2024 Draft Thread - Part II

[NatP4]

The fanbase has been overstating the length of this rebuild IMO. They intentionally tank for one more year and most likely have a fairly competitive roster in 2025/2026.

Will add two top 5 drafted players and atleast two more 1st round drafted players (via a Kuzma trade). The 2025 pick will be an instant impact player: Traore/Flagg/Bailey/Harper.

I’m manifesting a Topic&Traore backcourt.

[The Consiglieri]

By the time the Wiz are competitive Avdija, Kuzma and Kispert will be traded. We should not be making drafting decisions based on their presence on the roster.

While I agree that the Zards shouldn’t be making draft decisions based on the current roster, I totally disagree that Deni will (or should be) traded. Deni is 23 yrs old and on a great trajectory. Unless the Zards get a trade offer that they simply can’t refuse, I’m keeping Deni around for the long haul. I’d hope that the Zards will have a quality team in 3-4 years, at which time Deni will still only be 26 or 27 yrs old…and in his prime. Why would the Zards and we Zards’ fans not want that to happen?

Lastly, we should point out that the WIzards are, to put it mildly, not good. We had the second worst record in the league. We are enganging an OKC esque rebuild without having a PG or Russell Westbrook or Carmelo Anthony to jump start the process. There is no SGA on this roster. And look at how long the OKC rebuild took

Did it really take OKC a long time to rebuild? Here’ how many wins OKC has had in the last 4 seasons.

2020-21 — 22 wins
2021-22 — 24 wins
2022-23 — 40 wins
2023-24 — 57 wins

Three years from 22 wins to being the top team in the western conference with 57 wins. That’s not a long time.

Of course, it helps to have great drafts and a superstar like SGA

I am with Prime on this. You're forgetting two key things with OKC:
#1 they maximized vet trades on their roster. Like, in general, they would flip Beal situations early rather than late.
#2 they took advantage of a different league valuation of future firsts to swindle multiple teams for a true golden loom of future picks to such an extent that they almost don't know how to efficiently allocate the draft capital they have had.
#3 They imploded and rebuilt during the era of back to back to back great draft classes. We imploded during the worst draft class in eons.

We don't have those advantages.

I prefer to use the Wizards model from 2009-2014 because they also completely butchered their early rebuild, not due to keeping a superstar too long, but also by gifting the superstar a near untradable contract AND also butchering the first major piece of the rebuild (the '09 draft pick trade for Mike Miller and Foye vs us taking Johnny Davis.

We won the '10 lottery, did well enough in the '11, '12 and '13 lotteries, and in spite of all that, it still took us five years to become competitive for a playoff spot.

That team managed to get an elite PG prospect in '10, and an elite 2 in '12, and a high floor solid 3 in '13, didn't matter, us butchering '09, and '11 set us behind the 8 ball, add in that our bring out your dead contract strategy for picks, and our use of said picks on nothing but busts in '10 and '11 also hurt.

Regardless the analogy while imperfect holds: In '09 we screwed up, we also screwed up picks, and got lucky with some picks, and it still took 5 years.

This time we're playing in a much worse, much tougher lottery environment where you're more likely to get hosed by orders of magnitude than 15 years ago, were also working with a much worse draft in '24, than we had in '10, and we are also playing in a league that values firsts more than it once did 15 years ago.

So he's right, in my view anyway, it's gonna take a long time. This is why I suggested a month or two ago we think seriously about if, how and when a Deni should be traded. He's on a dream of a contract which makes him valuable to us, and even more valuable to competitive teams that can't acquire players like him at that cheap of a salary cost. On the positive side, he'll give us a cheap, cost controlled asset at a position of value for another 4 years, on the negative side, we should expect to suck, big time, for at least 3 of those 4 years turning those great seasons into mostly empty calories unless he helps develop prospects taken in '23, '24, '25 and '26 etc.

So would I trade him? Depends. What could we get for him at the '25 and '26 deadlines? If we get real, tangible assets, or huge draft capital value? I'd be in. If not, I'd probably sit tight and wait. Its interesting, but I do agree with prime that in a lot of ways, Deni doesn't make a lot of sense long term because the era of cheap cost control will likely match a period of totally ineffectual, craptacular basketball for us.

