The Kevin Durant To Washington Thread (Part 1)

[I_Like_Dirt]

I don't see Miami really having a chance. I think Dallas has a better chance than Miami, to be honest, and I don't think the Mavs have much of a chance, either, really.

The catch with Beverley and Lawson, is that the Rockets could actually keep both under some circumstances. Backup swingmen are of extremely limited value for a team that has Durant and Harden on it. Dump Ariza, Brewer and McDaniels (assuming they sign Durant), and:

Lawson/Beverley
Harden/Beverley
Durant/Dekker
Motiejunas/Capela
Howard/Capela

That team is freaky good and the title favorite, imo. But they have flexibility, too. If they decide a 3rd guard isn't as important as another big, they could drop either of Beverley or Lawson and add keep both Jones and Motiejunas. Either way, they'll have the room ML for a 3rd guard or a backup big. They could swap Motiejunas for Jones there, depending on who they like better, too. If Lawson doesn't work out like I think he will, though, keeping Ariza instead of him does make sense, but I think Lawson has talent and will work out pretty damn well on the Rockets. I don't think the Rockets will have any problem at all offloading guys like Brewer or McDaniels, either. The Knicks already wanted to pay Brewer similar money this offseason. Next offseason, even more teams are going to wish they could pay a player like Brewer that amount of money. McDaniels' contract goes away incredibly easy.

Personally, I think Durant is staying in OKC next offseason, but if not, I think Washington and Houston are the most likely destinations.

[Induveca]

^
And 1 for truth and use of the term "bamma".

What the hell is a bamma

[bondom34]

^
And 1 for truth and use of the term "bamma".

What the hell is a bamma

From the use I've heard, sort of slang for a fool. Only ever heard it used when I lived in VA, never before, never since.

[gambitx777]

We can be sneaky good this year, if we can be healthy, if otto can show up as a stretch 4, if kelly can give us half a decent year, we can be pretty good!

[montestewart]

^
And 1 for truth and use of the term "bamma".

What the hell is a bamma

From the use I've heard, sort of slang for a fool. Only ever heard it used when I lived in VA, never before, never since.

That's pretty much the meaning of bama/bamma, probably short for Alabama and originally applied to someone who came North from the deep South and was perceived and/or characterized as unsophisticated, sort of like rube or country bumpkin. I'm not sure I've heard it outside of the DC/Baltimore area, and I'm not sure I understand it's meanings well enough to use it without potentially causing great offense, even applied to someone who is literally from Alabama. Somewhere along the way, I started to realize that hick, redneck, etc. when carelessly applied can be pretty insulting. I like old standards like "you f_<l<ing idiot" that have fairly universally embraced meanings, but I still hear bama/bamma used occasionally around here.

[stevemcqueen1]

If Durant chooses the Wizards, it'll represent a sea change for the franchise. I'm trying to think of the biggest FA we've signed, and Paul Pierce is the only name that comes to mind. And it was a 37 year old Pierce on the MLE. Everyone else we've gotten has been through the draft or trades. And on this current team, the whole core was acquired through our first round draft picks. Wall with the 2010 pick, Beal with 2012, Porter with 2013, Gortat with 2014, and now Oubre with the 2015 pick. Nene was the biggest name player we got from a player for player trade in the Leonsis era.

We've operated as a small market franchise with a marginal brand and little appeal to upper tier free agents. And the truth is, that's what we've been. I think about that fandom map that Nate Silver made and how the Wizards have no reach beyond the immediate area surrounding DC. Durant would change that. You'd see Wizards support pop up in random counties in Montana. He'd bring an IMMENSE amount of brand equity to the team. It'd be so unfamiliar to what we know that it'd be weird. This forum would probably grow in membership and activity ten-fold.

Let's face it, we're just not that lucky. There is no universe where the Wizards become the team du jour for America's bandwagoning population. No universe where Les Boulez won't **** us and allow us to sustain a run of good luck that could actually lead to success and dominance. My mind is already moving on to what's next for us when Durant stays in OKC.

