Beal to Boston w/ Minnesota

[JRoy]

There are like, 10 different deals they could make with New Orleans that offer better assets and don’t involve bad longterm salary. They could get a combo of anyone on that roster other than Zion plus a cornucopia of picks to select from.

They could also deal with Denver and probably find ways to get anyone other than Jokic. Brooklyn for anything outside of KD/Irving. Warriors for Russell and picks. Etc etc

There’s no acceptable Beal trade that doesn’t involve an elite young player going the other way to Washington (no Wiggins is not even close to that). There needs to be a centerpiece player for them to start off the rebuild.

Ok, now you are reaching. In one sentence you mention NOP and in the next you say elite young player (not named Zion). Please layout one that is better than OP (and includes elite young player).

Every Beal trade scenario needs to be evaluated up against another. Every one has their pluses and minuses. But you haven’t yet explained why Wizards taking on salary and getting appropriately compensated is a bad thing???

And BTW, I am ignoring the error you made suggesting a maxed Russell is elite young player and very late and very far from now 1sts is even a positive trade package.

Here’s an actual realistic trade:

Beal/Wagner for Ingram/Hayes/Miller + Moore’s expiring + picks

Or

Beal for Harris/Porter Jr/Beasley + picks

There you go. Young players who have the upside to outplay their next contracts, that’s how your franchise creates value when starting a rebuild.


And a Russell trade (with appropriate pick haul attached) would be far better for them than the deal you suggested that puts an awful Wiggins on the team until 2024.

Taking on a short term salary is one thing. You don’t start a rebuild by taking on 4 years of albatross salary that could prevent you from doing things in the future. Not to mention Wiggins presence on the roster would be a roadblock to playing time for your other developmental prospects who might actually have potential.

Both those deals are better than the prospective poo poo platter from Boston.

[rugbyrugger23]

Ok, now you are reaching. In one sentence you mention NOP and in the next you say elite young player (not named Zion). Please layout one that is better than OP (and includes elite young player).

Every Beal trade scenario needs to be evaluated up against another. Every one has their pluses and minuses. But you haven’t yet explained why Wizards taking on salary and getting appropriately compensated is a bad thing???

And BTW, I am ignoring the error you made suggesting a maxed Russell is elite young player and very late and very far from now 1sts is even a positive trade package.

Here’s an actual realistic trade:

Beal/Wagner for Ingram/Hayes/Miller + Moore’s expiring + picks

Or

Beal for Harris/Porter Jr/Beasley + picks

There you go. Young players who have the upside to outplay their next contracts, that’s how your franchise creates value when starting a rebuild.


And a Russell trade (with appropriate pick haul attached) would be far better for them than the deal you suggested that puts an awful Wiggins on the team until 2024.

Taking on a short term salary is one thing. You don’t start a rebuild by taking on 4 years of albatross salary that could prevent you from doing things in the future. Not to mention Wiggins presence on the roster would be a roadblock to playing time for your other developmental prospects who might actually have potential.

Both those deals are better than the prospective poo poo platter from Boston.

Actually they are not. Only one is Denver’s “offer.” But we all know Denver is NOT making that offer.

[JRoy]

Here’s an actual realistic trade:

Beal/Wagner for Ingram/Hayes/Miller + Moore’s expiring + picks

Or

Beal for Harris/Porter Jr/Beasley + picks

There you go. Young players who have the upside to outplay their next contracts, that’s how your franchise creates value when starting a rebuild.


And a Russell trade (with appropriate pick haul attached) would be far better for them than the deal you suggested that puts an awful Wiggins on the team until 2024.

Taking on a short term salary is one thing. You don’t start a rebuild by taking on 4 years of albatross salary that could prevent you from doing things in the future. Not to mention Wiggins presence on the roster would be a roadblock to playing time for your other developmental prospects who might actually have potential.

Both those deals are better than the prospective poo poo platter from Boston.

Actually they are not. Only one is Denver’s “offer.” But we all know Denver is NOT making that offer.

Those offers are just as real as yours, except they actually offer value instead of guys Boston wants to dump while they can.

No team is giving value for Hayward. His contract is Wiggins level terrible. A number of teams will like Brown the player (I do) but not at the money he wants.

It takes two to tango and no one wants to grind on those uggos..