[CntOutSmrtCrazy]

By the time the Wiz are competitive Avdija, Kuzma and Kispert will be traded. We should not be making drafting decisions based on their presence on the roster. We'll see what Wiz leadership does but imo, a rebuild doesn't start unitl you have at least 1 player with elite potential. We curently don't have one and their are none in this draft. So the earliest we could get one is next year. If we do his prime would be 6+ years from now (he'd be competitive 3 years from now at best). I have no problem drafting a PG or a Center, but only if we genuinely believe they are the best prospect on the board. Not drafting someone because we have already drafted role players who play the same position doesn't make sense.

Not to mention the fact that the NBA is moving to position-less basketball. You can say that BC will not be a 2, but it's a distinction without importance because BC will be able to guard 2's or 1's or 3's or 4's. If you could create your ideal team, everyone would be able to switch 1-4 if not 1-5. From an offensive perspective, the league has moved to a dominant guard/3 point shooters/big man dynamic. And even teams with more ball movement, have guys that can shoot the 3, put the ball on the floor and create (albeit to different degrees) and a big. All that to say, a lineup next year of BC, Avdija, Kuzma, Kispert and Bagley. Is it a completely acceptable lineup. Even if we drafted a pg, would he be ball dominant (i.e. take the ball out of Avdija's, Kuzma's, BC's hands)?

Lastly, we should point out that the WIzards are, to put it mildly, not good. We had the second worst record in the league. We are enganging an OKC esque rebuild without having a PG or Russell Westbrook or Carmelo Anthony to jump start the process. There is no SGA on this roster. And look at how long the OKC rebuild took. Assuming we are committed to the rebuild, the future roster that is competitive will be vastly different than the one we have today. That's not to say that the players on this team are bad. Porzingis is going to the Finals. Caldwell-Pope just won last year. Gafford, looks to be on his way to the finals. Avdija, Kuzma and Kispert are all talented enough to be major contributors on championship rosters.

The goal should be to maximize the value of the players you draft. If we had a star and there was a pathway to building a contender keeping these guys, then I'd be the first one to say we should keep them. But we don't. And these guys have much more value on a contending team seeking the extra "edge."

It's utterly ludicrous to argue that Avdija should be traded because he is not on the team's timeline. The guy just turned 23.

I've seen this sentiment more than once, and I think part of it is just a reflexive and perhaps subliminal apprehensiveness about young players getting expensive once their rookie contracts are up. An elite role player like Deni is exactly the type of guy who might get paid a whole lot on the market and suddenly screw up the team's cap situation, sort of like what happened with Otto Porter. But the important thing to remember here is that this WILL NOT HAPPEN with Deni. Deni is already locked into an ultra cheap contract for FOUR MORE YEARS. Take a moment to let that sink in. Four years is an eternity in the NBA, and also happens to be the same length as a rookie contract.

Look at it this way. If we drafted, say, Tristan da Silva in June, and he turned out to be an elite role player in his rookie year, posting 19, 9 and 4 with good defense, would we immediately trade him for fear that he isn't on our timeline? Of course not! He would be considered a core piece for the future. So why would you trade Deni?

Because prime has always had this weird schtick with Avdija. Always popped up after some bad game to say how he "just doesn't see it" with him. At the same time he would say he should trade him when he played well because he'd never live up to his potential here. My guess is he doesn't like Deni, and was a Rui dude for some reason I'll never understand.

prime, the silence was deafening last season from you after Deni blossomed. We missed your selective posts.

Anyone that doesn't see Deni as a piece of the rebuild is blinded by bias. He most certainly is a starting caliber player on a championship team, no doubt about it.

[prime1time]

Makes perfect sense, prime. The key point is clearly expressed at the end: "maximize the value of the players you draft."

Which means, essentially, *always* draft the best player available. Never do otherwise. & that's true no matter who is already on your roster come draft night. Trades are best used to balance positional strength on your team. Don't use the draft to do that! Not if it means passing on the bpa.

