WHICH WAY WIZ? Does it really help to try and compete now?

[dtom7610]

I simply believe that we cannot be disneyfied in our estimations of what could happen or what our players "could" become.

I have a question for you (which I am leading to). I don't mean it as an argument, I am genuinely curious. I've been a Bullets fan for a very long time, and the past 30+ years have been a never-ending sequence of the Bullets getting the short end of the stick. Brent versus Mark, Harvey versus Horace, the poor man's Magic (John Williams) turning into the poor man's Dinner Bell Mel. Even when the Bullets had glimmers of hope, it always fell apart. The big 3 most recently, Howard and Webber, obtaining Kwame, Pervis, most improved players like Jim McIlvaine, the list just goes on and on.

Having lurked on this board for a while, I have a lot of respect for most of the posters, who know and understand the game far more than I do, but I can't help but believe there isn't a certain built in skepticism. There are impact rookies, players who reach their potential quickly, players who become premier role players, or players whose BBIQ seems to magically rise: it just never seems to happen for the Bullets. Even when it starts to, we find a way to mess it up </cough>Ike Austin</cough>.

Now I understand that you cannot rely on lighting in a bottle. However, one of the problems that has plagued the Bullets is that they have always seemed to look for the quick fix, always tried to replicate other teams' models of success, and, when we do show patience, we do so at exactly the wrong time (like sticking with an obviously flawed "big 3"). In short, we have not only been a losing franchise, but also a somewhat desperate one.

Personally, I believe that we do have the makings of a very special team. Does it require players to reach their potential? Yes, absolutely. But I also think that there is a great deal of luck required for a small market (or, in our case, a team without a good reputation), to become a contender. And it just seems to me that many Wizards fans seem to assume the worst, and advocate building by acquiring established players.

Sorry for rambling my way to my question, but my question is this: do you think that the Wizards' miserable past influences how we analyze this team? I know that there is a part of me that just assumes that McGee will never get it, and that we have seen the best that Blatche will be. But if they were on another team, I would at least give them a 30/70 shot of becoming a dominant frontcourt, and would advocate them building around that duo (plus Wall, etc.), and be patient. But as a Wizard fan, as I said, a part of me assumes the worst, and that 30/70 is actually 5/95.

The reason that I am raising this here is that I think the original poster was right, in saying that we are at a turning point. And my fear is that in trying to get "a combo that we can truly build around" (which I view as low percentage), we will never give the players that we have, that have the potential, the sustained responsibility they would need to become a combo that other teams try to emulate.

[fishercob]

Look, I'm not here to just argue for argument's sake or piss anyone off. I simply want what is best for this team. I want a championship-caliber team. Since the Miami thing (not to mention Chris Paul's quote), that is a pretty damn high hurdle. When Hughes and Gil were doing their thing, the league wasn't half as strong as it is now.

I simply believe that we cannot be disneyfied in our estimations of what could happen or what our players "could" become. We need a clear vision of what the goal is and what a championship roster looks like. Do I think Blatche and Java have Allstar potential in terms of their bodies? Of course. But, the one factor that always seems missed here, and somehow gets labelled as mysticism, is mindset and IQ. I get that it's harder to predict mentality than it is how high someone jumps. But, there is no "potential" without the mindset to reach that potential. And changing mentality is not as easy as changing your mind over what you are ordering for dinner.

I have no problem with going into next season with the goal as rebuilding Gil's rep and growing our youth, if the eventual outcome is to trade said assets to build the foundation of a true championship caliber team. But, we both know that's not what will happen. If we barely make the playoffs, now we are a playoff team in the eyes of the fanbase. No way could we then decide to ditch Gil (or trade Blatche for a top pick) and tank. So, we are stuck and banking our future on a second round pick with major attitude problems to completely alter his mental make-up and become a force in the league. That, to me, is not a good plan. Blatche should be viewed as a luxury, not a key piece to bank our future solely around -- if for the simple fact that it would be one of the greatest turnarounds in the history of the game if he actually lives up to "potential."

