Countdown to Ernie Grunfeld Firing

[montestewart]

Everybody already hates Lucky Ernie

[payitforward]

I think this line of thinking discounts the role of timing, luck, and just how dynamic things can be in the NBA.

Just based on our existing roster today, the range of possible outcomes is huge depending on the how good Wall, Beal, and Porter become. This year we will likely be without a first round pick. But we have all our future firsts and we have New Orleans' 2nd this year. If one of those "hits" maybe it becomes a core piece or a key asset in a transformational trade.

It's presumptuous to say that signing Gortat means we won't have cap room to sign a top tier free agent. Maybe we have to pay someone off with a draft pick to pay him, but that could be worth it.

Look, I hate Ernie as a GM and I've been sorely disappointed by Leonsis as an owner. But PIF Is right -- this situation is manageable. I pray that Ted rewards Ernie for his service and gives him the Bruce Allen role this summer, and then goes and hires a better GM. I don't buy the peaking bit. Not yet at least.

Yes, it is a dynamic arena, and it calls for a dynamic and visionary manager. With the right leader running the show and trying to undo damage, I can see this team turning around (so I guess I don't fully buy the peaking bit either). But as long as EG is making the decisions, I'll assume that every decision, big or small, is probably making things worse.

monte, I hate Ernie as a GM, but that's not fair.

Ernie stole Martell Webster off the free agent heap last year and appears to have gotten him for a bargain with his contract this summer.

Ariza, who is now being referred to as part of our core, was part of what was seemingly the worst trade in sports history.

He's had more misses than hits, but he's had some hits -- even recently.

A bad *trade* and a bad *player* are two different things. I always thought Ariza was a good player, because he always has been one! That doesn't make a trade turning a rebuilding team's cap room into an aging, injury-prone, top-salaried big and Ariza into a good trade. It wasn't one, and Ariza playing well doesn't make it one.

Webster, yes -- Martell has turned himself into a very valuable player. He's near the top of the heap among NBA 3s now. Ernie gets credit for signing him, just as a blind squirrel gets credit for finding a nut.

[DCZards]

The "peaking" crowd is wrong? Really...I think the "peaking" crowd has been right the past 4 years, and people like DCZards and Hands have been consistently wrong for the past 4 years.

The pro-Okariza people have absolutely been proven wrong. Ariza and Okafor provided nothing towards a winning season. Ariza has been solid so far this season, but he's in his contract year, and if you look at Ariza's past, his contract years have been his best ones. More than likely he walks this year anyway, so that's pretty much nothing in return. Okafor...well I don't need to say anything about that—his career might be over.

As for Webster...I'll take a wait-and-see approach on him. I still think he overpaid according to the market, and I definitely am not convinced that wasn't the case. EG just overbid himself like a fool.

And I like how you completely left out Maynor, who you've been completely wrong about.

Yup, i was dead wrong about Maynor...thus far.

Ariza has been rock solid and a contributor to winning and turning around the culture. Doesn't matter whether it's a contract year or not...Trevor been's good.

Okakor played very well last season...wasn't his fault that Wall and Nene missed a ton of games, most of which were losses. Okafor was turned into Gortat and I think you'll agree that he's helped win games this season.

As for Webster, if you check out the salaries of other free agent SG/SFs (Korver, Buddinger, JR Smith, Josh Smith), you'll see that he wasn't overpaid according to the market.

[payitforward]

Charlotte currently has the eight spot in the east with an 8-11 record. That means it is conceivable that the Wizards could win 35 games, make the playoffs as the eight seed, and lose their first round pick as part of the Marcin Gortat trade. Can we please fire EG now.

And if the Zards resign Gortat they will have likely locked up a player who is more productive and more instrumental to building a contender than a mid-first round pick.

There's a lot of reasons to fire EG but I don't think the trade for Gortat is one of them.

On its own, of course not, but:

1. You don't mention that we could also have signed him this summer w/o giving up that pick. Him or someone equivalent.

2. Neither you nor I know how "instrumental" a "mid-first round pick" can be! How good is Paul George? How good is Kawhi Leonard? It's a long list.

3. You ignore the many moves by Ernie that left us so unbalanced that one injury (to an injury-prone vet!) made it necessary to trade for him.

#3 -- that is why he should be fired.

[payitforward]

...Signing Gortat is completely independent of whether they traded for him or not. ...
Basically they are renting Gortat for a season...

I don't think that's right. I think having Gortat this year - loving playing with John Wall and loving living in DC gives us a huge advantage in resigning him next summer. I think he will also be instrumental in turning Vesely's confidence around as a mentor. ...