I'd have to really think hard about to come up with scenarios where I wouldn't draft the highest player on the draft board. Tbh, in most scenarios the better move would be to trade with another team who actually needs said player. Imo, the question isn't whether we should draft who's left between Risacher or Sarr but rather should we stay where we are or trade back. I think there's clear separation between those two players.

As a blanket statement, I'm skeptical. Seems to me there are many variables that would/ought to
be considered before consummating such a deal starting with what is the trading partner willing
to give up. Doesn't every team in fact need the best player(s) they can draft?

Since this convo has nothing to do with the Wiz as currently constructed or this current draft I'm going to exit this convo lol.

[payitforward]

Makes perfect sense, prime. The key point is clearly expressed at the end: "maximize the value of the players you draft."

Which means, essentially, *always* draft the best player available. Never do otherwise. & that's true no matter who is already on your roster come draft night. Trades are best used to balance positional strength on your team. Don't use the draft to do that! Not if it means passing on the bpa.

I'd have to really think hard about to come up with scenarios where I wouldn't draft the highest player on the draft board. Tbh, in most scenarios the better move would be to trade with another team who actually needs said player. Imo, the question isn't whether we should draft who's left between Risacher or Sarr but rather should we stay where we are or trade back. I think there's clear separation between those two players.

TBH, I have no take at all on how good either of these two players will wind up being.

I also have no patience with the POV that the talent in this draft is as if there were no top 3-5 players; it's as if you're starting w/ 5 or 6.

To prove what hooey that is, all you have to do is page through a decade or so of drafts & choose the ones where the best player that year went in the top 3. Happens way less than half the time.

[prime1time]

The fanbase has been overstating the length of this rebuild IMO. They intentionally tank for one more year and most likely have a fairly competitive roster in 2025/2026.

Will add two top 5 drafted players and atleast two more 1st round drafted players (via a Kuzma trade). The 2025 pick will be an instant impact player: Traore/Flagg/Bailey/Harper.

I’m manifesting a Topic&Traore backcourt.

Quick, who are you taking. Wall-Beal or Topic Trarore. Who are you taking Topic Traore or Wemby + anybody. This kind of approach is how you get 40 years on ineptitude. Pushing for a quick return to winning when you're not a destination franchise is a recipe for disaster. How would you rank these 5 players in terms of potential? Edwards, SGA, Wemby, Doncic and Traore/Flagg/Bailer/Harper. Those 4 are clearly in the last place to me and it's not close. For fun we can add Jokic, Tatum, Morant, Zion and any other young players.

Here's a genuine question. What's the goal of this rebuild? To genuinely build a team that has a chance to compete for a championship. Or to do just enough to keep fans emotionally connected to a team that really has no chance of winning. I've never seen Trarore play but unless he's Michael Jordan reincarnated it won't be enough.

[NatP4]

Wall and Beal were not the problem with the 2007-2015 rebuild.

Turning 6 1st round picks into Vesely, Singleton, Seraphin, McGee, Pecherov, and McGee and the numerous awful trades and FA signings were the problem.

They probably contend for a championship with Wall/Beal/Porter, if they simply pick anyone else selected after Vesely: Biyombo, Knight, Walker, Thompson, Burks, Morris x2, Leonard, Vucecic, Shumpert. Same for Singleton: Harris, Motuejunas, Faried, Mirotic, Jackson.

I mean, they literally made the two worst selections from the 19 players available in the 6-24 range. Ernie Grunfeld was a uniquely terrible GM.

[dckingsfan]

So would I trade him? Depends. What could we get for him at the '25 and '26 deadlines? If we get real, tangible assets, or huge draft capital value? I'd be in. If not, I'd probably sit tight and wait...

But then he is part of the rebuild. He is a material asset that should be considered if it is as a player or as a trade asset. The point that he should be considered like Kuzma is just wrong-headed.

If he continues to improve at his current pace, there will be lots of good trade offers (if someone blows you away with 4 first round picks you take it).

And there are lots of reasons to keep him, he is on a terrific contract through the 2027-28 season, wants to be here and continues to improve.

