ImageImageImageImageImage

Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX

Moderators: LyricalRico, nate33, montestewart

User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,326
And1: 9,753
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#121 » by nate33 » Sun Oct 4, 2020 7:29 pm

atlantabbq99 wrote:I was wondering if the DC fans would be interested in #6 for #9 and a protected 2021 pick?

I want the Hawks to draft Aaron Nesmith and #6 seems too high for that.


TGW wrote:I would pass on that trade. No reason to trade up IMO, even for Okongwu. Stay at #9 and take BPA.

Agreed. A future first round pick is an awful lot to give up just to move up 3 slots.

I'd trade our #9 and #39 to move up, but no future 1st. According to Kevin Pelton's pick value calculations, the #9 + #39 is actually almost exactly worth the #6.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,326
And1: 9,753
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#122 » by nate33 » Sun Oct 4, 2020 7:33 pm

Frichuela wrote:Another trade to consider -if we can not get Okongwu at #9- and the Pelicans agree is:

The Wiz send #9 + Schofield and the Pelicans send #13 + Josh Hart.

Why would the Pelicans do it? They may not want to pay Josh Hart in 2021 when he is an RFA and they may like a prospect at #9 such as Vassell, Okoro or Halliburton that will not be available at #13.

Why would the Wiz do it? Instead of using the MLE on a Derrick Jones or Torrey Craig, we may want to get Josh Hart on a cheap 1 year rookie deal and then extend him for an MLE type deal. Hart may be a bit short at 6’5” (and 6‘9” wingspan) to play wing, but he played plenty of minutes last year as a 3, and put up superb rebounding numbers and strong defense.

Interesting idea, but I don't want to sacrifice picks for a rental. I agree that Hart could help a bit, but we can just sign him next summer if he is the guy we want.
Frichuela
Freshman
Posts: 51
And1: 20
Joined: Feb 25, 2015
 

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#123 » by Frichuela » Mon Oct 5, 2020 11:22 am

nate33 wrote:
Frichuela wrote:Another trade to consider -if we can not get Okongwu at #9- and the Pelicans agree is:

The Wiz send #9 + Schofield and the Pelicans send #13 + Josh Hart.

Why would the Pelicans do it? They may not want to pay Josh Hart in 2021 when he is an RFA and they may like a prospect at #9 such as Vassell, Okoro or Halliburton that will not be available at #13.

Why would the Wiz do it? Instead of using the MLE on a Derrick Jones or Torrey Craig, we may want to get Josh Hart on a cheap 1 year rookie deal and then extend him for an MLE type deal. Hart may be a bit short at 6’5” (and 6‘9” wingspan) to play wing, but he played plenty of minutes last year as a 3, and put up superb rebounding numbers and strong defense.

Interesting idea, but I don't want to sacrifice picks for a rental. I agree that Hart could help a bit, but we can just sign him next summer if he is the guy we want.


This scenario is assuming we can not get Okongwu at #9 and we settle for a Sadiq Bey or Achiuwa that are likely to be available at #13.

Also I would not call Hart strictly a rental as he is an RFA next year. Ideally, we would extend him for a reasonable amount before he hits RFA...
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#124 » by payitforward » Mon Oct 5, 2020 1:02 pm

atlantabbq99 wrote:
payitforward wrote:Depends on the pick and the protection, of course, but given agreement about those issue... sure. We really like Okongwu on this board, so his being available would make the trade easier.

But, doesn't #9 still seem high for Nesmith to go? Won't he be there at #12 for example? Have you tried the Kings Board? If so, what do they say?

Btw, what do you guys think of your GM these days?


I also made similar offers on other team boards, to the Suns, Spurs, Kings, and New Orleans' fans.

All seem ok with a pick swap and throwing in a protected first round pick.

But ya you are right, the negotiations will all come down to the level of protection on the future pick.

Well, for starters, you didn't say R1 pick. &, in fact, a R1 pick is way too much to give in return for moving up 3 spots in the draft.

I can imagine you approaching us to offer the #6 for the #9 & the #37 (which we have from the Bulls). At least that would accord with someone's analysis of pick-value (http://nbasense.com/draft-pick-trade-value/2/kevin-pelton-2).

But, because of where the Wizards are in development, & because of the unusual nature of this draft (as I see it, that is), I would not be interested in that trade -- unless the first 5 picks had gone off strangely & I had a super-high value on the guy likely to go next.