Finally - right now the 15th pick next year doesn't project as a great player. This coming draft is the deepest in years at the top but not nearly as deep in the middle.

The thing is, whatever you think, they *are* renting Gortat for a season in return for a mid-first round pick. It's not like what you think has the power to change that!

If it works out well, does that give us an advantage in signing him? Sure. Does it guarantee that we'll be able to sign him? Obviously not. So... if he signs w/ the Spurs, for example, then we have cap room and we find someone else -- if we have a good season that's a bit easier (though of course money is always the main factor for anyone below the superstar level where money flows in for lots more places).

As to where "the 15th pick" projects -- you're having it both ways. You said w/o Gortat we don't make the playoffs. So maybe it's the 12th pick. And how do you know where the guy picked in that spot will wind up as a player? You don't.

Finally, again, you don't take into account the absolute mess Ernie made that put us in an emergency position because one guy went down. We gave away that pick for a guy Phoenix was trying to get rid of!

[DCZards]

2. Neither you nor I know how "instrumental" a "mid-first round pick" can be! How good is Paul George? How good is Kawhi Leonard? It's a long list.
.

George was a lottery pick (10th), mid-first round is in the 14-16 range. Yes, Leonard is very good. He was the 15th pick. The record will show that I wanted the Zards to draft Leonard. But the typical 15th pick in the NBA draft is nowhere near as productive as Gortat.

[payitforward]

Charlotte currently has the eight spot in the east with an 8-11 record. That means it is conceivable that the Wizards could win 35 games, make the playoffs as the eight seed, and lose their first round pick as part of the Marcin Gortat trade. Can we please fire EG now.

Don't forget, it's also very possible to miss the playoffs and lose the pick. Best of both worlds. And EG extended would cap another perfect season.

While technically possible, I think it is practically impossible. Too many Eastern conference teams would have to improve, and too many Western conference teams would have to become worse. If the Wizards fail to make the playoffs, it almost certainly means their record will be so far below .500 that at least 2 or more Western conference teams will be in the lottery that have better records than the Wizards.

You are right. It doesn't look likely. Still, right now 15 teams have worse records than we do, and 3 have the same record.

[payitforward]

There's a 100% chance that luck will play a role. You can look at the fortunes of every team in the league and cite examples of how things went one way when they could have gone another. It's just the nature of life.

I do not agree that management implies a specific plan of action. How could it -- circumstances change, opportunities crop up, values fluctuate, etc. Your action plan just can't be that specific when you're planning for the long term. You have general guiding principles that you do your best to stay true to, but within that you react to the landscape.

Why did we trade two picks for Glen Rice Jr when we had Porter, Beal, Webster and Ariza in tow? For the same reason the Redskins drafted Kirk Cousins, right? The value was too good for them to pass up based on where he was picked. Maybe he becomes a chip in a trade -- or maybe he gets so good where we can trade Beal. That's simple opportunism. It may not work and our decision-makers certainly have a worse track record than lots of their peers, but hey, Martell Webster.

How many times do we get to use Martell Webster to defend decisions by our FO? Is that what you're doing? He is working out -- stay healthy, Martell! -- but tell me some other marvelous FA signing we've made please.

Your argument re: Rice proves the opposite of what you want it to prove, or so it seems to me -- we traded a guy who already looks better than Rice, along w/ another pick, to be opportunistic!

[payitforward]

...explore Beal trades. ...

Beal for Faried and pick?
Beal, Ves, Seraphin for Al Horford?
Joakim Noah, Josh Smith, Cousins, Deandre Jordan?
Beal and Porter for Ilyasova and Larry Sanders?

#1 -- in a minute! #s2 and 4 no thanks. #3 I don't get.... we getting all 4 of those guys for Beal? You have them ranked the same in value, and we're getting 1 of them? What?

I get mad whenever DeAndre Jordan's name comes up. It would have been child's play to come out of that '08 draft with what I wanted, namely Batum and DJ (take a look at the trades Morey made that year to see what I mean) and maybe even Chalmers too -- he was the 3d high-value guy in my mind.

Instead Ernie picked a guy w/ 'potential' -- i.e. he wasn't even all that good in college!

[fishercob]

There's a 100% chance that luck will play a role. You can look at the fortunes of every team in the league and cite examples of how things went one way when they could have gone another. It's just the nature of life.

I do not agree that management implies a specific plan of action. How could it -- circumstances change, opportunities crop up, values fluctuate, etc. Your action plan just can't be that specific when you're planning for the long term. You have general guiding principles that you do your best to stay true to, but within that you react to the landscape.