[prime1time]

By the time the Wiz are competitive Avdija, Kuzma and Kispert will be traded. We should not be making drafting decisions based on their presence on the roster. We'll see what Wiz leadership does but imo, a rebuild doesn't start unitl you have at least 1 player with elite potential. We curently don't have one and their are none in this draft. So the earliest we could get one is next year. If we do his prime would be 6+ years from now (he'd be competitive 3 years from now at best). I have no problem drafting a PG or a Center, but only if we genuinely believe they are the best prospect on the board. Not drafting someone because we have already drafted role players who play the same position doesn't make sense.

Not to mention the fact that the NBA is moving to position-less basketball. You can say that BC will not be a 2, but it's a distinction without importance because BC will be able to guard 2's or 1's or 3's or 4's. If you could create your ideal team, everyone would be able to switch 1-4 if not 1-5. From an offensive perspective, the league has moved to a dominant guard/3 point shooters/big man dynamic. And even teams with more ball movement, have guys that can shoot the 3, put the ball on the floor and create (albeit to different degrees) and a big. All that to say, a lineup next year of BC, Avdija, Kuzma, Kispert and Bagley. Is it a completely acceptable lineup. Even if we drafted a pg, would he be ball dominant (i.e. take the ball out of Avdija's, Kuzma's, BC's hands)?

Lastly, we should point out that the WIzards are, to put it mildly, not good. We had the second worst record in the league. We are enganging an OKC esque rebuild without having a PG or Russell Westbrook or Carmelo Anthony to jump start the process. There is no SGA on this roster. And look at how long the OKC rebuild took. Assuming we are committed to the rebuild, the future roster that is competitive will be vastly different than the one we have today. That's not to say that the players on this team are bad. Porzingis is going to the Finals. Caldwell-Pope just won last year. Gafford, looks to be on his way to the finals. Avdija, Kuzma and Kispert are all talented enough to be major contributors on championship rosters.

The goal should be to maximize the value of the players you draft. If we had a star and there was a pathway to building a contender keeping these guys, then I'd be the first one to say we should keep them. But we don't. And these guys have much more value on a contending team seeking the extra "edge."

It's utterly ludicrous to argue that Avdija should be traded because he is not on the team's timeline. The guy just turned 23.

I've seen this sentiment more than once, and I think part of it is just a reflexive and perhaps subliminal apprehensiveness about young players getting expensive once their rookie contracts are up. An elite role player like Deni is exactly the type of guy who might get paid a whole lot on the market and suddenly screw up the team's cap situation, sort of like what happened with Otto Porter. But the important thing to remember here is that this WILL NOT HAPPEN with Deni. Deni is already locked into an ultra cheap contract for FOUR MORE YEARS. Take a moment to let that sink in. Four years is an eternity in the NBA, and also happens to be the same length as a rookie contract.

Look at it this way. If we drafted, say, Tristan da Silva in June, and he turned out to be an elite role player in his rookie year, posting 19, 9 and 4 with good defense, would we immediately trade him for fear that he isn't on our timeline? Of course not! He would be considered a core piece for the future. So why would you trade Deni?

Because prime has always had this weird schtick with Avdija. Always popped up after some bad game to say how he "just doesn't see it" with him. At the same time he would say he should trade him when he played well because he'd never live up to his potential here. My guess is he doesn't like Deni, and was a Rui dude for some reason I'll never understand.

prime, the silence was deafening last season from you after Deni blossomed. We missed your selective posts.

Anyone that doesn't see Deni as a piece of the rebuild is blinded by bias. He most certainly is a starting caliber player on a championship team, no doubt about it.

Cannot say that I'm surprised that many on this board has looked at Avdija's improvement last year with an uncritical lens. Being a Wizard fan, is like constantly trying to find water in a desert of despair. The moment, the first glimpse of water comes, even if it can't quench your thirst, you act like you've been saved.

The really hilarious thing is that you and I don't even disagree. In case you missed my comments, I'll quote them for you.

