ImageImageImageImageImage

Jerome Robinson thread

Moderators: nate33, montestewart, LyricalRico

payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,121
And1: 4,355
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#21 » by payitforward » Fri Feb 7, 2020 1:21 pm

bsilver wrote:McCrae is better and cheaper. At least Thomas is gone and Mathews looks like a good talent to backup Beal. I don’t have much faith in Shepard at this point.

I think you are missing something, bsilver. Here's what I wrote about yesterday's deals in the Shabazz thread. Tell me what you think:

payitforward wrote:...Think of... (yesterday's) 2 deals together, & what you see is Napier replacing IT, & Robinson replacing McRae.

In the first case, it's an obvious upgrade. Napier is actually good! In the second case, because Robinson is young, he has an upside that McRae doesn't have.

In short, it was a pair of minor, but cleverly thought-out moves. Best of all is the secondary message -- that we are continuing to build patiently through youth. IOW, from yesterday's small trades we learn that Tommy has an overall strategy driving what he does. We're not putting bandaids on top of bandaids any more.

Now, there was a cost to this -- namely, the rights to Sanon. We'll see what that amounts to.

But, wait, there's more! We should be able to re-sign Napier on the cheap. & having him makes Ish Smith dispensable. Now, Ish has been better than expected. But, Napier is better, cheaper, & younger.

IOW, because we have Napier, Ish can be traded in the off season, possibly for another young asset. Once this happens (I think it will, & I certainly hope it does), only then will we see the full benefit of yesterday's moves.

Once again, Tommy has really impressed me with his clever, thoughtful work!
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,121
And1: 4,355
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#22 » by payitforward » Fri Feb 7, 2020 2:11 pm

bsilver wrote:McCrae is better and cheaper...

No question that McRae has been the better player -- by a mile! But, I think you may be missing the point of these deals.

For starters, comparing the value of McRae vs. Robinson may not be as simple & straightforward as you make it seem.

As to "cheaper," for example, I expect McRae to command more $$ in the off-season -- at least I sure hope he does! He deserves it! -- so that I don't think there'll be much difference if any between what they make next season.

Moreover, McRae will be unrestricted 2+ months from now. There would have been a solid chance that he wound up somewhere else, whereupon it's a total loss, we'd get nothing for him. OTOH, we have control over Robinson for a couple of years. We could let him go this off season.

In fact, we could do that & then re-sign Jordan McRae! In which case, yesterday's deals would resolve to having gotten Shabazz Napier for IT & the rights to Issuf Sanon.

On the other side of the equation, Robinson is only now about to turn 23. There's certainly a chance that he develops. I'm not suggesting he has a high ceiling, don't get me wrong. No chance of that -- he wasn't all that good a college player (I thought he was a ridiculous pick @#13). But, it wouldn't be a huge surprise for him to be as good as McRae next year. Well... something of a surprise, it's true! :)

One more thing: Robinson was a lottery pick, & for better or worse these guys get more chances to succeed than you would expect; they retain some trade value for @ 4 years usually -- even if they're bad. Thus, I think of Robinson as tradable right now (i.e. in the off season) for a reasonably high R2 pick.

bsilver wrote:...At least Thomas is gone and Mathews looks like a good talent to backup Beal. I don’t have much faith in Sheppard at this point.

But... but... for Thomas to be gone, we needed to acquire a replacement for him! & that is what Tommy Sheppard got for Jordan McRae -- Shabazz Napier. How this reduces your faith in Sheppard, I do not understand -- especially since he is the guy who found Garrison Mathews! :)
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,165
And1: 9,642
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#23 » by nate33 » Fri Feb 7, 2020 2:21 pm

bsilver wrote:McCrae is better and cheaper. At least Thomas is gone and Mathews looks like a good talent to backup Beal. I don’t have much faith in Shepard at this point.

I think McRae's next contract will be more expensive.
Ruzious
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 41,052
And1: 6,906
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#24 » by Ruzious » Fri Feb 7, 2020 3:03 pm

Robinson's been ridiculously bad as a pro. My gut feeling is both Wash and LAC made the trade to avoid having to cut the player they traded. Mentally, it's easier to cut someone you haven't worked with.
"Look, you never know when you may need to borrow a cup of sugar, maybe some milk or a handgun" - Dan C. from Texas
Ruzious
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 41,052
And1: 6,906
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#25 » by Ruzious » Fri Feb 7, 2020 3:45 pm

payitforward wrote:
bsilver wrote:McCrae is better and cheaper. At least Thomas is gone and Mathews looks like a good talent to backup Beal. I don’t have much faith in Shepard at this point.