I'm completely open to new ideas that realistic describe how we can build a championship team -- with or without Gil. But, they can't be based on what I see as the fantasy of Blatche battling the refs, history and years of mental make-up to suddenly becoming one of the best bigs in the league and guiding us to a championship. That, again with all respect, sounds like a movie plot, not reality. All of the best players in the game are going to be on like four teams. We need a hell of alot better assets to even think of challenging them. We should view our players as assets until we get a combo that we can truly build around. Currently, we aren't close.

I freely admit that I have a hard time envisioning a championship team with either Blatche or McGee as the primary frontcourt option. But there was a time I couldn't envision Pau Gasol in that role either.

I agree that you cannot quantify the intagibles that are a huge part of the equation. But I also feel that things can change people -- guys get inspired, grow up, etc. I can see Ted Leonsis inspiring Blatche. Hell, I can see Jimmy Wall inspiring Blatche in a way that he hasn't been before.

But I am 100% with you that Blacthe's continued development is only a good thing -- even if it leads to Blatche being the Al Jefferson in our version of a future KG trade. If Blatche or McGee can develop enough that another team will take one of them and cap space and a pick for their stud -- Melo, Dwight Howard in 2 years, Yao, whomever -- then mission accomplished.

Dray has already beaten the odds. MId-late second rounders seldom make rosters, let alone put up the number he did over the last half season. He's far from perfect, but his growth is undeniable. If there's more of that there, then great -- maybe he is our Gasol, or maybe he helps us get him.

My point is that you are right when you talk about swinging for the fences. That means taking the guy in the late second round who has lotto talent but needs some reclamation work. Let's roll with what we have, see what kind of upside our own guys can realize, and then decide where to go from there. We're so far away from greatness right now, that our best chance -- today -- of hitting the powerball is of one of our wunderkinds to have an epiphany that allows them ro reach their potential.

[barelyawake]

Dtom,
Our problem has indeed been quick fixes. And I am not advocating that we merely go after established players. I completely agree that has been part of the problem. I have a problem with what you call banking on a flawed big three. I want us to keep trading and drafting until we get a core that will contend. That means scrapping a decent team for parts, if it will move you up the ladder for a better one. There are various ways to move up that ladder. One is by tanking and getting high draft picks. Another is by drafting players, developing them, and then trading them for higher draft picks or packaging them for better players. Another is by using cap to sign top talent. I want to do all three. But, I would like to time it so that we don't fall into the trap of being a "pretty good" team. I've said it several times over the years, it's easier to go from worst to first than it is the middle to the top.

My only solution thus far is to trade Arenas for cap and then tank. That solves many of our problems. It would artificially inflate Java's and Blatche's value since they would be our second and third options. That's good for trading purposes. Also, it would get us a few top picks -- since we would be both and young and flawed team. Also, it would give us that much more cap to spend in three years (right about the time I believe we will have enough assets to seriously contend). And if Blatche or Java blowup, then great. Then, we have two pieces to the puzzle, and simply need a third (and we have plenty of cap to use it on that third piece). No harm done. We can get someone even younger than Arenas and lengthen our window. I'm not advocating we "give-up" on Blatche, rather we see him as at best a means to get the core we need or at worst a roleplayer who can give us a 20 game one game of a seven game series.

As I said, I'm open to any other solutions. I just don't see any other way currently that won't end in a trap whereby we are just a decent team for the next five years -- and that would risk losing Wall to free agency.

Keep in mind that Arenas is one of my favorite alltime players. I don't want him on another team. But, we need another frontcourt player who is truly an impact player. One whom the league and refs have deemed someone worthy of a title. Because that's how this league works. It is a star's league. Stars get the calls -- from both the refs and the agents. They get traded for. They attract free agents. Etc. And without a star big, I do not see us coming close to the three superteams that are being formed.

[fishercob]

Dtom,
Our problem has indeed been quick fixes. And I am not advocating that we merely go after established players. I completely agree that has been part of the problem. I have a problem with what you call banking on a flawed big three. I want us to keep trading and drafting until we get a core that will contend. That means scrapping a decent team for parts, if it will move you up the ladder for a better one. There are various ways to move up that ladder. One is by tanking and getting high draft picks. Another is by drafting players, developing them, and then trading them for higher draft picks or packaging them for better players. Another is by using cap to sign top talent. I want to do all three. But, I would like to time it so that we don't fall into the trap of being a "pretty good" team. I've said it several times over the years, it's easier to go from worst to first than it is the middle to the top.