Porzingis is going to the Finals. Caldwell-Pope just won last year. Gafford, looks to be on his way to the finals. Avdija, Kuzma and Kispert are all talented enough to be major contributors on championship rosters

As for my opinion on Avdija, I have to wonder why honest, objective and unbiased criticism is made to seem synonymous with hate. . From the day we drafted Avdija until this day my opinion has stayed the same. Deni Avdija needs to be able to shoot the ball in order to have success. When he shot bad I stated it did not bode well for his future. Now that he has had his best 3-point shooting year, I'd point out that the rest of his game followed. Players come and players go. This notion of selective hate for any player is laughable.

With that being said, even with improved 3-point shooting, Avdija piloted us to the worst record in the NBA. Overcoming his 3-point shooting struggles, just made Avdija a solid role player. My opinion is that he's more valuable to this team in a trade than playing on the floor. Avdija could help a championship contender tomorrow. As for the Wizards, we are years away from being a contender. If you feel like Avdija has star potential, then keep him. But I see him as a role player. Which is why when we gave a drastically larger role, the team fell apart.

Draft a Center, draft a pg, barring a miracle (Avdija becoming a star) Avdija status on this team is tenous. There are three kinds of teams in the NBA. Teams that have stars. Teams with players that have the potential to become stars. And teams that have neither. The Wizards are in the third category.

[DCZards]

SGA is a great example of not needing a top pick to draft a great player—a point that PIF endlessly reminds us of.

SGA was the 11th pick in the 2018 draft.

That, imo, debunks the notion that you can predict the quality of a draft even before it happens. Because it’s impossible to tell in advance how a player—or a draft—will turn out. (Unless that player is a LeBron or Wemby.)

[prime1time]

Wall and Beal were not the problem with the 2007-2015 rebuild.

Turning 6 1st round picks into Vesely, Singleton, Seraphin, McGee, Pecherov, and McGee and the numerous awful trades and FA signings were the problem.

They probably contend for a championship with Wall/Beal/Porter, if they simply pick anyone else selected after Vesely: Biyombo, Knight, Walker, Thompson, Burks, Morris x2, Leonard, Vucecic, Shumpert. Same for Singleton: Harris, Motuejunas, Faried, Mirotic, Jackson.

I mean, they literally made the two worst selections from the 19 players available in the 6-24 range. Ernie Grunfeld was a uniquely terrible GM.

I both agree and disagree. Wall never developed a jumpshot. Never developed a halfcourt game. And neither Wall or Beal committed to playing defense. We can talk about all the missed picks, and it obviously impacted our ability to win, but as Doncic and Kyrie are currently showing, when the two main guys are that "dude" you can figure out the rest pretty easily. They traded for two members of their starting lineup mid-season. Think about it like this, who wins championships in the NBA. Role players are stars? Who's harder to find? Who's easier to replace? Because the Wizards are not a destination city

[payitforward]

...I prefer to use the Wizards model from 2009-2014 because they also completely butchered their early rebuild, not due to keeping a superstar too long, but also by gifting the superstar a near untradable contract AND also butchering the first major piece of the rebuild (the '09 draft pick trade for Mike Miller and Foye vs us taking Johnny Davis.

We won the '10 lottery, ... managed to get an elite PG prospect in '10,...

This time we're ...working with a much worse draft in '24, than we had in '10, and we are also playing in a league that values firsts more than it once did 15 years ago..

2010 was a terrible draft. By far the best player went at #10, & there were only 3 players out of R2 who were even remotely good.

I see no reason to think the league values R1 picks much differently now than if did 15 years ago. What gives you that impression?

...I do agree with prime that in a lot of ways, Deni doesn't make a lot of sense long term because the era of cheap cost control will likely match a period of totally ineffectual, craptacular basketball for us.

Deni is 23 years old.
He's over 2 years younger than Corey Kispert.
There are guys in the upcoming draft who are older than Deni!

[AFM]

There are people in this thread 4x as old as Deni.

[prime1time]

SGA is a great example of not needing a top pick to draft a great player—a point that PIF endlessly reminds us of.

SGA was the 11th pick in the 2018 draft.

That, imo, debunks the notion that you can predict the quality of a draft even before it happens. Because it’s impossible to tell in advance how a player—or a draft—will turn out. (Unless that player is a LeBron or Wemby.)