I think you are missing something, bsilver. Here's what I wrote about yesterday's deals in the Shabazz thread. Tell me what you think:

payitforward wrote:...Think of... (yesterday's) 2 deals together, & what you see is Napier replacing IT, & Robinson replacing McRae.

In the first case, it's an obvious upgrade. Napier is actually good! In the second case, because Robinson is young, he has an upside that McRae doesn't have.

In short, it was a pair of minor, but cleverly thought-out moves. Best of all is the secondary message -- that we are continuing to build patiently through youth. IOW, from yesterday's small trades we learn that Tommy has an overall strategy driving what he does. We're not putting bandaids on top of bandaids any more.

Now, there was a cost to this -- namely, the rights to Sanon. We'll see what that amounts to.

But, wait, there's more! We should be able to re-sign Napier on the cheap. & having him makes Ish Smith dispensable. Now, Ish has been better than expected. But, Napier is better, cheaper, & younger.

IOW, because we have Napier, Ish can be traded in the off season, possibly for another young asset. Once this happens (I think it will, & I certainly hope it does), only then will we see the full benefit of yesterday's moves.

Once again, Tommy has really impressed me with his clever, thoughtful work!

Since you re-posted your own post, I'll feel much better about bashing it. :)

Your basing your high opinion of the trade on the hope/expectation (?) that it will make it easier to trade Ish Smith... Sooo, are you using a crystal ball or a time machine? I mean... they could just sign Napier in the offseason - or acquire any of a dozen or 2 other point guards. Or, just as likely, they'll end up keeping Ish anyway and not re-sign Napier.
"Look, you never know when you may need to borrow a cup of sugar, maybe some milk or a handgun" - Dan C. from Texas
User avatar
FAH1223
RealGM
Posts: 11,177
And1: 3,974
Joined: Nov 01, 2005
Location: Laurel, MD
       

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#26 » by FAH1223 » Fri Feb 7, 2020 3:53 pm

long suffrin' boulez fan wrote:He has a really good looking shot.

It hasn’t gone in yet much though.

Probably worth taking a chance... I was bullish on Sannon though


Good looking shot, not going in a lot..

Jarvis Hayes? :lol:
Image
bsilver
Senior
Posts: 612
And1: 274
Joined: Aug 09, 2005
Location: New Haven, CT

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#27 » by bsilver » Fri Feb 7, 2020 4:00 pm

My main problem with trades is that I don’t believe Robinson will be any good. He’ll be 23 in two weeks and was a high draft pick so should have had the opportunity to show what he had. He’s been bad. Of course only time will tell.

I feel we never gave McRae enough respect. Management always seemed to feel they could do better. I hope he does get a good raise. OTOH we could probably have signed to cheap several year contract a few months ago.

Will Napier be an eventual upgrade over Smith? I don’t know. They play a different style. Smith’s been pleasant surprise and some games has been the best player on the court.

In the long run this trade probably makes little difference. We’re only talking about backups. My hope is that Garrison Mathews continues to impress and all these other guys will soon seem irrelevant. He may be the only one with major potential.
Shoe
Rookie
Posts: 1,013
And1: 750
Joined: Nov 06, 2017
 

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#28 » by Shoe » Fri Feb 7, 2020 4:05 pm

bsilver wrote:My main problem with trades is that I don’t believe Robinson will be any good. He’ll be 23 in two weeks and was a high draft pick so should have had the opportunity to show what he had. He’s been bad. Of course only time will tell.

I feel we never gave McRae enough respect. Management always seemed to feel they could do better. I hope he does get a good raise. OTOH we could probably have signed to cheap several year contract a few months ago.

Will Napier be an eventual upgrade over Smith? I don’t know. They play a different style. Smith’s been pleasant surprise and some games has been the best player on the court.

In the long run this trade probably makes little difference. We’re only talking about backups. My hope is that Garrison Mathews continues to impress and all these other guys will soon seem irrelevant. He may be the only one with major potential.


