Official Trade Thread XVIII: 1/20/12 - 5/14/12

[hands11]

I'd rather trade for Faried.

I would trade this lotto pick for Faried. Last year I said that Faried was worthy of the #6 pick. I knew he wasn't projected that high, so I said Leonard would be okay there, and Faried with the 18th.

I knew it was yet another incredibly dumb decision not to draft Faried at 18, but I wasn't surprised at all that Grunfeld didn't. Passing on Blair in round 2, and giving up the #5 for Foye and Miller both UFAs at the end of the season were stupid decisions. I knew Faried and Brooks were good enough for the lottery. Before the draft I posted that Faried is better than Blatche and Brooks is better than Young; but I knew the Wizards won't draft either player.

Right now, out of this draft outside of Davis, I'm not sure there is any player better than Kenneth Faried. I know they'd never trade the pick for Faried but if given a choice to do so IMO they should.

Check out this list of players with PER > 23 and WS/48 > .22, with minutes over 175:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... rder_by=ws

Denver and Spur tonight. I will check it out. It will be my first game seeing him in the NBA.

But keep this clean. You were pimping Faried. I was the one pimping Brooks.

Both were there when they selected Singleton. Most of the board was trying to figure out how to get Kanter or Williams. I think you and I were saying trade down and get more of these players. I was thinking more some combo of Nikola Vucevic/M Morris and Brooks but while you were focused on Faried.

Vucevic is PER 17 and we needed center help
Brooks is PER 16 shooting .446 .359 4 rbs 2 ast.

I thought help at C and SG was the way to go this year given they had Booker. Then go find your SG/SF stud.

But then we could have won more and some think we needed two shots at lotto picks. Just depends on your thinking I guess.

Faried and Brook or Vucevic and Brooks vs Ves and Singleton

If you had to vote today, I think either of those would be better. Given McGee is McGee and they are looking trade Dray, mine my not be as sexy, but I think it may be more functional.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

I'd rather trade for Faried.

I would trade this lotto pick for Faried. Last year I said that Faried was worthy of the #6 pick. I knew he wasn't projected that high, so I said Leonard would be okay there, and Faried with the 18th.

I knew it was yet another incredibly dumb decision not to draft Faried at 18, but I wasn't surprised at all that Grunfeld didn't. Passing on Blair in round 2, and giving up the #5 for Foye and Miller both UFAs at the end of the season were stupid decisions. I knew Faried and Brooks were good enough for the lottery. Before the draft I posted that Faried is better than Blatche and Brooks is better than Young; but I knew the Wizards won't draft either player.

Right now, out of this draft outside of Davis, I'm not sure there is any player better than Kenneth Faried. I know they'd never trade the pick for Faried but if given a choice to do so IMO they should.

Check out this list of players with PER > 23 and WS/48 > .22, with minutes over 175:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... rder_by=ws

Denver and Spur tonight. I will check it out. It will be my first game seeing him in the NBA.

But keep this clean. You were pimping Faried. I was the one pimping Brooks.

Both were there when they selected Singleton. Most of the board was trying to figure out how to get Kanter or Williams. I think you and I were saying trade down and get more of these players. I was thinking more some combo of Nikola Vucevic/M Morris and Brooks but while you were focused on Faried.

Vucevic is PER 17 and we needed center help
Brooks is PER 16 shooting .446 .359 4 rbs 2 ast.

I thought help at C and SG was the way to go this year given they had Booker. Then go find your SG/SF stud.

But then we could have won more and some think we needed two shots at lotto picks. Just depends on your thinking I guess.

Faried and Brook or Vucevic and Brooks vs Ves and Singleton

If you had to vote today, I think either of those would be better. Given McGee is McGee and they are looking trade Dray, mine my not be as sexy, but I think it may be more functional.

Yeah I really liked Vucevic at 6 given how the draft went down, I thought he was underrated and didn't really see a whole lot of difference between him and Kanter who everyone was drooling for, if anything I thought Vucevic was more skilled.

Singleton I thought was a good value where we got him. I liked Brooks, but thought with Crawford and the presumed return of Young, Singleton made more sense, although perhaps not so much after drafting Vesely. Faried would of been a nice pick there though as well.

But to me, Vesely over Vucevic just makes no sense when you evaluate their respective skill level. Grunfeld is overly enamored with length and athleticism.

