Hornets & Wizards: A fork in the road for each franchise

[Texas Chuck]

Interesting responses overall. I think Mark Williams is getting way over valued here.

Per36 he and Gafford are pretty identical.

Advanced stats give the edge to Gafford.

Not to mention Gafford actually plays basketball.

But the responses here are not in line with this at all.

This trade isn't Gafford for Williams. If you think that is a good deal, propose that. This is you wanting Charlotte to become Washington on purpose. Sorry that's just a tough sell for anyone.

[HornetJail]

Are you projecting Miles Bridges as a 2 guard?

it doesn't matter which player plays which position, Miller/Bridges is a perfectly viable wing rotation, but it requires better players at the 4 and 5.

(but Miller would be considered the 2 and Bridges the 3 technically)

[drosestruts]

Will actually be two separate trades as these teams decide to move in two different directions.

Trade #1:

Charlotte in: Kyle Kuzma and Daniel Gafford

Washington in: Gordon Hayward, Mark Williams, and Nick Smith


Trade #2:

Charlotte in: Jordan Poole and PHX 2025 2nd

Washington in: Kyle Lowry


Hornets:

Ball/Smith.Ntilinkina
Bridges/Poole/Bouknight
Miller/Martin/McGowens
Kuzma/Washington/Thor
Gafford/Richards

Hornets add some talent in Kuzma, Gafford, and Poole to create a complete roster of young veterans that are aligned in age, contracts, and timing. The excuses are over with this group, perform or fail.


Wizards:

For the Wizards it's expiring contracts and young players. Expirings help them expidite shaping a compliemntary roster around their young pieces. I think some guys have talent like a Kuzma, whose then in direct contention with Avdija and Coulibaly for minutes. It cleans up the roster while gaining financial flexibility.

Are you projecting Miles Bridges as a 2 guard?

Yes - i would play a bit of a jumbo lineup in this hypothetical world where this becomes the Hornets rosters.

[drosestruts]

Interesting responses overall. I think Mark Williams is getting way over valued here.

Per36 he and Gafford are pretty identical.

Advanced stats give the edge to Gafford.

Not to mention Gafford actually plays basketball.

But the responses here are not in line with this at all.

This trade isn't Gafford for Williams. If you think that is a good deal, propose that. This is you wanting Charlotte to become Washington on purpose. Sorry that's just a tough sell for anyone.

I think both teams have some talented players and they can:

1. Continue slowly building around the pieces they do have
2. Accelerate that growth with a trade
3. Scrap it and start over

probably some other options too.

I wouldn't call it "Charlotte becoming Washington" - I'd say Charlotte expedites adding talent by combining Ball/Bridges/Miller with Kuzma/Gafford/Poole. Washington meanwhile selects option 3.

Similarly I suppose - Washington could make a play for Ball and Bridges

[spankymoore7]

This is all kinds of bad for Charlotte…it has us losing two young players in Smith and Williams and nuking our cap space for one of the worst contracts in the NBA…it does not make any sense for Charlotte

[Scoot McGroot]

Interesting responses overall. I think Mark Williams is getting way over valued here.

Per36 he and Gafford are pretty identical.

Advanced stats give the edge to Gafford.

Not to mention Gafford actually plays basketball.

But the responses here are not in line with this at all.

This is an extremely interesting response. Especially that you just double down and don't once seem to consider that maybe, just maybe, you might hold a bit of an outlier opinion that the larger market doesn't share?

But in general, 2nd year player owed less than $10.5m for the next 2 years (and then restricted free agency) vs a 5th year player owed a little over $27.5m (and then unrestricted free agency) for 2 teams that are .204 and .184 in win percentage probably plays a huge value difference, no? And even after this deal, does Charlotte project to actually win any more games? Can we say that with certainty? That they'll have paid youth and taken on a terrible contract, to maybe not be any better after the deal?

[drosestruts]

Interesting responses overall. I think Mark Williams is getting way over valued here.

Per36 he and Gafford are pretty identical.

Advanced stats give the edge to Gafford.

Not to mention Gafford actually plays basketball.

But the responses here are not in line with this at all.