Adjusting to the NBA is hard. This year I can't blame him for feeling a tremendous amount of pressure to perform. Now he is off a contender and with a general manager that likes him, he should be able to get more comfortable little by little.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,165
And1: 9,642
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#29 » by nate33 » Fri Feb 7, 2020 4:54 pm

Ultimately, IT for Napier is clearly an upgrade. McRae for Robinson is an unknown. We won't know what McRae will cost next year and we don't know how much Robinson will improve.

It's also worth noting that Robinson's cost next year is pretty much irrelevant. No matter what we did, we were going to have a payroll somewhere above the cap and somewhere below the luxtax after resigning Bertans and signing an MLE vet. After using the MLE, the only exceptions we would have had to add other players is the vet-minimum exception (or Early Bird rights of about $3M if we had retained McRae). So it's either Robinson on his $3.7M contract, or a vet minimum guy, or McRae (if nobody offered him more than $3M).

So the only real question here is whether or not Robinson next year will be better than a vet-minimum guy or McRae. I don't know the answer to that.

One other note: Robinson's higher cap number might help to facilitate some trade in the future.
JWizmentality
RealGM
Posts: 13,588
And1: 4,599
Joined: Nov 21, 2004
Location: Cosmic Totality
   

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#30 » by JWizmentality » Fri Feb 7, 2020 8:34 pm

FAH1223 wrote:
long suffrin' boulez fan wrote:He has a really good looking shot.

It hasn’t gone in yet much though.

Probably worth taking a chance... I was bullish on Sannon though


Good looking shot, not going in a lot..

Jarvis Hayes? :lol:


Bradley Beal?
Shoe
Rookie
Posts: 1,013
And1: 750
Joined: Nov 06, 2017
 

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#31 » by Shoe » Fri Feb 7, 2020 8:55 pm

JWizmentality wrote:
FAH1223 wrote:
long suffrin' boulez fan wrote:He has a really good looking shot.

It hasn’t gone in yet much though.

Probably worth taking a chance... I was bullish on Sannon though


Good looking shot, not going in a lot..

Jarvis Hayes? :lol:


Bradley Beal?


Incredibly true if we remember early on, even now Beals not sinking his shots. But we've seen him evolve throughout his career and hopefully he takes Jerome under his wing.
prime1time
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,468
And1: 790
Joined: Nov 02, 2016
         

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#32 » by prime1time » Fri Feb 7, 2020 9:39 pm

This is how basketball works. If Jerome Robinson was putting up good numbers he wouldn't be available. The Wizards made this trade based on their scouting report from last years draft. The front office believes in him so I'm perfectly fine with giving him a chance. What do the Wizards have to lose? Were we going to resign McRae?

I think the change of scenery will do Robinson some good. Young players need to be given opportunities to play without worrying about being pulled.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,165
And1: 9,642
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#33 » by nate33 » Fri Feb 7, 2020 10:21 pm

prime1time wrote:This is how basketball works. If Jerome Robinson was putting up good numbers he wouldn't be available. The Wizards made this trade based on their scouting report from last years draft. The front office believes in him so I'm perfectly fine with giving him a chance. What do the Wizards have to lose? Were we going to resign McRae?

I think the change of scenery will do Robinson some good. Young players need to be given opportunities to play without worrying about being pulled.

It's a good strategy to "buy low" on guys as long as you aren't risking any long term assets. Sometimes those deals will pay off and you end up with a valuable asset to utilize or trade. Sometimes, those deals don't pay off.

In this case, if the move doesn't pay off, all we've lost is a roster spot for one season. There is no real downside.
User avatar
long suffrin' boulez fan
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,890
And1: 1,969
Joined: Nov 18, 2005
Location: Just above Ted's double bottom line
       

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#34 » by long suffrin' boulez fan » Fri Feb 7, 2020 10:59 pm

nate33 wrote:
prime1time wrote:This is how basketball works. If Jerome Robinson was putting up good numbers he wouldn't be available. The Wizards made this trade based on their scouting report from last years draft. The front office believes in him so I'm perfectly fine with giving him a chance. What do the Wizards have to lose? Were we going to resign McRae?

I think the change of scenery will do Robinson some good. Young players need to be given opportunities to play without worrying about being pulled.

It's a good strategy to "buy low" on guys as long as you aren't risking any long term assets. Sometimes those deals will pay off and you end up with a valuable asset to utilize or trade. Sometimes, those deals don't pay off.

In this case, if the move doesn't pay off, all we've lost is a roster spot for one season. There is no real downside.


