Martell Webster has back surgery -- OUT 3-5 months

Post #61 » by **Ruzious** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 12:44 pm

Dat2U wrote:
nate33 wrote:I still don't hold the Webster signing against EG. At the time, I don't think it was foreseeable that Ariza would become such a ridiculously good shooter. We were essentially platooning Webster and Ariza based on our need for offense or defense. Both guys were pretty critical. Yeah, in hindsight, Webster looks pretty expendable, but that wasn't the case when he signed his contract.

Completely disagree. Ariza's performance didn't need to be forseeable. The fact you had Ariza under contract and just spent a 3rd pick on another SF should have been enough reason not to sign Webster to a MLE sized contract for 4 years.

Giving EG a pass because you would have done the same thing... lol. Lots of people strongly argued against his resigning last offseason.

Yup, and one of the reasons was because he ended that season injured.

JWizmentality · Post #62 » by **JWizmentality** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:14 pm

Jesus f*cking Christ again?!?!? Wish Webster the best but f*ck me seriously?!?! I still say let Ariza walk and throw Otto in there. Time to find out if Ernie f*cked up again.

Post #63 » by **nate33** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:17 pm

Ruzious wrote:Gee, what a shocker that Webster has a serious back problem. We never knew that before Ernie extended him, except that we did. It was obvious. And yet, here we are,

To be fair, EG put the injury clause in his contract specifically because of the back issues.

We will just have to wait and see how it goes. If the surgery is a success and Webster only misses the first month of the season, then it's no big deal. If the surgery doesn't fix it and Webster misses a ton of games, then we void his contract a year early.

I just wish Randy had sat Webster for more than 4 games last season. Instead of watching Webster limp around for 20 games, Porter could have gotten more burn and we could be 20 games closer to having the flexibility to void Webster's final year.

Post #64 » by **nate33** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:21 pm

Dat2U wrote:Completely disagree. Ariza's performance didn't need to be forseeable. The fact you had Ariza under contract and just spent a 3rd pick on another SF should have been enough reason not to sign Webster to a MLE sized contract for 4 years.

Giving EG a pass because you would have done the same thing... lol. Lots of people strongly argued against his resigning last offseason.

Yes, you were against resigning him. You certainly have the right to complain about it and I don't have any problem with it.

I done see why you are loling at me though. I'm just being consistent. Maybe I'm wrong, but at least I'm not a hypocrite. I'm not going to bash EG for something based on 20/20 hindsight.

dckingsfan · Post #65 » by **dckingsfan** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 1:43 pm

Well, still guessing that Webster misses more than 1/2 the season (and probably won't be worth much). Better if he missed the entire season and really got himself where he needs to be. Then we might get one serviceable season from him - er - at that rate he is getting paid $10M per season - best not to think about that, it will drive you crazy :crazy:

Good news is he almost certainly be off the books after the 15-16 season. He is almost certainly untradeable until next year as an expiring.

Post #66 » by **LyricalRico** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:07 pm

nate33 wrote:I just wish Randy had sat Webster for more than 4 games last season. Instead of watching Webster limp around for 20 games, Porter could have gotten more burn and we could be 20 games closer to having the flexibility to void Webster's final year.

This is a great point. An injured Webster makes the refusal to play Porter even more of an issue.

payitforward · Post #67 » by **payitforward** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:08 pm

nate33 wrote:I still don't hold the Webster signing against EG. At the time, I don't think it was foreseeable that Ariza would become such a ridiculously good shooter. We were essentially platooning Webster and Ariza based on our need for offense or defense. Both guys were pretty critical. Yeah, in hindsight, Webster looks pretty expendable, but that wasn't the case when he signed his contract.

Webster was terrific his first year with us. Of course we wanted to re-sign him!

Given that he backed up both the 2 and the 3, he was by no means "expendable."

Not in retrospect either. Martell played @2200 minutes for us in 2013-14. Off the bench! That was the 5th most minutes of anyone on the team. And, even though his productivity went down as the season progressed (because of his creaky back, we assume), overall he was a very productive player.

As to the $$ we paid him, I didn't see any problem with that either. You can argue we should have signed him for 3 instead of 4 years -- after all, his back issues were already a known factor -- but... big deal. It was a risk, but not such a big one.

Hope he's back soon.

payitforward · Post #68 » by **payitforward** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 2:18 pm

LyricalRico wrote:
nate33 wrote:I just wish Randy had sat Webster for more than 4 games last season. Instead of watching Webster limp around for 20 games, Porter could have gotten more burn and we could be 20 games closer to having the flexibility to void Webster's final year.

