Wiz trade Shard and 2nd rounder for Okafor and Ariza-Part II

[Nivek]

I think it's a bad trade, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise by what happens on the floor. I'd love to be wrong.

[Zonkerbl]

Had they taken the strategy I described earlier in the thread, they'd have been able to use cap space to add younger players who could stick around for several years, as well as a short-term vet as a security blanket.

Confused. What young players did we miss out on? Or do you mean we could have gotten some young players next summer?

Are any good SF FAs coming on the market next year?

[Nivek]

Had they taken the strategy I described earlier in the thread, they'd have been able to use cap space to add younger players who could stick around for several years, as well as a short-term vet as a security blanket.

Confused. What young players did we miss out on? Or do you mean we could have gotten some young players next summer?

Are any good SF FAs coming on the market next year?

- Ryan Anderson
- Ersan Ilyasova
- Lou Williams
- Danny Green

Just to name a few I mentioned earlier in the thread.

In my opinion, an offseason of using cap space to acquire Brand as a veteran frontcourt safety net for a year, and signing Danny Green and Lou Williams (as a third guard) would have been preferable to trading for Okafor/Ariza.

Or, the Wizards could have used their cap space to do what New Orleans did with the Wizards' cap space: sign & trade for Ryan Anderson, Ilyasova, Batum...

[BigA]

Of course, Ted has said/written at least a few things and then the team has done the opposite.

I think it's important to keep this in mind. Leonsis can't really say "over the next few years cap space is likely to become more valuable than it is now, contracts will more constrained, and teams will have more incentive to get out from under bad deals. We can probably flip Okafor for value at the 2014 trade deadline, and if things work out he'll make us more competitive in the meantime. Also, by that time the value of our younger players will be clearer, etc."

The arguments against the trade resonate more with me than the ones in favor, but I'm hoping that this works out.

[payitforward]

If Okafor ends up being an anchor in the middle--rebounding, playing good D and helping the Zards win games--I don't know why we would be so anxious to trade him.

Trouble is that Okafor has produced just about like an average nba player at the 5 over the last few years. So why would one take seriously your "if" scenario pray tell?

People on this board have put forth strategies for improving the Zards, even proposing trades/free agent signings that they would have done instead of trading for Okafor/Ariza. But I have yet to see one idea that I think is significantly better than what the Zards have already done this offseason.

In other words, so far you think the optimal move for us was not to buy out Rashard but trade him for another team to buy out in order to acquire an unbelievably over-priced contract for a journeyman along with another journeyman whose contract isn't as overpriced? That was the best we would have been able to do? Trying to get Ilyasova wouldn't have been better? Brand at 25% the price wouldn't have been better than Oak? Brandon Rush wouldn't be better than Ariza? Nothing is better; it's all good...?

(Landry Fields, Childress, really?) And aren't most of these strategies/trades/free agent signings really just the hopes and dreams of us fans on the outside looking in?

Childress wouldn't help build a contending team down the line, but then neither does Ariza. Fields would, and he is a great deal better than Ariza. Look at his numbers. Numbers get added up and determine who wins games. But there is something to what you say about our thoughts just being the hopes and dreams of fans. Fans who are sick of watching Ernie be clever and attain mediocrity every once in a while

I'm just going to wait and see how the trade plays out in terms of the team's oncourt success before making any final judgements about the wisdom of the trade.

No, really? Zards, we'll all do that. But what Okafor and Ariza have done in the last couple of years is the best guide to what it's likely they'll do this year, and we do have that info. I wouldn't bet my retirement $$ on this turning out to have been a brilliant move.

[DCZards]

Peace and love, payit.

[payitforward]

Peace and love, payit.

My frustration is with Ernie. But... I took it out on you!

[closg00]

Peace and love, payit.

I agree with pay-it and I hope for the best. pay it had nothing to apologize or IMO.

[nate33]

I've been out of town for a week so forgive me if I'm rehashing old arguments.

I think the decision to amnesty Blatche only reinforces my belief that the Lewis/Okafor trade was a bad one. I was willing to go along with the trade under the assumption that we were unwilling to pay Blatche $23M to go away. By retaining Blatche, the maximum cap space we could generate this offseason was just $5M. With that in mind, I could understand the argument that Okafor + Ariza for 2 years is better than what we could buy for $5M.