[nate33]

I'm trying to think of the biggest FA we've signed, and Paul Pierce is the only name that comes to mind.

Gilbert Arenas

[stevemcqueen1]

I'm trying to think of the biggest FA we've signed, and Paul Pierce is the only name that comes to mind.

Gilbert Arenas

Oh yeah, duh. I mis-remembered that as a trade for some reason. It makes me feel a little better to think about Arenas, but then he is the only instance instance I can think of where the franchise was a true draw. The only other times big names have come here in FA is when they've been at the end of their careers.

I would love to be a fly on the wall in the discussions where top tier free agents suss out their potential destinations with their agents. I want to see how often the Wizards even come up. I think Durant truly will give us serious consideration. But only because he's from DC and loves the area. If he were from somewhere else, like Texas or New York, I don't think we would even occur to him.

[TheSecretWeapon]

The Arenas signing took a TON of good fortune. First being that Arenas was a second round pick, and Golden State was unable to make a competing offer because of the CBA at the time. Second being that the Clippers and the Wizards both had about the same amount of cap room so each team made practically identical contract offers. Third being that the Wizards had the cap space at all -- the previous regime had given Bryon Russell a player option, which (if he'd exercised it) would have reduced Washington's cap space by $1.5 million. And fourth being that Arenas was a goofball who made his decision by flipping a coin 10 times and picking Washington because the Clippers "won" the coin toss eight times.

I'm not convinced there was anything particular about the Wizards that attracted Arenas. They tied with the Clippers for best offer and Arenas essentially chose Washington at random.

[lastemp3ror]

Did anyone see the video with two NBA bloggers talking about which team has the highest odds to land Durant? I can't link it for some reason. They both think that OKC has the highest odds (as do the people who voted) which is understandable, however they both don't understand why Washington finished second in voting. They talk about how other teams are deeper and better than the Wizards (GS and Houston). They also talk about how Durant is a leader and won't follow Lebron's footsteps by going home. I think those two statements are both conflicting. If he is a leader, than why would Durant go to GS where he may become option #2 behind Curry? Why would he go to Houston where he may (emphasis on may) become option #2 behind Harden? I know that the term "leader" is vague, however to me it seemed like they meant, the alpha male on a squad.....I don't know.

They also say that with OKC Durant will have the best chance of winning a title. If that is Durant's main concern don't you think he would choose Houston or GS over OKC? Both of those teams are much deeper than either OKC or the Wizards. I found that part to also be mind boggling.

Also, I think the Wizards WITH Durant is a better team than OKC with Durant if that is truly Durant's main concern as they point out. Yes Westbrook is better than anyone on our team but I think it stops there. Being a better player doesn't mean he fits well with a player like Durant. Westbrook proved last season that he excels at being the top dog which conflicts with having Durant. Durant would be better with a PG that facilitates the offense like Wall. Also, although Westbrook is the best player on both squads (outside of Durant), the rest of OKC team isn't as good as the rest of DC's team (I think next year will prove this), which isn't saying much IMO because both teams lack depth. Last but not least the East is a much easier path to the title than the West.

Maybe I am living in the DC bubble and I am biased, however I seemed to disagree with almost everything they said with the exception of the fact in all likely hood Durant will stay with OKC. I am sure someone will give me some advance stat saying otherwise but I am just throwing my opinion out there.

They also kinda poke fun at the Wizards a bit, which annoyed me the most lol.

[bondom34]

I think Nate explained earlier, but part of the advantage OKC has is that to keep him, they don't need to make any moves to free cap space, which maintains the current depth. They're at minimum 2 deep and a few positions 3 deep with pretty solid talent and would be able to maintain that, where other teams would need to either renounce free agents or make trades to send out salary and hence, bench depth.

Though I agree with the part about Houston and GSW. I don't see it. And ESPN's forecast also voted NOP with the 4th best shot when I last saw.