I agree with the theory, but not with the facts. We traded Sannon for Robinson, right?

So it wasn’t a roster spot, but rather the comparative upsides of two young players we’re wagering.
In Rizzo we trust
Ruzious
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 41,052
And1: 6,906
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#35 » by Ruzious » Fri Feb 7, 2020 11:13 pm

long suffrin' boulez fan wrote:
nate33 wrote:
prime1time wrote:This is how basketball works. If Jerome Robinson was putting up good numbers he wouldn't be available. The Wizards made this trade based on their scouting report from last years draft. The front office believes in him so I'm perfectly fine with giving him a chance. What do the Wizards have to lose? Were we going to resign McRae?

I think the change of scenery will do Robinson some good. Young players need to be given opportunities to play without worrying about being pulled.

It's a good strategy to "buy low" on guys as long as you aren't risking any long term assets. Sometimes those deals will pay off and you end up with a valuable asset to utilize or trade. Sometimes, those deals don't pay off.

In this case, if the move doesn't pay off, all we've lost is a roster spot for one season. There is no real downside.


I agree with the theory, but not with the facts. We traded Sannon for Robinson, right?

So it wasn’t a roster spot, but rather the comparative upsides of two young players we’re wagering.

Sanon went to the Knicks as part of the trade, IT to the Clipps, and Robinson to the Wiz.
"Look, you never know when you may need to borrow a cup of sugar, maybe some milk or a handgun" - Dan C. from Texas
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,165
And1: 9,642
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#36 » by nate33 » Fri Feb 7, 2020 11:25 pm

Ruzious wrote:
long suffrin' boulez fan wrote:
nate33 wrote:It's a good strategy to "buy low" on guys as long as you aren't risking any long term assets. Sometimes those deals will pay off and you end up with a valuable asset to utilize or trade. Sometimes, those deals don't pay off.

In this case, if the move doesn't pay off, all we've lost is a roster spot for one season. There is no real downside.


I agree with the theory, but not with the facts. We traded Sannon for Robinson, right?

So it wasn’t a roster spot, but rather the comparative upsides of two young players we’re wagering.

Sanon went to the Knicks as part of the trade, IT to the Clipps, and Robinson to the Wiz.

And by roster spot, I was referring to next year. Robinson will now be part of the 15 man roster next year. There's no avoiding it (unless he is traded or we eat $3.7M in cutting him). That's the real opportunity cost of acquiring him. The money is irrelevant because we were limited in how we could add salary by the exceptions we had available, not by the luxtax threshold.
User avatar
long suffrin' boulez fan
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,890
And1: 1,969
Joined: Nov 18, 2005
Location: Just above Ted's double bottom line
       

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#37 » by long suffrin' boulez fan » Sat Feb 8, 2020 2:31 am

nate33 wrote:
Ruzious wrote:
long suffrin' boulez fan wrote:
I agree with the theory, but not with the facts. We traded Sannon for Robinson, right?

So it wasn’t a roster spot, but rather the comparative upsides of two young players we’re wagering.

Sanon went to the Knicks as part of the trade, IT to the Clipps, and Robinson to the Wiz.

And by roster spot, I was referring to next year. Robinson will now be part of the 15 man roster next year. There's no avoiding it (unless he is traded or we eat $3.7M in cutting him). That's the real opportunity cost of acquiring him. The money is irrelevant because we were limited in how we could add salary by the exceptions we had available, not by the luxtax threshold.


Ah. My bad.
In Rizzo we trust
truwizfan4evr
Analyst
Posts: 3,733
And1: 530
Joined: Jul 07, 2008
Location: tanking
 

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#38 » by truwizfan4evr » Sat Feb 8, 2020 3:05 am

he looked good in the g league at least.
You Shouldn't Play For Money, But You Should Play Because You Have A Passion For It -- Bradley Beal
User avatar
gambitx777
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,173
And1: 571
Joined: Dec 18, 2012

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#39 » by gambitx777 » Sat Feb 8, 2020 3:05 am

I think he has a good shot at being a good shooter. And those are important .
truwizfan4evr wrote:he looked good in the g league at least.


Sent from my SM-G965U1 using RealGM mobile app
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,121
And1: 4,355
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Jerome Robinson thread 

Post#40 » by payitforward » Sat Feb 8, 2020 3:26 am

Ummm, what does anyone think we were going to get for IT & the rights to Sanon?
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.

Return to Washington Wizards