Official Trade Thread -- Part XL

[gambitx777]

I can agree with you, all I was saying way that we shouldn't question weather we take our pick. We need our pick no matter what.

The question is does Ted tell tommy to go get better at all costs or does he say keep the ship right. Getting a guy like wood, using the full mle on a good or better player. Making another move or two or three around the frindges along with getting deni back health would and could put us in the ranks of that hope and a prayer group. And that's about as good as it gets right now.

I don't want to stop trying to get better -- in fact, I want to get a whole lot better!

Moreover, I agree with you that we'd improve a whole lot if we had a better coach & if our starting 3 & 4 were better. For that matter, an outstanding 6th man at the 2-3 would be a big help. I don't mention Center, because we don't yet know Gafford's ceiling, & I like Bryant more than you do. But, all the same -- I agree overall.

But, that's different from the idea that Ted would "go all in" -- what does that even mean?

If it means we'd live in tax land for some years so that we could add Christian Wood to our roster -- which would make us contend for a title -- then, no thanks: I wouldn't get into that position. & I don't think Wood, whom as you know I like a lot, would make us a title contender.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using RealGM mobile app

[9 and 20]

Question is why would Cleveland agree on a Garland for Rui trade? I would only see this if they climb up in the lottery and draft a guard (Suggs or Green).

Yes, this is key isn't it? They took Garland with Rui on the board & available lower down. & Garland improved substantially his 2d year in the league, which Rui did not (that's not to say that Garland was actually productive; he's still not very good).

I'm not particularly a fan of Garland, but no one would take Rui straight up for him. I don't care who they draft, they still wouldn't entertain that trade.

The other half of the trade is no better, really. I'd much rather have Nance on his salary than Bertans on his. Doesn't seem very controversial.

To put it another way -- this would be a great trade! But it doesn't seem possible.

It seems OK, value-wise, but I wouldn't do this unless I had another plan in place to bring in another forward that could play rotation-level minutes, at least - either with the MLE or trade. Or more likely two forwards.

I don't think they'd trade Nance for Bertans, separate from the Rui-Garland part. A Kevin Love/Davis Bertans front court would be amazing, though. If they're trying to tank for a few years, that would be a great place to start.

[9 and 20]

The draft pick should be used imo. But it's not really about that I don't mind trading back a few spots in that proposed Huston trade but, I think the big question is, will Ted go into the tax to go all in. ?

Why would he do that?

We are down 2-0 in R1 of the playoffs to a very good but not great opponent. I can't think of a single actually-available player, at any cost, who would turn us into a title contender.

As long as the Nets & Lakers are healthy, everyone else including the Bucks, 76ers, Jazz, Nuggets are playing for a hope and a prayer. But that doesn't stop them from trying.

I'd say we're a upgrade at coach and two players from that next level. An upgrade at PF or C and a starting capable wing. Not easy but not impossible. Probably not likely either given our salary situation but again that doesn't stop teams from trying.

Yeah, I don't think we're that far away from the top half of the East. If they bring another starting or at least rotation level wing and either Rui or Deni establishes himself as a legit starter, we'd probably be pretty good next year.

Who cares that we're not as good as the Nets. Terd can open up that wallet and spend some cash. Maybe we can hit the elusive 50 win mark that has eluded us for 40 years.

[Dat2U]

This is assuming Beal works out an extension and returns.

7 returning rotation players under contract

PG Westbrook
SG Beal
SF Avdija
PF Hachimura / Bertans
C Bryant / Gafford

Obviously depth on the perimeter is a must. Most agree a starting wing is needed although Avdija returning will help.

Most hope Mathews will re-sign as the backup SG but he's a free agent so no guarantee he returns.

Both Neto & Ish are free agents. Wiz could seek out a more expensive 3rd guard with better size that can get extended run with Russ/Beal and not kill us or go the traditional backup PG route again and try find another 15 minute a night stop gap or two in FA.

The biggest disagreement on the board is the frontcourt. Bryant is developing into one of the better offensive Cs in the league and provides solid spacing but he really struggled in drop coverage in P&Rs and is coming off an injury which potentially limits his mobility and foot speed which was already subpar for a starting C role.

The outsized role a C has in being the last line of defense makes it a priority that he displays above average awareness and the ability to challenge shots. Gafford's massive impact implicitly shows how much a difference a C can change the game when he defends at a high level. Gafford turned the Wizards from lottery status to solid playoff team in less than 20 minutes a night. That's what going from Wagner to Gafford did.

