Trae Young, Come on DOWN

[payitforward]

In any case, it's very unlikely that Trae will, or would if he played, make us a bunch better.

OTOH, if Trae doesn't play, I'd say the tank is pretty secure given that we really have no PG at all now.

[dckingsfan]

In any case, it's very unlikely that Trae will, or would if he played, make us a bunch better.

OTOH, if Trae doesn't play, I'd say the tank is pretty secure given that we really have no PG at all now.

Well, we do have tank driver Sargent Bub.

Not sure I needed the green font there...

[ledell_gumbo]

I believe that management doesn't want to build around Trae either. I think they see Trae as an intermediate step. The idea is to have a true PG so that we don't have to force our guys to play outside of their comfort zone all the time. Kyshawn shouldn't be a primary pick-and-roll operator. He should be a secondary pick-and-roll guy operating against a defense that has already had to shift from side-to-side. Tre Johnson shouldn't have to be a playmaker and dish out 5 assists per game. He should be coming off of screens and attacking closeouts. Sarr should not be a 25% usage guy with a TS% of .567. He should be a 20% USG guy with a TS% of .620. Trae Young can facilitate this by taking over PG duties and setting other guys up. It will help our offense, at the cost of our defense.

I think this is exactly right. Young will allow the team to be much more functional (and fun) next year, without much opportunity cost, and he provides a potentially useful expiring contract. That's it. What's more, there aren't even a lot of other options that would make them more competitive without committing them to a long-term vision.

What happens in 2027 is entirely separate and unknown. My guess is that he'll move on, as you say. If he somehow turns out to evolve into a perfect fit, great -- they can consider an extension then. Yes, there's a danger they'll get too excited about short-term success -- but we don't need to worry about that yet.

[TheBlackCzar]

https://troyhaliburton.substack.com/p/the-wizards-rebuild-was-never-about?r=yuum&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay&triedRedirect=true

A must read — by a great guy who is a smart, thoughtful, broad-picture fan, not to mention someone who is close to the inner sanctum of this team.

I enjoyed it, but he waaay exaggerates his points.

Trae Young is NOT the star Haliburton suggests he is. His last really good season was 2021-2. The idea that he has it in him to make us a better team is pure fantasy.

I'm not suggesting he can't have some positive effects. But, he'll also have negative ones. Nor do I think he was acquired b/c of a mistaken idea that he can improve us significantly.

The biggest possible plus from this trade is if Trae plays well enough that he can be moved at next year's deadline for a better return than what we gave up for him (which was, essentially, Corey Kispert).

My main problem with Trae Young the player is that I think he is a floor raiser but not a ceiling raiser. He'll win us regular season games, but he won't win against the playoffs when you run into teams with the personnel and game plan to negate him offensively and attack him defensively. I just don't think you can build a team around Trae Young.

Having said that, I believe that management doesn't want to build around Trae either. I think they see Trae as an intermediate step. The idea is to have a true PG so that we don't have to force our guys to play outside of their comfort zone all the time. Kyshawn shouldn't be a primary pick-and-roll operator. He should be a secondary pick-and-roll guy operating against a defense that has already had to shift from side-to-side. Tre Johnson shouldn't have to be a playmaker and dish out 5 assists per game. He should be coming off of screens and attacking closeouts. Sarr should not be a 25% usage guy with a TS% of .567. He should be a 20% USG guy with a TS% of .620. Trae Young can facilitate this by taking over PG duties and setting other guys up. It will help our offense, at the cost of our defense.

What I would like to see happen is for us to draft Peterson or Flemings this summer and ultimately shift the PG role into their hands. But Peterson in particular is probably not ready for that as a rookie. So he can start off in a secondary role alongside Trae and learn to be a primary operator over time. I would probably refrain from extending Trae in this scenario. Then, in Summer 2027, we cut Trae loose and hopefully have a team that is nearly as good offensively while being MUCH better defensively.

