Who would you want in return for Nick Young?

[Wizards2Lottery]

I don't know what he has to do in order to win the trust of this fan base. He scores at will, he's shown good defense this year, kept us in games, brought us back in games, he gets to the free throw line, he's passing the ball this year...

and here we are comparing him to Courtney Alexander. I personally hate these player to player comparisons. Why can't we just consider him who he is rather than trying to find a scrub from the past to compare him to.

Unless we get a solid big man in return for him there is no reason to trade him. How many players in the league can create there own shot and have range that goes all the way to the three point line? The few who can do that are all superstars in this league.

That's a little overly confrontational, don't ya think? I'm not sure why you'd get emotional over me expressing my opinion.

Am I crazy, or have they played only 3 games this season... and lost all of them. Feel free to verbally abuse me as you wish when he's playing great and contributing to victories... for the Zards.

he's done all he can for a 2nd year player to keep us competitive against good teams like the Bucks and Pistons.

I'm sorry if you don't see the super star potential in Nick Young. Some of you still hating on him have your judgement clouded about him since draft day. He's proven the doubters wrong ever since but the same terrible Courtney Alexander comparison is still being thrown around. He's going to be a top 5 SG in the league within two years and some of you will still be calling him Courtney Alexander.

[LyricalRico]

I'm sorry if you don't see the super star potential in Nick Young. Some of you still hating on him have your judgement clouded about him since draft day. He's proven the doubters wrong ever since but the same terrible Courtney Alexander comparison is still being thrown around. He's going to be a top 5 SG in the league within two years and some of you will still be calling him Courtney Alexander.

I wouldn't quite go that far. I'll admit that I was one of his biggest detractors after the 2007 summer league. But he looks much more focused this year and I now think he could become an important part of this team's future.

Superstar? I wouldn't go that far. He seems more like Eddie Jones without the defense. A capable starter but not a guy that's going to singlehandedly take a team to the next level (which is what superstars should do). That being said, I absolutely think he's this team's top prospect and I'm off the "trade Nick Young" bandwagon.

[Wizards2Lottery]

Superstar? I wouldn't go that far. He seems more like Eddie Jones without the defense. A capable starter but not a guy that's going to singlehandedly take a team to the next level (which is what superstars should do). That being said, I absolutely think he's this team's top prospect and I'm off the "trade Nick Young" bandwagon.

What qualities does he not have that can't make him a superstar? He's shown rapid improvement ever since hes joined the league. He's in his 2nd year and looks to be a strong candidate for the six man of the year award if he can keep coming of the bench and lighting it up.

A guy with his talents is definitely talented of carrying a team on his back if asked to and he seems coachable so he should keep getting better.

[Wizards2Lottery]

Superstar? I wouldn't go that far. He seems more like Eddie Jones without the defense. A capable starter but not a guy that's going to singlehandedly take a team to the next level (which is what superstars should do). That being said, I absolutely think he's this team's top prospect and I'm off the "trade Nick Young" bandwagon.

What qualities does he not have that can't make him a superstar? He's shown rapid improvement ever since hes joined the league. He's in his 2nd year and looks to be a strong candidate for the six man of the year award if he can keep coming of the bench and lighting it up.

A guy with his talents is definitely talented of carrying a team on his back if asked to and he seems coachable so he should keep getting better. He has the potential to be a 20 PPG scorer with good defense and game changing ability.

[LyricalRico]

Superstar? I wouldn't go that far. He seems more like Eddie Jones without the defense. A capable starter but not a guy that's going to singlehandedly take a team to the next level (which is what superstars should do). That being said, I absolutely think he's this team's top prospect and I'm off the "trade Nick Young" bandwagon.

What qualities does he not have that can't make him a superstar? He's shown rapid improvement ever since hes joined the league. He's in his 2nd year and looks to be a strong candidate for the six man of the year award if he can keep coming of the bench and lighting it up.

A guy with his talents is definitely talented of carrying a team on his back if asked to and he seems coachable so he should keep getting better.

We probably just have a different definition of "superstar". IMO true superstars are franchis players who are generally considered to be deserving of the max or close to it. They also typically have an impact from day one. The only arguable superstar that I can think of that did nothing early on and later turned into a stud was McGrady (and he hasn't really done anything).

Young seems like he's on a path similar to Michael Redd. Not much playing time as a rookie, then better as the years go by (usually just in time to get paid). If he could be as good as Redd that would be great, but it wouldn't make him a superstar.