Why did we trade two picks for Glen Rice Jr when we had Porter, Beal, Webster and Ariza in tow? For the same reason the Redskins drafted Kirk Cousins, right? The value was too good for them to pass up based on where he was picked. Maybe he becomes a chip in a trade -- or maybe he gets so good where we can trade Beal. That's simple opportunism. It may not work and our decision-makers certainly have a worse track record than lots of their peers, but hey, Martell Webster.

How many times do we get to use Martell Webster to defend decisions by our FO? Is that what you're doing? He is working out -- stay healthy, Martell! -- but tell me some other marvelous FA signing we've made please.

Your argument re: Rice proves the opposite of what you want it to prove, or so it seems to me -- we traded a guy who already looks better than Rice, along w/ another pick, to be opportunistic!

This is an odd response to one post that was part of a larger discussion.

My mention of Webster in this instance was not to defend anything -- it was a folksy shoulder shrug alluding something along the lines of nuts and blind squirrels.

As to Wolters-Rice, what types of conclusions are you comfortable drawing based on the sample size? Obviously the sample on Wolters is much larger, and he doesn't seem to be helping Milwaukee win so much.

[payitforward]

I don't think that's right. I think having Gortat this year - loving playing with John Wall and loving living in DC gives us a huge advantage in resigning him next summer. I think he will also be instrumental in turning Vesely's confidence around as a mentor. I also think that the Wiz would not be making the playoffs without Gortat and without the injured Okafor. I don't see how the team would be competitive with Ves or Seraphin as the starter and first big off the bench. Without Gortat, what would we be in the games where Nene can't play? I don't think there's much of a way we'd win many games with Ves AND Seraphin in the starting lineup.

Finally - right now the 15th pick next year doesn't project as a great player. This coming draft is the deepest in years at the top but not nearly as deep in the middle.

Yup, without Okafor and with Nene missing probably 15-20 games this season the chances of the Zards making the playoffs would have been slim to none. Bringing in a quality starter and big man like Gortat was critical for that reason alone. And the chances of resigning Gortat (as opposed to signing him as a free agent) are significantly better, imo, now that he's already bonding with his teammates and the city of DC.

I heard Gortat on 980 AM yesterday talking about the "chemistry" (his word) that he's developing with Wall and how he likes the way the team has gelled recently. He also said that he's gotten to know Wall better and called him a "good kid" who welcomes advice and constructive criticism. Gortat said Wall seems like he's "from another planet" with the speed in which he gets up and down the court.

No one could doubt your second point; yes, it is more likely we resign him than to sign him as a FA. Still, if he signs w/ e.g. the Spurs, what will your crystal ball say then? And why would we be unable to go out and sign an equal value FA?

For sure he makes us better, but we have some other guys who are even more responsible for our surge. Hence, what do you think our record is likely to be given how good we're playing these days (7-2 run)? 46-47 wins? And we'd be a dozen wins worse w/ some other less expensive pick up instead of Gortat?

Anyway speculation of the kind you indulge in -- and my version as well -- is pointless. Who knows what would have happened, and it's fun to watch the team play well!

This is the "fire EG" thread -- the relevant point in re: Gortat is the vulnerable position our GM put us in. 4 years into a rebuild no less!

[nate33]

I'm not interested in trading Beal, nor am I interested in trading Porter at the moment. But I'm open to anything.

And I think the "we're peaking and there's not much upside beyond this" crowd should consider trading Beal before trading Porter because Beal has so much more value on the open market right now. We're winning without Beal; he's not all that productive yet. MOving him could help us add a star player or close to a team that already has a strong top six.

Personally, I think such a move would be short-sited and it illustrates why trading Porter would be as well.

The problem I have with the "peaking" crowd is that many of them are the same people who thought the world was coming to an end when the Zards traded for Okafor/Ariza and that EG overpaid for Webster. I think they've been proven wrong on both counts. So I'm not to eager to see the Zards make personnel moves and decisions based on that crowd's analysis.

I disagree. I think what is happening is pretty much what they predicted -- that the Wizards' rush to get good was going to keep them from being great.

Thank you, fishercob. Yes, things are going just as the naysayers predicted the moment we traded Shart for Okafor. Frankly, we are extremely lucky that things didn't go worse. We should have had the 8th pick in the draft, not the 3rd and we'd have ended up with KCP or McCollum. As the naysayers said over and over again, the smart move would have been to buy out Lewis, sign Ryan Anderson plus an amnestied stopgap big like Brand or Haywood. We would have had max cap room this past offseason plus a core player at PF already in place.

