RealGM

Let's assume Ted came in and fired Ernie after the Rubio/Curry for Randy Foye and Mike Miller deal . . . then basically just sat pat, resigning our FAs and making the same draft manuevering but not making the deals for aging vets. Would you rather have this team going forward than the one we have?

PG Wall/Foye/Mack (Temple)
SG Beal/Young/Foye (Rice)
SF Webster/Porter (Singleton)
PF Blatche/Booker/Vesely
C McGee/Seraphin (Gooden)

Plus a pick between 10 and 20 in this year's draft.

I don't understand the point. It is like getting rid of EG's best work, and keeping his worst.

Wouldn't we have millions in cap space, and how would that team have to 10th to 20th pick in the draft? That team would clearly be in the high lottery.

If you were to say the Wizards had signed other players rather than Nick, McGee and Blatche, I might understand the point of this exercise, but it is totally lost on me what you are trying to prove.

Also, I don't understand why the Wizards are stuck with EG's awful draft history.

So, to answer your question, under this scenario, I would prefer the team the Wizards have to the one that is mentioned in this post.

Would you like your leaky boat with or without a bucket?

penbeast0 wrote:Let's assume Ted came in and fired Ernie after the Rubio/Curry for Randy Foye and Mike Miller deal . . . then basically just sat pat, resigning our FAs and making the same draft manuevering but not making the deals for aging vets. Would you rather have this team going forward than the one we have?

PG Wall/Foye/Mack (Temple)
SG Beal/Young/Foye (Rice)
SF Webster/Porter (Singleton)
PF Blatche/Booker/Vesely
C McGee/Seraphin (Gooden)

Plus a pick between 10 and 20 in this year's draft.

And about a zillion dollars in cap room. And that pick would be top 10 because we would suck. I also think we would not have resigned McGee. Not for $11M a year.

nate33 wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:Let's assume Ted came in and fired Ernie after the Rubio/Curry for Randy Foye and Mike Miller deal . . . then basically just sat pat, resigning our FAs and making the same draft manuevering but not making the deals for aging vets. Would you rather have this team going forward than the one we have?

PG Wall/Foye/Mack (Temple)
SG Beal/Young/Foye (Rice)
SF Webster/Porter (Singleton)
PF Blatche/Booker/Vesely
C McGee/Seraphin (Gooden)

Plus a pick between 10 and 20 in this year's draft.

And about a zillion dollars in cap room. And that pick would be top 10 because we would suck. I also think we would not have resigned McGee. Not for $11M a year.

And we could resign Gil


But how much cap would we have with Nick making 9M a year and McGee making $10,750,000 to $12,000,000

And bring back

I'm assuming (a) we did resign McGee and (b) that the choice is mediocre because otherwise it would be too easy a choice.

penbeast0 wrote:I'm assuming (a) we did resign McGee and (b) that the choice is mediocre because otherwise it would be too easy a choice.

Is McGee still co-host of Shaqtin the Fool? Does Blatchemo continue to have Wizards stats or does he switch to Nets stats? Trying to gauge tradability, since those two and Young still probably need to be moved.

Considering the unknowns of Gortat/Ariza, if those two are resigned for not too much/long (or just Gortat), I'd say current team. Otherwise, I'd probably go with the other team. I see a lot of options for trades with that imaginary team, much more than with the current team. A different GM could do something with that, although if EG was fired after 2009 and this is the best the next guy did, I'd start to wonder if it wasn't time for a change again.

What I'm curious about is how Washington would end up with a pick between 10-20 with that disaster of a roster.

As CCJ used to say, without the deals for Nene and Okafor, our young bigs would have had the time and focused coaching to develop closer to their potential. So, Seraphin and Vesely would be better, Booker probably about the same, and Blatche presumably more like his NJ form while McGee would be a major disappointment (as he is in Denver). And with that development and Foye instead of our terrible disaster (Eric Maynor anyone?) at 3rd guard, somehow we apparently won enough games to be at least a 1 and out in the playoffs.

That's the theory.

penbeast0 wrote:As CCJ used to say, without the deals for Nene and Okafor, our young bigs would have had the time and focused coaching to develop closer to their potential. So, Seraphin and Vesely would be better, Booker probably about the same, and Blatche presumably more like his NJ form while McGee would be a major disappointment (as he is in Denver). And with that development and Foye instead of our terrible disaster (Eric Maynor anyone?) at 3rd guard, somehow we apparently won enough games to be at least a 1 and out in the playoffs.

That's the theory.

I like the guard rotation, and maybe Young turns out a little better than he is now, but at least he can score off the bench (as can Foye) and he can probably still play some man D. It's that front line, but there would be some trade options, with Blatchemo expiring next year and McGee the following year.

You guys arguing about the potential of McGee, Blatche and Nick Young are freaking hopeless.

penbeast0 wrote:As CCJ used to say, without the deals for Nene and Okafor, our young bigs would have had the time and focused coaching to develop closer to their potential. So, Seraphin and Vesely would be better, Booker probably about the same, and Blatche presumably more like his NJ form while McGee would be a major disappointment (as he is in Denver). And with that development and Foye instead of our terrible disaster (Eric Maynor anyone?) at 3rd guard, somehow we apparently won enough games to be at least a 1 and out in the playoffs.

That's the theory.

I don't think those are safe assumptions, Penbeast.