[rugbyrugger23]

Both those deals are better than the prospective poo poo platter from Boston.

Actually they are not. Only one is Denver’s “offer.” But we all know Denver is NOT making that offer.

Those offers are just as real as yours, except they actually offer value instead of guys Boston wants to dump while they can.

No team is giving value for Hayward. His contract is Wiggins level terrible. A number of teams will like Brown the player (I do) but not at the money he wants.

It takes two to tango and no one wants to grind on those uggos..

Ok, you are not thinking logical here.

Look back at this thread. Washington is taking on salary. What does that look like?

Once you understand that, what is the best asset(s) Wizards can get for Beal. Boston has the best pick without debate. Why? Look back at this thread.

Youth. If that is what Wizards get, fine but what team is offering a premium youth for Beal (Denver isn’t offering Harris, Ingram and Brown of course are very questionable value youth — as will most/any offer involve a youth with questions/warts).

[JRoy]

Actually they are not. Only one is Denver’s “offer.” But we all know Denver is NOT making that offer.

Those offers are just as real as yours, except they actually offer value instead of guys Boston wants to dump while they can.

No team is giving value for Hayward. His contract is Wiggins level terrible. A number of teams will like Brown the player (I do) but not at the money he wants.

It takes two to tango and no one wants to grind on those uggos..

Ok, you are not thinking logical here.

Look back at this thread. Washington is taking on salary. What does that look like?

Once you understand that, what is the best asset(s) Wizards can get for Beal. Boston has the best pick without debate. Why? Look back at this thread.

Youth. If that is what Wizards get, fine but what team is offering a premium youth for Beal (Denver isn’t offering Harris, Ingram and Brown of course are very questionable value youth — as will most/any offer involve a youth with questions/warts).

Beal is a top 5 shooting guard in his prime. He will draw solid or he will not be traded. Certainly not for that weak sauce. That kind of offer gets you Kevin Love, not Beal.

[rugbyrugger23]

Those offers are just as real as yours, except they actually offer value instead of guys Boston wants to dump while they can.

No team is giving value for Hayward. His contract is Wiggins level terrible. A number of teams will like Brown the player (I do) but not at the money he wants.

It takes two to tango and no one wants to grind on those uggos..

Ok, you are not thinking logical here.

Look back at this thread. Washington is taking on salary. What does that look like?

Once you understand that, what is the best asset(s) Wizards can get for Beal. Boston has the best pick without debate. Why? Look back at this thread.

Youth. If that is what Wizards get, fine but what team is offering a premium youth for Beal (Denver isn’t offering Harris, Ingram and Brown of course are very questionable value youth — as will most/any offer involve a youth with questions/warts).

Beal is a top 5 shooting guard in his prime. He will draw solid or he will not be traded. Certainly not for that weak sauce. That kind of offer gets you Kevin Love, not Beal.

Lol. Love isn’t sniffing this value. He is negative value (outside of Cleveland).

If you think Beal is getting more than 5x 1sts, 2x 1st swaps, 2x 2nds (high end), with the contract dollars in being Wiggins — I guess we will see.

[JRoy]

Pretty sure WAS will send Beal west if at all possible.

[rugbyrugger23]

Pretty sure WAS will send Beal west if at all possible.

Yes. Because NOP sent Davis to another conference. They took the best deal for them.

OKC sent George to same conference.

Westbrook was sent to same conference.

Spurs sent Kawhi to opposite conference — but took lesser offer.

I think Washington wanting Beal in West is very far down the list for Wizards considering offers.

[JRoy]

Pretty sure WAS will send Beal west if at all possible.

Yes. Because NOP sent Davis to another conference. They took the best deal for them.

OKC sent George to same conference.

Westbrook was sent to same conference.

Spurs sent Kawhi to opposite conference — but took lesser offer.

I think Washington wanting Beal in West is very far down the list for Wizards considering offers.

It is down on the list, but far above taking a bad offer to help Boston out of their upcoming salary issues.

[Illmatic12]

And in OP you are — in form of picks.

Memphis 1st has more value to Wizards than Ingram or Russell.

As of now we have no certainty of what that Memphis pick will convey into.

Ingram was a legit #2 overall pick and we’re at least certain he can do productive things in the NBA. And even if you max him out and later decide to go in a different direction, many GMs like Ingram’s potential and that contract is still very movable.

