Garland to ask out if Mitchell extended

[Knicks Byke]

so it begins.

[srhcan]

Read on Twitter

wow; I did not know things were so bad between Mitchell and Garland.
Mitchell should be #1 priority of Cavs; if he signed then trade Garland and get a pure PG instead.

[Drakeem]

Garland’s just not that attractive of an option. What kind of team is he for.

Pelicans

I wonder if an Ingram for Garland swap makes sense for both teams. Both positions of need and players who aren't the happiest with their role.

[jazzfan1971]

Nah, both are still miles better than sexton

The Lebron stat had Sexton ranked #69 and Garland #131 last season.

I'll give you that it was a very up year for Sexton and a very down year for Garland. But, I think if we just look at last season it's very arguable who was better between Garland and Sexton. (Mitchell was on a whole 'nother level than both)

https://stathead.com/tiny/F3CDV

That link as a more traditional comparison between the two.

Garland broke his jaw and drank through a straw for two months and lost a ton of weight

He’s a better shooter, passer, ball handler, defender, way higher BBIQ. Sexton has a more simplified and specialized role because he sucks at basically everything except scoring and gets to take shots on a team without many other options. Garland had to fit into a winning team with expectations with a less defined role that fluctuated from ‘do everything’ to ‘sit around and let Mitchell do everything’ because we have a coach who doesn’t know how to utilize the skillset of anyone besides the lead ball handler on the team.

I appreciate you providing context. It is all valid and worth consideration.

However, last season, the two were statically pretty similar with Sexton probably having the edge.

Next season Garland maybe blows sexton. Out of the water. The year before this he surely did. All I'm saying is that if you just look at last season one could argue that Sexton was better.

[jbk1234]

Read on Twitter

wow; I did not know things were so bad between Mitchell and Garland.
Mitchell should be #1 priority of Cavs; if he signed then trade Garland and get a pure PG instead.

Garland is a pure PG.

[JonFromVA]

Sexton had already been moved to the bench before he got injured

You won't find a bigger Garland fan than me on this board, but Rich Paul doesn't run the Cavs, and if Altman thinks running it back is the way to go, then that's what he should do. If Altman thinks that extending Mitchell is what he should do, then that's what he should do.

Not that it really matters at this point Sexton was still starting when he got injured in that game against the Knicks.

I don't get Altman's fascination with small guards and non shooting bigs but he's got a big mess on his hands right now. It took less than an hour after being eliminated for the dirty laundry to start airing.

Sexton got to start in that game because Garland was out. The reality is the Cavs made their decision before the season started

Yeah, something changed, but you're misremembering it. What happened is the Cavs took Collin aside and told him that Darius was going to be running the team and for the first 20 seconds in the shot clock he needed to be either attacking or passing. If the clock ran down and we needed a shot, then he'd be free to do what he wanted.

DG was handed the proverbial keys of the team, but they were still trying to make the pairing work until Collin got hurt.

[jbk1234]

The Lebron stat had Sexton ranked #69 and Garland #131 last season.

I'll give you that it was a very up year for Sexton and a very down year for Garland. But, I think if we just look at last season it's very arguable who was better between Garland and Sexton. (Mitchell was on a whole 'nother level than both)

https://stathead.com/tiny/F3CDV

That link as a more traditional comparison between the two.

Garland broke his jaw and drank through a straw for two months and lost a ton of weight

He’s a better shooter, passer, ball handler, defender, way higher BBIQ. Sexton has a more simplified and specialized role because he sucks at basically everything except scoring and gets to take shots on a team without many other options. Garland had to fit into a winning team with expectations with a less defined role that fluctuated from ‘do everything’ to ‘sit around and let Mitchell do everything’ because we have a coach who doesn’t know how to utilize the skillset of anyone besides the lead ball handler on the team.

I appreciate you providing context. It is all valid and worth consideration.

However, last season, the two were statically pretty similar with Sexton probably having the edge.

Next season Garland maybe blows sexton. Out of the water. The year before this he surely did. All I'm saying is that if you just look at last season one could argue that Sexton was better.

You're not going to convince Cavs fans that Sexton is now, ever will be, or ever has been better than Garland.

Sexton puts up counting stats on losing teams, and until he starts on a team that actually produces a winng record, people are going to question whether his style of play is conducive to winning.

[JonFromVA]

Read on Twitter

wow; I did not know things were so bad between Mitchell and Garland.
Mitchell should be #1 priority of Cavs; if he signed then trade Garland and get a pure PG instead.

Garland is a pure PG.

Garland could become a top-notch pure PG if the Cavs would bring someone in to help mentor him, but many of his skills in that area are under-developed. He is a willing facilitator that often struggles to find his offensive rhythm unless he's able to pound the ball a lot and get shots up, and much of his playmaking ability comes from his offensive threat level. So, it's all wrapped up.