So determining whether Bryant can be not just a productive player in the league but a 2-way C on a team that goes deep into the playoffs is one that must be answered.

Gafford can certainly play a few more minutes but whether he can stay out of foul trouble to start and play major minutes is huge question. Additionally the ability to maintain the energy he's played with over longer stretches is unproven at this point.

The other issue with the frontcourt is the Hachimura/Bertans duo. The Wizards have alot invested in both. Hachimura through marketing ops in Japan and Bertans 5-yr $80 mil deal. Rui's flashed perimeter improvement defensively over the last year & Bertans is an elite floor spacer and 3pt gunner. Problem is their flaws are so clear. Rui is counted on to be a 3rd option but doesn't display the confidence or complete game to be that option on a consistent basis. 3pt shooting is still an issue and teams don't really respect him from there yet. Also he's still rebounds like a 3. If he's not scoring he's hurting the team. Bertans is too hot & cold and is worthless beyond the attention defenses pay to him offensively. Between the two there are too many nights where we get nothing from the 4... especially rebounding & defensively.

One of our PFs needs to be able to defend/rebound. One of them probably has to go. Bertans is impacful but is incredibly streaky, older and far more expensive. Hachimura b/c of strides on the defensive side isn't a huge negative as he was as a rookie but it would be a stretch to say he's making a positive impact. Hachimura may still have modest trade value but marketing value to the Wizards probably exceeds that and prevents him from being moved. I'm sure the Wizards could move Bertans to get out his deal. Shooting will always be valued but the likely return probably makes us worse. Without Bertans, we're probably the worst 3pt shooting team in the league so just dumping his salary isn't an option. Trading Bertans means we need to replace his scoring/floor spacing. Trading Hachimura means we need a new 3rd option. So there's not necessarily a clear direction to go in.

[payitforward]

I can agree with you, all I was saying way that we shouldn't question weather we take our pick. We need our pick no matter what.

The question is does Ted tell tommy to go get better at all costs or does he say keep the ship right. Getting a guy like wood, using the full mle on a good or better player. Making another move or two or three around the frindges along with getting deni back health would and could put us in the ranks of that hope and a prayer group. And that's about as good as it gets right now.

I don't want to stop trying to get better -- in fact, I want to get a whole lot better!

Moreover, I agree with you that we'd improve a whole lot if we had a better coach & if our starting 3 & 4 were better. For that matter, an outstanding 6th man at the 2-3 would be a big help. I don't mention Center, because we don't yet know Gafford's ceiling, & I like Bryant more than you do. But, all the same -- I agree overall.

But, that's different from the idea that Ted would "go all in" -- what does that even mean?

If it means we'd live in tax land for some years so that we could add Christian Wood to our roster -- which would make us contend for a title -- then, no thanks: I wouldn't get into that position. & I don't think Wood, whom as you know I like a lot, would make us a title contender.

I couldn't agree more! We need our pick. & we also need to buy a R2 pick. &, if there's a promising guy who goes undrafted (or even another lower R2 pick available to buy), we need a third rookie as well.

You remember Prime1time writing that we need to acquire a 3d star, no matter what the cost, then fill out the roster with ultra-cheap veterans? If I've got it right, that was his idea for how to "go for it." Go "all in."

This is just a variation on his idea. Right now, we're at $118.5m for 9 guys (incl. Gafford & Gill). If we can retain Mathews for @$2m, then adding 3 rookies for @$5m total would take us to 13 players at @ $125.5m. Add a veteran minimum player, & it's $127m for 14 guys -- $9+m under the luxury tax.

Either we'd sign the best FA available for that much $$, or if there was a star or potential star available to sign for, say, $20m, then we could decide to go for it, & we'd only be $11m into lux tax territory.

Still an expensive risk, but better by far than any other way to try & maximize results right now. We're still building the team's future -- i.e. there's a path to a next generation, because we'd have added youth & Russ comes off the books at the end of the following season. Whereupon the whole salary structure looks different.

[Ruzious]

Question is why would Cleveland agree on a Garland for Rui trade? I would only see this if they climb up in the lottery and draft a guard (Suggs or Green).

That was part of the assumption that was spelled out - that Cleveland trades Garland because they pick Suggs or Green... as well as the belief that Garland and Sexton don't complement each other well - part of the reason Cleveland was so bad this season. They don't have to climb up in the draft - they were 22-50 and have their pick.

