nate33 wrote:joshuacf wrote:nate33 wrote:Just curious,
What kind of star player do you think might be obtainable with cap room?
Teams don't let superstars walk in free agency unless they are over-the-hill. To get a star, you have to work out a trade. And in any such hypothetical trade, I would expect us to send out future picks and a good player or two to make the salaries match. And in that scenario, having Payton Watson isn't an impediment. He is either the outgoing ballast, or he is one of the reasons a star would want to come here.
A Myles Turner, Jalen Brunson, Jimmy Butler level player. All guys who walked in free agency.
Myles Turner isn't a star. He isn't as good as Peyton Watson.
Jimmy Butler never changed teams via free agency. He was traded.
Jalen Brunson is a good example, but he wasn't a "star" when he signed in New York. He was a 6th man who got inserted into Dallas' starting lineup after Luka got hurt. He played very well, averaging 17/5/4 on a .591 TS% for the rest of the season. That's nice production, but short of a "star". New York signed him thinking he would be a quality starter, not an MVP candidate. It only cost them a 3-year contract at $25M per year. But because they gambled on a productive player who played well when thrust into a starting role, it paid off nicely.
I can think of a current player in this free agency market that matches that criteria. A good young player who got thrust into a starting role this season and played exceptionally well, though still a bit shy of "star" production. Like Brunson, he can probably be obtained from "good starter" money, not star money - I'd estimate about $30M a year.
His name is Peyton Watson.
I agree.
We already made the "star" move with Trae Young. For a team like the Wizards, the best chance to obtain a prime star is in the draft via a high pick (tanking), or identifying an ascending player that has untapped high end potential. This is what they did when they signed Arenas. Brunson to the Knicks is another example. And if course SGA.
The benefit that should be considered with Watson is the possibility of signing him as a FA. We don't have to give up any assets, no young players depart, no future draft picks, no 2026 late first. We simply have to pay more than other teams. And we have the cap room to do that.
We are constantly hearing about this team using its cap room to take on a "bad contract" if it results in adding draft capital in the process. Paying tens of millions of dollars to bring in a player we don't necessarily want or intend to keep long-term in order to acquire a draft pick.
Or trading draft assets to "take a flyer" on a player like Zion Williamson in the hopes that he'll get his act together and stay healthy for a mere late 1st rounder this year and maybe one in 2029.
If we're willing to pay tens of millions for a bad contract to obtain a 1st round pick, wouldn't it be more prudent to maybe pay a bit more, maybe go above perceived market value, to outbid for a player that you view to have the potential high end outcome of a 1st round pick, a player who fits your culture , fits your timeline, fits your roster, fits your system and style of play. And allows you to retain your draft capital. Retain your young players. You are willing to pay more because you give up less. And its a player that you see as continuing to improve to where the production will meet the value of the money when all is said and done. We can take advantage of our good cap situation and leverage that against the Nuggets poor cap situation and that of most other teams in the league, limiting our competition for Watson, allowing us to acquire him without forfeiting assets or without even possibly overpaying, maybe even sign him to a descending contract.
We add another piece, without subtracting any. No jettisoning a player or pick we later regret. We add another foundational young player to the core of Sarr, Tre, Kyshawn, and our top 5 draft pick!