My only solution thus far is to trade Arenas for cap and then tank. That solves many of our problems. It would artificially inflate Java's and Blatche's value since they would be our second and third options. That's good for trading purposes. Also, it would get us a few top picks -- since we would be both and young and flawed team. Also, it would give us that much more cap to spend in three years (right about the time I believe we will have enough assets to seriously contend). And if Blatche or Java blowup, then great. Then, we have two pieces to the puzzle, and simply need a third (and we have plenty of cap to use it on that third piece). No harm done. We can get someone even younger than Arenas and lengthen our window. I'm not advocating we "give-up" on Blatche, rather we see him as at best a means to get the core we need or at worst a roleplayer who can give us a 20 game one game of a seven game series.

As I said, I'm open to any other solutions. I just don't see any other way currently that won't end in a trap whereby we are just a decent team for the next five years -- and that would risk losing Wall to free agency.

Keep in mind that Arenas is one of my favorite alltime players. I don't want him on another team. But, we need another frontcourt player who is truly an impact player. One whom the league and refs have deemed someone worthy of a title. Because that's how this league works. It is a star's league. Stars get the calls -- from both the refs and the agents. They get the traded for. They attract free agents. Etc. And without a star big, I do not see us coming close to the three superteams that are being formed.

Barely, I think an Arenas trade right now would accomplish the opposite. I think it would stunt Wall's development and Dray and McGee's as well. I'd much rather cash in Blatche or McGee after an impressive season running alongside Gil and Wall than after a more frustrating one where there weaknesses are further exposed because there's undue pressure on them to produce offense.

IMHO, McGee is not an "option" on offense. His offense should consist of oops and putbacks. And frankly, with what little we know today, I'm more hopeful that Seraphin could become a stud than McGee. We jumped in front of San Antone and OKC to get this kid. That tells me something.

[barelyawake]

And Fish, I get that perspective. I get the whole "taste of winning" bit. I personally don't see Wall being harmed by a couple losing seasons. Kid is a leader, and even if he weren't, he still has that new car smell. It usually takes a couple seasons at least before a kid starts slacking on the dream that he's the next big thing. Kids come into the league with alot of hope. I don't see him getting down on himself, or opting for outside distractions, for many seasons. Hell, I personally think Wall is a winner and won't ever quit.

I only hope that after a year of "seeing what we have," we still have the courage to dismantle the team to move-up the ladder. I still say, at some point, we are probably going to need to either tank or trade Arenas or both. I just hope after a year, if we make the playoffs, we aren't locked into the "core" pieces of our roster. And I hope we realize when we've reached the ceiling in terms of market value for both Java and Blatche, and sell high.

[fishercob]

I only hope that after a year of "seeing what we have," we still have the courage to dismantle the team to move-up the ladder. I still say, at some point, we are probably going to need to either tank or trade Arenas or both. I just hope after a year, if we make the playoffs, we aren't locked into the "core" pieces of our roster. And I hope we realize when we've reached the ceiling in terms of market value for both Java and Blatche, and sell high.

Agree 100%, but here is where I have faith in Ted Leonsis, bigtime. The First "Commandment" of his little manifesto:

1. Ask yourself the big question: “Can this team–as constructed–ever win a championship?” If the answer is yes — stay the course and try to find the right formula — if the answer is no, then plan to rebuild. Don’t fake it–really do the analytics and be brutally honest. Once you have your answer, develop the game plan to try to REALLY win a championship. Always run away from experts that say, “We are just one player away.” Recognize there is no easy and fast systemic fix. It will be a bumpy ride–have confidence in the plan–”trust and verify: the progress — but don’t deviate from the plan.”

Wall is the only certainty here right now. The rest are maybes that need to prove they belong here long term. If they prove they can be foundational pieces, they'll be here. If not -- no matter their record, salary, or popularity -- they'll be gone. That helps me sleep at night!

[Tyrone Messby]

I'll chime in and add more to my thoughts.

I feel as if this team keeps Arenas around, they'll be a 7th or 8th seed at best but they'll also have the potential to knock out the 1st or 2nd seed over the next couple of seasons. This team will be entertaining to watch either way in my opinion, but...


