Nivek wrote:You wrote that Wall and Beal are the only players who could remotely fit into the team's long-term plans. Why not Webster? He is only 26, coming off his best season, finally healthy. He is by no means an all-star, but is the kind of solid role player that allows a team to not worry about a position.
You said it yourself right at the end: solid role player. I wouldn't mind keeping Webster around at the right price, but he's not a building block. The Wizards STILL need to go about step 1 of a rebuild, which is acquiring top-shelf NBA talent. Beal looks like he's on his way to that level. Wall
could get there, but looks more like he won't. Nene used to be there, but at age 30 probably won't get back to that level. Webster doesn't look like he'll get there -- players usually peak around his age and then maintain to about 30.
Webster is worth keeping around -- at the right price. But you don't win by building around role players.[/quote]
OK - it's a matter of semantics. Agreed, you don't win by building around role players, but you still need them. Webster isn't a building block, but the kind of solid role player that you need to win. The Wizards should keep him, at the right price. And that may be a little higher (but only a little) than they should otherwise pay for a role player providing his level of production, because while solid role players are easier to find than top-shelf stars, the Wizards don't even have a track record of getting those.
"It takes talent, strategy and millions of dollars to compete in the N.B.A. But regret is the league’s greatest currency." - Howard Beck