Ingram being a #2 pick has nothing to do with nothing — and means nothing.

If you think Ingram today is even close to equal value of Memphis 1st, we will never agree. Best to agree to disagree.

Yeah we absolutely disagree then .. would rather have Ingram. Still remember Boston fans hyping that conditional Kings pick as if it was a golden ticket , how did that turn out ?? Ah right , the worst pick in the lottery this past draft .

I’m not sure if this is being made clear enough - The Wizards franchise already has payroll constraints due to Wall’s deal which he won’t be able to outplay. They want the rest of their payroll spent on young players with the potential to outplay what they’re earning, this is how they’re going to create asset value , not by taking on 4 years of an albatross contract no one else wants. Washington quite literally might be the last team in the NBA who would ever take on Wiggins deal.

[rugbyrugger23]

As of now we have no certainty of what that Memphis pick will convey into.

Ingram was a legit #2 overall pick and we’re at least certain he can do productive things in the NBA. And even if you max him out and later decide to go in a different direction, many GMs like Ingram’s potential and that contract is still very movable.

Ingram being a #2 pick has nothing to do with nothing — and means nothing.

If you think Ingram today is even close to equal value of Memphis 1st, we will never agree. Best to agree to disagree.

Yeah we absolutely disagree then .. would rather have Ingram. Still remember Boston fans hyping that conditional Kings pick as if it was a golden ticket , how did that turn out ?? Ah right , the worst pick in the lottery this past draft .

I’m not sure if this is being made clear enough - The Wizards franchise already has payroll constraints due to Wall’s deal which he won’t be able to outplay. They want the rest of their payroll spent on young players with the potential to outplay what they’re earning, this is how they’re going to create asset value , not by taking on 4 years of an albatross contract no one else wants. Washington quite literally might be the last team in the NBA who would ever take on Wiggins deal.

You realize you are contradicting yourself. If Ingram is centerpiece to your Beal trade, he too will be getting paid — and could be more and longer than Wiggins. Even if he has more production for those dollars, Wizards would be forced to pay him whatever it takes to keep him in DC — no matter what his play looks like. What GM wants to lose the centerpiece and only piece of value for trading Beal? Ingram quite literally could be same/similar/worse payroll outcome as Wiggins.

[rugbyrugger23]

Pretty sure WAS will send Beal west if at all possible.

Yes. Because NOP sent Davis to another conference. They took the best deal for them.

OKC sent George to same conference.

Westbrook was sent to same conference.

Spurs sent Kawhi to opposite conference — but took lesser offer.

I think Washington wanting Beal in West is very far down the list for Wizards considering offers.

It is down on the list, but far above taking a bad offer to help Boston out of their upcoming salary issues.

Who said anything about “helping” Boston (I get the snarky comment you are throwing out there).

If Wizards take on any bad contracts — from anyone — they get compensated. Simple concept to understand, yes?

And since NBA trades require salary matching and Wizards have no need for salary cap (other than to take on bad contracts for assets), why is accomplishing that within Beal trade hard for you to understand???

[Illmatic12]

Ingram being a #2 pick has nothing to do with nothing — and means nothing.

If you think Ingram today is even close to equal value of Memphis 1st, we will never agree. Best to agree to disagree.

Yeah we absolutely disagree then .. would rather have Ingram. Still remember Boston fans hyping that conditional Kings pick as if it was a golden ticket , how did that turn out ?? Ah right , the worst pick in the lottery this past draft .

I’m not sure if this is being made clear enough - The Wizards franchise already has payroll constraints due to Wall’s deal which he won’t be able to outplay. They want the rest of their payroll spent on young players with the potential to outplay what they’re earning, this is how they’re going to create asset value , not by taking on 4 years of an albatross contract no one else wants. Washington quite literally might be the last team in the NBA who would ever take on Wiggins deal.

You realize you are contradicting yourself. If Ingram is centerpiece to your Beal trade, he too will be getting paid — and could be more and longer than Wiggins. Even if he has more production for those dollars, Wizards would be forced to pay him whatever it takes to keep him in DC — no matter what his play looks like. What GM wants to lose the centerpiece and only piece of value for trading Beal? Ingram quite literally could be same/similar/worse payroll outcome as Wiggins.

