Ted's been approved, it's official!

[nate33]

For that matter, he doesn't compare all that badly to Pau Gasol either.

FWIW, here is a pace-adjusted per-36 comparison of the two at comparable ages. I also broke out Blatche's production in the second half of last year because that is our only sample with him as a starter and primary option. They're quite similar except Gasol is more efficient, mainly because he gets to the FT line a lot more.

Code: Select all

blatche,a  PTS  RbR  AST  STL  BLK   TO eFG%  TS%  PER
09-10 2H  21.7 13.2  3.3  1.5  0.8  3.2 .496 .530 20.3
2009-10   18.5 13.1  2.8  1.4  1.1  2.9 .485 .519 17.7
2008-09   15.4 13.3  2.5  1.1  1.6  2.5 .475 .508 15.0
2007-08   13.7 14.8  2.0  1.2  2.5  2.5 .477 .512 15.6

gasol,pau  PTS  RbR  AST  STL  BLK   TO eFG%  TS%  PER
2003-04   20.5 14.2  2.9  0.7  2.0  2.8 .484 .542 21.8
2002-03   19.0 14.3  2.8  0.4  1.8  2.6 .510 .570 20.6
2001-02   17.6 14.1  2.7  0.5  2.1  2.7 .518 .566 19.5

[barelyawake]

If people here believe that we are winning a championship with Blatche and McGee as our starting PF and C, they are completely deluding themselves. Period. It's a pipedream to believe that Blatche is somehow going to develop into an Allstar player who can lead a frontcourt. What in his personality possibly leads you to this assumption? Btw, Odom is the third best big man on the Lakers -- which is a fine role for Blatche. But, he is in no way a leader. How many examples do we have of his immaturity -- including last year with the stat padding stunt.

Again Hoops, you are putting words into my mouth. I never claimed that we will get another number one lottery pick. It is good however to plan to be bad in strong drafts. It's fairly predictable how you build a champion. And it's easier to go from last to first than it is middle of the pack to first. It's been that way for decades. We have a couple tradeable assets and a first pick. We need more assets. We need more high picks either to trade or use. The problem, as Ji correctly pointed out, is with a backcourt of Arenas/Wall we MAY be too good too fast. That both hurts our rebuilding and will land us with a mediocre team for the next decade.

I'll state again, we have no "core." We have a couple assets. The goal should be to get an allstar big to put with Wall. The "fanbase" could currently care less about anyone but Wall. The "fanbase" wants us to put the best team around Wall possible and build a champion. Perhaps a few diehards here care about the rest of the team, but the majority of the fanbase doesn't. They only care about winning. If we have to tank a couple years to get more assets to build a champion, that will be forgiven. Being a team who barely misses the playoffs for the next five years will not.

When I say "tank," I don't mean to lose games on purpose. I mean to only keep and develop those assets who will help us in the future (thus not trying to win for the sake of winning).

Going into our rebuilding process without a clear plan is what the Wizards have being doing for decades. This pie-in-the-sky idea that we will "see what happens" without taking steps to guide our future is insanity. As is believing that somehow we will turn a mentalcase like Blatche into a guy who will take over a championship game against the best players at his position and lead a team under the greatest pressure there is. He's not that guy. He'll never be that guy. And the sooner we realize that, and plan accordingly, the better our chances for a real future.

Almost every single championship was won off the backs of a championship caliber big and small. Wall isn't going to be Kobe or MJ. Thus, we need a real star big. And Arenas will not likely be a superstar in three years when Wall is seasoned enough to win a championship. Not taking all these factors in when crafting a future, and blindly going in with this "we can't predict the future" mentality, will stunt our growth as a team, and it's terrible GMing.

[Ruzious]

I'm skeptical of Blatche and/or McGee combo leading us to a championship, mice elf, but Blatche already exceeded my expectations, and we need to see how far he continues to improve - as he does have the physical ability and the instincts. So he's got the 1st 2 halves; he just needs the 3rd half. As the saying goes, big guys often take longer to develop. Even Pam McGee warned us when young Jav was a rookie, he was physically a 17 year old - as the men in her family were late to mature (I just saw that interview on a youtube video the other day.). Well, mentally these 2 are also late to mature, but if they do, they can be part of an outstanding core. It's no sure thing, but it's definitely possible.