[payitforward]

Question is why would Cleveland agree on a Garland for Rui trade? I would only see this if they climb up in the lottery and draft a guard (Suggs or Green).

That was part of the assumption that was spelled out - that Cleveland trades Garland because they pick Suggs or Green... as well as the belief that Garland and Sexton don't complement each other well - part of the reason Cleveland was so bad this season. They don't have to climb up in the draft - they were 22-50 and have their pick.

So they're motivated to trade Garland; no problem. The question remains why they'd trade him for Rui.

[Ruzious]

Question is why would Cleveland agree on a Garland for Rui trade? I would only see this if they climb up in the lottery and draft a guard (Suggs or Green).

That was part of the assumption that was spelled out - that Cleveland trades Garland because they pick Suggs or Green... as well as the belief that Garland and Sexton don't complement each other well - part of the reason Cleveland was so bad this season. They don't have to climb up in the draft - they were 22-50 and have their pick.

So they're motivated to trade Garland; no problem. The question remains why they'd trade him for Rui.

I've already explained why I think they might. I understand you don't buy it, but I'm not going to go through this again.

[payitforward]

Ruz -- I don't see an explanation of why Cleveland would want Rui in particular. But, NBD.

[dckingsfan]

Question is why would Cleveland agree on a Garland for Rui trade? I would only see this if they climb up in the lottery and draft a guard (Suggs or Green).

That was part of the assumption that was spelled out - that Cleveland trades Garland because they pick Suggs or Green... as well as the belief that Garland and Sexton don't complement each other well - part of the reason Cleveland was so bad this season. They don't have to climb up in the draft - they were 22-50 and have their pick.

So they're motivated to trade Garland; no problem. The question remains why they'd trade him for Rui.

That is a good question - a hypothetical. I could see them thinking that Nance, Osman, Rui, Okoro as a reasonable forward rotation.

If they get a Suggs or Green, maybe?

[payitforward]

Even that response, dckingsfan, doesn't answer the question. Not to mention that Nance goes out as part of Ruz's proposed trade!

Garland has more trade value than Rui. Substantially more. He was a higher pick, & he improved his numbers significantly in his 2d year, which Rui did not do.

The rest of the trade has them sending Nance & us sending Bertans. But, that doesn't move the trade any closer to even; it moves it further from being even. Nance is a proven, very good PF. He didn't have a very good year this year -- for him. But, it was a lot better than Davis had.

I'd be all for this trade! I just don't see Cleveland having much interest. That said, surely we've talked enough about this idea.

[JAR69]

Most of the discussion is based on the idea of running it back with Beal and Westbrook. But this offseason is still likely to be the best time to trade Beal. Even more so, with the winning streak in the last half of the season and nearly winning the scoring title. Who knows what Beal will want if we get swept? And what is our ceiling if we run it back? ECF if everything falls into place (and it never does)?

Here's one not that different from prior proposed trades, but one that might work for both teams.

WAS trades Beal and Hachimura to BOS.
BOS trades Brown, Langford, and their 2021 first round pick (16th) to WAS.

(Works in the trade checker for this season.)

WAS gets an allstar SG/SF who is more than three years younger than Beal and signed through 2023-24, plus another first round pick this year. Langford is filler. (I'd rather have Nesmith, but I don't thin BOS would give him up.) WAS moves Avdija to PF where he belongs. We are thin, but with two picks this year to address that.

Westbrook/Brown/???/Avdija/Gafford with (let's say) Neto/Matthews/Langford/Bertans/Bryant plus the two picks (some combo of Giddey/Wagner/Duarte/Kispert/Butler) is a younger squad with decent upside. We might even be able to package the two picks to trade up, or trade one of them down.

BOS gets a better scorer than Brown, brings him together with his St. Louis/Chaminade buddy, and goes a long way toward solving its problems at PF.

Walker/Beal/Tatum/Hachimua/Williams is a very nice lineup, with Smart/Thompson/Nesmith/Williams/Edwards off the bench.

[WallToWall]

If we go the route of trading Beal this off-season (I am not in favor of this idea), then we should also trade Westbrook. Do you think, based on his play in the 2nd half of the season, he will fetch more than one 1st round pick? If yes, then I'd have to say we win that trade!

[Ruzious]

Even that response, dckingsfan, doesn't answer the question. Not to mention that Nance goes out as part of Ruz's proposed trade!

Garland has more trade value than Rui. Substantially more. He was a higher pick, & he improved his numbers significantly in his 2d year, which Rui did not do.