[dangermouse]

Grunfeld is overly enamored with length and athleticism.

I wonder what Freud would say about that

[Dat2U]

Admittedly I didn't like Vucevic all that much prior to the draft. And it was based on him playing way too soft twice during the few times I've watched him. I think one particularly uninspiring performance was during tourney time and it left a real bad taste in my mouth.

Just goes to show you that you shouldn't base everything on just a handful games. The advanced numbers were pretty good and certainly his ability to step out with range is a valuable commodity in today's NBA.

Lesson learned there.

[hands11]

Admittedly I didn't like Vucevic all that much prior to the draft. And it was based on him playing way too soft twice during the few times I've watched him. I think one particularly uninspiring performance was during tourney time and it left a real bad taste in my mouth.

Just goes to show you that you shouldn't base everything on just a handful games. The advanced numbers were pretty good and certainly his ability to step out with range is a valuable commodity in today's NBA.

Lesson learned there.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=320304020

how much longer until he is starting on a regular basis ?

Yeah, what really got me was that interview tape watching him practice and him talking about his daily routine and diet. It showed me that he got it and was serious at all levels of developing his game. He showed good footwork and he had the length and size. He will keep getting better.

Because we needed help at center both short and long term, I thought he was ideal for this team. Then Brooks just seemed like a no brainer to replace Nick. Same arm length. Way smarter and better handles. I think Brooks has star potential. Faried is clearly a really nice player are well. People seem to have been down on that draft class but I think it was loaded.

Kyrie, Brooks, Morris, Faried, Nikola Vucevic That is not a shabby starting line up and there is more then enough there to make a great bench.

[Jimmy Recard]

I would trade this lotto pick for Faried.

I like Faried, but hell no CCJ.

[dlts20]

I would trade this lotto pick for Faried.

I like Faried, but hell no CCJ.

agreed. NO way. Id take him right now but not for a lotto pick in this draft.

[Nivek]

I see where CCJ is coming from. I wouldn't trade the top pick (Davis) for Faried, but say the Wiz end up 5th or 6th (like they ALWAYS seem to do). I'd rather have Faried than Sullinger or Barnes.

[dlts20]

I see where CCJ is coming from. I wouldn't trade the top pick (Davis) for Faried, but say the Wiz end up 5th or 6th (like they ALWAYS seem to do). I'd rather have Faried than Sullinger or Barnes.

Nah, Ill take Barnes. Havent seen enough of Sully. Some are high on him and some think he will be crap. Barnes has been very dissapointing but I kinda see some of that College stuff in him. LIke how Rudy Gay was underacheiving but you knew he still had NBA talent and could blossom in the right situation. It wouldnt shock me if Barnes is a better pro than College player. The same with the Percy but I kinda think he may be a flat out bust....lol

[Illuminaire]

However, where our shouts of horror come from is that trading the 5th pick for Faried may be fair actual value but completely ignores the perceived value of the two assets in question - and not in our favor.

CCJ needs to add a little poker swag to his proposed trades.

[Nivek]

I see where CCJ is coming from. I wouldn't trade the top pick (Davis) for Faried, but say the Wiz end up 5th or 6th (like they ALWAYS seem to do). I'd rather have Faried than Sullinger or Barnes.

Nah, Ill take Barnes. Havent seen enough of Sully. Some are high on him and some think he will be crap. Barnes has been very dissapointing but I kinda see some of that College stuff in him. LIke how Rudy Gay was underacheiving but you knew he still had NBA talent and could blossom in the right situation. It wouldnt shock me if Barnes is a better pro than College player. The same with the Percy but I kinda think he may be a flat out bust....lol

Poor salesmanship using Gay as your example -- he's a guy I wouldn't want on my team. He's been about average in terms of offensive efficiency, but he doesn't rebound much or defend. Seems like a classic Wizards player -- athletic, looks like a player, but doesn't actually a great deal out there. If that's what Barnes is going to be, I DEFINITELY would prefer Faried.

[dlts20]

I see where CCJ is coming from. I wouldn't trade the top pick (Davis) for Faried, but say the Wiz end up 5th or 6th (like they ALWAYS seem to do). I'd rather have Faried than Sullinger or Barnes.