But now that we've amnestied Blatche, that argument goes out the window. By amnestying Blatche, we would have had $12M in cap room. Clearly, we could have done much better this offseason with $12M in cap space than Okafor + Ariza. (As Nivek has mentioned, Brand + Danny Green would have given us two better players plus the potential for max cap room next summer.)

What's disturbing is that I think even EG would accept my argument that we could do better with $12M in cap space than Okafor + Ariza. The problem wasn't that he didn't understand the premise. The problem was that he didn't expect to amnesty Blatche at the time the trade was made.

The bottom line is that EG didn't have an offseason plan laid out. He just haphazardly made one move after another.

[Knighthonor]

I've been out of town for a week so forgive me if I'm rehashing old arguments.

I think the decision to amnesty Blatche only reinforces my belief that the Lewis/Okafor trade was a bad one. I was willing to go along with the trade under the assumption that we were unwilling to pay Blatche $23M to go away. By retaining Blatche, the maximum cap space we could generate this offseason was just $5M. With that in mind, I could understand the argument that Okafor + Ariza for 2 years is better than what we could buy for $5M.

But now that we've amnestied Blatche, that argument goes out the window. By amnestying Blatche, we would have had $12M in cap room. Clearly, we could have done much better this offseason with $12M in cap space than Okafor + Ariza. (As Nivek has mentioned, Brand + Danny Green would have given us two better players plus the potential for max cap room next summer.)

What's disturbing is that I think even EG would except my argument that we could do better with $12M in cap space than Okafor + Ariza. The problem wasn't that he didn't understand the premise. The problem was that he didn't expect to amnesty Blatche at the time the trade was made.

The bottom line is that EG didn't have an offseason plan laid out. He just haphazardly made one move after another.

Conspiracy Theory:

or maybe the trade that he did with NO, was so Stern will give Wizards #1 pick in 2013 for assisting the Hornets....

[Kanyewest]

Conspiracy Theory:

or maybe the trade that he did with NO, was so Stern will give Wizards #1 pick in 2013 for assisting the Hornets....

Or maybe it was part of the payment for the #3 pick for Bradley Beal.

[LyricalRico]

I can't say that nate's arguments aren't compelling, but I'm still comfortable with a 2 year plan where we take the next step in the upcoming seasons and target 2014 for big moves. Depending on how things work once Okafor and Ariza's contracts get to their last year, we may still be looking at making a move in 2013 or at the Feb 2014 trade deadline.

[DCZards]

My biggest problem with Nate's argument is his opinion that the Zards would have had two "better" players with Brand and Green...assuming they would have even signed with the Zards. Not only is Okafor younger than Brand, I believe Okafor is a much better fit defensively than Brand and that he'll be a better rebounder than Brand.

Green may be better than Ariza, but Green is nothing special, IMO. If he were, teams other than SA would have tried to sign him away from the Spurs during this current frenzy of overpaying role players like Landry Fields. 2-3 years from now C. Singleton will be as good or better than Green...and Singleton is cheaper and younger.

I understand people being unhappy with the trade and the loss of cap space, but I'm not impressed by any of the alternatives that have been floated thus far. And most of the alternatives I've seen depend on "wishing and hoping" that the Zards attract a quality free agent. A strategy that Ted clearly said he is uncomfortable with.

[nate33]

The Wizards could have signed Brand because they would have been able to outbid Dallas. Likewise with Green. But even if Brand and Green aren't quite as good, they're close. And I'd much rather be almost as good as we are now but with MAX CAP ROOM next year than in the current state we are now with no realistic cap room in the foreseeable future.

I can't believe you are even debating this. It's a no brainer. The moves made after our trade (Ben Gordon for a 1st round pick, the Ryan Anderson S&T, the Ilyasova signing, the Green signing, the Brand and Haywood amnesty waiver claims) prove that we overpaid dramatically for Okafor and Ariza.

[Kanyewest]

The Wizards could have signed Brand because they would have been able to outbid Dallas. Likewise with Green. But even if Brand and Green aren't quite as good, they're close. And I'd much rather be almost as good as we are now but with MAX CAP ROOM next year than in the current state we are now with no realistic cap room in the foreseeable future.

I can't believe you are even debating this. It's a no brainer. The moves made after our trade (Ben Gordon for a 1st round pick, the Ryan Anderson S&T, the Ilyasova signing, the Green signing, the Brand and Haywood amnesty waiver claims) prove that we overpaid dramatically for Okafor and Ariza.