Who knows what we could have done this offseason with that cap room? Maybe we could have taken Gortat off of Phoenix' hands without giving up the pick. We could have the same team we have right now but with Anderson in place of Ariza and our 2014 draft pick intact.

[fishercob]

The problem I have with the "peaking" crowd is that many of them are the same people who thought the world was coming to an end when the Zards traded for Okafor/Ariza and that EG overpaid for Webster. I think they've been proven wrong on both counts. So I'm not to eager to see the Zards make personnel moves and decisions based on that crowd's analysis.

I disagree. I think what is happening is pretty much what they predicted -- that the Wizards' rush to get good was going to keep them from being great.

Thank you, fishercob.

As always, you're welcome. I serve at your pleasure. Or something.

Yes, things are going just as the naysayers predicted the moment we traded Shart for Okafor. Frankly, we are extremely lucky that things didn't go worse. We should have had the 8th pick in the draft, not the 3rd and we'd have ended up with KCP or McCollum.

See! Luck! It comes in all forms -- moving up, moving down, injuries, Byron Russell's agent, etc.

As the naysayers said over and over again, the smart move would have been to buy out Lewis, sign Ryan Anderson plus an amnestied stopgap big like Brand or Haywood. We would have had max cap room this past offseason plus a core player at PF already in place.

Who knows what we could have done this offseason with that cap room? Maybe we could have taken Gortat off of Phoenix' hands without giving up the pick. We could have the same team we have right now but with Anderson in place of Ariza and our 2014 draft pick intact.

Funny, when you put it that way, I'm not all THAT excited by the alternative. I mean, yes, it's better, no doubt. But when I look at our current team vs. your hypothetical one, I still think both versions' upside are tied up in staying healthy (I'm sure our friends in Chicago would agree) and Wall and Beal's improvement.

I know Ernie sucks. I'm much more interested in figuring out the best course of action from here and I do believe there's still a good amount of upside.

[payitforward]

I'm not interested in trading Beal, nor am I interested in trading Porter at the moment. But I'm open to anything.

And I think the "we're peaking and there's not much upside beyond this" crowd should consider trading Beal before trading Porter because Beal has so much more value on the open market right now. We're winning without Beal; he's not all that productive yet. MOving him could help us add a star player or close to a team that already has a strong top six.

Personally, I think such a move would be short-sited and it illustrates why trading Porter would be as well.

The problem I have with the "peaking" crowd is that many of them are the same people who thought the world was coming to an end when the Zards traded for Okafor/Ariza and that EG overpaid for Webster. I think they've been proven wrong on both counts. So I'm not to eager to see the Zards make personnel moves and decisions based on that crowd's analysis.

You know, Zards, it would be great if you ever offered any kind of real basis for what you think, instead of pointing your crystal ball, assuming your instincts always give you the right answers, and misrepresenting folks. I mean I'm not in the forum characterizing you as one of those people who say "in Ernie we trust" just because you have some opinion.... I'd appreciate a little higher level of respect for analyses that differ from your ex cathedra opinionizing. I know you are capable of it too; I know it from your avatar!

The question re: Webster is whether we could have re-signed him for less. That's quite a different issue from saying we "overpaid for Webster." It's an open issue, though admittedly one to which we'll never have an answer.

Nor does how unbelievably well the guy is playing affect the question of whether we could have signed him for less. You do see that, don't you? Right now, based on productivity, he's way underpaid!

As to the Okariza trade -- no one thought the world was coming to an end, but it was an awful trade. Again, you do understand that whether a trade is good is a different question from whether a player is good, right? And you do understand that the trade for Okafor is what caused us to have an utter emergency need for a big on the eve of this season, causing us to overpay to get one, right? Or maybe you think Phoenix didn't notice that we were holding our socks?

Age, future draft assets, and cap flexibility tell you whether a team is likely to be able to keep improving. It's not magic, it's obvious. We've traded flexibility and future assets (in essence: youth) for age for quite some time now, and we've done a poor job overall in using the enormous draft assets we had.

Just facts. Not a tide of negativity. Nor do I think "peaking" is inevitable -- unless, of course, we keep EG as our GM.

[payitforward]

I'm not interested in trading Beal, nor am I interested in trading Porter at the moment. But I'm open to anything.

And I think the "we're peaking and there's not much upside beyond this" crowd should consider trading Beal before trading Porter because Beal has so much more value on the open market right now. We're winning without Beal; he's not all that productive yet. MOving him could help us add a star player or close to a team that already has a strong top six.

Personally, I think such a move would be short-sited and it illustrates why trading Porter would be as well.