Of course you don't "need" a top pick to draft a great player. Look at our very own Gilbert Arenas. Then you have Kobe. And Jokic. You have Kawhi, PG and Jimmy Butler. You also have Giannis. But if those teams really knew what they were getting, they would have traded up to get them no? They wouldn't have risked someone else taking them. Who are the stars that the Wizards have had since 2000. I'm not counting MJ. Maybe you can count Stackhouse. Arenas was a star, we lucked into signing him and then injuries destroyed him. Wizards homers will disagree but at any point during Wall's career was he ever a top 3 pg? I loved Beal but this season exposed him. In a league dominated by stars, those guys simply aren't going to get it done.

How long should the Wizards tank? Until they get a truly generational star. That's how long. If it means trading Kuzma and Poole I'd trade Kuzma and Poole. If it means trading Avdija, I'd trade Avdija. What is the 76ers rebuild without Embiid? What are the Bucks without Giannis? What are the Nuggets without Jokic? The NBA is a star driven league.

[DCZards]

With that being said, even with improved 3-point shooting, Avdija piloted us to the worst record in the NBA. Overcoming his 3-point shooting struggles, just made Avdija a solid role player. My opinion is that he's more valuable to this team in a trade than playing on the floor. Avdija could help a championship contender tomorrow. As for the Wizards, we are years away from being a contender. If you feel like Avdija has star potential, then keep him. But I see him as a role player. Which is why when we gave a drastically larger role, the team fell apart.

So now you blaming Deni for the Zards being a bad team last season. Do you not recognize that the team was bereft of talent? Or was Deni supposed to single-handedly overcome that talent deficit and take the team to the playoffs?

BTW, the team did not fall apart when Deni was given a larger role. It was already a bad team.

In fact, I'd argue that the Zards played some of it's best ball in the last few weeks of the season when Deni played more minutes and took on a larger role.

[DCZards]

How long should the Wizards tank? Until they get a truly generational star. That's how long. If it means trading Kuzma and Poole I'd trade Kuzma and Poole. If it means trading Avdija, I'd trade Avdija. What is the 76ers rebuild without Embiid? What are the Bucks without Giannis? What are the Nuggets without Jokic? The NBA is a star driven league.

There so many contradictions in this statement that I don't know where to start. You say the Zards should tank until they get a "truly generational star," but then you acknowledge that you can get that star with the 15th pick (Giannis) or in the second round (Jokic).

So, which is it, do you have to tank and get a top pick to get a generational star or do you have to draft well/get lucky? And how often does an easily identifiable "generational star" come along?

[payitforward]

Wall and Beal were not the problem with the 2007-2015 rebuild.

Turning 6 1st round picks into Vesely, Singleton, Seraphin, McGee, Pecherov, and McGee and the numerous awful trades and FA signings were the problem.

They probably contend for a championship with Wall/Beal/Porter, if they simply pick anyone else selected after Vesely: Biyombo, Knight, Walker, Thompson, Burks, Morris x2, Leonard, Vucecic, Shumpert. Same for Singleton: Harris, Motuejunas, Faried, Mirotic, Jackson.

I mean, they literally made the two worst selections from the 19 players available in the 6-24 range. Ernie Grunfeld was a uniquely terrible GM.

I both agree and disagree. Wall never developed a jumpshot. Never developed a halfcourt game. And neither Wall or Beal committed to playing defense. We can talk about all the missed picks, and it obviously impacted our ability to win, but as Doncic and Kyrie are currently showing, when the two main guys are that "dude" you can figure out the rest pretty easily. They traded for two members of their starting lineup mid-season. Think about it like this, who wins championships in the NBA. Role players are stars? Who's harder to find? Who's easier to replace? Because the Wizards are not a destination city

1. Wall & Beal as a pair were not in a class with Doncic & Irving. Not even close.
2. We had exactly 2 runs of terrific play in the Wall/Beal era:

a. We opened the '14 -15 season 19-6, fueled by Rashual Butler's brief imitation of a superstar. He returned to reality, & we went 27-30 the rest of the way.

b. In '16-17 we went from 16-18 to 41-24 -- a 25-6 run! Then we closed the season 8-9.