Corey Maggette is a better asset than was a Rashard Lewis, hence the reason why the Piston acquired him. I believe Ryan Anderson will not be as effective in New Orleans as he was in Stan Van Gundy's system and with Dwight Howard. With Illyasova and Danny Green, the Wizards would have had to offer a more than what Milwaulkee and San Antonio were willing to pay and perhaps more than the amount that they agreed to. Personally, I wasn't impressed with Green and how he disappeared in the playoffs against OKC and I thought the efficiency of his numbers were due more to him being in San Antonio and their players (Duncan, Ginobli, Parker).

[closg00]

The Wizards could have signed Brand because they would have been able to outbid Dallas. Likewise with Green. But even if Brand and Green aren't quite as good, they're close. And I'd much rather be almost as good as we are now but with MAX CAP ROOM next year than in the current state we are now with no realistic cap room in the foreseeable future.

I can't believe you are even debating this. It's a no brainer. The moves made after our trade (Ben Gordon for a 1st round pick, the Ryan Anderson S&T, the Ilyasova signing, the Green signing, the Brand and Haywood amnesty waiver claims) prove that we overpaid dramatically for Okafor and Ariza.

It's not even close Nate, I think you have made the winning argument.

[leswizards]

Corey Maggette is a better asset than was a Rashard Lewis, hence the reason why the Piston acquired him.

I used to think the same, and posted something similiar, but now that I think about, I think the Wizards actually could have made the better deal. If the Wizards bought out Lewis, and amnestied Blatche, and made it a pure BYOD deal, then the Wizards' offer would have been superior to Charlotte's

[DCZards]

I used to think the same, and posted something similiar, but now that I think about, I think the Wizards actually could have made the better deal. If the Wizards bought out Lewis, and amnestied Blatche, and made it a pure BYOD deal, then the Wizards' offer would have been superior to Charlotte's

Ted has made it clear that he was NOT going to buyout Lewis. So as we assess the trade--and evaluate EG as it relates to the trade--I hope we can agree to start with the reality that EG's boss, the guy who pays the bills, instructed EG to trade Lewis.

I'd love to hear trade idea's involving Lewis since that was the only option EG was apparently given by his boss.

[nate33]

I used to think the same, and posted something similiar, but now that I think about, I think the Wizards actually could have made the better deal. If the Wizards bought out Lewis, and amnestied Blatche, and made it a pure BYOD deal, then the Wizards' offer would have been superior to Charlotte's

Ted has made it clear that he was NOT going to buyout Lewis. So as we assess the trade--and evaluate EG as it relates to the trade--I hope we can agree to start with the reality that EG's boss, the guy who pays the bills, instructed EG to trade Lewis.

I'd love to hear trade idea's involving Lewis since that was the only option EG was apparently given by his boss.

If that's the case, then Ted is as foolhardy as EG. Why provide an illogical mandate like, "we won't amnesty Lewis"? It's fine if Ted doesn't want to throw money away, but by amnestying Lewis and signing Brand and Green (for example), Ted would have saved much more money while assembling an equally as good team with cap flexibility next year.

[montestewart]

I used to think the same, and posted something similiar, but now that I think about, I think the Wizards actually could have made the better deal. If the Wizards bought out Lewis, and amnestied Blatche, and made it a pure BYOD deal, then the Wizards' offer would have been superior to Charlotte's

Ted has made it clear that he was NOT going to buyout Lewis. So as we assess the trade--and evaluate EG as it relates to the trade--I hope we can agree to start with the reality that EG's boss, the guy who pays the bills, instructed EG to trade Lewis.

I'd love to hear trade idea's involving Lewis since that was the only option EG was apparently given by his boss.

Lewis for Okafor, Ariza, and #10
Lewis for Okafor, Ariza, and future 1st
Lewis for Okafor
Lewis and #46 for Ariza
Lewis and #32 for Ariza (and Satoransky would probably still be there at #46)

PS: As you noted, this was "apparently" the option given to EG by Leonsis, but we only know what happened, not whether Leonis is giving an accurate description of his reasoning or whether Leonsis' decision was influenced by EG's input:

EG: Sure, we could buy him out, but boss, I think we could get some real players for him instead. Hornets might even give us Okafor and Ariza, but we might have to toss a pick their way.
TL: Great thinking Erg, but it might not be a popular decision with the fan base. I'll take the responsibility. I'll take the blame. I'll take the fall.