Because Ingram has the potential to outplay his next contract . With continued progression Brandon Ingram from age 22-26 has the potential to be considered a positive trade value on the 25% rookie extension.. and we already know Wiggins deal likely is not and will not be a positive ever.



This is basically saying a team in developmental mode should take on a $100 + million developmental project that they already know is guaranteed to fail. There is zero upside in the Wiggins deal , and the picks you’re attaching have no certainty in their value.

Maybe that’s what I’m missing here .. do you actually think Wiggins has the potential to be a good player ? If that’s the case then yeah we literally will never agree and I’d encourage you to listen to NBA insiders (Zach Lowe, Windhorst etc) for an accurate gauge of how Wiggins value is perceived.

[penbeast0]

Let's see if we can find common ground with this scenario...

Wizards Trade: Beal + Miles
Wizards Receive: Wiggins + G. Williams (or Langford -- they choose) + Memphis 2020 1st via Celtics + Bucks 2020 1st via Celtics + 2021 Celtics 1st (unprotected) + 2022 1st Swap Rights with Celtics + 2023 Celtics 1st (limited protections) + 2024 1st Swap Rights with Celtics + 2x Wolves FSRPs

Wolves Trade: Wiggins + Covington + 2x FSRPs
Wolves Receive: Hayward + Brown

Celtics Trade: Hayward + Brown + G. Williams (or Langford -- Wizards choose) + Memphis 2020 1st Owed + Bucks 2020 1st Owed + 2021 Own 1st (unprotected) + 2022 1st Swap Rights to Wizards + 2023 Own 1st (limited protections) + 2024 1st Swap Rights to Wizards
Celtics Receive: Beal + Covington + Miles

Wizards Why: finally trade Beal for what equates to 5x FRPs, 2x 1st swaps, and 2x FSRPs. They take on Wiggins as tank commander 2019/20 version -- and see what he can become given full chuck rights, in a new situation within East, for a season with Wall on sideline. Wiggins contract aligns with Wall and most likely 1 year less and maybe even dollars less overall vs. what Brown's new contract might equate to.

Wolves Why: they move on from the Wiggins experiment and turn his contract into Hayward's contract. They see if Brown can be a better sidekick to Towns and what he looks like out of Boston. Crazy enough his contract might be longer and bigger than even the albatross that is Wiggins' contract (but hopefully for them Brown looks better with Towns). Longterm can Towns, Brown, and Culver be a big 3?

Celtics Why: it cost them a lot of draft capital, but they land 2x years of Beal and 3x years of Covington for their win-now efforts in hopes they both re-sign -- while dumping Hayward contract and not taking on any bad contracts in return. They also avoid the re-sign dilemma this is Brown.
C: Kanter
F: Covington
F: Simmons
G: Beal
G: Walker

Hate Wiggins but this is the kind of deal the Wiz take if they aren't really confident in resigning Beal. It will be ugly but that's what tanking is all about. If all Beal deals were this good (even with Wiggins's worthless butt attached), I wouldn't cringe every time I opened one.

[JRoy]

Yes. Because NOP sent Davis to another conference. They took the best deal for them.

OKC sent George to same conference.

Westbrook was sent to same conference.

Spurs sent Kawhi to opposite conference — but took lesser offer.

I think Washington wanting Beal in West is very far down the list for Wizards considering offers.

It is down on the list, but far above taking a bad offer to help Boston out of their upcoming salary issues.

Who said anything about “helping” Boston (I get the snarky comment you are throwing out there).

If Wizards take on any bad contracts — from anyone — they get compensated. Simple concept to understand, yes?

And since NBA trades require salary matching and Wizards have no need for salary cap (other than to take on bad contracts for assets), why is accomplishing that within Beal trade hard for you to understand???

Why is so hard for you to understand that no team wants to give up an all star in his prime for bad contracts?

[Illmatic12]

Let's see if we can find common ground with this scenario...

