2016 Offseason Thread -- Not (just) #KD2DC

[80sballboy]

http://www.csnmidatlantic.com/washington-wizards/arron-afflalo-perfect-wizards-backcourt

I've always like Afflalo but I'd say no if he wants more than 2-year deal at 31. Another one that depends on the price.

[jivelikenice]

Definite no to Afflalo. Look, he'd help but at 31 and at probably 10-11 mil per what's the upside? Chasing old players that have nowhere to go but down lacks any creativity. Its worth paying the premium for a younger player who can outperform his deal and still be marketable when the next jump occurs next year; healthier for the roster imo.

[Ruzious]

His production was pretty low last season, and his defensive numbers are bad. Now that he's on the wrong side of 30, he's a player I would stay away from.

[DCZards]

So we should have confidence that Scott Brooks will be calling the shots with regards to the roster, even though no one actually involved with the team has said or hinted this. Because he's being paid much more than Ernie.

And we should have confidence that Brooks will excel in this expanded GM-like role, even though it appears that his experience with OKC and before was limited to coaching, with no management or personnel authority beyond what a HC usually has.

An alternate explanation is that the Wizards had to overpay Brooks because they needed to make some move that could be spun as a positive for the fans, particularly planholders, after a disastrous season. And that Ernie is still calling the shots, because that's what he's said, with no contradiction from Ted or Brooks himself.

I seriously doubt that Scott Brooks would accept a job where he had little or no say into who is signed to play on the team he was about to coach.

As one of the most proven and sought after coaches this offseason, I'm sure Brooks used that leverage to get both a top dollar contract and a major voice in the shaping of the Zards roster. Why wouldn't he, especially when he knows that the team will need to add at least 6-7 players this offseason. Brooks will undoubtedly want the Zards to pursue players who fit with the offensive and defensive system he plans to run.

I agree that we don't know whether Brooks will excel as it relates to helping to select players, but there's no doubt, at least in my mind, that the Zards roster next season will have his fingerprints all over it. I don’t need Ted, EG or Brooks to publicly state this in order to believe it.

[gtn130]

lol Scott Brooks. People think he'd be much better than EG as a decision maker?

[BigA]

So we should have confidence that Scott Brooks will be calling the shots with regards to the roster, even though no one actually involved with the team has said or hinted this. Because he's being paid much more than Ernie.

And we should have confidence that Brooks will excel in this expanded GM-like role, even though it appears that his experience with OKC and before was limited to coaching, with no management or personnel authority beyond what a HC usually has.

An alternate explanation is that the Wizards had to overpay Brooks because they needed to make some move that could be spun as a positive for the fans, particularly planholders, after a disastrous season. And that Ernie is still calling the shots, because that's what he's said, with no contradiction from Ted or Brooks himself.

I seriously doubt that Scott Brooks would accept a job where he had little or no say into who is signed to play on the team he was about to coach.

As one of the most proven and sought after coaches this offseason, I'm sure Brooks used that leverage to get both a top dollar contract and a major voice in the shaping of the Zards roster. Why wouldn't he, especially when he knows that the team will need to add at least 6-7 players this offseason. Brooks will undoubtedly want the Zards to pursue players who fit with the offensive and defensive system he plans to run.

I agree that we don't know whether Brooks will excel as it relates to helping to select players, but there's no doubt, at least in my mind, that the Zards roster next season will have his fingerprints all over it. I don’t need Ted, EG or Brooks to publicly state this in order to believe it.

I'm not arguing that Brooks will have "little or no say." I expect that he'll have the same say that other high-priced, proven, head coaches have working with an established GM. As much as, say, Mike D'Antoni will have in Houston or as much as Flip Saunders had when he was with the Wizards.

Ernie will make sure that Brooks is okay with the FA signings they are planning, and Brooks will be involved in developing whatever strategy there is. What are Plan B and Plan C when Durant turns them down? Brooks will be central to any pitch they make to Durant, if they are able to get a meeting.

Brooks and Ernie along with the coaching and FO staffs are all there when they are bringing in guys to work out, and Brooks will be involved with prioritizing who they might take if they decide to buy/trade back into the draft.

But the current public narrative, which includes Brooks being hired, is that the Wizards have a strong young core that just needs to develop a bit more to contend, and the right FA signing(s) will put them over. In taking the job, Brooks himself must have bought into that. So Brooks is not going to be pushing through any major changes in direction such as a S&T with Beal. Brooks is not going to be the moving force in determining whether they get a 2016 draft pick and how they do it. He'll have input, and Ernie will make sure they are on the same page, but it will be Ernie's page.