And if Peterson is gone and someone like Dybantsa, Boozer or Wilson is best player available, we draft them, extend Trae and roll with Trae Young at PG for a longer period of time. We would still look to find someone to replace him Young eventually (or maybe Carrington gets there), but in the meantime, we would at least be a .500-ish team and learn to play meaningful games. And you never know, maybe Kyshawn or Tre Johnson continue to improve enough to take over as primary option. That's what Jalen Johnson did, as did Devin Booker.

When was the last time we went to the ECF?

[Despy]

We needed an injured pg. CJ was killing the tank and neither cj or silver would have liked us beching him for bull reasons.

[payitforward]

You think Trae Young is taking us to the ECF?

[nate33]

I enjoyed it, but he waaay exaggerates his points.

Trae Young is NOT the star Haliburton suggests he is. His last really good season was 2021-2. The idea that he has it in him to make us a better team is pure fantasy.

I'm not suggesting he can't have some positive effects. But, he'll also have negative ones. Nor do I think he was acquired b/c of a mistaken idea that he can improve us significantly.

The biggest possible plus from this trade is if Trae plays well enough that he can be moved at next year's deadline for a better return than what we gave up for him (which was, essentially, Corey Kispert).

My main problem with Trae Young the player is that I think he is a floor raiser but not a ceiling raiser. He'll win us regular season games, but he won't win against the playoffs when you run into teams with the personnel and game plan to negate him offensively and attack him defensively. I just don't think you can build a team around Trae Young.

Having said that, I believe that management doesn't want to build around Trae either. I think they see Trae as an intermediate step. The idea is to have a true PG so that we don't have to force our guys to play outside of their comfort zone all the time. Kyshawn shouldn't be a primary pick-and-roll operator. He should be a secondary pick-and-roll guy operating against a defense that has already had to shift from side-to-side. Tre Johnson shouldn't have to be a playmaker and dish out 5 assists per game. He should be coming off of screens and attacking closeouts. Sarr should not be a 25% usage guy with a TS% of .567. He should be a 20% USG guy with a TS% of .620. Trae Young can facilitate this by taking over PG duties and setting other guys up. It will help our offense, at the cost of our defense.

What I would like to see happen is for us to draft Peterson or Flemings this summer and ultimately shift the PG role into their hands. But Peterson in particular is probably not ready for that as a rookie. So he can start off in a secondary role alongside Trae and learn to be a primary operator over time. I would probably refrain from extending Trae in this scenario. Then, in Summer 2027, we cut Trae loose and hopefully have a team that is nearly as good offensively while being MUCH better defensively.

And if Peterson is gone and someone like Dybantsa, Boozer or Wilson is best player available, we draft them, extend Trae and roll with Trae Young at PG for a longer period of time. We would still look to find someone to replace him Young eventually (or maybe Carrington gets there), but in the meantime, we would at least be a .500-ish team and learn to play meaningful games. And you never know, maybe Kyshawn or Tre Johnson continue to improve enough to take over as primary option. That's what Jalen Johnson did, as did Devin Booker.

When was the last time we went to the ECF?

That ECF run by Atlanta was a massive fluke. They got there because Ben Simmons imploded in real time on live TV. The Hawks never cracked 43 wins in any other season of Trae Young's career.

[dobrojim]

When was the last time we went to the ECF?

The year we lost to the Sonics in 1979.

The Bullets were a tough team in the 70s

Finals 4x

Lost to MIL 1971 (Jabbar, Oscar and Dandridge; Elvin Hayes joined the Bullets the next year)
Lost to GS 1975 (Rick Barry)
Beat SEA 1978 (Gus, DJ and Sikma)
Lost to SEA 1979

All 3 Finals series losses were sweeps.

[dobrojim]

You think Trae Young is taking us to the ECF?

Absolutely not. Not unless 2-3 of our kids seriously emerge as big time stars.