You haven't answered my question about Travis Schlenk, btw -- are you & other fans still liking him?
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#125 » by payitforward » Mon Oct 5, 2020 1:13 pm

Frichuela wrote:
atlantabbq99 wrote:I was wondering if the DC fans would be interested in #6 for #9 and a protected 2021 pick?

I want the Hawks to draft Aaron Nesmith and #6 seems too high for that.

How about Atlanta sends their #6 and Huerter and the Wizards send Jerome Robinson, their #9, #37 and next year’s 2021 1st top 10 protected (2022 top 8 protected, 2023 top 5 protected, and if it does not convey it turns into 2024 and 2025 seconds)....

Atlanta would jump at this! Or should.

In essence, we'd be sending Robinson & a R1 pick for Huerter. Okay, Robinson is unlikely ever to be even an adequate NBA player, & we do save $$ dumping him, but that's still a pretty big bet on Huerter.

& even if Atlanta considered Robinson's salary as 100% dead weight, it'd mean nothing given how little is on the books.
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,326
And1: 9,753
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#126 » by nate33 » Mon Oct 5, 2020 1:31 pm

Frichuela wrote:
nate33 wrote:
Frichuela wrote:Another trade to consider -if we can not get Okongwu at #9- and the Pelicans agree is:

The Wiz send #9 + Schofield and the Pelicans send #13 + Josh Hart.

Why would the Pelicans do it? They may not want to pay Josh Hart in 2021 when he is an RFA and they may like a prospect at #9 such as Vassell, Okoro or Halliburton that will not be available at #13.

Why would the Wiz do it? Instead of using the MLE on a Derrick Jones or Torrey Craig, we may want to get Josh Hart on a cheap 1 year rookie deal and then extend him for an MLE type deal. Hart may be a bit short at 6’5” (and 6‘9” wingspan) to play wing, but he played plenty of minutes last year as a 3, and put up superb rebounding numbers and strong defense.

Interesting idea, but I don't want to sacrifice picks for a rental. I agree that Hart could help a bit, but we can just sign him next summer if he is the guy we want.


This scenario is assuming we can not get Okongwu at #9 and we settle for a Sadiq Bey or Achiuwa that are likely to be available at #13.

Also I would not call Hart strictly a rental as he is an RFA next year. Ideally, we would extend him for a reasonable amount before he hits RFA...

Hart's likely price will be well below the MLE. There isn't all that much advantage is having his Bird Rights. It's not like we will have the luxtax room to sign an MLE free agent AND Hart, not when we already have Wall, Beal, Bertans and Bryant on the books for $100M.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#127 » by payitforward » Mon Oct 5, 2020 1:50 pm

Frichuela wrote:
nate33 wrote:
Frichuela wrote:Another trade to consider -if we can not get Okongwu at #9- and the Pelicans agree is:

The Wiz send #9 + Schofield and the Pelicans send #13 + Josh Hart.

Why would the Pelicans do it? They may not want to pay Josh Hart in 2021 when he is an RFA and they may like a prospect at #9 such as Vassell, Okoro or Halliburton that will not be available at #13.

Why would the Wiz do it? Instead of using the MLE on a Derrick Jones or Torrey Craig, we may want to get Josh Hart on a cheap 1 year rookie deal and then extend him for an MLE type deal. Hart may be a bit short at 6’5” (and 6‘9” wingspan) to play wing, but he played plenty of minutes last year as a 3, and put up superb rebounding numbers and strong defense.

Interesting idea, but I don't want to sacrifice picks for a rental. I agree that Hart could help a bit, but we can just sign him next summer if he is the guy we want.

This scenario is assuming we can not get Okongwu at #9 and we settle for a Sadiq Bey or Achiuwa that are likely to be available at #13.

Also I would not call Hart strictly a rental as he is an RFA next year. Ideally, we would extend him for a reasonable amount before he hits RFA...

I'm with Frichuela on this. The value difference between #9 & #13 is about equal to a #30 or #31 pick. Josh Hart is well worth that! Especially since we also move Admiral's dead end dollars in the deal.

&, yes, I'd sign Hart long term immediately -- in fact, a satisfactory conversation about that with his agent should be a requirement for making the trade, as nate is certainly right not to do this for a rental!

Hart would be a big upgrade immediately; he'd be our backup 2, & he'd allow us to play Brown significant minutes at the point.

It's worth looking closely at Hart's numbers. He was outstanding as a rookie, virtually a clone of the tremendous year he'd just had at Villanova. Yet, compared to those rookie numbers, this year his 2pt % is up, his FT% is up, his defensive & offensive rebounds are up, his assists are up, & his steals are up.