So that's more than "little or no say," but it's far from a Thibodeau or Stan Van Gundy set up where the GM and FO actually report to the HC/VP for Basketball Operations.

[pcbothwel]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DWolfsonKSTP/status/745644141611147264[/tweet]

[AFM]

Man I can't root for Noah after seeing Nene take his virginity

[80sballboy]

lol Scott Brooks. People think he'd be much better than EG as a decision maker?

He's not the GM, but he should have some input. And sure, I'd probably rather have Dan Grunfeld make the decisions than Ernie.

[80sballboy]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/DWolfsonKSTP/status/745644141611147264[/tweet]

Not shocking that they are interested. How much does he have left in the tank and he appears less durable than Nene.

http://www.bulletsforever.com/2016/6/22/12005064/joakim-noah-washington-wizards-nba-free-agency-2016

[pcbothwel]

Man I can't root for Noah after seeing Nene take his virginity

LOL. i hear ya, but having guys like Noah and Otto get points of cutting to the basket and Offensive rebounds really improves a team over the course of the season. Having your starting and backup Center run the floor creates a lot of easy buckets.

[stevemcqueen1]

I would be pleased if we signed Noah. I think we need characters like him in the locker room.

If we signed him I would be hesitant to trade Gortat though. Gortat's durability would be key when our other center is so injury prone.

[Dat2U]

You could do a lot worse than Noah. I'd rather go younger at backup C but Noah when healthy is a difference maker. He wasn't healthy at all last season so I would take his stats with a grain of salt.

[gtn130]

Trading for Rolo would have been nice

[payitforward]

You listed 5 different points and mentioned them as "Not Happening" or unsure/unlikely. But thats not close to true:

1) Whiteside: The first and hardest step, but find me a team thats a better/likely fit...really
2) Gortat for Zeller: Why not? Charlotte has cap space to absorb Gortats salary.
3) Beal: Beal's cap hold IS 14.8M, you act like this is not certain. We can Max him after we've made other moves.
4) Sato: He is coming over. Im calling a guarantee. KD2DC is "speculation", Sato to DC is going to happen
5) Deng: Same as Whiteside. How many playoff teams can offer him 2/22M+ and a starting spot.

#1 -- Ummm, if "unsure/unlikely" is "not close to true" on this one, then I suppose you'd like to put a little money on at even odds on Whiteside becoming a Wizard, right? Name the figure, please; I'll take it all. Oh... you don't want to? Ok, ok.

#2 -- You want to trade Gortat for Zeller straight up? We get Zeller and cap space; they get Gortat. If that's a good trade for us, why is it not a bad trade for Charlotte? If it's a bad trade for Charlotte, why do they do it? Oh, and am I right: this is only something we do once we have Whiteside posing in a Wizards jersey, right?

#3 is correct -- I was being a little dense.

#4 I hope you are right, and he does come over. Now that you've guaranteed it, my mind is eased about it -- I know you have inside sources. Still, lets assume he does: are you also guaranteeing any particular level of NBA productivity for Satoransky.

#5 -- "playoff team?" Did you miss the recent NBA season? Moreover, Deng -- playing out of position at the 4 last year -- didn't have a particularly good season. Even if you say he did, the numbers say he didn't. So, I don't want to give him $11m to start at the 4. But, you do, and you might be right that once again Ernie can successfully overpay a veteran who is in his last years in the league.

My god man. you dont quite, and even fire back with condescension.

Whiteside : You said "signing Whiteside (which isn't going to happen)". i simply countered and said that "Not Going Happen" is an overly pessimistic stance and I laid why the Wiz would be in the running. No need to act like a child.
I'd say the odds of Wiz being able to sign Whiteside are about 25-30%, IF THEY WANT TO. We may not know as the Wiz could elect no to pursue him. Whiteside has a good bit of risk and 4/96M is a huge gamble.

Gortat for Zeller: What the hell kind of argument is "Team X wouldn't do a trade, because its good for Team Y". There is such a thing as a mutually beneficial trade. The reason we do it is to save money and get a good fit to backup Whiteside. He can also play a little PF, which Gortat cant. Charlotte does it because Gortat has proven to be a top 10-12 starting C.

