penbeast0 wrote:So, the question is what situation you are in and how you believe these players will perform in the future. If you believe, as I do, that Wall will come back and be an above average NBA starter (but not an elite one), and you believe, as I do, that Wiggins will improve a bit over time but probably never get it to the point that he's an above average NBA starter, you would probably value Wall's contract more than Wiggins despite the extra money. For a tanking team, however, Wiggins might be a better bet. That's how I see it for Minnesota, who I see as much closer to being a contending team than Washington at this point; and for Washington, who I see as tanking for at least 2 more years before trying to rebuild a winning base. So, yes, I prefer Wall's contract although I can certainly see that with different answers to the questions I asked, you would have a different answer.
That’s a great post, and this is particular good paragraph.
For me, I determine how positive or negative it is based on the difference between price and projected performance. This influences market value, so we can see how close or far are projections are when a player goes through free agency. What contract would each get if they went through free agency at the start of the month?
If Wall is projected to be an average NBA starter, (not fifth starter, but not a star), with average NBA health, I think that pegs his value at around $16-$18 mil. If he can reach this level for half of this season, that’s $8.5 mil of production, plus three years of $17, so about $60 mil. That seems fair to me - he was seeing issues (particularly defensively) before the major injury, but he also started higher than an average starter too, so I’d take this middle ground. He’s paid $169, so that’s a negative $109. Others are welcome to disagree with this valuation - perhaps some GM who needs a PG would pay him more.
I think there is a lot of hyperbole about Wiggins, but I suspect if he was a free agent this summer, some team would have given him the MLE. He plays a position of need, never gets hurt, has length and athleticism, and I suspect some needy GM would convince himself that they could reach him. Four years is about $40 mil. Wiggins is paid $121, so removing $40 mil is .. negative $81.
I think people could make convincing arguments why that gap should be smaller or greater. Maybe they believe Wall will do better, and remain healthy. Maybe people believe that since Wiggins is worth zero, because he’s performed so badly. For me, I think both players are better where they are. Wall has a fan base in DC that he wouldn’t have elsewhere, Wiggins is KAT’s buddy, the right age, and doesn’t rock the boat after Jimmy Butler.
I don’t think the Wizards should trade Beal or Wall - both have more value right where they are now. Penbeast is right that their value depends on the direction of the franchise, even if their use is “tank commander.”