The thing is, he's rarely been healthy and that impinges on his ability to perform consistently. It's not so different with Mitchell.

If they are both healthy and sharing the load to avoid fatigue, the pairing could work. If one or both of them are going to need their touches to get going, it's going to be clumsy and the other guy is going to feel shut out.

[Pointgod]

A trade that would be perfect for both teams but never happen is a Franz for Garland move.

[JonFromVA]

At no point did I pick up a vibe all season that Garland didn't want to be playing with Mitchell. In fact, Garland's play was typically the worst when Mitchell was off the floor. They seemed like best friends-- or brothers. But maybe Mitchell was too big-brothery.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is entirely Rich Paul's and LeBron's perspective, and I wouldn't be surprised if Garland finds new representation.

That said, if Garland's asking for a separation, let's send him to Utah for the Cavs' picks back.

fwiw, Rich Paul is not actually being credited as the source of this rumor, it's "sources".

IMO, if Garland wants to be traded, the only thing he needs to do is contact the team he wants to be traded to via legal collusion and then ask the Cavs. So, the real question here is why is this leaking and leaking now. Given the reporters involved it might have even been someone in the Cavs organization that leaked this albeit they are typically tight lipped.

[jbk1234]

wow; I did not know things were so bad between Mitchell and Garland.
Mitchell should be #1 priority of Cavs; if he signed then trade Garland and get a pure PG instead.

Garland is a pure PG.

Garland could become a top-notch pure PG if the Cavs would bring someone in to help mentor him, but many of his skills in that area are under-developed. He is a willing facilitator that often struggles to find his offensive rhythm unless he's able to pound the ball a lot and get shots up, and much of his playmaking ability comes from his offensive threat level. So, it's all wrapped up.

The thing is, he's rarely been healthy and that impinges on his ability to perform consistently. It's not so different with Mitchell.

If they are both healthy and sharing the load to avoid fatigue, the pairing could work. If one or both of them are going to need their touches to get going, it's going to be clumsy and the other guy is going to feel shut out.

It also has to do with coaching. Garland had Horford on a string, the Celtics completely vacated the painted area, and there were like 3-4 possessions where no one cut to the rim (fatigue was a contributing factor in the 4th). But you see Garland bring three defenders with him under the basket, he turns around, there's no trailer on the play, and fans blame him for the turnover. We just play dumb sometimes and it's frustrating.

[Roger Murdock]

People talk about Garland on defense like he’s Trae Young or Dame Lilliard

He’s more like a smaller Steph Curry. He plays passing lanes well and does his best to stay in front of his man. He’s physically not built to be a Jrue type and he fouls too much. Cavs have had a top notch defense 3 years in a row. His physical gifts for defense are awful but he doesn’t what he can and ends up being fine. He’s definitely better and way less of a liability than what most teams roll out for the 5th best defender

[JonFromVA]

Garland is a pure PG.

Garland could become a top-notch pure PG if the Cavs would bring someone in to help mentor him, but many of his skills in that area are under-developed. He is a willing facilitator that often struggles to find his offensive rhythm unless he's able to pound the ball a lot and get shots up, and much of his playmaking ability comes from his offensive threat level. So, it's all wrapped up.

The thing is, he's rarely been healthy and that impinges on his ability to perform consistently. It's not so different with Mitchell.

If they are both healthy and sharing the load to avoid fatigue, the pairing could work. If one or both of them are going to need their touches to get going, it's going to be clumsy and the other guy is going to feel shut out.

It also has to do with coaching. Garland had Horford on a string, the Celtics completely vacated the painted area, and there were like 3-4 possessions where no one cut to the rim (fatigue was a contributing factor in the 4th). But you see Garland bring three defenders with him under the basket, he turns around, there's no trailer on the play, and fans blame him for the turnover. We just play dumb sometimes and it's frustrating.

Good, case in point. A good PG doesn't need the coaching staff to design anything for him, he talks, he points, he yells if necessary and his teammates will be where he needs them to be. But he can't be doing everything on-the-fly, he has to understand what the defense is doing so he can plan his attack and make sure his teammates are doing what he needs them to be doing.

If multiple teammates are trying to read the defense and they're not making the same reads, you are going to get a lot of turnovers.

[jbk1234]

Garland could become a top-notch pure PG if the Cavs would bring someone in to help mentor him, but many of his skills in that area are under-developed. He is a willing facilitator that often struggles to find his offensive rhythm unless he's able to pound the ball a lot and get shots up, and much of his playmaking ability comes from his offensive threat level. So, it's all wrapped up.