[nate33]

With that being said, even with improved 3-point shooting, Avdija piloted us to the worst record in the NBA. Overcoming his 3-point shooting struggles, just made Avdija a solid role player. My opinion is that he's more valuable to this team in a trade than playing on the floor. Avdija could help a championship contender tomorrow. As for the Wizards, we are years away from being a contender. If you feel like Avdija has star potential, then keep him. But I see him as a role player. Which is why when we gave a drastically larger role, the team fell apart.

So now you blaming Deni for the Zards being a bad team last season. Do you not recognize that the team was bereft of talent? Or was Deni supposed to single-handedly overcome that talent deficit and take the team to the playoffs?

BTW, the team did not fall apart when Deni was given a larger role. It was already a bad team.

In fact, I'd argue that the Zards played some of it's best ball in the last few weeks of the season when Deni played more minutes and took on a larger role.

I posted this in the Deni thread a while back:

We really need to take a moment and appreciate what Deni has done in the final third of the season. He isn't just a rock solid player, he has produced like an All-Star.

Since February 8th, Deni has averaged 19.3 points, 9.5 rebounds, 3.9 assists on a .604 TS%. The team was just -1.2 per 100 possessions in those minutes, so Deni had this talentless roster playing like a 37-win team while he was on the floor.

[nate33]

The fanbase has been overstating the length of this rebuild IMO. They intentionally tank for one more year and most likely have a fairly competitive roster in 2025/2026.

Will add two top 5 drafted players and atleast two more 1st round drafted players (via a Kuzma trade). The 2025 pick will be an instant impact player: Traore/Flagg/Bailey/Harper.

We know for a fact that we sucked this past season, and we will suck next year. So that's a guarantee of 2 horrible years of rebuild. And it's a pretty sure bet that we will suck in the 2025-26 season as well, unless our 2025 draft pick has a Wemby/Lebron/Shaq tier of dominance as a rookie. (There's also the issue of our 2026 protected FRP owed to NY.)

I think it's more likely that our 2025 pick will have a Banchero/Edwards type of impact as a rookie - meaning they will impress, but they'll also be inefficient and turnover-prone in a manner that doesn't not promote much immediate winning. Even with improved play from Bilal and our 2024 pick, I don't think we climb out of the bottom of the East in the 2025-26 season. I wouldn't expect much winning until 2026-27, which means 3 years of misery. And if we strike out with our 2025 pick, it could be a 4th year of misery.

[payitforward]

How long should the Wizards tank? Until they get a truly generational star. That's how long. If it means trading Kuzma and Poole I'd trade Kuzma and Poole. If it means trading Avdija, I'd trade Avdija. What is the 76ers rebuild without Embiid? What are the Bucks without Giannis? What are the Nuggets without Jokic? The NBA is a star driven league.

There so many contradictions in this statement that I don't know where to start. You say the Zards should tank until they get a "truly generational star," but then you acknowledge that you can get that star with the 15th pick (Giannis) or in the second round (Jokic).

So, which is it, do you have to tank and get a top pick to get a generational star or do you have to draft well/get lucky? And how often does an easily identifiable "generational star" come along?

"Tank" is just a word. When the ball goes up no one tries to lose.

Alas, there's no real way to rebuild that doesn't cause you to have multiple bad seasons.
Moreover, a successful rebuild also & inevitably involves luck!

Of all kinds, btw -- after all, in 2018, Phoenix & Sacramento weren't required to take Ayton & Bagley, leaving Doncic for the Mavs. For that matter only 1 of the 10 teams who passed on SG-A got Doncic!

I don't even think it's really about "smart" or "dumb" teams. Much of the most important stuff simply can't be known. E.g. if Denver or anyone had known that Jokic was a generational player, he wouldn't have lasted until #41. Obviously. Ditto Jimmy Butler at 30, Kawhi at 15, PG at 10 -- they'd all have gone first in their drafts.

Of course, a team can have multiple bad seasons without trying to rebuild -- see the Washington Wizards as a prime example. In other words, even if being "smart" doesn't suffice for success, it's still pretty clear that being "dumb" does not help!