I want this team to take their shots through the draft, but then again, EG is still running this team. The way I feel is that this team has a real shot to stake their claim at the top of the NBA mountain if they just base their gameplan on the draft over the next 2 seasons and then make a trade or bring in a star to fit the puzzle. We have our pillars with Wall, Blatche, and to a lesser extent McGee. Who knows what Booker or Seraphin will bring us? Maybe they can be added. As I see it now though, I don't think the rebuild would take that long. I'm thinking 2 more seasons and this team will be ready to roll. I really see a D.C. sports renaissance taking place in the next few years and I want the Wiz, Caps, Skins, and Nats in dominant harmony.

However; I'm afraid that Leonsis might take the "OKC plan" and run with it and never open up his pockets to get this team to the next level. I'm starting to wonder what his plan for the Caps is. They're knocking on the window to get to the Cup, but Leonsis refuses to open it. And his "yes" man McPhee is almost as big of an idiot as EG.

Having said that, I won't be mad if they decide to keep Arenas because there is certainly a chance that we see the Arenas of old and then we're sitting here with potentially the best backcourt in the NBA with one of the most promising PF's with Blatche. Maybe we should take this season to see what we have. Certainly nothing wrong with it.Then we're looking at filling the SF position and the C position which could be potentially filled with Booker and McGee. Give this team a bench and maybe they turn into contenders. Either way, I think we'll know alot about this team in over the next 2 seasons. Should be interesting no matter what. And I do have one thing that I haven't had since 2007 with this team...Hope.

[Hoopalotta]

Look, I'm not here to just argue for argument's sake or piss anyone off. I simply want what is best for this team. I want a championship-caliber team. Since the Miami thing (not to mention Chris Paul's quote), that is a pretty damn high hurdle. When Hughes and Gil were doing their thing, the league wasn't half as strong as it is now.

Agreed. Many here seem to misinterpret what the "and my cake too" angle ultimately will lead to in this environment.

I simply believe that we cannot be disneyfied in our estimations of what could happen or what our players "could" become. We need a clear vision of what the goal is and what a championship roster looks like. Do I think Blatche and Java have Allstar potential in terms of their bodies? Of course...snip....
I get that it's harder to predict mentality than it is how high someone jumps. But, there is no "potential" without the mindset to reach that potential. And changing mentality is not as easy as changing your mind over what you are ordering for dinner.

I'd differ there in terms of Blatce. I know you have made a number of references later in this post to working up Blatche's trade value for a better big, and I have no problem with that, but to talk about Blatche as a guy who's got potential based on his body is a mistake. Mentality? OK, I'll cede that as a potential pitfall, though I'm not all sold it's that bad as the develop[ment culture has been well askew here. But I think IQ is Blatche's biggest strength as an offensive player. The dude's pretty polished and see's the game.

Now, does that mean your idea of working up his trade value and moving him is inherently flawed? No, it doesn't and we should be open to that, but I will say that as I look around at the young bigman prospects around the league, I'm not all that impressed as far as seeing complete players. We'll see. If you take a David Lee type learning curve and plug it onto Derrick Favors, you've got a manimal, but as of now there's not a lot of young bigs who don't have some obvious fatal flaws or limitations. I'd need to go over it in a bit more detail, but Greg Oden kind of jumps out as the only real "shoulda' been" championship big to have come in the league of late. So in a "young big for young big" trade, I can't say who I'd be so up for as of now. Though again, I'm not saying we don't do it, but I'm not seeing fleets of better options, at least if we're looking for a shot creator.

As to McGee, a lot of questions will be answered this year.

....But, the one factor that always seems missed here, and somehow gets labelled as mysticism, is mindset and IQ.....

As an aside, let the historical record show that my mysticism comment was only in relation to crystal balling the top of future drafts and acting on it in a decisive manner a few years out. It was very clearly stated as being such and had absolutely nothing at all to do with evaluating IQ and mindset.