Nah, Ill take Barnes. Havent seen enough of Sully. Some are high on him and some think he will be crap. Barnes has been very dissapointing but I kinda see some of that College stuff in him. LIke how Rudy Gay was underacheiving but you knew he still had NBA talent and could blossom in the right situation. It wouldnt shock me if Barnes is a better pro than College player. The same with the Percy but I kinda think he may be a flat out bust....lol

Poor salesmanship using Gay as your example -- he's a guy I wouldn't want on my team. He's been about average in terms of offensive efficiency, but he doesn't rebound much or defend. Seems like a classic Wizards player -- athletic, looks like a player, but doesn't actually a great deal out there. If that's what Barnes is going to be, I DEFINITELY would prefer Faried.

I dont think his D is as bad as you say, atleast not enough to cancel out his offense. However, I totally disagree about his rebounding. You want him to average 10rpg or something at the SF spot? He's solid for a SF if not good. Give me Gay over him all day

[Nivek]

I'm not saying Gay is BAD on the boards -- he's okay for SF, maybe even a shade above average. I think his offense is overrated because his efficiency has been about average for his career, and is worse than average this season. Overall, I think Gay is better than average, but not by a lot.

Faried is a first-rate rebounder who can generate offense from offensive rebounding. His efficiency is outstanding, and it's not because of a preposterously low usage rate -- his possession usage is about 19% (average is 20%). I'd rather have Faried than Gay, just like I think I'd rather have him than Barnes. (Not 100% sure about that -- I'd want to study Barnes a bit more.)

But, CCJ's point is a good one, I think. Faried's a better pro right now -- and is going to be a better pro -- than all but a handful of players from this year's draft. If the Wiz landed at 5, 6, 7, I'd be happy if they swapped the pick for Faried. (It won't happen because I think the front office would fear the PR backlash that would come from trading for a guy that didn't until 22nd last year. But in basketball terms, it would likely be better for the team long-run than taking one of the college kids.)

[pcbothwel]

Not that I dont agree with most of you here who tout guys like Faried, but I believe we should all temper our growth projections. There are numerous instances of polished players falling out of the lottery who go on to have success their rookie year and everyone says "how could you miss on that guy when his productivity was staring you in the face." Like I said, i agree that a lot of GM's overlook important statistical indicators for the sake of "athleticsm and potential", but just look at the list of guys below and how they were perceived after their rookie year and compare to now.

2009:
Darren Collison: Some people wanted to trade CP3 in order to start Collison, since then he has regressed.
DeJuan Blair: While a good rebounder, he has stagnated/regressed offensively and defensively
Taj Gibson: Again, no real growth from Rookie Year
Omar Casspi: Regressed to not even starting for Cavs.

2008:
Jason Thompson: supposed to be the hard working Blatche...no growth
George Hill: "should we trade Tony Parker"...Hill is basically gone nowhere
Courtney Lee: Clutch for Magic in playoffs. Nothing since
CDR: Made a name with Rose at Memphis as polisched wing. Never progessed

2007:
Carl Landry
Rudy Fernandez
Quincy Douby

2006:
Craig Smith
Renaldo Balkman
Leon Powe
Daniel Gibson

Again, I do not disagree with the Faried assessment on here by some, Im just saying we should "temper" our disappointment for other teams rookie performances.

[truwizfan4evr]

Goldentstate intrested in Javale Mcgee http://www.csnwashington.com/blog/wizar ... edID=10480

[truwizfan4evr]

Golden state has a lot talent I wish they were dumb enough to give us Ellis for McGee . I would even take David lee large contract on. I figure McGee will walk on the wizards anyway. We have not extended his contract yet. If we had to trade with GS, who would you want us to get back for McGee?

[dlts20]

I'm not saying Gay is BAD on the boards -- he's okay for SF, maybe even a shade above average. I think his offense is overrated because his efficiency has been about average for his career, and is worse than average this season. Overall, I think Gay is better than average, but not by a lot.

Faried is a first-rate rebounder who can generate offense from offensive rebounding. His efficiency is outstanding, and it's not because of a preposterously low usage rate -- his possession usage is about 19% (average is 20%). I'd rather have Faried than Gay, just like I think I'd rather have him than Barnes. (Not 100% sure about that -- I'd want to study Barnes a bit more.)

But, CCJ's point is a good one, I think. Faried's a better pro right now -- and is going to be a better pro -- than all but a handful of players from this year's draft. If the Wiz landed at 5, 6, 7, I'd be happy if they swapped the pick for Faried. (It won't happen because I think the front office would fear the PR backlash that would come from trading for a guy that didn't until 22nd last year. But in basketball terms, it would likely be better for the team long-run than taking one of the college kids.)