Uncle Ted is smart to say - we're not there yet, we've got to be... wait for it... longer... Patient! These things will work out themselves, because this isn't going to be a deep team with no holes and solid veteran leadership. If DreJav don't improve, the team will be in lottoland again next June - maybe not top 5 - but probably top 10, and we'll maybe do another BOYD. If they do improve as hoped, then we won't cessenarily need a lotto pick. And we'll be using that cap space to acquire an outstanding veteran (as opposed to someone like Ron Artest).

[nate33]

Almost every single championship was won off the backs of a championship caliber big and small. Wall isn't going to be Kobe or MJ. Thus, we need a real star big. And Arenas will not likely be a superstar in three years when Wall is seasoned enough to win a championship. Not taking all these factors in when crafting a future, and blindly going in with this "we can't predict the future" mentality, will stunt our growth as a team, and it's terrible GMing.

Nevertheless, we still can't predict the future. I don't see the logic in arbitrarily trading either of our young bigs for a future pick in the 8-20 range (which is what they'd get us in return). The odds of us finding a franchise big in the 8-20 range is lower than the odds of Blatche or McGee panning out to be a franchise big themselves.

It seems to me, that the most useful thing to take away from your rant is that we really should trade away Arenas for the best package of youth/picks/cap relief we can get. That's an idea that makes sense to me. Arenas is just good enough to keep us out of the top of the draft, but he is unlikely to be good enough to carry us to a title by the time the rest of the team is ready to compete. We're better off dumping him and being worse in the short term while we accumulate picks and develop our young players.

I've consistently advocated trading Arenas as soon as we can do so painlessly. I believe that a trade right now is unlikely, but an Arenas trade at the Trade Deadline might be possible.

[AceDegenerate]

I've consistently advocated trading Arenas as soon as we can do so painlessly. I believe that a trade right now is unlikely, but an Arenas trade at the Trade Deadline might be possible.

Because like many here you're more concerned with the act of rebuilding rather than watching this team play basketball. Wall alone is good enough to keep this team out of the lottery for the next couple years. This team is not getting another Top pick unless they trade for one.

[nate33]

Wall alone is good enough to keep this team out of the lottery for the next couple years. This team is not getting another Top pick unless they trade for one.

I don't think Wall alone, as a rookie, is good enough to keep us out of the bottom 10 next year. But Wall and Arenas together might make the 8th seed in the East. We're talking about the difference between the 6-10 pick and the #15 pick. Add to that the advantages of having the cap room from eliminating Arenas' contract. We could buy an additional mid round pick next year and/or add some good free agents. And the same argument applies in the following season when we'd probably still be a sub .500 ballclub without Arenas but we're a likely playoff team with him.

I get that you are the designated Arenas defender on this board and you take umbrage to any negative comments sent his way. Understand that I like Arenas. I think he'll be a good player for us and that he is ultimately worth a lot more than the lowball offers we are getting right now. But that doesn't change the fact that this team is no longer the ideal situation for Arenas. We simply are not in need of a 29-year-old combo guard making a near-max salary when the rest of the team is composed of sub-24-year-olds who aren't yet in their prime.

Rehabillitate his value, then trade him. Not because he sucks; not because he's a headcase; not because he is overpaid; but because he is too old to peak alongside our core and he plays the same position as our (hopefully) superstar of the future.

[Zonkerbl]

If people here believe that we are winning a championship with Blatche and McGee as our starting PF and C, they are completely deluding themselves. Period. It's a pipedream to believe that Blatche is somehow going to develop into an Allstar player who can lead a frontcourt. What in his personality possibly leads you to this assumption? Btw, Odom is the third best big man on the Lakers -- which is a fine role for Blatche. But, he is in no way a leader. How many examples do we have of his immaturity -- including last year with the stat padding stunt.

But who in this thread has said that we are going to win a championship with Blatche and McGee (recently)?