Guys like Redd, Eddie Jones in his prime, and even Rip Hamilton are all examples of good players who are quality starters that can even be occasional All-Stars if the conference is weak enough or there are injuries to better players. But they are still B level stars who can't carry a team by themselves. They aren't "superstars" by my definition.

[I_Like_Dirt]

JJ makes $14M and Atlanta is a cheap organization with no attendance.

...but your trade of Etan, AD and Young meant the Hawks would be taking back more salary, not less, along with even less marketable players and make their problems even worse. Almost every other team in the NBA could put together a better offer for Joe Johnson that would include at least a few expiring contracts and a comparable prospect.

[Wizards2Lottery]

Guys like Redd, Eddie Jones in his prime, and even Rip Hamilton are all examples of good players who are quality starters that can even be occasional All-Stars if the conference is weak enough or there are injuries to better players. But they are still B level stars who can't carry a team by themselves. They aren't "superstars" by my definition.

Woud you consider Gil a superstar? Because I believe one day Young can have the same impact on this team that Gil had pre injuries.

[LyricalRico]

^ I would put Gilbert much closer to "superstar" than Nick Young. Absolutely.

[Wizards2Lottery]

^ I would put Gilbert much closer to "superstar" than Nick Young. Absolutely.

When Gil was in his 2nd year, most people wouldn't have been reluctant to put him in the superstar category too.

I see nothing that differentiates Young and Arenas. Both guys score, do little of everything else (though Gil has improved as a passer over the years)... I think Young has the potential to be as good a scorer as Gilbert.

[yungal07]

Ruzious -- forget stats for a second. Where do you see the similarities in CA and Nick's game? I remember CA pretty vividly and I don't see how their game compares. CA preferred to come off screens to get his jumper off. If he put the ball on the floor it would be maybe two dribbles at the most and then he'd pull up for a jumper. He was never comfortable handling the ball in the open court, and he almost never penetrated into the heart of the defense. He created space with the elevation on his shot, not with movement or dribble moves. He had no back to the basket game either. These are totally opposite of how Nick scores his points. Nick likes to penetrate, back down his defender, or use crossovers and jab moves to create space for his jumpshot.

If you're looking for a comparison, then I think it would be closer to a more efficient version of Jamal Crawford, except that Nick likes to get in the lane, unlike Crawford who prefers to jack up contested 3's.

[Dat2U]

I see improvement in Young's game this year but I tend to agree with Ruzious. Young is still pretty much a one-trick pony. He'd had better score and be efficient at doing so b/c he brings little else to the table. He may be a marginally better passer & defender thus far but he's still not great in either area.

Being an efficient scorer isn't necessarily one of his strong points either. He wasn't one in college and he wasn't last year either as a rookie. So far so good this season but lets remember it's only 3 games.

I don't think I'd trade Young for Maxiell but I'd definitely do it for a Tyrus Thomas or maybe even a Joakim Noah.

Rookie G/F that Nick Young was more efficient than last season: Kevin Durant, Corey Brewer, Mike Conley, Acie Law, Rodney Stuckey, Marco Bellinelli, Daequan Cook and probably a bunch more, but I don't feel like looking it up right now.

I can't understand and agree with you about the non-scoring aspects of the game, but you're just flat out wrong about the efficiency part. Nick Young has been more efficient than any of his draft-day counterparts since day 1. I'm not even including guys like James White and Morris Almond who are not or are very close to being out of the NBA.

Where are you getting your numbers from??? Sure, I'll give you Acie Law. Corey Brewer, Marco Bellinelli & Daequan Cook, but those were basically the four least productive offensive rookies in the league last year. Durant & Stuckey had better rookie seasons, even though Durant was forced to be a #1 option offensively.

Nick Young had a PER of 11.6 (15.0 is league average). For comparison, Kevin Durant had a PER 15.8 and Stuckey's was 13.6 (14.5 in the playoffs).

During the '07 draft, the reason many experts were down on Nick Young was because of his lack luster numbers in college. No one can doubt his talent, but his production has always been a questionmark.

Bottom line, he didn't have a great rookie year but he's shown good improvement in shot selection and ball movement thus far this season. I hope he keeps it up. For three games so far this season, he's shown himself as a rotation worthy player who probably should start ahead of a bottom rung starting SG in DeShawn Stevenson. That said, its pretty presumptous for folks to call him the next superstar or even compare his long term outlook to what a healthy Gilbert Arenas brings to the table. I think its a bit of the homerism that's making folks get ahead of themselves. Young has a loooooooooooong way to go before he can even be labeled as an above average SG at his position. My goodness, we've had three games of him coming off the bench where he's played well. That's not enough to make any conclusions about anything.