The only thing worth noting as having gone down is his 3pt % -- but, that's on a whole lot of attempts: as a rookie he took over 5 per 40 minutes at 39.6%. This year, for some reason, he took just over 8 per 40 minutes. Obviously, that level of 3-pt. usage didn't agree with his game, as his efficiency went down to 34.2%
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#128 » by payitforward » Mon Oct 5, 2020 2:11 pm

atlantabbq99 wrote:
Frichuela wrote:
atlantabbq99 wrote:I was wondering if the DC fans would be interested in #6 for #9 and a protected 2021 pick?

I want the Hawks to draft Aaron Nesmith and #6 seems too high for that.


How about Atlanta sends their #6 and Huerter and the Wizards send Jerome Robinson, their #9, #37 and next year’s 2021 1st top 10 protected (2022 top 8 protected, 2023 top 5 protected, and if it does not convey it turns into 2024 and 2025 seconds).

Fyi- you do not have a high 2nd round pick this year, so #37 may be appealing..

There is not much wiggle room here, but we can negotiate between the level of protection on the future 1st round pick and additional second round picks.

Independent of any trade with us, I think you are substantially exaggerating the value-difference between a #6 pick & a #9 pick.

I don't think that difference of 3 spots gets you any R1 pick this year or next year, not even the #30. & unless I felt sure the pick I was giving 2 years from now was going to be in the last 7 in that year's R1, I wouldn't even give you that pick plus #9 to move up 3 spots.

Have you tried Boston? Imagine you were to trade your #6 to Boston for their #14, plus whatever. Would you expect to get all 3 of their R1 picks? I don't think they'd be likely to be interested in that, do you? Yet, #14 is 8 spots below #6.
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#129 » by payitforward » Mon Oct 5, 2020 2:25 pm

nate33 wrote:...I'd trade our #9 and #39 to move up, but no future 1st. According to Kevin Pelton's pick value calculations, the #9 + #39 is actually almost exactly worth the #6.

Minor point... we have the #37 not 39 -- & it's that pick plus #9 which add up to the value of #6 in Pelton's calculations. (I mention only in case you find yourself posting off of memory some time in the future.)

Yet, unlike you, I wouldn't make that trade -- oh... maybe if Okongwu were there, & if I knew 100% that I was going to buy Elton Brand's #34 or #36 pick.
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,326
And1: 9,753
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#130 » by nate33 » Mon Oct 5, 2020 2:34 pm

payitforward wrote:
Frichuela wrote:
nate33 wrote:Interesting idea, but I don't want to sacrifice picks for a rental. I agree that Hart could help a bit, but we can just sign him next summer if he is the guy we want.

This scenario is assuming we can not get Okongwu at #9 and we settle for a Sadiq Bey or Achiuwa that are likely to be available at #13.

Also I would not call Hart strictly a rental as he is an RFA next year. Ideally, we would extend him for a reasonable amount before he hits RFA...

I'm with Frichuela on this. The value difference between #9 & #13 is about equal to a #30 or #31 pick. Josh Hart is well worth that! Especially since we also move Admiral's dead end dollars in the deal.

&, yes, I'd sign Hart long term immediately -- in fact, a satisfactory conversation about that with his agent should be a requirement for making the trade, as nate is certainly right not to do this for a rental!

Hart would be a big upgrade immediately; he'd be our backup 2, & he'd allow us to play Brown significant minutes at the point.

It's worth looking closely at Hart's numbers. He was outstanding as a rookie, virtually a clone of the tremendous year he'd just had at Villanova. Yet, compared to those rookie numbers, this year his 2pt % is up, his FT% is up, his defensive & offensive rebounds are up, his assists are up, & his steals are up.

The only thing worth noting as having gone down is his 3pt % -- but, that's on a whole lot of attempts: as a rookie he took over 5 per 40 minutes at 39.6%. This year, for some reason, he took just over 8 per 40 minutes. Obviously, that level of 3-pt. usage didn't agree with his game, as his efficiency went down to 34.2%

Josh Hart is worth it if you were getting him for 2 or 3 years on a cheap contract. But the Josh Hart we're talking about is the Josh Hart who is a free agent in 2021. And in 2021, he isn't going to cost more the MLE, so if we want him then, we can just sign him. Bird Rights aren't necessary.