Satoransky: More condescension huh? How about this, Id put the odds at 90%. We have his rights. We want him. He wants to play in the NBA. He'll make twice as much here as Europe...

Deng: "Deng -- playing out of position at the 4 last year -- didn't have a particularly good season. Even if you say he did, the numbers say he didn't."
Huh?!?. Per possession, Deng Turned it over less, rebounded more, and played better defense than he had anytime recently.
BPM, VORP, TS, WS/48 all show a player who had one of his best years of his career.

Please show me how he had a bad season.

Im not sure what your deal is man.

Apologies -- no point in my trying to disprove what are after all only opinions by you or any of us. I'll be delighted if Sato comes over, & I certainly agree that Whiteside is a risk. I don't see why we'd have such a high likelihood of signing him, however. No way to come to closure on that, however.

As for the rest, I'll leave it alone. I didn't find your picture realistic, but maybe that's not to the point.

[pineappleheadindc]

Basically, this argument applies for nearly every free agent. Everybody has the potential to be bid up to a level where they're more expensive than they're worth. This free agency will be about trying to outguess the market and lock in players quickly at reasonable deals, or being patient and waiting for decent guys to slip through the cracks.

It's not really possible to target any particular free agent at this time. We need to target a whole bunch of them, but be willing to say no to any contract that's too expensive.

So basically, this all plays into EG's strengths, eh?

[Ruzious]

So we should have confidence that Scott Brooks will be calling the shots with regards to the roster, even though no one actually involved with the team has said or hinted this. Because he's being paid much more than Ernie.

And we should have confidence that Brooks will excel in this expanded GM-like role, even though it appears that his experience with OKC and before was limited to coaching, with no management or personnel authority beyond what a HC usually has.

An alternate explanation is that the Wizards had to overpay Brooks because they needed to make some move that could be spun as a positive for the fans, particularly planholders, after a disastrous season. And that Ernie is still calling the shots, because that's what he's said, with no contradiction from Ted or Brooks himself.

I seriously doubt that Scott Brooks would accept a job where he had little or no say into who is signed to play on the team he was about to coach.

As one of the most proven and sought after coaches this offseason, I'm sure Brooks used that leverage to get both a top dollar contract and a major voice in the shaping of the Zards roster. Why wouldn't he, especially when he knows that the team will need to add at least 6-7 players this offseason. Brooks will undoubtedly want the Zards to pursue players who fit with the offensive and defensive system he plans to run.

I agree that we don't know whether Brooks will excel as it relates to helping to select players, but there's no doubt, at least in my mind, that the Zards roster next season will have his fingerprints all over it. I don’t need Ted, EG or Brooks to publicly state this in order to believe it.

I'm not arguing that Brooks will have "little or no say." I expect that he'll have the same say that other high-priced, proven, head coaches have working with an established GM. As much as, say, Mike D'Antoni will have in Houston or as much as Flip Saunders had when he was with the Wizards.

Ernie will make sure that Brooks is okay with the FA signings they are planning, and Brooks will be involved in developing whatever strategy there is. What are Plan B and Plan C when Durant turns them down? Brooks will be central to any pitch they make to Durant, if they are able to get a meeting.

Brooks and Ernie along with the coaching and FO staffs are all there when they are bringing in guys to work out, and Brooks will be involved with prioritizing who they might take if they decide to buy/trade back into the draft.

But the current public narrative, which includes Brooks being hired, is that the Wizards have a strong young core that just needs to develop a bit more to contend, and the right FA signing(s) will put them over. In taking the job, Brooks himself must have bought into that. So Brooks is not going to be pushing through any major changes in direction such as a S&T with Beal. Brooks is not going to be the moving force in determining whether they get a 2016 draft pick and how they do it. He'll have input, and Ernie will make sure they are on the same page, but it will be Ernie's page.

So that's more than "little or no say," but it's far from a Thibodeau or Stan Van Gundy set up where the GM and FO actually report to the HC/VP for Basketball Operations.

Good points. From Brooks' comments, it seems clear that he's going to be nothing more than a status quo guy who's not looking to make major changes. He's got his money. Expectations aren't high. Why rock the boat?

[Wizardspride]

I seriously doubt that Scott Brooks would accept a job where he had little or no say into who is signed to play on the team he was about to coach.

