Trade Alert: Grading LeVert deal from all angles

The Cleveland Cavaliers made their big NBA Trade Deadline move a few days early, trading for Indiana Pacers guard Caris LeVert on Sunday afternoon. It set off an avalanche of trade activity since, including Domantas Sabonis and CJ McCollum changing teams on Tuesday.

Ever since Ricky Rubio and Collin Sexton went down this season, it’s been fait accompli that the Cavs would find a replacement to better face the playoff push. Players from Luke Kennard to Buddy Hield (now in Indiana himself) to Evan Fournier were bandied about, (and Eric Gordon and Gary Harris and…well, the rumor mill was grinding vigorously) but in the end it was Caris LeVert who is relocating to Forest City.

The final details of the deal involved Ricky Rubio’s expiring contract being exchanged for Caris LeVert’s deal:

The Cavs cashed in their assets this season for Pacers guard Caris LeVert. How should this deal be graded from all angles?

Should Cavs fans be excited about the acquisition? Bummed at not acquiring someone else? Was this an overpay or a steal? Is LeVert a rental or a long-term piece of the core? These are questions that have to be raised in the wake of such a significant move.

To find the answers, let’s look at this trade from every angle. We’ll dish out grades for LeVert’s on-court fit, the asset value of the trade, the long-term impact and the opportunity cost. Then we’ll give a final verdict on whether this was a good move or not for the Cavs.

Grading LeVert deal from all angles: On-court fit

The Cleveland Cavaliers have tried it all at shooting guard this season. Collin Sexton started the season before his knee injury, and Isaac Okoro has been a frequent starter since then. Ricky Rubio closed games at the 2 to great effect before he tore his ACL. Cedi Osman, Dylan Windler, Dean Wade and even Lamar Stevens have logged minutes at the 2.

Now the Cavs can cut through that chaos and point to a clear starter at shooting guard, a player who should step in as a starter immediately and hold down the job for the foreseeable future. Despite their lost season, the Pacers were 2.0 points per 100 possessions better than their opponents when LeVert played the 2, which he did so 65 percent of the time.

Garland showed alongside Rubio that he can thrive off-ball, so putting the ball in LeVert’s hands and letting Garland move off screens should unlock some offensive juice. Garland is certainly the better on-ball option, but deploying him in different ways will put strain on opposing defenses. LeVert is a capable ball-handler and underrated playmaker; his assist percentage of 22 percent is in the 84th percentile among league shooting guards.

The Cavs will therefore also likely deploy him as the lead guard in bench lineups where Cedi Osman is in at the 2, a role LeVert can succeed in but that stretches him past his comfort level. Putting the ball in his hands mitigates the spacing concerns; just a 33.4 percent 3-pointer shooter for his career, he has been ice cold in Indiana, hitting 32 percent of his triples since joining them midseason a year ago.

That’s where the problems will really bloom. The Cavs start a non-shooter in Jarrett Allen and a so-so shooter in Evan Mobley. As long as LeVert is replacing Isaac Okoro in the starting lineup, and especially if Osman or Lauri Markkanen are starting at the 3, the spacing should be decent enough to survive. Yet playing LeVert at the 2 makes it difficult to put Lamar Stevens or Okoro on the court with him, and pairing LeVert and Rajon Rondo seems like a perilous decision.

Defensively LeVert is a problem as well, a player whose upright stance makes him a blow-by candidate on the perimeter. He will gamble for steals but isn’t a dynamic turnover-forcing player. He rates out as an average or worse player this season by many metrics because he gives up all of the value he provides on offense. That’s less of a problem in Cleveland than it was in Indiana given the elite duo guarding the paint behind him, but it certainly hurts the Cavs.

Cleveland needed a secondary playmaker and a confident shot-creator who can create against tough defenses or late in the clock. LeVert can be that guy; not the most efficient such shot taker, but someone able to make something akin to lemonade when the Cavs’ offense is dealt lemons. He also gives the Cavs a player who can get hot and score 30 or even 40 points; even when players like Jarrett Allen or Evan Mobley are at their best those totals are a stretch.

In the end, LeVert solves some problems for the Cavs but certainly not all of them. Given the team’s lack of offensive creation at the 2, they needed a player like LeVert. Given Garland’s defensive issues, they needed a better defender than LeVert. How the team balances those issues will be important to determining their ceiling this postseason.

Grade: B+

Grading LeVert deal from all angles: Asset Value

Caris LeVert is 27 years old, likely older than many fans realized, and is under contract for this season at $17.5 million and next year at $18.8 million. He was traded in the same James Harden blockbuster that brought Jarrett Allen to Cleveland, moving from Brooklyn to Indiana. Reports are that he was going to be a Houston Rocket until the Pacers offered Victor Oladipo for LeVert.

13 months later, LeVert was moved for what appears to be a higher value than he was last year. The Cavs traded an expiring salary in Ricky Rubio; given that the Pacers now have Malcolm Brogdon, Tyrese Haliburton and T.J. McConnell under contract long-term, it’s unlike Rubio was anything other than matching salary.

The Cavs then also sent their first-round pick this season, which will likely fall in the 15-25 range, swapped their lucrative Houston 2022 second-rounder for a Miami Heat second-round pick (likely a 20-spot drop or so) and sent a Utah 2027 second-round pick that has some upside given the age of Utah’s core.

Norman Powell went for less, but is also under contract for three seasons longer than LeVert. CJ McCollum went for more and is on a negative value contract. Buddy Hield had some value in the Domantas Sabonis – Haliburton deal, but likely not much. Players such as Eric Gordon and Gary Harris haven’t yet been moved.