Obviously, if we were 100% certain that the guy we want at #9 would still be available at #13, then we are essentially trading nothing for Josh Hart, and I would do it. But I don't see how we can have that 100% certainty when we're on the clock at #9. Ultimately, the trade is a risk. A risk with the only reward being a one-year rental during a season that we are not contenders.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#131 » by payitforward » Mon Oct 5, 2020 4:21 pm

I take your points, nate -- &, given it's a risk, it's obviously not 100% that we reap all the rewards. Still, some factors significantly mitigate risks of this trade:

1. As I wrote, I wouldn't pull the trigger without a deal in place for Hart's future. Such a deal would likely include a range of possibilities based on how productive he was this coming season. The NBA is a business; this must happen all the time.

2. Yes, the same guy we'd have picked at #9 might be on the board at #13. In this case, it's Hart for free.

3. If that guy is not on the board, then the guy we do pick at #13 might turn out to be as good or better than that guy! Surely, history teaches us that this is pretty close to even odds. If even, Hart for free. If better, ...duh.

4. The guy we'd have picked at #9 & the one we pick at #13 instead might both turn out to be busts. Back to "Hart for free."

5. Our #13 pick may not be as good as the guy we'd have taken at #9, but he might be close enough all the same that, objectively, Hart & he together are a better haul than that guy alone.

None of the above completely eliminates the risk that a) Hart & his agent go back on the deal mentioned above, b) our #13 pick is a bust, & c) the guy we'd have taken at #9 turns out to be good.

In that case, we'd have cashed in our #9 pick for nothing in return. But, "a" seems unlikely (go back on deals & people stop dealing with you: not in an agent's interest), & I'd bet the confluence of "b" & "c" is quite low in likelihood (first question: how often is the #9 pick in the draft a really good player).

Still, that risk can't be eliminated.
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
Frichuela
Freshman
Posts: 51
And1: 20
Joined: Feb 25, 2015
 

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#132 » by Frichuela » Mon Oct 5, 2020 11:02 pm

payitforward wrote:
5. Our #13 pick may not be as good as the guy we'd have taken at #9, but he might be close enough all the same that, objectively, Hart & he together are a better haul than that guy alone.

.


This! I think this is a plausible scenario...again should our preferred pick at #9 be gone (Okongwu is mine)...what if we could get an Achiuwa or S Bey at #13 and Hart on top of it?
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,326
And1: 9,753
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#133 » by nate33 » Tue Oct 6, 2020 2:25 am

Frichuela wrote:
payitforward wrote:
5. Our #13 pick may not be as good as the guy we'd have taken at #9, but he might be close enough all the same that, objectively, Hart & he together are a better haul than that guy alone.

.


This! I think this is a plausible scenario...again should our preferred pick at #9 be gone (Okongwu is mine)...what if we could get an Achiuwa or S Bey at #13 and Hart on top of it?

I don't know how many different ways I can say this.

Hart has no value beyond 2021. Once Summer 2021 comes, he will sign for a market value contract and will, by definition, have no value above and beyond any other market value contract signed with the MLE that offseason. The only value Hart brings is for the 2020-21 season, which is going to be a shortened season during which we have no chance at contention. I'd rather get the better player in the draft at #9, play a little worse in 2020-21 (because we won't have Hart and we lose 1 or 2 more games), get a better draft pick in 2021, and then in 2021 use the MLE to sign Hart or perhaps an even better player at a position of greater need.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#134 » by payitforward » Tue Oct 6, 2020 4:35 pm

nate33 wrote:...I don't know how many different ways I can say this....

You made yourself clear the first time, nate, & in my case at least, I responded that "I take your points."

But, I don't think this...
nate33 wrote:...Hart has no value beyond 2021.

...is as definitive as you'd like it to be. To me, the problem lies in the last clause of this sentence
nate33 wrote:...Once Summer 2021 comes, he will sign for a market value contract and will, by definition, have no value above and beyond any other market value contract signed with the MLE that offseason....

Even in a free market, some things are better bargains than others. I think Hart is likely to be one of those free market bargains. Plus, my argument for the trade to acquire him was based on being able to negotiate with his agent to give us a definitive edge in that market (or, at the very least, a leg up). &, in general, I think the team a guy plays for has an edge in extending him, don't you? Assuming he's happy there...? Viz. I'd say we have an edge in Bertans' case.

Thus, I think there is another variable at play here, namely a difference between you & me (& Frichuela as well) in how good we think Josh Hart is. Am I wrong to find a hint of this here? --
nate33 wrote:...in 2021 use the MLE to sign Hart or perhaps an even better player at a position of greater need.