This is an extremely interesting response. Especially that you just double down and don't once seem to consider that maybe, just maybe, you might hold a bit of an outlier opinion that the larger market doesn't share?

But in general, 2nd year player owed less than $10.5m for the next 2 years (and then restricted free agency) vs a 5th year player owed a little over $27.5m (and then unrestricted free agency) for 2 teams that are .204 and .184 in win percentage probably plays a huge value difference, no? And even after this deal, does Charlotte project to actually win any more games? Can we say that with certainty? That they'll have paid youth and taken on a terrible contract, to maybe not be any better after the deal?

So you value worse players over better players if they are on cheaper deals and younger in age?

I would project Charlotte to win more games with the roster in this hypothetical scenario over their current roster. What certainty I can say that with.... i don't know? Seems like a weird hurdle, you propose lots of trades here, what certainty do you have they will work? Probably just as much as anyone here Scoot.

[Scoot McGroot]

Interesting responses overall. I think Mark Williams is getting way over valued here.

Per36 he and Gafford are pretty identical.

Advanced stats give the edge to Gafford.

Not to mention Gafford actually plays basketball.

But the responses here are not in line with this at all.

This is an extremely interesting response. Especially that you just double down and don't once seem to consider that maybe, just maybe, you might hold a bit of an outlier opinion that the larger market doesn't share?

But in general, 2nd year player owed less than $10.5m for the next 2 years (and then restricted free agency) vs a 5th year player owed a little over $27.5m (and then unrestricted free agency) for 2 teams that are .204 and .184 in win percentage probably plays a huge value difference, no? And even after this deal, does Charlotte project to actually win any more games? Can we say that with certainty? That they'll have paid youth and taken on a terrible contract, to maybe not be any better after the deal?

So you value worse players over better players if they are on cheaper deals and younger in age?

No. I value players based on not just what they've done, but what they're projected to do. A player younger in age generally has more room to grow. A cheaper deal gives you a lot more room to develop them. I also assume that neither Mark Williams nor Daniel Gafford are exactly what they will be for the rest of their careers. Etc. Surely you agree?

I would project Charlotte to win more games with the roster in this hypothetical scenario over their current roster. What certainty I can say that with.... i don't know? Seems like a weird hurdle, you propose lots of trades here, what certainty do you have they will work? Probably just as much as anyone here Scoot.

I generally try and find two teams that are in different positions and try and help them find something that helps both of them. Both Charlotte and Washington are terrible teams, with few building blocks, so why would they swap like this? For all the reasons you think that Charlotte should do this, why would Washington? For all the reasons Washington would do this, why would Charlotte? And as for certainty they will work? I don't. But if everyone comes to me and says "hey, there's some issues here", I would probably reflect just a little and say "Hmmm, maybe there is?"


But again, for as much as you post here, you seem to only want to be celebrated and cheered in your suggestions. You don't seem to ever embrace discussion or differing opinions. If you want an echo chamber or to simply tell people how much smarter you are, maybe just go yell on Twitter? If you want discussion and maybe some ideas to help you learn, feel free to post here? But the idea that you see everyone offering suggestions or corrections or pointing out flaws, but simply double down and say "No, it is I whom is correct and everyone else that is wrong!" seems unwise?

[drosestruts]

This is an extremely interesting response. Especially that you just double down and don't once seem to consider that maybe, just maybe, you might hold a bit of an outlier opinion that the larger market doesn't share?

But in general, 2nd year player owed less than $10.5m for the next 2 years (and then restricted free agency) vs a 5th year player owed a little over $27.5m (and then unrestricted free agency) for 2 teams that are .204 and .184 in win percentage probably plays a huge value difference, no? And even after this deal, does Charlotte project to actually win any more games? Can we say that with certainty? That they'll have paid youth and taken on a terrible contract, to maybe not be any better after the deal?

So you value worse players over better players if they are on cheaper deals and younger in age?

No. I value players based on not just what they've done, but what they're projected to do. A player younger in age generally has more room to grow. A cheaper deal gives you a lot more room to develop them. I also assume that neither Mark Williams nor Daniel Gafford are exactly what they will be for the rest of their careers. Etc. Surely you agree?