[Higga]

If Durant chooses the Wizards, it'll represent a sea change for the franchise. I'm trying to think of the biggest FA we've signed, and Paul Pierce is the only name that comes to mind. And it was a 37 year old Pierce on the MLE. Everyone else we've gotten has been through the draft or trades. And on this current team, the whole core was acquired through our first round draft picks. Wall with the 2010 pick, Beal with 2012, Porter with 2013, Gortat with 2014, and now Oubre with the 2015 pick. Nene was the biggest name player we got from a player for player trade in the Leonsis era.

We've operated as a small market franchise with a marginal brand and little appeal to upper tier free agents. And the truth is, that's what we've been. I think about that fandom map that Nate Silver made and how the Wizards have no reach beyond the immediate area surrounding DC. Durant would change that. You'd see Wizards support pop up in random counties in Montana. He'd bring an IMMENSE amount of brand equity to the team. It'd be so unfamiliar to what we know that it'd be weird. This forum would probably grow in membership and activity ten-fold.

Let's face it, we're just not that lucky. There is no universe where the Wizards become the team du jour for America's bandwagoning population. No universe where Les Boulez won't **** us and allow us to sustain a run of good luck that could actually lead to success and dominance. My mind is already moving on to what's next for us when Durant stays in OKC.

Gotta believe man. Golden State finally won a title after ~40 years. Its our time.

[payitforward]

I might add that when I see the way people who are rational on a wide range of subjects want to read the tea leaves on whether KD will sign with Washington -- hell they want to read the tea leaves on whether there *are* any tea leaves on that subject! -- a forest of eyebrow furrows flourishes upon my forehead (that's for you LR).

Your position amounts to "unless Kevin Durant calls a press conference and declares -- while under contract with OKC -- that he's signing with the Wizards, there's no reason at all to believe it could happen."

There's often truth to the "where there's smoke there's fire" cliche....

There have been several stories from credible journalists that there is an expectation amongst people in the know that Durant will come to Washington if he leaves OKC. Others have suggested that he's definitely coming.

At the same time, the Wizards have behaved via their personnel moves and non-moves that they have legitimate chance to land Durant. ...
There's smoke here. The Wizards plainly believe they have a shot at Durant. People around the league believe the Wizards have a shot at Durant. While I'd still put my money on him remaining in OKC, I do think there's reason to be hopeful.

If I gave that impression, I apologize. Of course there's a chance he comes here. And it certainly seems true that the Wizards have behaved as if they had a legit shot at landing him -- and to make sure they have the cap room, etc. to do so.

And it would be great if he did come here -- who wouldn't want that?

What I was reacting to -- and sorry if I over-reacted -- was, as I said, the "reading the tea leaves." So, on this thread we just had a photo of Wall and Durant at a charity football game. That's fine, of course -- it expresses hope. Hope is a good thing.

But it has zero to do w/ "Kevin Durant to Washington."

Finally, it's making/not making moves based on getting him here -- that's what worries me. Or, rather, some of the moves/non-moves worry me.

[nate33]

Did anyone see the video with two NBA bloggers talking about which team has the highest odds to land Durant? I can't link it for some reason. They both think that OKC has the highest odds (as do the people who voted) which is understandable, however they both don't understand why Washington finished second in voting. They talk about how other teams are deeper and better than the Wizards (GS and Houston). They also talk about how Durant is a leader and won't follow Lebron's footsteps by going home. I think those two statements are both conflicting. If he is a leader, than why would Durant go to GS where he may become option #2 behind Curry? Why would he go to Houston where he may (emphasis on may) become option #2 behind Harden? I know that the term "leader" is vague, however to me it seemed like they meant, the alpha male on a squad.....I don't know.

They also say that with OKC Durant will have the best chance of winning a title. If that is Durant's main concern don't you think he would choose Houston or GS over OKC? Both of those teams are much deeper than either OKC or the Wizards. I found that part to also be mind boggling.

Also, I think the Wizards WITH Durant is a better team than OKC with Durant if that is truly Durant's main concern as they point out. Yes Westbrook is better than anyone on our team but I think it stops there. Being a better player doesn't mean he fits well with a player like Durant. Westbrook proved last season that he excels at being the top dog which conflicts with having Durant. Durant would be better with a PG that facilitates the offense like Wall. Also, although Westbrook is the best player on both squads (outside of Durant), the rest of OKC team isn't as good as the rest of DC's team (I think next year will prove this), which isn't saying much IMO because both teams lack depth. Last but not least the East is a much easier path to the title than the West.