If the Cavs get a legitimate long-term starter at the 2, then perhaps the compensation sent to the Pacers — effectively a back-end first and two seconds with enough value to equal another back-end first — ends up being fair. As it stands this seems like an overpay for LeVert, a player with clear flaws and a robust injury history. He absolutely has a lot of talent and production, but so do other players who were out there on the market.

The Cavs felt that LeVert was the best on-court fit and lined up closer to their timeline than the other options. They also reportedly had to outbid other suitors, including the New York Knicks. In the end they didn’t mortgage the future, they traded mostly out of a draft most pundits view as the weakest in some time, and they got back a player who will start for them. That’s not the worst asset play in the world.

Grade: C+

Grading LeVert deal from all angles: Long-term plan

The Cleveland Cavaliers have held steady on their evaluation of Collin Sexton since before the season began. They love his competitive fire, his scoring talent, his motor; they want him in the locker room and on this team. They also think he is a bench player, a 6th-Man type, and want to pay and deploy him as such. That is why the two sides didn’t come to a contract agreement on an extension last year, but it is also why they haven’t traded him away.

Adding LeVert is another piece to the long-term roster puzzle. The team clearly looked for a player who could start alongside Darius Garland; LeVert may not be a plus defender, but at 6’6″ he offers a lot more size and rebounding at the 2. He fits the theory of a team that head coach J.B. Bickerstaff and the front office are leaning into, that in a game where large men try to put a sphere through a ring suspended 10 feet in the air, size matters.

Yet does that signal Sexton’s departure this summer? Not necessarily. If the organization can get Sexton to buy into a bench role — and a limited market this summer with so few teams holding cap space could help — then he could slot in behind and at times alongside LeVert. Yet adding LeVert means the Cavs have even more leverage; if Sexton walks they still have their starting 2 intact.

As things stand, the Cavs look to have significant cap space in the summer of 2023, when the market will be flush with free agents. That being said, the Cavs also aren’t much of a free agent draw. Will being really good change that? Maybe, maybe not. Inking LeVert to a contract extension cuts into that space, so the Cavs would be wise to only do so at a solid value. Unfortunately, the history of this organization is to sign the extension or new contract now, ask questions later. That worked for Jarrett Allen, but less so for Kevin Love.

LeVert is in the midst of his prime, is probably properly paid and fits a need for this team. His presence could also help the team bring back Sexton at a value number. Yet if the Cavs make a longer-term commitment, especially a lucrative one, this could turn into a long-term problem quickly.

Grade: B-

Grading LeVert deal from all angles: Missed opportunities

The trade for Caris LeVert can’t be viewed in a vacuum, as if that trade was the only option and the two teams just haggled over price. If the Cavs chose not to execute the deal for LeVert there were other players out there on the market as well.

Norman Powell is one such player we highlighted after he was traded to the LA Clippers. Powell is under contract for a long time, three seasons longer than LeVert, and is a year older than LeVert. He would have been a much better 2-way fit with this team, a high-level shooter and defender, but he doesn’t bring the on-ball creation of LeVert.

That’s a similar story for player such as Gary Harris or Buddy Hield. Those players may have been less expensive, but it’s clear the Cavs wanted a player who could man the 2 but also run the offense when Garland sits. They viewed LeVert + Cedi Osman as a better combination of shot creation and 3-and-D then something like Rajon Rondo + Buddy Hield.

Luke Kennard is another player that should be brought up here. He is on a longer contract but for less money, and he brings more shooting and a little less creation than LeVert. Defensively both are questionable options, although at least LeVert has size. It may be that the Clippers decided they didn’t want to put Kennard on the market; if Steve Ballmer is comfortable paying hand over fist for the most competitive roster possible then Kennard’s contract isn’t a problem.

Finally, the Eric Gordon question. The Rockets’ veteran guard is clearly available and probably could have been had for simply the Cavs’ first-roud pick this year. He is 33 years old, the biggest barrier to the Cavs adding him, but he can create shots on-ball, is a rugged defender and is shooting 42.7 percent from deep this year. He doesn’t fit the timeline, but he would have checked more boxes than anyone else available in this price range.

Caris LeVert truly does look like the player who meets as much of the Cavs’ wish list as possible — a 2-guard with size, on-ball creation and youg enough to potentially be a long-term piece. Other options at a lower cost may have been preferable, but LeVert was unique in what he offered this team.

Grade: B

Grading LeVert deal from all angles: Final Verdict

Caris LeVert is by all accounts a great guy, a solid teammate and hard worker who has publicly said all the right things about joining the team and putting in the work. He is also a player who likes the ball in his hands to the extent that he bucks play calls that require giving up the rock or moving off-ball. Will playing for a top seed like the Cavs drive him towards more buy-in?

LeVert’s contract as it stands is not onerous, but any potential extension would be, especially if it means a raise on his current salary amount. His impact on Sexton’s future with the team will be something to watch closely, as will his play when sharing the court with Darius Garland.

At the end of the day, while other teams are making trades that bewilder or irritate their fan bases, the Cavs’ move for LeVert seems to have energized theirs. The team is excited, LeVert seems excited, and fans are excited. That’s the right recipe for this team in this season even if the team may have given up too much to bring him in.

This deal will ultimately be graded on how LeVert fits with Garland, if he is a part of the closing lineups, and whether he elevates his game in the postseason. If those areas see a positive return, the price given up will be well worth it. If he struggles in the areas he has struggled in thus far in his career, the Cavs may wish they had better leveraged their assets at this deadline to make a different move.

Grade: B-

This is a solid trade by the Cavs. It likely won’t be the move that pushes them over the top, but that was always going to be about the development of Garland and Mobley anyway. Let’s see how the stretch run goes and continue to reevaluate. For now, this was good enough.