The wizards draft grades!

[payitforward]

I don't know that the trade up from 37 could have been done after Bey & Tillman had been picked. Memphis & Dallas both have awfully smart FOs, & I think they might have been extremely happy to have walked away with these two guys.

But, it seems pretty possible that Tommy could have bought either #34 or #36 a week or so before the draft. Of course, we can't know that, but still....

The larger point is that there were 18 trades involving the 21 picks from #16-36 (a number of those picks were traded twice), but we were involved in none of them.

As to our trade, although I think Cassius Winston was a tremendous value to get at #53, we can't have known he'd be there when we made the move. So... what was the intention behind that trade?

Beats me. We dropped 16 spots in return for a R2 pick 4 years from now? Huh...? Given the discount on future assets & the fact that OKC seems more than likely to have a low R2 pick when that draft comes, I'd say that pick was worth next to nothing. So... what was the goal of that trade?

Seems like we could have gotten 49 & 58 -- Cassius Winston & then Paul Reed, who I'd say is likely worth more than a 2024 IOU for a late R2 pick. Or, how about 42 & 60, taking say Jahm'ius Ramsay -- & maybe still get Winston? Or else Nate Hinton? Or 43 & 52 to take Ramsey & Grant Riller?

What I'm missing is any understanding of Tommy Sheppard's intentions. What exactly is he trying to do? I

To me at least, lack of intention is what makes you unable to do what you need to do to get a guy like Tillman. Luckily, we did get a prospect at 53 who is likely as good as most or all the guys taken from 37-52.

[The Consiglieri]

It's pointless to grade drafts immediately after the draft. That's like grading the mock drafts the day before draft day.

We don't know anything more about these players than we knew a week ago, so how can we possibly evaluate which teams did well and which teams didn't?

EDIT:
Sorry Thedragonking, I didn't mean to come off like I'm attacking you. It's just that post-draft grades have always been a pet peeve of mine.

Grades are based on a perception as to whether teams extracted the most or the least value possible w/the draft slots available to them. That's why. And you can grade that.

Of course consensus is in the eye of the beholder, and w/the passage of time, evaluations of players change rendering the grades less accurate, but if you simply evaluate based on player perception and slot value, you can get an idea. While nobody knew SGA was going to be as good as he was in his draft class, anyone with sense knew that MPJR falling as far as he did was asinine stupidity of the highest order, the former case was a value that's as much luck as it is smarts, but simply grabbing MPJR as Denver did was smart from the jump as that was 10+ slots lower than his value, and even moreso if you consider his perceived value the previous summer. We are potentially the inheritors of that value in this class, landing a guy with a consensus top 5, tier 1 grade for the class at 9. He may end up being a bust, but for current value, he was a steal. Time will tell if the eval was actually right.

[likwitdesi]

I don't know that the trade up from 37 could have been done after Bey & Tillman had been picked. Memphis & Dallas both have awfully smart FOs, & I think they might have been extremely happy to have walked away with these two guys.

But, it seems pretty possible that Tommy could have bought either #34 or #36 a week or so before the draft. Of course, we can't know that, but still....

The larger point is that there were 18 trades involving the 21 picks from #16-36 (a number of those picks were traded twice), but we were involved in none of them.

As to our trade, although I think Cassius Winston was a tremendous value to get at #53, we can't have known he'd be there when we made the move. So... what was the intention behind that trade?

Beats me. We dropped 16 spots in return for a R2 pick 4 years from now? Huh...? Given the discount on future assets & the fact that OKC seems more than likely to have a low R2 pick when that draft comes, I'd say that pick was worth next to nothing. So... what was the goal of that trade?

Seems like we could have gotten 49 & 58 -- Cassius Winston & then Paul Reed, who I'd say is likely worth more than a 2024 IOU for a late R2 pick. Or, how about 42 & 60, taking say Jahm'ius Ramsay -- & maybe still get Winston? Or else Nate Hinton? Or 43 & 52 to take Ramsey & Grant Riller?