[TheBlackCzar]

You think Trae Young is taking us to the ECF?

He's done something not done in my lifetime...
So it's more possible than not......
Doesn't guarantee anything, but considering todays NBA scoring is much more important, we have a better shot today than we did yesterday....

ATL was 16th or 19th in defense last season.....
It's different sources, but that's the range they were in......

If our defense was that level, and he could elevate our offense to 13-15 range, we could be much improved next year.....

[payitforward]

Love the optimism!
Things sure have changed around here, huh?

[AFM]

Some of us are trying

[doclinkin]

And some of us are very trying.

[FAH1223]

When was the last time we went to the ECF?

The year we lost to the Sonics in 1979.

The Bullets were a tough team in the 70s

Finals 4x

Lost to MIL 1971 (Jabbar, Oscar and Dandridge; Elvin Hayes joined the Bullets the next year)
Lost to GS 1975 (Rick Barry)
Beat SEA 1978 (Gus, DJ and Sikma)
Lost to SEA 1979

All 3 Finals series losses were sweeps.

Bullets lost in 5 games to Seattle in 1979!

[Benjammin]

I was there at the game when they lost.

Sent from my Pixel 10 Pro XL using Tapatalk

[Kanyewest]

The flukey Trae Young.

Watch on YouTube

[JAR69]

I thought I would hate this less in the morning. I don't.

As a matter of asset management, it's fine. We bought low on an allstar. But an allstar that literally no one else wanted at his price. We essentially consolidated Corey's last 2-3 years into next season for Trae. (I don't know if they would have picked up his option.) The main cost is cap room for the offseason that might have been used to acquire draft picks. But that is speculation. Overall, neutral to OK.

But getting Trae brings serious risks. I still don't get how this works with the tank. People think we are going to shut him down for most of the season. But then how do we determine whether he works with youth and if he should get an extension? And Trae wants an extension, so he has an interest in playing. We are already on the edge or risking losing our pick. It is insanity to do anything to increase that risk.

I'm also worried about how this impacts player development. Sure, having Trae means more open shots for Tre, easier PNR baskets for Sarr, etc. But does that help them develop? It pads their stats, but I want them to learn how to shoot with someone in their face, hit a contested shot around the basket, develop counter-moves. That is what makes them better long-term. I also want the kids taking the last shot, doing things in pressure time. I expect everyone will defer to our allstar at the end of games. Development is hard, and achieved in part through trying, failing, improving, and trying again. Positive team results can help, and too much losing carries risk. But the point is individual development.

And how does acquiring Trae impact team chemistry and accountability? Just 48 hours ago we were talking about how the post-Nets loss team meeting and Keefe benching Cam for loafing on defense turned into chemistry and accountability. It would be great if Trae puts in great effort on defense going forward. But what if he doesn't? Benching Cam Whitmore is one thing. Is Keefe going to be able to hold Trae accountabie? If not, that sends a terrible message to the kids.

Perhaps my biggest worry is about the front office. This move seems to be, at least in part, about Travis Schlenk. Schlenk acquired Trae at the draft, trading Luka for him. That move has been rightfully panned. To rehabilitate his own reputation, Schelnk hopes Trae to turn into the superstar he thinks Trae still can be (he can't). Maybe that isn't what this is about. But if it is, it gives me deep concerns about the front office. I thought Winger and Dawkins wanted to do things the OKC way. They mostly have. This move seems to run counter to that on many levels. I don't get it.

This is 2026, Wiz have already leaked that Trae Young is facing injuries. They will keep him on the bench for an extended period of time and then he would be load managed. Hating on the trade because he would hurt the tank is not a realistic take. Especially when we were winning games and hurting the tank with CJ.

As for your other point about hurting the development of the other players, I would imagine that not having a pg on the roster would do much more to hurt their development. I've seen Wizards teams where the blind leads the blind. Jordan Crawford, Andray Blatche, Nick Young etc. It doesn't work. Trae Young's presence will make offense easier for everyone else to be successful. Thus building confidence and setting them on a productive future path.