Blatche can be a starter on a championship team. Because he can, face it. He doesn't have to be an all star. He doesn'thave to be the leader. He doesn't even have to be the second highest scorer on the team. You're saying the Celtics have an all star big and the Lakers have an all star big. Blatche doesn't have to be that guy. If we had an all star center, we'd be fine. We don't have one at the moment, yes. But Blatche is not the problem in our frontcourt. McGee is the question mark. He might gain twenty pounds of muscle and magically transform into a legit championship quality center, or he might continue to frat around and accomplish nothing.

[nate33]

To further my argument for trading Arenas, consider the following two scenarios:

Scenario 1: We keep Arenas.
* We finish 41-43 this year, squeak into the playoffs and get eliminated in 5. We pick 15th in 2011. Young doesn't "turn the corner" so we end up cutting him.
* We have enough cap room to sign Kendrick Perkins and resign Thornton
* We finish 46-33 in 2011/12, get the 5th seed and get eliminated in 6. We pick 20th in 2012.
* The 15th pick from last year ends up as a useful reserve. Our 20th pick in 2012 is a bust.
* Our lineup in 2012/13 and beyond is Wall, Arenas, #15, Thornton, Blatche, McGee, Perkins and scrubs. We peak out as a #4 seed in the East. Arenas fades as Wall and Blatche peak and we never have the firepower to seriously contend.

Scenario 2: We dump Arenas for Eddy Curry:
* We finish 30-52 this year. Young becomes a serviceable starter or quality reserve. Wall starts to assert his leadership over the team by the end of the season.
* We pick 7th in 2011. We sign Perkins and have enough cap room leftover to engineer a BOYD trade for the #16 pick in the draft even after resigning Young.
* We finish 42-42 in 2011/12 and just make the playoffs where we lose 4-1.
* We pick 15th in 2012 and have enough cap room to buy the #18 pick in the draft and sign Nicholas Batum as a free agent.
* Our lineup for 2012/13 and beyond is Wall, Young, Batum, Blatche, McGee, Perkins, #7, #16, #15, #18.

So in Scenario 1, three seasons from now, our lineup is:
PG Wall/Arenas
SG Arenas/#15
SF Thornton/scrub
PF Blatche/#20
C Perkins/McGee

In Scenario 2, three season from now, our lineup is:
PG Wall/#18
SG #7/Young
SF Batum/#16
PF Blatche/#15
C Perkins/McGee

Which team has a chance at a championship in the foreseeable future? If one of those four picks turns out to be a star, I say it's the scenario 2 team.

[Zonkerbl]

Um, but your making different assumptions about N1 between your two scenarios. If he's a bust in scenario one isn't he also a bust in scenario 2?

Also we have the #15 in both scenarios. The difference in picks is #15 and #20 in scenario 1 vs #15, #7, #16, and #18. So the real question is are we better off with Arenas and #20, or #7, #16, and #18.

Also in scenario one you have Thornton/Scrub vs Batum/a draft pick (also likely a scrub). That's more than a marginal improvement, I guess.

Yeesh, I don't know. I guess we're marginally better off in scenario two, but not by much. Neither of those lineups scream "potential championship contender" to me.

[LyricalRico]

Um, but your making different assumptions about N1 between your two scenarios. If he's a bust in scenario one isn't he also a bust in scenario 2?

Yeah, I noticed that as well. I also don't think that whether or not Nick Young becomes a quality reserve will have a bearing on the team's championship hopes. You can find backup SGs anywhere.

[AceDegenerate]

People who are realistically thinking this team can compete for a championship with or without Arenas are dreaming anyway. John Wall has not even stepped foot on an NBA floor, he's far from the athlete and having the body that LeBron James came into the league with, so with our medical staff he may be just as prone to serious injury as every player before him.

I'm more concerned with the Wizards putting out the absolute best lineup to compete on a night to night basis starting in Game 1 of the regular season THIS year. I've yet to see a single trade involving Arenas that makes the team better RIGHT NOW. Haven't we shed enough salary? Hasn't the team given up enough talent (that has taken many years to accumulate mind you, Tyrone Nesby starting @ SF is not that far off).

All the rest of you with you championship pipe dreams can keep dreaming. Very few teams win championships in the NBA, and I was more than pleased with the Wizards as a competitive playoff team who if things fell their way, may have sneaked their way into the Finals any one of the years they made the playoffs.