The thing is, he's rarely been healthy and that impinges on his ability to perform consistently. It's not so different with Mitchell.

If they are both healthy and sharing the load to avoid fatigue, the pairing could work. If one or both of them are going to need their touches to get going, it's going to be clumsy and the other guy is going to feel shut out.

It also has to do with coaching. Garland had Horford on a string, the Celtics completely vacated the painted area, and there were like 3-4 possessions where no one cut to the rim (fatigue was a contributing factor in the 4th). But you see Garland bring three defenders with him under the basket, he turns around, there's no trailer on the play, and fans blame him for the turnover. We just play dumb sometimes and it's frustrating.

Good, case in point. A good PG doesn't need the coaching staff to design anything for him, he talks, he points, he yells if necessary and his teammates will be where he needs them to be. But he can't be doing everything on-the-fly, he has to understand what the defense is doing so he can plan his attack and make sure his teammates are doing what he needs them to be doing.

If multiple teammates are trying to read the defense and they're not making the same reads, you are going to get a lot of turnovers.

Does the weakside player really need someone to tell him to trail the play when three defenders follow one guy? You don't need two players undefended at the 3 point line.

[JonFromVA]

People talk about Garland on defense like he’s Trae Young or Dame Lilliard

He’s more like a smaller Steph Curry. He plays passing lanes well and does his best to stay in front of his man. He’s physically not built to be a Jrue type and he fouls too much. Cavs have had a top notch defense 3 years in a row. His physical gifts for defense are awful but he doesn’t what he can and ends up being fine. He’s definitely better and way less of a liability than what most teams roll out for the 5th best defender

It seemed pretty awful when the Celtics would involve him in a P&R. The Cavs have some elite rim protectors at least when Allen or Mobley are in the paint, but even so it gets our defense in to rotation and Garland is sometimes blowing those covers.

Wouldn't hurt to review the numbers from the Orlando and Celtics series if you'd like to show he wasn't exploited defensively.

[Zeno]

A trade that would be perfect for both teams but never happen is a Franz for Garland move.

I thought about that but it would only be ‘perfect’ if Franz could shoot. If not, I am not sure if that really solves that Cavs issues at all. And if Franz can shoot, then Orlando would be making a mistake.

[JonFromVA]

It also has to do with coaching. Garland had Horford on a string, the Celtics completely vacated the painted area, and there were like 3-4 possessions where no one cut to the rim (fatigue was a contributing factor in the 4th). But you see Garland bring three defenders with him under the basket, he turns around, there's no trailer on the play, and fans blame him for the turnover. We just play dumb sometimes and it's frustrating.

Good, case in point. A good PG doesn't need the coaching staff to design anything for him, he talks, he points, he yells if necessary and his teammates will be where he needs them to be. But he can't be doing everything on-the-fly, he has to understand what the defense is doing so he can plan his attack and make sure his teammates are doing what he needs them to be doing.

If multiple teammates are trying to read the defense and they're not making the same reads, you are going to get a lot of turnovers.

Does the weakside player really need someone to tell him to trail the play when three defenders follow one guy? You don't need two players undefended at the 3 point line.

He doesn't if the players understand in advance that's what's supposed to happen, or they could arrange it on the fly with nothing more than eye contact ... but they need to communicate. It can involve the coach, but doesn't have to.

[JonFromVA]

A trade that would be perfect for both teams but never happen is a Franz for Garland move.

I thought about that but it would only be ‘perfect’ if Franz could shoot. If not, I am not sure if that really solves that Cavs issues at all. And if Franz can shoot, then Orlando would be making a mistake.

Franz shot better in previous years, it wouldn't be crazy to bet on his shooting returning. Just like it wouldn't be crazy to bet on Garland playing a whole lot better if he ever gets back to 100%.

[Zeno]

A trade that would be perfect for both teams but never happen is a Franz for Garland move.

I thought about that but it would only be ‘perfect’ if Franz could shoot. If not, I am not sure if that really solves that Cavs issues at all. And if Franz can shoot, then Orlando would be making a mistake.

Franz shot better in previous years, it wouldn't be crazy to bet on his shooting returning. Just like it wouldn't be crazy to bet on Garland playing a whole lot better if he ever gets back to 100%.

Yeah, I was arguing against the trade being perfect is all. Both teams would be making a bet.

[louc1970]

Garland at 22 and 23 was a top 15 guard in the league. He's had injury issues this season and the fit with Mitchell isn't ideal, but if I'm another team I'm trying to acquire him.

Would you like the fit for the Magic?

I think the cost would be too high.
If Mitchell stays, Cleveland decides that Okoro is a 2G or a SF. Then the trade request for Garland becomes either Suggs and filler or F. Wagner and filler.
Not sure Magic would want to give up either.