To be honest, your entire post gives the impression of a person who doesn't like the deal and thus comes up with reasons not to like the deal. But you're kind of grasping at straws. Aspects of the deal that are more akin to being afraid of shadows than actual problems. Trae's going to hurt team chemistry and accountability. What's the basis for this? Trae's going to set a bad image for defense. Do we say the same for Jokic and Luka and Steph and any other top 10 offensive initiator?

You don't like the trade, but doesn't it make more sense to actually wait to see how the trade will turn out? If we're going to come up with reasons why the trade could go spectacularly wrong, I could list a hundred reasons. But if all these things do come to fruition then we just move on from him.

I would also say that having a true PG that can facilitate the offense and get players the ball in the spots they thrive will help the development of our youngsters more than McCollum who basically dribbles down and goes one on one, or Kispert who mostly is a player that doesn't help anyone. Those players are not making anyone better.

Fair enough - both good points. Seems like I got up on the wrong side of the bed. I still don't love the trade, but I'm generally an optimist, and I'm coming around some. Happy with the reports that he isn't likely to play much this season. And if he does play (this season or next), hopefully his faciliation and gravity will be good for the kids. I can still see his presence altering what has seemed to me to be good team chemistry, but you're right that we can wait and see.

[dobrojim]

When was the last time we went to the ECF?

The year we lost to the Sonics in 1979.

The Bullets were a tough team in the 70s

Finals 4x

Lost to MIL 1971 (Jabbar, Oscar and Dandridge; Elvin Hayes joined the Bullets the next year)
Lost to GS 1975 (Rick Barry)
Beat SEA 1978 (Gus, DJ and Sikma)
Lost to SEA 1979

All 3 Finals series losses were sweeps.

Bullets lost in 5 games to Seattle in 1979!

I didn't look it up. My bad.

[gambitx777]

Hot take. Have tre opt out and resign a full 5 year starting at 35 with team options. Garunteed for 2-3 seasons with team options at the last two. Will he take that, doubt it but that is probably still an over pay of he's at his best. Maybe he signs up for 3 years of garuntees money and a fresh yeah and an extra 50 mill garunteed. With 70 mill in non g money of hea playing well.

Sent from my SM-S926U1 using RealGM mobile app

[BobbyD78]

I’ve tried to talk myself into liking this deal. I can’t.

I’m hoping the deal is really about the tank. The timing seems right. They had to get rid of CJ. The team is/was getting better and risking the loss of the ‘26 pick.

But, Trae Young? He betrays Dawkins principles.

If the deal is to shut down Young and keep the pick, then I get it. But, I have a bad feeling that an extension is coming.

Regardless, I don’t think Trae helps the Wiz next season with the big picture. That big picture has included 2 way players, length, and integrating players into their motion offense.

Trae doesn’t fit. At all. He is a step back. Maybe a sugar rush at times. But, with Dawkins, I think we have all wanted player development and a path towards a Thunder-like team.

So far, Dawkins has been delivering. We have seen player development. Including better defense - both in the lane and on the perimeter (Bub, for instance, has become a better 1-on-1 defender). We have been doing things the right way with the re-build. And, the improved play is proof of that.

The offense struggles. We don’t have a true point guard. But, Trae will dominate the ball if the Wiz keep him. That’s likely the end of the motion offense, which everyone has been trained in. I don’t see how Trae and Keefe co-exist. Keefe has shown growth as a coach of young, developing players. But, who thinks that Trae will do anything but his own thing once he’s the starter. That will undermine a lot of what the Wizards have been doing.

If Trae starts, there is no defensive solution. He has been terrible. He’s the opposite of what the Wizards have been building for.

If Ted pulled the trigger, I’m pissed. If Dawkins pulled the trigger, then I hope Trae is just a brief flashing light on the road to building a championship contender.