I think Faried is kinda overrated also. I think he's good at what he does but in some way he's like Lin. His impact is much higher in the Nuggez system, offense, & team then it would be on another team. IDK if he boards as well and he definitaly wouldnt score on more of a halfcourt team. He also wouldnt do it as well if he played with scrubs around him instead of the Nuggz who are 2 deep at every spot.

I just think if he had been on the Wiz in Flip's system with our roster then he wouldnt have the same impact. He's also playing with Lawson & Miller so he gets alot of alley's & p&r dunks like Jordan

[Nivek]

Faried is polished? Wow -- didn't know.

Rebounding is usually portable. If a guy can rebound in one situation, he can usually rebound in other situations as well.

Agreed that Faried benefits from playing with Lawson and Miller, although they also benefit from playing with him. In DC, he'd be a nice alley-oop and PNR target for Wall. Faried's percentage of assisted buckets at the rim is about the same as McGee's for example.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I see where CCJ is coming from. I wouldn't trade the top pick (Davis) for Faried, but say the Wiz end up 5th or 6th (like they ALWAYS seem to do). I'd rather have Faried than Sullinger or Barnes.

I would keep Davis, Thomas Robinson, and that's about it. I think MKG and Brad Beal will be absolute studs. But, so is Faried. I really like Tyler Zeller. I am sure a guy like Jae Crowder or Damian Lillard is going to blow up at the next level, unexpectedly. However, I'm already seeing a monster in Faried.

Think back to the year the Wizards passed up on Paul Millsap. That year, I said Millsap was way better than Shelden Williams and Alexander Johnson (FSU). I thought Hilton Armstrong was a bum and that Josh Boone was nothing special.

The Wizards selected Oleksiy Pecherov #18.

Look back at the 2006 draft.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2006.html

I defy you to find any PF better than Millsap after #2 overall, LaMarcus Aldridge.

Tyrus Thomas (4), Shelden Williams (5), Hilton Armstrong (12), Renaldo Balkman (20), Josh Boone (23), Joel Freeland (30), Solomon Jones(33), Paul Davis (34), Craig Smith (36) certainly are not better than Millsap who went #47.

Forward to this past draft. Kenneth Faried legitimately has a chance to be Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Jerome Kersey all wrapped into one. I believe he is BETTER THAN PAUL MILLSAP AND DEJUAN BLAIR. In three years, Faried could be the type of player to anchor a championship-level defense.

Ask yourself: How much better is any player from this draft going to be than this guy?

I would trade anything past the top-3. I think I like Tyler Zeller a lot, but he's not a guarantee to provide what Faried clearly does.

Faried is the quickest jumper and has the highest motor of just about anyone in the league--already. He's obviously a great rebounder. I THINK the guy is going to score a bunch of points, too.

[nate33]

Not that I dont agree with most of you here who tout guys like Faried, but I believe we should all temper our growth projections. There are numerous instances of polished players falling out of the lottery who go on to have success their rookie year and everyone says "how could you miss on that guy when his productivity was staring you in the face." Like I said, i agree that a lot of GM's overlook important statistical indicators for the sake of "athleticsm and potential", but just look at the list of guys below and how they were perceived after their rookie year and compare to now.

2009:
Darren Collison: Some people wanted to trade CP3 in order to start Collison, since then he has regressed.
DeJuan Blair: While a good rebounder, he has stagnated/regressed offensively and defensively
Taj Gibson: Again, no real growth from Rookie Year
Omar Casspi: Regressed to not even starting for Cavs.

2008:
Jason Thompson: supposed to be the hard working Blatche...no growth
George Hill: "should we trade Tony Parker"...Hill is basically gone nowhere
Courtney Lee: Clutch for Magic in playoffs. Nothing since
CDR: Made a name with Rose at Memphis as polisched wing. Never progessed

2007:
Carl Landry
Rudy Fernandez
Quincy Douby

2006:
Craig Smith
Renaldo Balkman
Leon Powe
Daniel Gibson

Again, I do not disagree with the Faried assessment on here by some, Im just saying we should "temper" our disappointment for other teams rookie performances.

Excellent post! Food for thought right there.