This is a great point. An injured Webster makes the refusal to play Porter even more of an issue.

Meh... More hindsight. And I don't want to void Martell's last year! I want him to be healthy and play as he's shown he can.

Now... maybe if he'd played less he would have recovered w/o surgery? But, we don't know that.

Keep in mind that "win now" was the big Wizards mantra last year. We weren't putting any weight on rookie shoulders!

hands11 · Post #69 » by **hands11** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 7:00 pm

LyricalRico wrote:
nate33 wrote:I just wish Randy had sat Webster for more than 4 games last season. Instead of watching Webster limp around for 20 games, Porter could have gotten more burn and we could be 20 games closer to having the flexibility to void Webster's final year.

This is a great point. An injured Webster makes the refusal to play Porter even more of an issue.

Yeah. I really wanted Randy to work Otto into the rotation. I remember working up a rotation that would have fit him in.

When he finally got some minutes in April he looked like he had adjusted. I wanted him as a secret weapon going into the playoffs.

So where are these Webster contract details.

All I have found is he has 3 yrs with the forth a option.

http://www.spotrac.com/nba/washington-w ... l-webster/
http://hoopshype.com/salaries/washington.htm
http://data.shamsports.com/content/page ... izards.jsp

Martell Webster signed a 4 year / $21.99 million contract with the Washington Wizards, including $16,145,250 guaranteed, and an annual average salary of $5,497,625.

That works out to 3/5.4M

Considering they got his first year of production on a sweet discount 1.6M, I think that works out pretty awesome over 4 years. 4/4.4M

hands11 · Post #70 » by **hands11** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 7:13 pm

thinker07 wrote:This is a really WOW. It means that IF Gortat and Ariza both resign we won't have a single proven reserve wing. This would seem to guarantee that the Wiz will have to sign a veteran wing. Otherwise if Ariza or Beal get hurt we'd be looking at Otto or Rice as starters and the other one as the only wing backup.

I had that as their plan so this news means nothing has change in my book.

To Nates comment about the only thing being a set back is them not being able to trade him this summer...well I never saw that happening anyway. Before the trade deadline was my target if they wanted to move him. I always had him penciled in for the roster next year.

Signing him was the right move when they did it and I fully supported the idea.

I feel bad for Webster that this has cropped up again. My brother struggles with his back. He is always stretching and doing exercises to keep himself right. Its a bummer thing to have to deal with but he is healthy and in shape so he can mostly deal with it. Mostly that is. He get uncomfortable sitting for to long and he leg will go numb, etc.

FAH1223 · Post #71 » by **FAH1223** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 7:39 pm

Let's just hope Nene can not be killed in the FIBA World Cup due to injury and he comes in and balls out in the first two months of the season.

I'd love to trade Webster with Nene for more front court help!

queridiculo · Post #72 » by **queridiculo** » Sat Jun 28, 2014 8:39 pm

Hidden Eye wrote:
queridiculo wrote:
Hidden Eye wrote:Not surprised by this when he was playing SF just sped up the process. Not sure if Otto can play the 2 so just start Rice.

Huh?

Webster had no business playing SF just adds more stress. Otto and Rice Jr time to play but Temple plays better D and has better ballhandling. You can't have it both ways. 2 Unit gotta get juiced up next season if the Wiz wanna get more tv time.

So you're arguing that Webster shouldn't be playing his natural position? Ok then...

pcbothwel · Post #73 » by **pcbothwel** » Sun Jun 29, 2014 4:41 pm

i still think this could work out. Webster misses 2/3rds of the season and Rice/Porter get some burn. Webster comes back for the last 25-30 games while still missing a game here and there so he doesn't get re-injured. He contributes as key bench player for final run/playoffs.

He is then only 5-6 games away from his last year being non-guaranteed(which he'll most definitely miss). 3/16M is not bad assuming he contributes to the playoff run and doesn't fall apart the following year...

Post #74 » by **Ruzious** » Sun Jun 29, 2014 4:51 pm

pcbothwel wrote:i still think this could work out. Webster misses 2/3rds of the season and Rice/Porter get some burn. Webster comes back for the last 25-30 games while still missing a game here and there so he doesn't get re-injured. He contributes as key bench player for final run/playoffs.

He is then only 5-6 games away from his last year being non-guaranteed(which he'll most definitely miss). 3/16M is not bad assuming he contributes to the playoff run and doesn't fall apart the following year...