Too many are concerned with building the next Dynasty, when it's not going to happen. The Celtics, Lakers, Bulls, etc. have that market cornered in this league.

[fishercob]

Wow. I am SO glad you're not running the Wizards.

Might I remind you:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMk5sMHj58I[/youtube]

[fishercob]

Hey everyone! Let's dance!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zLlIdZikDk[/youtube]

[Ruzious]

People who are realistically thinking this team can compete for a championship with or without Arenas are dreaming anyway. John Wall has not even stepped foot on an NBA floor, he's far from the athlete and having the body that LeBron James came into the league with, so with our medical staff he may be just as prone to serious injury as every player before him.

I'm more concerned with the Wizards putting out the absolute best lineup to compete on a night to night basis starting in Game 1 of the regular season THIS year. I've yet to see a single trade involving Arenas that makes the team better RIGHT NOW. Haven't we shed enough salary? Hasn't the team given up enough talent (that has taken many years to accumulate mind you, Tyrone Nesby starting @ SF is not that far off).

All the rest of you with you championship pipe dreams can keep dreaming. Very few teams win championships in the NBA, and I was more than pleased with the Wizards as a competitive playoff team who if things fell their way, may have sneaked their way into the Finals any one of the years they made the playoffs.

Too many are concerned with building the next Dynasty, when it's not going to happen. The Celtics, Lakers, Bulls, etc. have that market cornered in this league.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying that as long as the team is competitive day to day, you're fine with a team that goes .500 every year - with no hope of ever competing for a championship.

[dandridge 10]

Based on Krizko's posts, I'd venture to guess he would be happy with any Wizards team as long as Gilbert is still on it.

[LyricalRico]

Based on Krizko's posts, I'd venture to guess he would be happy with any Wizards team as long as Gilbert is still on it.

[go'stags]

I'm certainly not content with .500 ball, but I do get what Krizko is saying. If we have the chance to be the Trail Blazers of the late 90's, ie great teams but never win a Championship, lose to the top tier talents, or if things break our way a certain year we can win it all or get to the finals, you would rather us pass that up in hopes of landing the next Shaq? I'll pass on that.

I obviously would love to win a championship, but it's not something that if it happens will pay all my bills or cure my Uncles bum leg. Its sports were talking about. Entertainment. I'll gladly take playing games well into may, even if it means losing to a team that got lucky enough to draft a young Shaq. The way I see it, as long as we don't have an obvious cog that is preventing us from winning it all, ie Jamison at PF, then I'll be fine with a very competitive conference finals as our peak.

I'm not willing, however, to sit through 3,5, or however many years of sucking it takes for us to get the chance to draft the next annoying primma donna, instant champion type player, ala Shaq or LeBron. Maybe if it guaranteed my uncle could run wind sprints again it would be worth it, but alas, its entertainment.

As for Arenas, I definitely want to keep him. How old is Pierce? Or Allen? Yea, Gil has had some injuries, but that also means a lot less minutes played, which might be more important. When Gil's contract expires, he"ll be what, 32? Thats around the same age as Pierce right now, with less minutes played. In that season, Blatche is 27, Wall is 25, McGee is 26(?), and probably a FA or 2 is also at a ripe age. Along with any BOYD from this year, who will also be in the same age range as our youngsters ..that team can't compete? Were going to get someone better than Gil as a closer of games at that point? What age do our players need to be for us to compete? And do they all have to be the same age? I think Wall is a "special" player, capable of competing for a championship at the young age of 25(theres some sarcasm in there).

I think some people are misjudging Blatche's talents. What exactly is an all-star big? Not trying to be an arse, just actually curious. Is it a young KG? The current KG? Gasol?

I see Blatche, on a good team, capable of averaging around 20-10 efficiently with very good defense. That's an all-star big to me. McGee is a complete wildcard, but regardless of him living up to his potential or not, I agree we need a top defensive Center to bang with the big boys. Aldrich? Perkins? We've got options.

Yea, they both have to mature. What 22 and 23 years old don't have to? I can pretty much guarantee that they both will. Blatche has already started to show signs of progression in his maturity. it's not fair to judge someones maturity, especially when projecting into the future, based off of them as 23 year olds. I really hope no one does that for me.