Wizards Trade: Beal + Miles
Wizards Receive: Wiggins + G. Williams (or Langford -- they choose) + Memphis 2020 1st via Celtics + Bucks 2020 1st via Celtics + 2021 Celtics 1st (unprotected) + 2022 1st Swap Rights with Celtics + 2023 Celtics 1st (limited protections) + 2024 1st Swap Rights with Celtics + 2x Wolves FSRPs

Wolves Trade: Wiggins + Covington + 2x FSRPs
Wolves Receive: Hayward + Brown

Celtics Trade: Hayward + Brown + G. Williams (or Langford -- Wizards choose) + Memphis 2020 1st Owed + Bucks 2020 1st Owed + 2021 Own 1st (unprotected) + 2022 1st Swap Rights to Wizards + 2023 Own 1st (limited protections) + 2024 1st Swap Rights to Wizards
Celtics Receive: Beal + Covington + Miles

Wizards Why: finally trade Beal for what equates to 5x FRPs, 2x 1st swaps, and 2x FSRPs. They take on Wiggins as tank commander 2019/20 version -- and see what he can become given full chuck rights, in a new situation within East, for a season with Wall on sideline. Wiggins contract aligns with Wall and most likely 1 year less and maybe even dollars less overall vs. what Brown's new contract might equate to.

Wolves Why: they move on from the Wiggins experiment and turn his contract into Hayward's contract. They see if Brown can be a better sidekick to Towns and what he looks like out of Boston. Crazy enough his contract might be longer and bigger than even the albatross that is Wiggins' contract (but hopefully for them Brown looks better with Towns). Longterm can Towns, Brown, and Culver be a big 3?

Celtics Why: it cost them a lot of draft capital, but they land 2x years of Beal and 3x years of Covington for their win-now efforts in hopes they both re-sign -- while dumping Hayward contract and not taking on any bad contracts in return. They also avoid the re-sign dilemma this is Brown.
C: Kanter
F: Covington
F: Simmons
G: Beal
G: Walker

Hate Wiggins but this is the kind of deal the Wiz take if they aren't really confident in resigning Beal. It will be ugly but that's what tanking is all about. If all Beal deals were this good (even with Wiggins's worthless butt attached), I wouldn't cringe every time I opened one.

Are you also assuming that Leonsis will sell the team? On which planet is he agreeing to tank for 4 years while throwing money down the drain .. Sheppard would be fired for even suggesting that

By the time those supposed picks conveyed everyone involved in making the trade would have been fired. That’s why you don’t see GMs making those sorts of transactions in real life, only in 2k

[shrink]

It is down on the list, but far above taking a bad offer to help Boston out of their upcoming salary issues.

Who said anything about “helping” Boston (I get the snarky comment you are throwing out there).

If Wizards take on any bad contracts — from anyone — they get compensated. Simple concept to understand, yes?

And since NBA trades require salary matching and Wizards have no need for salary cap (other than to take on bad contracts for assets), why is accomplishing that within Beal trade hard for you to understand???

Why is so hard for you to understand that no team wants to give up an all star in his prime for bad contracts?

It’s bad contracts PLUS COMPENSATION. And if WAS trades Beal, it will be to bring in the most compensation.

I don’t care about how you debate this specific offer is, but the structure is not bad. If WAS trades Beal, they aren’t contending - they are in a rebuild. And rebuilding teams often want to take on a bad contract IF they get paid enough to do it. In other words,

Beal for expirings plus compensation, then ..
Expirings for bad contract and even more compensation.

You guys can argue how much compensation is fair.

I would also add that if WAS trades Beal, again they aren’t contending, and as we saw with OKC (twice) and NOP, they will send him to the team that offers the best compensation, regardless of conference.

[penbeast0]

Are you also assuming that Leonsis will sell the team? On which planet is he agreeing to tank for 4 years while throwing money down the drain .. Sheppard would be fired for even suggesting that

By the time those supposed picks conveyed everyone involved in making the trade would have been fired. That’s why you don’t see GMs making those sorts of transactions in real life, only in 2k

Again, I am making the assumption that John Wall will not return to be better than he was before his injury; that he will indeed be a bad contract until his contract expires. I also agree that he and Wiggins will be consistently a bad team. The difference is I don't see us creating a contender before Wall's contract becomes an expiring; even with Beal I see us as a treadmill team.