I would project Charlotte to win more games with the roster in this hypothetical scenario over their current roster. What certainty I can say that with.... i don't know? Seems like a weird hurdle, you propose lots of trades here, what certainty do you have they will work? Probably just as much as anyone here Scoot.

I generally try and find two teams that are in different positions and try and help them find something that helps both of them. Both Charlotte and Washington are terrible teams, with few building blocks, so why would they swap like this? For all the reasons you think that Charlotte should do this, why would Washington? For all the reasons Washington would do this, why would Charlotte? And as for certainty they will work? I don't. But if everyone comes to me and says "hey, there's some issues here", I would probably reflect just a little and say "Hmmm, maybe there is?"


But again, for as much as you post here, you seem to only want to be celebrated and cheered in your suggestions. You don't seem to ever embrace discussion or differing opinions. If you want an echo chamber or to simply tell people how much smarter you are, maybe just go yell on Twitter? If you want discussion and maybe some ideas to help you learn, feel free to post here? But the idea that you see everyone offering suggestions or corrections or pointing out flaws, but simply double down and say "No, it is I whom is correct and everyone else that is wrong!" seems unwise?

Definitley fair and can certainly reflect on feedback received.

I interpreted and focused on several reactions to this trade that seemed to really value Mark Williams and consider his being involved in the trade to be some offensive deal breaker.

I've shared that the per36 numbers between Gafford and Williams are similar and that advanced stats favor Gafford. I've also shared how Williams misses a lot of games.

The responses I've seen generally talk to William's age and theoretical potential. What are less quantifiable.

[Scoot McGroot]

So you value worse players over better players if they are on cheaper deals and younger in age?

No. I value players based on not just what they've done, but what they're projected to do. A player younger in age generally has more room to grow. A cheaper deal gives you a lot more room to develop them. I also assume that neither Mark Williams nor Daniel Gafford are exactly what they will be for the rest of their careers. Etc. Surely you agree?

I would project Charlotte to win more games with the roster in this hypothetical scenario over their current roster. What certainty I can say that with.... i don't know? Seems like a weird hurdle, you propose lots of trades here, what certainty do you have they will work? Probably just as much as anyone here Scoot.

I generally try and find two teams that are in different positions and try and help them find something that helps both of them. Both Charlotte and Washington are terrible teams, with few building blocks, so why would they swap like this? For all the reasons you think that Charlotte should do this, why would Washington? For all the reasons Washington would do this, why would Charlotte? And as for certainty they will work? I don't. But if everyone comes to me and says "hey, there's some issues here", I would probably reflect just a little and say "Hmmm, maybe there is?"


But again, for as much as you post here, you seem to only want to be celebrated and cheered in your suggestions. You don't seem to ever embrace discussion or differing opinions. If you want an echo chamber or to simply tell people how much smarter you are, maybe just go yell on Twitter? If you want discussion and maybe some ideas to help you learn, feel free to post here? But the idea that you see everyone offering suggestions or corrections or pointing out flaws, but simply double down and say "No, it is I whom is correct and everyone else that is wrong!" seems unwise?

Definitley fair and can certainly reflect on feedback received.

I interpreted and focused on several reactions to this trade that seemed to really value Mark Williams and consider his being involved in the trade to be some offensive deal breaker.

I've shared that the per36 numbers between Gafford and Williams are similar and that advanced stats favor Gafford. I've also shared how Williams misses a lot of games.

The responses I've seen generally talk to William's age and theoretical potential. What are less quantifiable.

To be fair, this is how the nba has always operated on trades. Better players are often traded for younger players that project to be better. And in many cases, the team trading the better player has to pay to get the young player with promise. How do we value that? It simply can’t be put on a simple equation.

[amcoolio]

Regardless of Mark Williams value, this Hornets team simply cannot add Poole to their team

They need strong defenders around LaMelo and Miller. Poole makes them way worse despite the stats

[penbeast0]

Regardless of Mark Williams value, this Hornets team simply cannot add Poole to their team

They need strong defenders around LaMelo and Miller. Poole makes them way worse despite the stats

Just curious, what stats are those that Poole is producing that might make them better?