After so many years getting the same back problems, at some point there's a permanent toll and you don't get back that step you lost. Think of it like the cat buried in "Pet Semetary". The first time it came back, it still had some cat skills, but after the 2nd and 3rd times... eh, a bit sketchy, sketchier still, then.....

Kanyewest · Post #75 » by **Kanyewest** » Sun Jun 29, 2014 5:55 pm

Dat2U wrote:
nate33 wrote:I still don't hold the Webster signing against EG. At the time, I don't think it was foreseeable that Ariza would become such a ridiculously good shooter. We were essentially platooning Webster and Ariza based on our need for offense or defense. Both guys were pretty critical. Yeah, in hindsight, Webster looks pretty expendable, but that wasn't the case when he signed his contract.

Completely disagree. Ariza's performance didn't need to be forseeable. The fact you had Ariza under contract and just spent a 3rd pick on another SF should have been enough reason not to sign Webster to a MLE sized contract for 4 years.

Giving EG a pass because you would have done the same thing... lol. Lots of people strongly argued against his resigning last offseason.

Well I disagree that the addition of Porter made Webster expendable. Otto Porter at this point doesn't fit in with Wall's drive and kick strategy as Porter is only a 19% 3 point shooter from 3. I would be interested to see what other free agency options were available, Mike Dunleavy was out there but I believe he ended up making the same amount of money as Webster. Dorrell Wright may have been a better value but didn't even get that many minutes with Portland in the postseason.

Post #76 » by **nate33** » Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:41 pm

I meant that Ariza's improvement in shooting made Webster redundant. We no longer needed to platoon the two. We could just play Ariza.

Kanyewest · Post #77 » by **Kanyewest** » Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:43 pm

nate33 wrote:I meant that Ariza's improvement in shooting made Webster redundant. We no longer needed to platoon the two. We could just play Ariza.

Yup. That's the key. Although based on Ariza's current suitors I wonder if he gets overpaid and whether it makes sense to bring Ariza back.

The Rockets, Mavericks, Pistons, Clippers and Suns are all expected to pursue Ariza once free agency opens on July 1, according to sources.

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/stor ... les-lakers

rockymac52 · Post #78 » by **rockymac52** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:26 pm

A lot of hoopla is being made of Webster's 4th year 180 games trigger. Let me clarify. The reported 180 games in the preceding 3 years thing is correct, HOWEVER, if it doesn't reach that threshold, he's still partially guaranteed in that 4th year - for $2.5 million to be exact. So really not that big of a savings if he misses enough games and we need to clear cap space in his 4th year.

Also, someone (maybe Nate?) said Ernie put this provision into the contract specifically because of Webster's back. Maybe that was his reasoning, but if that's the case, he went about it incredibly poorly. There is a contract provision known as Exhibit 3 which deals with Prior Injuries. It allows the team to specify a certain prior injury (in this case, Martell's back - I'm not a doctor so I can't get any more specific than that), and if that player re-aggravates that specific injury, then the team is allowed to waive the player without having to pay him another dollar. That contract exhibit exists solely for situations like these, and yet Ernie didn't use it. I believe Martell's agent is Dan Fegan. If so, kudos to Fegan for out-negotiating Ernie in this regard.

dckingsfan · Post #79 » by **dckingsfan** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:41 pm

Agents=28
EG=0

fishercob · Post #80 » by **fishercob** » Mon Jun 30, 2014 9:45 pm

rockymac52 wrote:A lot of hoopla is being made of Webster's 4th year 180 games trigger. Let me clarify. The reported 180 games in the preceding 3 years thing is correct, HOWEVER, if it doesn't reach that threshold, he's still partially guaranteed in that 4th year - for $2.5 million to be exact. So really not that big of a savings if he misses enough games and we need to clear cap space in his 4th year.

Also, someone (maybe Nate?) said Ernie put this provision into the contract specifically because of Webster's back. Maybe that was his reasoning, but if that's the case, he went about it incredibly poorly. There is a contract provision known as Exhibit 3 which deals with Prior Injuries. It allows the team to specify a certain prior injury (in this case, Martell's back - I'm not a doctor so I can't get any more specific than that), and if that player re-aggravates that specific injury, then the team is allowed to waive the player without having to pay him another dollar. That contract exhibit exists solely for situations like these, and yet Ernie didn't use it. I believe Martell's agent is Dan Fegan. If so, kudos to Fegan for out-negotiating Ernie in this regard.

Where did you see the $2.5M part? ShamSports says the final year is fully unguaranteed if certain conditions are met.