As one of the most proven and sought after coaches this offseason, I'm sure Brooks used that leverage to get both a top dollar contract and a major voice in the shaping of the Zards roster. Why wouldn't he, especially when he knows that the team will need to add at least 6-7 players this offseason. Brooks will undoubtedly want the Zards to pursue players who fit with the offensive and defensive system he plans to run.

I agree that we don't know whether Brooks will excel as it relates to helping to select players, but there's no doubt, at least in my mind, that the Zards roster next season will have his fingerprints all over it. I don’t need Ted, EG or Brooks to publicly state this in order to believe it.

I'm not arguing that Brooks will have "little or no say." I expect that he'll have the same say that other high-priced, proven, head coaches have working with an established GM. As much as, say, Mike D'Antoni will have in Houston or as much as Flip Saunders had when he was with the Wizards.

Ernie will make sure that Brooks is okay with the FA signings they are planning, and Brooks will be involved in developing whatever strategy there is. What are Plan B and Plan C when Durant turns them down? Brooks will be central to any pitch they make to Durant, if they are able to get a meeting.

Brooks and Ernie along with the coaching and FO staffs are all there when they are bringing in guys to work out, and Brooks will be involved with prioritizing who they might take if they decide to buy/trade back into the draft.

But the current public narrative, which includes Brooks being hired, is that the Wizards have a strong young core that just needs to develop a bit more to contend, and the right FA signing(s) will put them over. In taking the job, Brooks himself must have bought into that. So Brooks is not going to be pushing through any major changes in direction such as a S&T with Beal. Brooks is not going to be the moving force in determining whether they get a 2016 draft pick and how they do it. He'll have input, and Ernie will make sure they are on the same page, but it will be Ernie's page.

So that's more than "little or no say," but it's far from a Thibodeau or Stan Van Gundy set up where the GM and FO actually report to the HC/VP for Basketball Operations.

Good points. From Brooks' comments, it seems clear that he's going to be nothing more than a status quo guy who's not looking to make major changes. He's got his money. Expectations aren't high. Why rock the boat?

You're reading an awful lot into Brooks' comments.

[stevemcqueen1]

Is there a consensus opinion on here about Jared Sullinger? His value? Would we as fans support going after him as an RFA?

[DCZards]

I seriously doubt that Scott Brooks would accept a job where he had little or no say into who is signed to play on the team he was about to coach.

As one of the most proven and sought after coaches this offseason, I'm sure Brooks used that leverage to get both a top dollar contract and a major voice in the shaping of the Zards roster. Why wouldn't he, especially when he knows that the team will need to add at least 6-7 players this offseason. Brooks will undoubtedly want the Zards to pursue players who fit with the offensive and defensive system he plans to run.

I agree that we don't know whether Brooks will excel as it relates to helping to select players, but there's no doubt, at least in my mind, that the Zards roster next season will have his fingerprints all over it. I don’t need Ted, EG or Brooks to publicly state this in order to believe it.

I'm not arguing that Brooks will have "little or no say." I expect that he'll have the same say that other high-priced, proven, head coaches have working with an established GM. As much as, say, Mike D'Antoni will have in Houston or as much as Flip Saunders had when he was with the Wizards.

Ernie will make sure that Brooks is okay with the FA signings they are planning, and Brooks will be involved in developing whatever strategy there is. What are Plan B and Plan C when Durant turns them down? Brooks will be central to any pitch they make to Durant, if they are able to get a meeting.

Brooks and Ernie along with the coaching and FO staffs are all there when they are bringing in guys to work out, and Brooks will be involved with prioritizing who they might take if they decide to buy/trade back into the draft.

But the current public narrative, which includes Brooks being hired, is that the Wizards have a strong young core that just needs to develop a bit more to contend, and the right FA signing(s) will put them over. In taking the job, Brooks himself must have bought into that. So Brooks is not going to be pushing through any major changes in direction such as a S&T with Beal. Brooks is not going to be the moving force in determining whether they get a 2016 draft pick and how they do it. He'll have input, and Ernie will make sure they are on the same page, but it will be Ernie's page.

So that's more than "little or no say," but it's far from a Thibodeau or Stan Van Gundy set up where the GM and FO actually report to the HC/VP for Basketball Operations.

Good points. From Brooks' comments, it seems clear that he's going to be nothing more than a status quo guy who's not looking to make major changes. He's got his money. Expectations aren't high. Why rock the boat?

Exactly what comments by Brooks are you talking about? Anything said publicly shouldn't be taken at face value.