OTOH, I am in complete agreement with you that there'd be no benefit signing him if we were focused on...
nate33 wrote:... the 2020-21 season, which is going to be a shortened season during which we have no chance at contention....
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,326
And1: 9,753
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#135 » by nate33 » Tue Oct 6, 2020 5:28 pm

payitforward wrote:Even in a free market, some things are better bargains than others. I think Hart is likely to be one of those free market bargains. Plus, my argument for the trade to acquire him was based on being able to negotiate with his agent to give us a definitive edge in that market (or, at the very least, a leg up). &, in general, I think the team a guy plays for has an edge in extending him, don't you? Assuming he's happy there...? Viz. I'd say we have an edge in Bertans' case.

We have an edge with Bertans because he will cost more than the MLE, leaving only 2 or 3 plausible suitors. In 2021, there will be dozens of teams with cap room and many more with the MLE and luxtax room. It will be about as competitive as the free agency market gets. I really don't think having Hart on the roster will be much of an advantage. His agent will seek the highest bidder.

Furthermore, things change in a year. A year from now, with the MLE at our disposal, it is highly unlikely that Hart will be THE best bargain available. This trade is only helpful in the long run if Hart is the best possible free agent target of all free agents NEXT year. That's one heck of a crystal ball you've got there.

Basically, you are sacrificing 4 spaces in the draft based solely on your faith in Hart being the very best free agency target for us a year from now, and that we will have a material advantage in signing him if he played in DC last year. I think the first assumption is almost certainly incorrect, and the second assumption is likely to be incorrect as well.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#136 » by payitforward » Wed Oct 7, 2020 2:45 am

He doesn't have to be "THE best." He just has to be worth more than he gets paid. I don't have a crystal ball, nate, but I do have a lot of experience observing this space. Hart is the kind of player who is often underpaid. He is a lot better than Josh Richardson, for example, & Richardson is making more $$ than it's likely Hart will get.

OTOH, your point that he will be in a particularly competitive market may make that statement false.

Worth mentioning, however: if that's true about Hart, it has to be true about any other target player in that market. In which case, it would make sense to avoid being in that market.

In any case, I think we've probably squeezed as much as we can out of this subject! :) Especially since it's only marginally related to any possible move by the Wizards.
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,326
And1: 9,753
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#137 » by nate33 » Sun Oct 11, 2020 8:06 pm

On the Trade Board, it looks like some Dallas fans have interest in Bertans and are willing to trade the #18 for him. Would you do the following trade:

Washington trades: Bertans (S&T 3 years with the first year at $15.75M or less)
Dallas trades: #18, Delon Wright, Boban Marjanovic

I'm very leery of signing Bertans to a long term deal at $16M a year. If he plays exactly like he did this year, he might be worth it, but I'm getting a bit of a Martell Webster vibe. 2019-20 might have been a fluke season. Guys rarely shoot that insanely well for multiple years in a row. If his 3P% drops just 2% from 42.4% to 40.4% and his 3PA's per 36 drop from 10.7 to 8.7, then suddenly he looks more like Terrence Ross than Davis Bertans. And I don't want to be paying Terrence Ross $16M a year.

If we can turn him into a pick plus Delon Wright on a fair contract (9.0M and $8.5M next two years respectively), I'd do it. An added plus is that Boban's $3.5M deal is expiring and we could probably package that with Ish's deal and get some more value from a team looking to clear 2021 cap room.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#138 » by payitforward » Sun Oct 11, 2020 9:03 pm

Great thought, nate -- what a deal that would be for us!

First off, Delon Wright is outstanding -- a very under-rated player. He'd step right in & be the first player off the bench at the 1 & the 2 (especially in the light of your follow-on suggestion of moving Ish/Marjanovic).

Adding that #18 pick would be a big plus too. If Jalen Smith were there, he'd be a great choice at that spot.

Say we traded our #9 to SAS for #11 & 39: we could take everyone's favorite Precious Achiuwa, Jalen Smith (or Desmond Bane?), plus Malachi Flynn & Vernon Carey in R2.

Worth noting, however, that Bertans' 3pt % in 2018-19 was 42.9% -- even higher than this year! -- & that he's at 41.1% for his career. Still like the deal, however!

Only problem with it is -- why don't they just sign Davis directly?
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 56,326
And1: 9,753
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#139 » by nate33 » Sun Oct 11, 2020 11:12 pm

payitforward wrote:Only problem with it is -- why don't they just sign Davis directly?

They don't have the cap room to pay more than the MLE.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 14,389
And1: 4,413
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX 

Post#140 » by payitforward » Mon Oct 12, 2020 2:54 am

Aah -- got it.
Such a creative idea! Need to email someone in the Dallas FO? :)
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.

Return to Washington Wizards