I have no problem with going into next season with the goal as rebuilding Gil's rep and growing our youth, if the eventual outcome is to trade said assets to build the foundation of a true championship caliber team. But, we both know that's not what will happen. If we barely make the playoffs, now we are a playoff team in the eyes of the fanbase. No way could we then decide to ditch Gil (or trade Blatche for a top pick) and tank. So, we are stuck and banking our future on a second round pick with major attitude problems to completely alter his mental make-up and become a force in the league. That, to me, is not a good plan.

That maps the road to mediocrity well, yes.

Blatche should be viewed as a luxury, not a key piece to bank our future solely around -- if for the simple fact that it would be one of the greatest turnarounds in the history of the game if he actually lives up to "potential."

I'm completely open to new ideas that realistic describe how we can build a championship team -- with or without Gil. But, they can't be based on what I see as the fantasy of Blatche battling the refs, history and years of mental make-up to suddenly becoming one of the best bigs in the league and guiding us to a championship. That, again with all respect, sounds like a movie plot, not reality.

We'll, your way and my way are about the same as far as getting things started, but I would hold open the evaluation window on Blatche. I actually think Blatche is in the upper 10-20% of young bigs as far as living up to his potential as an offensive player and I say that as someone not particularly high on his athletic gifts aside from agility. I don't see him as a guy who's left so many grapes on the vine, really. What he does well is all about skill, feel, instincts and decisions. He has a nice frame, but there's flocks of dudes with more physical upside than him. If he improves his ability to draw fouls (which is obviously a problem) and play help D, I like him paired with a big beast type.

His relationship with the Refs is an issue though, yes, as he actually draws contact pretty well but just hasn't endeared himself to the point where he gets the whistle. If he can't overcome that, it is indeed a big limitation to his efficiency and should come into our evaluations. But that is such a transient external factor that I'm hardly willing to close the book on things or even think about making a decision now. Even the presence of Wall's glow could affect his ability to get calls.

And again, going through the East team by team, I'm not blown away with the sorts of young bigs out there (ie. potential replacements). It's just a lot of guys with very specific strengths and weaknesses, even at the top.

All of the best players in the game are going to be on like four teams. We need a hell of alot better assets to even think of challenging them. We should view our players as assets until we get a combo that we can truly build around. Currently, we aren't close.

Yeah, this is a problem for which a solution is tough. Many won't really even acknowledge the problem. All I really have as of now is the idea of pushing the window backwards to attack when the super team - and sadly, the potential follow up squads - are less supple in their sinews. It's tough, though - the bar's up there pretty good.

[Hoopalotta]

Going back to the Josh Howard signing question, I've alluded to it before, but I don't see how we're teaching the kids to win by bringing in a high usage player who's going to take their shot attempts.

With Gil and Wall we have enough in the way of perimeter creators who slash for my liking and I'm just wanting a spacer who's content to be the 5th option. It's a less is more situation.

I'd just like a deferential glue guy so that Thornton can come off the bench with his pants on fire as the high usage sixth man.

[barelyawake]

Hoops, the mysticism line wasn't about you. I understand why me using the same word got you confused. But, I've been arguing that in determining "potential" mentally is a huge factor here for nearly a decade, and before that even, when Doc and I inhabited the ESPN boards.

[AceDegenerate]

I'd prefer the Wiz try and sign someone like Matt Barnes right now to Howard or others who they've been mentioned as interested in.

[Hoopalotta]

Hoops, the mysticism line wasn't about you. I understand why me using the same word got you confused. But, I've been arguing that in determining "potential" mentally is a huge factor here for nearly a decade, and before that even, when Doc and I inhabited the ESPN boards.

OK, my bad.

[Hoopalotta]

I'd prefer the Wiz try and sign someone like Matt Barnes right now to Howard or others who they've been mentioned as interested in.

If I were going that route, I'd definitely prefer Barnes too. What I seem to recall reading of late is that, as he's never really been paid before, he's looking for a hefty contract. Will he get it? I don't know, but I think we'd probably have to overpay (would he take a big salary slot on a one year deal?)

Still, despite certain 'shtick' aspects to him, there are some good things there.

[Dat2U]

And Fish, I get that perspective. I get the whole "taste of winning" bit. I personally don't see Wall being harmed by a couple losing seasons. Kid is a leader, and even if he weren't, he still has that new car smell. It usually takes a couple seasons at least before a kid starts slacking on the dream that he's the next big thing. Kids come into the league with alot of hope. I don't see him getting down on himself, or opting for outside distractions, for many seasons. Hell, I personally think Wall is a winner and won't ever quit.