Based on what I've read here and recently, I wonder what some of you would have been calling Jarvis Hayes after the first 10 games of his rookie year? Yall would have been ready to put him in the Hall Of Fame!

[yungal07]

^^^I compared Nick's TS% and efg% to those other guys...i think that is more indicative of efficency than PER is. I believe PER numbers are biased towards players who play more minutes.

[nate33]

Superstar? I wouldn't go that far. He seems more like Eddie Jones without the defense. A capable starter but not a guy that's going to singlehandedly take a team to the next level (which is what superstars should do). That being said, I absolutely think he's this team's top prospect and I'm off the "trade Nick Young" bandwagon.

Young is better offensively that Eddie Jones ever was. Eddie Jones was kind of a rich man's Deshawn Stevenson. He played excellent D and could score efficiently when set up by other players, but he wasn't the type to break a guy down off the dribble and create his own shot.

The best comparison for Nick Young right now is a young Rip Hamilton. Like Young, Hamilton was an excellent scorer with limited contributions in the rest of the box score. Hamilton was better off the ball but Young is better with the ball in his hands.

Another analogy is a more-efficient Jamal Crawford.

Either way, I think it's fairly obvious that Young has the potential to be an above-average starting SG. It's not crazy to think that he'll make a few all star games in his career.

[pancakes3]

well, not all-star. not with wade, arenas, richardson, calderon, joe johnson, igoudala, all young guards with higher levels of game than i foresee Young having, but i'm betting that he'll definitely be competitive and put up 20 ppg within the next 5 years.

[MJG]

well, not all-star. not with wade, arenas, richardson, calderon, joe johnson, igoudala, all young guards with higher levels of game than i foresee Young having, but i'm betting that he'll definitely be competitive and put up 20 ppg within the next 5 years.

I think "20 ppg within the next 5 years" is actually a very pessimistic view. While I admit it's still early, he's already averaging 15.8 points in only 25.3 minutes so far this season. At that rate, he only needs to play about 32 MPG to get up to 20 PPG. Even if you think he's just on a hot streak and will slow down a bit, he still looks plenty capable of putting up 20 PPG right now if he gets in in the 36 MPG range.

I think if his overall game continues to marginally improve, to the point where you can give him 36+ MPG as a starting SG without hurting the team, then he could very easily be a top ten scorer in the next five years. And since scoring rules in the NBA, in turn, he could very easily be an all-star (assuming he's playing for a playoff-caliber team).

[RickRoll_inDC]

so wait....why doesn't Young start again? I'm confused........
He's the next big thing. He should be getting 30 minutes on a regular basis and at least 20 points as a result.

As for the original question of what would we want in return for N1, basically it would have to be Kobe or LeBron. Nick has potential to be better than every other young guard in the NBA. I might not even take Kobe because he's 30 years old and Nick is 23 and could someday be as good of a scorer as Kobe.
As for LeBron, he just wouldn't be accepted in DC anyway....he's earned a bad name here.

So basically, Nick young is staying a wizard

[hands11]

NY isn't going anywhere.

[yungal07]

Obviously he's not efficient enough for some folks.

Right now, Nick is shooting a higher percentage than all of our bigmen.

[nate33]

Obviously he's not efficient enough for some folks.

Right now, Nick is shooting a higher percentage than all of our bigmen.

There are 34 players in the league averaging at least 25 minutes per game, who score at least 25 points per 48. Young ranks 3rd among them in TS%. He also ranks 2nd lowest in turnovers.

[WizarDynasty]

the honest truth is that nick young is our best defensive guard and our best offensive guard next to gilbert. Nick is better perimeter defender than both jamison and butler which shows how valuable he is to this club and he has freakish 7ft wingspan...longer than jamison and caron. the player i would compare him to is a young kobe, but not as aggressive. He also has game like richard hamilton except better perimeter defender and far more deadly once he is in the lane. The biggest improvement i see him this year is that he is showing more explosiveness blowing past his man and taking it to hole with power. Last year, he was easily knocked off balance, now he is showing power and explosiveness in his drive and opponents really have to noticeablly foul him in order to stop him. Last year, they foul but it was so slight and not easily noticeble because young didn't have any force when taking it to hole. He is showing more aggressiveness..."i don't know if anyone noticed when he bodied up vince carter and didn't back down from him when vince tried to challenge his manhood." He is starting to look like gil...deadly shooter, explosive to basket.