Maybe I am living in the DC bubble and I am biased, however I seemed to disagree with almost everything they said with the exception of the fact in all likely hood Durant will stay with OKC. I am sure someone will give me some advance stat saying otherwise but I am just throwing my opinion out there.

They also kinda poke fun at the Wizards a bit, which annoyed me the most lol.

Golden State would have to make a ton of moves to get themselves far enough under the cap to make a run at Durant. They'd have to trade away Iggy or Bogut and renounce the rights to Barnes. They'd also have to let much of their depth go (Livingston, Bird Rights on Speights and Barbosa). I just don't see them disrupting their chemistry like that. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. They can keep their top 10 players for 2 more years, and their youngest 5 players (Curry, Thompson, Barnes, Thompson, Ezeli) for a long long time.

[fishercob]

I might add that when I see the way people who are rational on a wide range of subjects want to read the tea leaves on whether KD will sign with Washington -- hell they want to read the tea leaves on whether there *are* any tea leaves on that subject! -- a forest of eyebrow furrows flourishes upon my forehead (that's for you LR).

Your position amounts to "unless Kevin Durant calls a press conference and declares -- while under contract with OKC -- that he's signing with the Wizards, there's no reason at all to believe it could happen."

There's often truth to the "where there's smoke there's fire" cliche....

There have been several stories from credible journalists that there is an expectation amongst people in the know that Durant will come to Washington if he leaves OKC. Others have suggested that he's definitely coming.

At the same time, the Wizards have behaved via their personnel moves and non-moves that they have legitimate chance to land Durant. ...
There's smoke here. The Wizards plainly believe they have a shot at Durant. People around the league believe the Wizards have a shot at Durant. While I'd still put my money on him remaining in OKC, I do think there's reason to be hopeful.

If I gave that impression, I apologize. Of course there's a chance he comes here. And it certainly seems true that the Wizards have behaved as if they had a legit shot at landing him -- and to make sure they have the cap room, etc. to do so.

And it would be great if he did come here -- who wouldn't want that?

What I was reacting to -- and sorry if I over-reacted -- was, as I said, the "reading the tea leaves." So, on this thread we just had a photo of Wall and Durant at a charity football game. That's fine, of course -- it expresses hope. Hope is a good thing.

But it has zero to do w/ "Kevin Durant to Washington."

Finally, it's making/not making moves based on getting him here -- that's what worries me. Or, rather, some of the moves/non-moves worry me.

I share your concern. I doubt that we'll ever have complete enough information to make a call on this. But look, if the Wizards have truly no reason to believe that Durant is interested -- that this is just pie in the sky "he's from here and he loves the crap-ass football team!" -- then the methods of their pursuit are galactically stupid. But if they think they have a reasonable shot at him and he ends up not coming here, I can't fault them for betting big. The hardest thing in the NBA is to land a superstar, and I'm cool with them making a well-strategized big bet and failing.

I maintain though, and think you agree, that they were too conservative this summer. Understanding the desire to keep the ledger clean next summer, I also think that nearly any decent player signed to a multi-year deal this summer would be an asset next summer. I think not pursuing guys like Mike Dunleavy, Biymbo, etc, given the deals they received, was a mistake.

If they land Durant, the mistake will prove to be a pretty low cost one (unless Biyombo or another opportunity cost guy we passed on blows up and becomes a huge asset). If they miss out on Durant, their non-moves this summer will be more costly. Such is life.

[long suffrin' boulez fan]

I'm trying to think of the biggest FA we've signed, and Paul Pierce is the only name that comes to mind.

Gilbert Arenas

I'll see your Gilbert Arenas and raise you a Bobby Dandridge.

Agent Zero was crazy fun to watch. Bobby D brought us a championship.