I only hope that after a year of "seeing what we have," we still have the courage to dismantle the team to move-up the ladder. I still say, at some point, we are probably going to need to either tank or trade Arenas or both. I just hope after a year, if we make the playoffs, we aren't locked into the "core" pieces of our roster. And I hope we realize when we've reached the ceiling in terms of market value for both Java and Blatche, and sell high.

1. Losing hurts. Losing does take an incredible toll on the players, coaching staff & the organization. I'm not saying Wall can't handle it, I just don't see how it benefits him or helps in his growth.

2. I'm real tired of this strawman argument you've created with Blatche. There's not one person on this board who believe for a second that Blatche is a franchise big. Or that we don't need an anchor defensively in the post. We all get it and understand it. But just b/c he's not a franchise changing player doesn't mean we should be looking to deal him down the road.

3. I see no problem with Blatche being a core piece for years to come. I think you need stop focusing on what he can't do and realize he does bring a nice all-around skillset to the table. He might not be our Gasol or Bynum, but he definitely can be our own version of Lamar Odom.

If Blatche can get us a franchise player then I'm all ears, but until then, bitching about what he can't do is getting real old.

[nate33]

Going back to the Josh Howard signing question, I've alluded to it before, but I don't see how we're teaching the kids to win by bringing in a high usage player who's going to take their shot attempts.

With Gil and Wall we have enough in the way of perimeter creators who slash for my liking and I'm just wanting a spacer who's content to be the 5th option. It's a less is more situation.

I'd just like a deferential glue guy so that Thornton can come off the bench with his pants on fire as the high usage sixth man.

That's why I wanted Dorrell Wright. But with Wright gone, I'm not sure how many guys are left that fit your specifications. I'd love to acquire Nicholas Batum, but then, so would most other teams in this league. I suppose Matt Barnes is an option. I'd gladly trade for Battier but the sense from Houston fans is that he is untouchable. Trevor Ariza and Marvin Williams could be available, but both have contracts that last beyond 2012.

[Dat2U]

I think one's stance on this issue essentially boils down to one's stance on the following two questions:

1. What should we do with our remaining $10.7M in cap space?
2. What should we do with Arenas?

On Question 1, we have essentially three options:
1. Invest in a starting-caliber long-term solution at SF now (such as trading cap space for Marvin Williams).
2. Sign a stopgap vet SF on a one-year or two-year deal (such as Josh Howard)
3. Do nothing. Let Booker, Young and Cartier Martin fight it out for the starting role. Save our cap space for a BOYD trade and give more time for the youngsters to develop.

Question 1: Unless there was a starting SF or C available on an expiring contract through trade, I'd pretty much leave the space untouched. Just because the money is there doesn't mean we'd have to spend it.

A. So I'd say no to investing in a long term solution at SF because I don't see one out there. Unless Granger is going to be available.

B. I guess a stopgap vet on a one year deal is okay. Losing flexibility next offseason to sign a stopgap over a two year deal seems very shortsighted. I want to compete now, but not sacrifice a long term visison to do so. So no to Barnes unless its a one-yr deal. Also re-signing Josh Howard is plain miserable idea. Sorry, but I prefer to have someone who will be ready to play by training camp and whose ACL's are still intact. You guys might be excited by what Howard did in those four games in a Wiz uni last season, but b/c of the injury & the seriousness of it, he won't be that same player for a while, if ever again.

C. I definitely prefer to do nothing. I'm fine with Cartier Martin & the Alonzo Gee's of the world. An NBDL all-star would be fine with me. Booker is an undersized PF btw, at least imo.

Question 2: I'd keep Gil for now. Long term, I have no idea. We've got to let those cards playout
though. Dumping Gil would be a step back competivitely. I'd rather see what Wall & Arenas can do for a half a season before figuring out a course of action going forward.

[barelyawake]

Dat, if Lamar Odom is our best big, we ain't winning a championship against the megateams being created. The argument then becomes how the hell do you get a big better than Blatche? People still have much higher hopes than Lamar Odom for Blatche. Perhaps you don't. I'll take the time to grab specific quotes if you need them.