The problem I have with the "peaking" crowd is that many of them are the same people who thought the world was coming to an end when the Zards traded for Okafor/Ariza and that EG overpaid for Webster. I think they've been proven wrong on both counts. So I'm not to eager to see the Zards make personnel moves and decisions based on that crowd's analysis.

Well said.

You bet. "In Ernie we trust" is your motto -- right there under your avatar picture of Ernie. And it's obvious you were right to trust him. After all, in only four years and one month he turned us into a team with a .500 record. That's some really good work, huh?

I've asked you repeatedly, maybe this time you'll answer: why do you think Ernie G. is a good GM? You're obviously an intelligent person; you write well, you have interesting trade ideas, etc. Is it really not possible for you to say what you like about Ernie's work over the years? And if not, why?

No insult meant, really not -- I just can't figure it out and would love to know.

[payitforward]

2. Neither you nor I know how "instrumental" a "mid-first round pick" can be! How good is Paul George? How good is Kawhi Leonard? It's a long list.

George was a lottery pick (10th), mid-first round is in the 14-16 range. Yes, Leonard is very good. He was the 15th pick. The record will show that I wanted the Zards to draft Leonard. But the typical 15th pick in the NBA draft is nowhere near as productive as Gortat.

Dude... where was Gortat picked?

We are not protected down to 14, Zards.

[DCZards]

You know, Zards, it would be great if you ever offered any kind of real basis for what you think, instead of pointing your crystal ball, assuming your instincts always give you the right answers, and misrepresenting folks. I mean I'm not in the forum characterizing you as one of those people who say "in Ernie we trust" just because you have some opinion.... I'd appreciate a little higher level of respect for analyses that differ from your ex cathedra opinionizing. I know you are capable of it too; I know it from your avatar!

I agree with you, pif. I should never had singled out anyone as being in any "crowd." It's really not my style. My bad.

[payitforward]

You know, Zards, it would be great if you ever offered any kind of real basis for what you think, instead of pointing your crystal ball, assuming your instincts always give you the right answers, and misrepresenting folks. I mean I'm not in the forum characterizing you as one of those people who say "in Ernie we trust" just because you have some opinion.... I'd appreciate a little higher level of respect for analyses that differ from your ex cathedra opinionizing. I know you are capable of it too; I know it from your avatar!

I agree with you, pif. I should never had singled out anyone as being in any "crowd." It's really not my style. My bad.

No problem. And these threads do lead to one dimensional statements -- I mean I want Ernie gone gone gone, but I am delighted for us to be playing so well.

[DCZards]

Thank you, fishercob. Yes, things are going just as the naysayers predicted the moment we traded Shart for Okafor. Frankly, we are extremely lucky that things didn't go worse. We should have had the 8th pick in the draft, not the 3rd and we'd have ended up with KCP or McCollum. As the naysayers said over and over again, the smart move would have been to buy out Lewis, sign Ryan Anderson plus an amnestied stopgap big like Brand or Haywood. We would have had max cap room this past offseason plus a core player at PF already in place.

To riff off of something that PIF just said, How many times are we going to use Ryan Anderson to flog EG for the moves he made during the 2012 off season? Yes, MAYBE the smart move would have been to sign Anderson, but it's pure speculation to suggest that Anderson would have ended up signing with the Zards. And might Webster at $5 mil a season actually be a much better deal than Anderson at $8 mil?

[nate33]

Thank you, fishercob. Yes, things are going just as the naysayers predicted the moment we traded Shart for Okafor. Frankly, we are extremely lucky that things didn't go worse. We should have had the 8th pick in the draft, not the 3rd and we'd have ended up with KCP or McCollum. As the naysayers said over and over again, the smart move would have been to buy out Lewis, sign Ryan Anderson plus an amnestied stopgap big like Brand or Haywood. We would have had max cap room this past offseason plus a core player at PF already in place.

To riff off of something that PIF just said, How many times are we going to use Ryan Anderson to flog EG for the moves he made during the 2012 off season? Yes, MAYBE the smart move would have been to sign Anderson, but it's pure speculation to suggest that Anderson would have ended up signing with the Zards. And might Webster at $5 mil a season actually be a much better deal than Anderson at $8 mil?

I'm going to keep flogging EG with Ryan Anderson because it was a known deal available. I'm sure there were other good ones too. The bottom line is that paying $46M for 2 years of Okariza was clearly not an efficient use of resources. (Technically it was $32M for those two if you factor jettisoning Lewis' contract. But even at $32M, it was a bad plan.) Both those guys were too old to realistically be expected to be part of our long term, and they were too expensive to be worth their salary. In the two offseasons since the trade, there have been dozens of quality young players who have been obtained by one team or another at a better cost.