[verbal8]

I maintain though, and think you agree, that they were too conservative this summer. Understanding the desire to keep the ledger clean next summer, I also think that nearly any decent player signed to a multi-year deal this summer would be an asset next summer. I think not pursuing guys like Mike Dunleavy, Biymbo, etc, given the deals they received, was a mistake.

If they land Durant, the mistake will prove to be a pretty low cost one (unless Biyombo or another opportunity cost guy we passed on blows up and becomes a huge asset). If they miss out on Durant, their non-moves this summer will be more costly. Such is life.

I think Biyombo vs. Dudley illustrates what you are saying well. Dudley is at best a horizontal move with little upside. With the injury issues a decent amount of even average production is looking questionable. True there is a risk on the 2nd year it would have taken to acquire Biyombo, however generally it is easier to convert underpaid players into cap space than the reverse. Typically the most favorable contracts to teams - rookie deals and max contracts to superstar don't involve directly using cap space.

[fishercob]

I maintain though, and think you agree, that they were too conservative this summer. Understanding the desire to keep the ledger clean next summer, I also think that nearly any decent player signed to a multi-year deal this summer would be an asset next summer. I think not pursuing guys like Mike Dunleavy, Biymbo, etc, given the deals they received, was a mistake.

If they land Durant, the mistake will prove to be a pretty low cost one (unless Biyombo or another opportunity cost guy we passed on blows up and becomes a huge asset). If they miss out on Durant, their non-moves this summer will be more costly. Such is life.

I think Biyombo vs. Dudley illustrates what you are saying well. Dudley is at best a horizontal move with little upside. With the injury issues a decent amount of even average production is looking questionable. True there is a risk on the 2nd year it would have taken to acquire Biyombo, however generally it is easier to convert underpaid players into cap space than the reverse. Typically the most favorable contracts to teams - rookie deals and max contracts to superstar don't involve directly using cap space.

We could have had both.

[nate33]

I maintain though, and think you agree, that they were too conservative this summer. Understanding the desire to keep the ledger clean next summer, I also think that nearly any decent player signed to a multi-year deal this summer would be an asset next summer. I think not pursuing guys like Mike Dunleavy, Biymbo, etc, given the deals they received, was a mistake.

If they land Durant, the mistake will prove to be a pretty low cost one (unless Biyombo or another opportunity cost guy we passed on blows up and becomes a huge asset). If they miss out on Durant, their non-moves this summer will be more costly. Such is life.

I think Biyombo vs. Dudley illustrates what you are saying well. Dudley is at best a horizontal move with little upside. With the injury issues a decent amount of even average production is looking questionable. True there is a risk on the 2nd year it would have taken to acquire Biyombo, however generally it is easier to convert underpaid players into cap space than the reverse. Typically the most favorable contracts to teams - rookie deals and max contracts to superstar don't involve directly using cap space.

We could have had both.

It makes me so angry every time I think about this. This team should have Biyombo at backup center on a 3-year deal instead of a redundant Alan Anderson on a 1-year rental. It would have all come together so perfectly next summer:

PG Wall/2016 1st
SG Beal/Sato
SF Porter/Oubre
PF Durant/Humphries
C Gortat/Biyombo

[thricethefun]

I think Biyombo vs. Dudley illustrates what you are saying well. Dudley is at best a horizontal move with little upside. With the injury issues a decent amount of even average production is looking questionable. True there is a risk on the 2nd year it would have taken to acquire Biyombo, however generally it is easier to convert underpaid players into cap space than the reverse. Typically the most favorable contracts to teams - rookie deals and max contracts to superstar don't involve directly using cap space.

We could have had both.

It makes me so angry every time I think about this. This team should have Biyombo at backup center on a 3-year deal instead of a redundant Alan Anderson on a 1-year rental. It would have all come together so perfectly next summer:

PG Wall/2016 1st
SG Beal/Sato
SF Porter/Oubre
PF Durant/Humphries
C Gortat/Biyombo

We are going to be loving the AA pickup if Beal misses any sort of time this year which given his history he most likely will. AA can also play small forward and if Dudley misses time from his back surgery we will need him to get minutes at backup sf as well.