[Dat2U]

Dat, if Lamar Odom is our best big, we ain't winning a championship against the megateams being created. The argument then becomes how the hell do you get a big better than Blatche? People still have much higher hopes than Lamar Odom for Blatche. Perhaps you don't. I'll take the time to grab specific quotes if you need them.

Ok, so Blatche can't be our best big, then fine. I'm not sure how you define best but okay.

Even with that being said, that doesn't mean he can't be a part of the solution long term.

I think its pretty much close to a 100% that everyone on here believes we need a legit defensive big that can anchor the post. And probably everyone agrees that Blatche isn't going to be that guy.

So what's the problem?

[Consiglieri81]

All the rebuilding years, all the draft picks, all the "looking to compete down the line", it has NEVER worked out for the Washington Wizards. We still always end up back to square one.

you have it exactly backwards. The problem with this franchise is that we never tried to rebuild through the draft. We've always looked for the quick fix. Webber for Richmond; Hamilton for Stackhouse; #5 for Jamison; #5 for Miller. It always backfires.

Nate, you're dead wrong here. Grunfeld made foolish trades. When we made picks, he made foolish picks. I don't believe with the history of the franchise that the Pollin hiearchy had any clue or made management go through any thorough due diligence before they made a trade or made a pick.

You CAN sign some low level free agents, and make solid picks. Look at Portland these past 7 years. It didn't work out the way they wanted but they are a perfect example. Houston as well. Sign complimentary pieces and draft wisely.

To state we need to blow things up and start over when we never started to begin with is foolish. You're logic is "it hasn't worked before, why try again?". When you have a company run with nepotism and incompetence for 20 years, then suddenly are blessed with a CEO and new ownership of the highest level you don't hogtie them with the decisions and expecations of the aforementioned incompetents.

Nate, these past few months the doldrums of the Wiz franchise and history have really shown through in your posts and suggestions (trade Arenas for Curry, WHAT?....etc). Now tank because the org has had no luck with poor management? Massive respect for your knowledge of the cap and the game. But don't forget this franchise is not cursed with anything but poor ownership and management.........that is nearly gone now.

Grunfeld made foolish trades and free agent signings no doubt, but foolish picks? I disagree sharply. Compare his picks to what we were used to pre-grunfeld. Pre-Grunfeld this place was a total freaking wasteland of moronic pick after moronic pick (almost all of which were high picks) and the few times we didn't blow our picks, we traded young and big (Rasheed, Webber) for old and small (Strick, and Richmond). Stupid arse franchise, moronic, and horrific to put it mildly. Hell we traded a lottery pick at one point for freaking 4 games of mark price tooling around courts in a lark because of plantar faciaitas before he hung up his hi tops and retired.

This team was an umitigated disaster that was 10,000x worse than what we saw the last two years.

Look back:

'85: Kenny Green and Manute Bol

'86: Hot Plate Williams and Steve Mitchell

'87: Mugsy and Duane Washington and Derrick Dowel

'88: Harvey Grant and Ledeal Eackles

'89: Tom Hammonds and Ed Horton

'90: Greg Foster and AJ English

'91: LaBradford Smith

'92: Guggs and Mark Price

'93: Cheney and the Giant

'94: Howard and Jim McIlvaine

'95: Wallace and T. Rencher

'96: Ronnie Henderson

'97: Shammgod! Drobgnac!

'98: Jahidi White

'99: Rip Hamilton, Calvin Booth

'00: Mike Smith

I give the Jordan era a pass because at least it was going outside Abe's Triumvirate of f---wits.