Sorry for the rant.

[Hoopalotta]

If people here believe that we are winning a championship with Blatche and McGee as our starting PF and C, they are completely deluding themselves.

Yeah, I mean, this is where we differ basically. I concede that McGee is not, at least as of now, starting center material, but I'd consider him to be an impact player off the bench with the potential for an effect similar to Odom (obviously based on entirely different strengths).

My view is that, as of this moment and taking into account injuries, only Gasol is a better scorer of the bigs still playing. Will Blatche ever be a leader for us? I don't really think so, but I'm not worried and don't think he needs to be. Is Gasol a leader on the Lakers? Memphis fans would have told you he was turning into a petulant "headcase" before he was traded. Some might have uncharitably said "a whiny bitch" (not my words). My view is Blatche's personality (and game) is better for team chemistry than Caron Butler's. Haywood is on record after the Dallas trade as to thinking Dray could be an Allstar. Yes, I think Dray can get it done for us and there will be very, very few bigs drafted in the next three years as talented as him.

I have nothing against the front office leaving some holes in this years squad (or important roles to be filled by rookies) so as that we get a higher pick next year, but short of outright dumping Webber, I mean Wallace, I mean the other Wallace, no, no, I mean Blatche, I don't see how we're going to get a really high pick. I am absolutely NOT willing to move Blatche for poor value, considering it a highly destructive and self defeating step that will likely see us drafting inferior replacements in the future. Freakin' Donatas "The Lithuanian Yi" Mountiejounas is 6th on the Draft Express 2011 mock right now.

Furthermore, as to the bigs, I don't think we need a superstar. I'd like to plug in a nasty defensive center to start in front of McGee and have Flip go to work coaching 'em up. We need a Perkins type player and we're about good as far as I'm concerned.

So no, I'm not seeing tangible steps to score absolute top talent through the draft at this moment and I don't see how throwing every player who doesn't measure up to Moses Malone away makes any sense. As a general rule, "don't be particularly good these next two years and maximize our draft position" sounds good, but I'm not going to throw away young bigs to do it.

So I'm definitely saying no to an overly inflexible mantra that would have us spinning around looking for a transcendent bigman who might not be available in our draft window and who we'd only ever be able to have a 25% chance at anyway.

[barelyawake]

I would love to know where I stated we should "dump" Blatche. I never have stated that. My point was we need a better big than Blatche to compete for a championship. And a clearly thought out plan, with several contingenies, as to how to get said big in the next three years. We ought not go in relying on Blatche, nor should we simply look year to year thinking "well you can't predict the future, so we'll see what happens." We control our fate. The choices we make need to be based on how they will affect getting us a championship roster -- and by that I mean an allstar big. And once again, Wall is not going to be Kobe Bryant. We need someone better than Gasol to win a title with Wall (especially since he's a point guard). And stats do not tell you what kind of a man you will end up being in a championship game. Gasol has both more heart and a higher IQ than Blatche. There are different kinds of "difficult" personalities. Gasol was botching because he wanted to win. Blatche, on the otherhand, asked am opposing teammate if he could get a rebound in to put up some meaningless stat. You don't see the difference in mentality? And once again, I never said we need to tank to win the lottery to get a big. That's something you fabricated. It's true, however, that a top five pick (especially in a year deep with big men), would increase our chances. That's why you read three drafts ahead and factor that into your thinking.

[Hoopalotta]

Alright, I officially give up on making any sense of how your theories would apply to actual tangible steps. Any time I make any assumption, you're in here with "I never said that" and come in with some ethereal higher philosophy of what have you. It lies far outside of my capabilities to decipher exactly what particular actions are being suggested through the kaleidoscope here.

So, land a big better than Gasol? I don't know, isn't Gasol just about the best forward-center in the game?

OK, so fine, we'll keep Blatche and still score a "high pick" with which to draft our superstar big (real world result: Mason Plumlee with the 12th pick). Or maybe we won't and other steps, somehow alluded to within this octopus ink cloud of a plan will lead to our superstar big.

I have no idea.