The rest of the trade has them sending Nance & us sending Bertans. But, that doesn't move the trade any closer to even; it moves it further from being even. Nance is a proven, very good PF. He didn't have a very good year this year -- for him. But, it was a lot better than Davis had.

I'd be all for this trade! I just don't see Cleveland having much interest. That said, surely we've talked enough about this idea.

You've talked too much, tbh.

[Illuminaire]

I don't understand the point of a Beal trade if it's just to run things back with a younger, slightly inferior player.

Strategically, a Beal trade should be part of a large scale reboot and an attempt to maximize talent acquisition. AKA, a proper rebuild. Which, I grant, is something Ted has never been willing to do, with all the commensurate results that come with bandaid solutions.

[payitforward]

I don't understand the point of a Beal trade if it's just to run things back with a younger, slightly inferior player.

Strategically, a Beal trade should be part of a large scale reboot and an attempt to maximize talent acquisition. AKA, a proper rebuild. Which, I grant, is something Ted has never been willing to do, with all the commensurate results that come with bandaid solutions.

But, isn't that exactly what we're doing? Isn't this team going through a complete rebuild?

Only two current Wizards players were with the team 2 years ago today. In fact, of our 15-man roster, 10 guys are in their first year as Washington Wizards.

So, it seems to me that we are in the middle of "a large scale reboot." But that is not a process which can be brought to completion in the short time Tommy has had since Ernie was (finally!) let go. Moreover, though we've made huge changes, not all of them seem to be working out, & even the ones that are most positive are not fully realized.

Still, we are a totally different team from last year, & we are a much better team too. In fact, given our season, we'd have to say that the "reboot" is going reasonably well.

There is much much more to do, of course. & a bunch of key moves can't yet be called successes. & some just look like mistakes (above all giving Bertans a really big, really long contract).

It is, as they say, a process. & the truth is it's only just begun.

[gambitx777]

The real question is why would we be interested in trading rui for garland. The kid can't even get minutes on one of the worst squads in the league and you think he's worth rui? Rui have been developing really well, he does a lot of things good and shows real promise not to mention the fan base he brings. You don't trade him for garland.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using RealGM mobile app

[Illuminaire]

But, isn't that exactly what we're doing? Isn't this team going through a complete rebuild?

First, my post was in response to some Beal trades that brought in Jaylen Brown plus a grab bag of low value whatever. Which is to say, a lateral move that is probably a slight downgrade, but which maintains the Wiz as a treadmill team.

Second, no. The Wizards have not done a "proper rebuild" (my words). They have not attempted to "maximize talent acquisition" (also my words). Year after year, the Wizards try to be as good as they possibly can be - with a mediocre talent base and no way to get impact free agents.

This is a death sentence for any team that wants to truly compete. You know this. You've argued things very close to this in the past.

You are also very aware that the only escape from perpetual mediocrity is to successfully acquire more talent. Which doesn't mean just reshuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. AKA, just replacing people on the roster does not mean a rebuild is being attempted. That can sound counter-intuitive, but it's more a ship of Theseus question. If the Wizards lose mediocre players and replace them with equally mediocre players, they aren't rebuilding. They're in the spin cycle.

I'm fairly certain you know that's what's happening, and that it's primarily because Leonsis has too big of an ego to ever admit he's wrong, or that his team sucks.

I could say more, but there's not much point. There is also no point to trading Bradley Beal for a slightly inferior piece, so the Wizards can continue to struggle their way to 35-40 wins and a first round exit, year after year, until the sun swells up into a red giant and dies.

[9 and 20]

I like Jaylen Brown and he's better than Beal at certain things. Overall, Beal probably better but Brown is good player and it's pretty close. I'd trade Beal for Brown if the alternative is getting a bunch of middling draft picks. If we can trade Beal for a couple of really high picks, I might do that too. I just don't want to see a bunch of #15-25 picks coming back for him.

[9 and 20]

The Heat just got blasted by the Bucks and they probably need to rebuild. Are they trading Jimmy Butler? Every time Butler has been traded, it's been for spare parts. We have some spare parts. Bertans and Thomas Bryant would need to be in there for salary. Maybe Hutchison too. Russ and Butler together may not be ideal, but better Butler than Raul Neto at forward. What else would need to go to the Heat to make this happen? A future first? The rights to Vladimir Veremenko?

Like others, I don't see a reasonable way to add a really good player. Whoever we add is going to have some warts, one way or another.