I think the solution is to get a lot of rookie scale cost controlled contracts and rebuild from the ground up and not try to push the process to completion before Wall (and Wiggins) expire. BY then, we will have multiple young players coming up on the end of their cost controlled period and I would expect us to be in much the same state Boston is in now, possibly better if we get lucky and get a player significantly better than Tatum, possibly worse. But then Wiggins and Wall expire and now we have a strong base of young talent and a lot of money to either retain it or find a quality player to fix our weaknesses.

We have been trying for over 40 years to shortcircuit the rebuild process and we have been failing. The last contender we had was around 1978. That's my goal. This deal might make that possible. Beal for Ingram, Ball, and shorter bad contracts isn't going to do that. At best that's another treadmill team. To me that's not enough to give up Beal for; this might be.

[Illmatic12]

Are you also assuming that Leonsis will sell the team? On which planet is he agreeing to tank for 4 years while throwing money down the drain .. Sheppard would be fired for even suggesting that

By the time those supposed picks conveyed everyone involved in making the trade would have been fired. That’s why you don’t see GMs making those sorts of transactions in real life, only in 2k

Again, I am making the assumption that John Wall will not return to be better than he was before his injury; that he will indeed be a bad contract until his contract expires. I also agree that he and Wiggins will be consistently a bad team. The difference is I don't see us creating a contender before Wall's contract becomes an expiring; even with Beal I see us as a treadmill team.

I think the solution is to get a lot of rookie scale cost controlled contracts and rebuild from the ground up and not try to push the process to completion before Wall (and Wiggins) expire. BY then, we will have multiple young players coming up on the end of their cost controlled period and I would expect us to be in much the same state Boston is in now, possibly better if we get lucky and get a player significantly better than Tatum, possibly worse. But then Wiggins and Wall expire and now we have a strong base of young talent and a lot of money to either retain it or find a quality player to fix our weaknesses.

We have been trying for over 40 years to shortcircuit the rebuild process and we have been failing. The last contender we had was around 1978. That's my goal. This deal might make that possible. Beal for Ingram, Ball, and shorter bad contracts isn't going to do that. At best that's another treadmill team. To me that's not enough to give up Beal for; this might be.

Boston?? Come on penbeast, don’t go off the deep end on us. Boston has been consistently competitive these past few years. If I’m reading your words correctly ..you are suggesting the Wiz sign up to be a toxic expensive cesspool for 4 years, and that once they get cap space they will magically emerge as an attractive destination for top talent??

Celtics didn’t just tank and slip into the abyss while waiting for the Brooklyn picks to come in. Their success added overall value to the organization over that time period, not just from a W-L standpoint but presumably contributed to them being able to develop and retain valuable players (while losing some also), coaching staff, front office talent and so on.

And even with those positives Boston is basically still a treadmill team, with no clear path to being championship caliber. So if that’s what you’re hoping to achieve then the potential downside of this Wiggins fiasco is far too risky.

[Illmatic12]

Who said anything about “helping” Boston (I get the snarky comment you are throwing out there).

If Wizards take on any bad contracts — from anyone — they get compensated. Simple concept to understand, yes?

And since NBA trades require salary matching and Wizards have no need for salary cap (other than to take on bad contracts for assets), why is accomplishing that within Beal trade hard for you to understand???

Why is so hard for you to understand that no team wants to give up an all star in his prime for bad contracts?

It’s bad contracts PLUS COMPENSATION. And if WAS trades Beal, it will be to bring in the most compensation.

I don’t care about how you debate this specific offer is, but the structure is not bad. If WAS trades Beal, they aren’t contending - they are in a rebuild. And rebuilding teams often want to take on a bad contract IF they get paid enough to do it. In other words,

Beal for expirings plus compensation, then ..
Expirings for bad contract and even more compensation.

You guys can argue how much compensation is fair.

I would also add that if WAS trades Beal, again they aren’t contending, and as we saw with OKC (twice) and NOP, they will send him to the team that offers the best compensation, regardless of conference.

Cap space is the most valuable currency of the NBA. Why? It gives you the open opportunity to sign players who directly add value to your franchise. Washington voluntarily tying up 65% of the cap on bad/negative contracts would literally be suicide to their business operations.

If this kind of deal were to happen, it’s because both owners called each other directly and negotiated the trade to make the Wizards whole from the ownership/business context. So WAS would likely be receiving a rookie Zion, rookie Blake Griffin level #1 pick , or that kind of asset.