NBA coaching staffs are not one guy. Every player has access to detailed personal instruction, skill development, and mentoring. Moreover, do you really think that established veteran players were really taking away any time or focus from the coaches who are being paid to develop players? They already are what they are, if anything veterans take less coaching (unless they have a problematic personality).

There are critical factors in player development, and almost all of them belong to the player who is developing. Focus, effort, willingness to accept coaching, and sheer talent are all important things that would not have changed a bit. Moreover, Blatche had a long period of burn where he (and McGee) were the focal point of the organization's development for big men. That turned out poorly. Why would it be different than it actually was? History says the Wiz front office runs a loose ship. Whatever influence they do have on players appears to be in the negative.

Well, the other assumption is that they are complete disasters and we are in the heart of the Jabari Parker derby which, again, would make this question too easy (at least for me).

Assumptions have to be made, but not all assumptions are equally reasonable or supported by available evidence.

With that said, I don't think the criteria for determining which assumptions are valid should be based on what makes the question "too easy." I think the criteria should be based on what gives the most supportable and theoretically accurate conclusion.

The roster set out about would not win very many games based on the available evidence regarding the quality and production of the players within it. That information should inform our opinions for this mental exercise, else why are we even having a conversation?

Illuminaire wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:As CCJ used to say, without the deals for Nene and Okafor, our young bigs would have had the time and focused coaching to develop closer to their potential. So, Seraphin and Vesely would be better, Booker probably about the same, and Blatche presumably more like his NJ form while McGee would be a major disappointment (as he is in Denver). And with that development and Foye instead of our terrible disaster (Eric Maynor anyone?) at 3rd guard, somehow we apparently won enough games to be at least a 1 and out in the playoffs.

That's the theory.

I don't think those are safe assumptions, Penbeast.

NBA coaching staffs are not one guy. Every player has access to detailed personal instruction, skill development, and mentoring. Moreover, do you really think that established veteran players were really taking away any time or focus from the coaches who are being paid to develop players? They already are what they are, if anything veterans take less coaching (unless they have a problematic personality).

There are critical factors in player development, and almost all of them belong to the player who is developing. Focus, effort, willingness to accept coaching, and sheer talent are all important things that would not have changed a bit. Moreover, Blatche had a long period of burn where he (and McGee) were the focal point of the organization's development for big men. That turned out poorly. Why would it be different than it actually was? History says the Wiz front office runs a loose ship. Whatever influence they do have on players appears to be in the negative.

penbeast, thanks for including me in the discussion. Life has me focusing a lot of attention elsewhere. Yes, I would say young guys would have gotten more time.

The guy the trades hurt the most IMO is Kevin Seraphin. He had a very impressive streak of double figure scoring as a starter. He's a capable defender. The Wizards screwed the guy's career. He is flawed in that he looks to score too often and he doesn't rebound well or bring winning energy. However, flash back to 2011-2012 and Seraphin was a promising player.

Another thing I think was not the right move was to get a big man and THEN amnesty Blacthe. Andray would have been better next to healthier Nene. I thought Okafor plus Nene was when the Wizards went backwards and blamed everything on youth.

I was wrong about McGee. Javale's a net negative. No way around it. I was wrong about him.

Also, my assessment didn't take into account just how effective both Okafor and Ariza would be. The latter turned out to become a stud this past season.

Looking at Randy being re-signed, lots of optimism after they made the playoffs, and the end of things--I would have to say Ernie and Ted's means proved justified. I will say they developed Wall and Beal in a winning environment. It will be okay if they re-sign Ariza and Gortat, and if the rest of the East doesn't overtake them in improvements from the draft. If, however, they don't resign Gortat and/or Ariza then Wittman's not going to look like a good coach. Wall being a max player could really disappoint if he doesn't get back Ariza and Gortat.

I still feel bad about the way the Wizards did their young players. I think the playoff success coud prove to be fool's gold. But I have to say that this past season was a success and I'll say I was wrong ... for now.

I still think there's some hope for Seraphin, but the fact that his stats were among the very worst in the NBA says the Wizards did what every single NBA team would have done - which is to find somebody better and to put him on the bench. He was given more opportunities here than perhaps any other team would have given him. And teams like San Antonio and Miami would never have given him a second look. The NBA is not the D League.

Ruzious wrote:I still think there's some hope for Seraphin, but the fact that his stats were among the very worst in the NBA says the Wizards did what every single NBA team would have done - which is to find somebody better and to put him on the bench. He was given more opportunities here than perhaps any other team would have given him. And teams like San Antonio and Miami would never have given him a second look. The NBA is not the D League.

Seraphin has got Mucho physical talent. His issue is all mental. He's a nice shooter, has got an NBA body. If I were a team, I'd go after him on the cheap in the off-season, and try and use a new coaching staff to perhaps find a diamond in the rough.

Ruzious wrote:I still think there's some hope for Seraphin, but the fact that his stats were among the very worst in the NBA says the Wizards did what every single NBA team would have done - which is to find somebody better and to put him on the bench. He was given more opportunities here than perhaps any other team would have given him. And teams like San Antonio and Miami would never have given him a second look. The NBA is not the D League.

What would the Spurs have done with Seraphin? They would have done with Seraphin what they did with Splitter, they would have let him get seasoning and experience overseas for a few years, or they would have had him playing full-time in the D-League under the close supervision of the coaching staff before rolling him out.

Kevin does has some skills, but he is never going to improve/develop with the Wizards.