What I'm missing is any understanding of Tommy Sheppard's intentions. What exactly is he trying to do? I

To me at least, lack of intention is what makes you unable to do what you need to do to get a guy like Tillman. Luckily, we did get a prospect at 53 who is likely as good as most or all the guys taken from 37-52.

Second round picks sell for between $2M-$3M. In essence, by moving Schofield, who they did not think would make the team, they shed $1.5M in expenses as his 2nd year was guaranteed and they picked up a future 2nd in the process. To another poster's point, this draft had one of the deepest pools of 2nd round talent ever. Tommy probably didn't see much of a difference between 37 and 53 and saw it as an opportunity to make a move.

This is probably more about Ted. His wallet likely took a hit last season and will this season so doing anything to minimize being in the red likely helps.

[payitforward]

I don't know that the trade up from 37 could have been done after Bey & Tillman had been picked. Memphis & Dallas both have awfully smart FOs, & I think they might have been extremely happy to have walked away with these two guys.

But, it seems pretty possible that Tommy could have bought either #34 or #36 a week or so before the draft. Of course, we can't know that, but still....

The larger point is that there were 18 trades involving the 21 picks from #16-36 (a number of those picks were traded twice), but we were involved in none of them.

As to our trade, although I think Cassius Winston was a tremendous value to get at #53, we can't have known he'd be there when we made the move. So... what was the intention behind that trade?

Beats me. We dropped 16 spots in return for a R2 pick 4 years from now? Huh...? Given the discount on future assets & the fact that OKC seems more than likely to have a low R2 pick when that draft comes, I'd say that pick was worth next to nothing. So... what was the goal of that trade?

Seems like we could have gotten 49 & 58 -- Cassius Winston & then Paul Reed, who I'd say is likely worth more than a 2024 IOU for a late R2 pick. Or, how about 42 & 60, taking say Jahm'ius Ramsay -- & maybe still get Winston? Or else Nate Hinton? Or 43 & 52 to take Ramsey & Grant Riller?

What I'm missing is any understanding of Tommy Sheppard's intentions. What exactly is he trying to do? I

To me at least, lack of intention is what makes you unable to do what you need to do to get a guy like Tillman. Luckily, we did get a prospect at 53 who is likely as good as most or all the guys taken from 37-52.

Second round picks sell for between $2M-$3M. In essence, by moving Schofield, who they did not think would make the team, they shed $1.5M in expenses as his 2nd year was guaranteed and they picked up a future 2nd in the process. To another poster's point, this draft had one of the deepest pools of 2nd round talent ever. Tommy probably didn't see much of a difference between 37 and 53 and saw it as an opportunity to make a move.

This is probably more about Ted. His wallet likely took a hit last season and will this season so doing anything to minimize being in the red likely helps.

I didn't realize that Schofield's departure was part of this move. Of course, that changes the value proposition a little.

I don't know what "other poster" you mean to cite, but I've been writing for months that this draft featured an extremely deep R2. In fact, I wrote that in this thread earlier today -- so I think you may just be citing me! For which thanks.

[payitforward]

By the way, this:

... In essence, by moving Schofield, who they did not think would make the team,...

...really won't do as a defense of Tommy, since what you are saying is that he cleaned up his draft mistake from last year. IOW, buying the pick to take Schofield was an error (which I wrote at the time, btw), & that mistake cost us opportunity in this draft, which had, as you write...

...one of the deepest pools of 2nd round talent ever....

How you can see this as anything other than a mistake, I don't know. So, if as you write...

...Tommy probably didn't see much of a difference between 37 and 53...

then good work by a GM is to get two guys out of that deep pool. Better by far to eat Schofield's $1.5m, trade down for 2 picks in this year's R2, & take one of the sets of players I mentioned.

Moreover, I don't buy that...

...This is probably more about Ted. His wallet likely took a hit last season and will this season so doing anything to minimize being in the red likely helps.

Schofield's salary is 1% of the Washington Wizards roster salary total. Irrelevent.

In short, it's by no means a big deal but it was definitely a way sub-optimal move.

[gambitx777]

Jan vesley could never score like this kid. He reminds me a bit of what we hopped Josh jackson could have been mixed with a young gallanari

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using RealGM mobile app