would. And I think if we bring Sexton back, it'll be at a salary number that dictates that he is at least considered for the starting job, if not given it until it's proven that it won't work.

LeVert's defense was far better than advertised, while his offense was far worse. He's too susceptible to breaking off plays and going one-on-three and we he doesn't convert, those are just lost possessions.

[JonFromVA]

fwiw, short of Ricky returning and being healthy game 1 - Okoro probably deserves to be treated as the incumbent starting SG until someone beats him out.

Most of our best lineups included Isaac at SG.

LeVert was part of some good lineups, but unless we want to entertain bringing Jarrett off the bench, those primarily had him at SF and Isaac at SG. So Caris should be competing for the SF, SG, and possibly the backup PG spots, and Collin for the SG and possibly backup PG spots.

Okoro was benched in the Atlanta play-in game to start LeVert and LeVert got more minutes in both play-in games. I think the pecking order is Sexton (if signed) > LeVert > Okoro entering camp, although it's close enough that any of them could emerge as the starter.

lol, remind me did we beat Atlanta?

Not to mention, Caris is pretty much a finished product, while there's hope Isaac has improved over the Summer.

By all means JBB should be experimenting with lineups, but we had a fair bit of success with Isaac at SG last season and not so much with LeVert or Sexton. Things can change especially with a full training camp to get integrated and hopefully everyone healthy, but there was no "magic" like we saw with Ricky with either of those guys. They may be able to do some of the things Ricky can do - but neither will ever have his feel for the game.

[JonFromVA]

Fedor reported it's the lineup they intended to play when they traded for LeVert in the first place. Okoro got fewer minutes in both play-in games combined than LeVert got in each.

I agreed with starting LeVert against the Hawks. You can't let Trae hide in a post season game. Again, it worked great in the first half.

I didn't have a problem starting Okoro against the Nets. I didn't have a problem with Okoro getting the hook early. Kyrie went into video game mode and you have to get something back when that happens.

I think it might be a mistake to read too much into that sequence though. We didn't have Allen in game 1 and he played one handed in game 2. In addition to the defensive boost, we could've really used a few of those 16ppg he averages.

LeVert also got more court time over the nine games to end the regular season when they both started. You can say that's because LeVert has more ballhandling, but at the moment we don't have enough ballhandling either, it will be hard to add it through the draft, and Ricky Rubio isn't walking through that door (till midseason if at all).

I don't think it's outlandish to say that the Cavs have a higher opinion of LeVert than we do. I don't think I'd start LeVert over Okoro but I think the Cavs would. And I think if we bring Sexton back, it'll be at a salary number that dictates that he is at least considered for the starting job, if not given it until it's proven that it won't work.

In the playoffs, you can run the minutes through the roof if you have to, but in the regular season you need to do a better job balancing out your starters and reserves.

Having Okoro in the starting lineup was one less mouth to feed on offense and relief for DG on defense, then bringing in Ricky off-the-bench gave us all sorts of neat options.

But those Isaac starting lineups were not just a place-holder to get to those Ricky minutes, they were effective too and if the opponent was feeling frisky and started trapping Darius we could just bring in Ricky sooner.

Anyway, we're still a long ways from even knowing what our opening day roster will be, and nothing I've said has anything to do with dislike for LeVert or Sexton ... it's just by the numbers.

[toooskies]

Fedor reported on the wine & gold podcast that Sexton is full go, no limitations after his recovery from surgery.