Compare that to Grunfeld:

'03: Was he '03? If so Arvis Hayes and Steve Blake

'04: Peter Ramos

'05: Andray Blatche

'06: Pecherov and Veeremenko

'07: Nick Young, D Mac

'08: Javale McGee

'09: Sold and Sold

'10 Wall, Seraphin, Booker, big dude to block shots

Now I'll grant that there's a lot of debris here, but the bulk of those blown wiz picks were high 1st and 2nd's, not so for EG, and EG still managed to find in Blatche, Young, DMac and McGee guys who belong in the league, all of them, every single one of them picked late in their rounds outside of the easy zone where we normally pick. This team has been abysmal on draft day, abysmal regardless of where it picked for freaking ever. Now granted we haven't unearthed superstardom w/Grunfeld till probably now, and it was a no brainer, but even so, McGee was huge value for where we got him, Young was not much worse or better than can be expected for where he was selected, D Mac was much better than should be expected in that slot, ditto Blatche. None of the, "What in the ---, you idiots!!!! that marked my experience as a boulez fan in the eighties and for much of the nineties (granted they stunned me a couple of times, discovering Guggs, actually getting huge value in Howard, and stealing Rip Hamilton (but then flushing that down the toilet by trading him for a cancerous d-bag, but those were rare rare moments).

I kinda agree on the bulk of your other points, and really, really want us to land a quality smart GM, who is on the cutting edge, and i want to heave the current one out the door, but all the same I'm happy we landed McGee, Blatche, and hell even Young, and the now lost DMac, and hell even Seraphin w/picks outside the blue chip zone. That's pretty damn good as far as im concerned, and hell maybe even booker will be a find.

Personally, I want to suck for a few years, I think we need to land another blue chip pick or two to potentially build something really good here, and w/Wall as the definitive leader to build around, any other strategy doesn't really make sense to me, as a huge free agent signing would disrupt chemistry and the annoited one's development as the go to leader. He doesn't need anyone to challenge his authority, he just needs complimentary pieces, another 2+super talents, hopefully landed in the draft, and that will take patience. I don't want quick fixes. As a DC fan we should all be used to what works (the Caps Strategy, sort of the Nats Strategy which is unfortunately being short circuited by cheap ownership) and most definitely not the prior Boulez strategy of no plan and loyalty, and sure as hell no cutting edge, and not the redskins strategy of desperately trying to plug leaks year after year when the ship can't sail to begin with. Lets take our medicine for 2-3 years and then find ourselves w/a damn fine team by '12-'13, '13-'14 at the latest that can freaking last. We've been in the wilderness for freaking thirty damn years, w/a few "The Malone Years", and a few "Knucklehead Nineties 8 seed, we hope" years, and a few "The Little Big 3" years, all amounting to very little and mostly 18-35 win seasons, bottom 10 in the league finishes for 3/4's of our years. Enough already, lets take our medicine and build a damn winner. It'll take time, but we've got time, what we don't have is the patience for a half-arsed job. Which as been the M.O. of the Boulez and the Redskins for the past 30 years and past 20 years respectively.

Happily, I'm positive this is what Leonsis actually plans to do.

[BanndNDC]

It's one thing to not mind sucking (in the hopes of landing top draft picks) but it's another thing to sell off decent players (at bargain basement prices) in order to ensure sucking. the best way to succeed is to maximize the use of our assets. letting arenas rehab his value and blatche create value before trading them would bring a higher long term return then selling them now for less.

right now arenas is worth nothing but maybe an expiring contract. keeping him would sacrifice 5 or so draft spots in 2011. let his value grow again before trading him would make up that difference in future assets. giving blatche time to solidify his value would do likewise. we don't need to dump them financially so why not hold onto them, we've already taken the loss we've and the potential benefits (extra assets) are worth more than the potential costs (immediate draft position).

there is no need to slash and burn. slow growth means maximizing the use of our assets.


We all now the pieces we need to seriously compete. An inside presence, an elite rebounder, a sg/sf defensive specialist and a long range shooter/scorer (if arenas is dealt). the only difference we have is how to acquire them. I am personally not convinced that the best way to acquire these pieces is through making big bets every year on a high draft position. High draft position does give us better odds of getting players that fill tow needs (an elite rebounding inside presence a la dwight howard) but those are only available at the very top and requires a lot of luck. frequently more limited and single skill players are available in the mid range (haywood/aldrich, patterson/blair, wallace/bell etc.). smart/focused drafting with a little luck and use of the MLE can net those within 3 years. I just think the odds of acquiring the necessary small pieces to complement wall/arenas and maybe blatche are better than the odds of going all in for a shot at the next cousins and durant. it's more conservative and runs the potential problem of plateauing at a perennial mid level playoff team but the odds are better. it's betting on colors and not numbers in roulette.