ImageImageImageImageImage

Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday

Moderators: LyricalRico, nate33, montestewart

payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 17,249
And1: 5,623
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#121 » by payitforward » Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:00 pm

doclinkin wrote:...We traded away a late first round pick to provide leverage and flexibility for the Dinwiddie sign and trade....

I just noticed this, doc. Did I miss something? Or, what do you have in mind that I'm not getting...?

How did trading #22 for Holiday & #31 help in the acquisition of Dinwiddie?
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 24,240
And1: 5,941
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#122 » by penbeast0 » Sat Aug 21, 2021 4:48 pm

Dat2U wrote:
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:Tommy is playing chess. I don't know what his rating is but I know he ain't playing no damn checkers


Tommy might be playing Chinese checkers. It damn sure ain't no chess tho.


He didn't say he was playing chess very well. :clown:
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
User avatar
doclinkin
RealGM
Posts: 11,038
And1: 3,211
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: .wizuds.

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#123 » by doclinkin » Sat Aug 21, 2021 6:03 pm

payitforward wrote:
doclinkin wrote:...We traded away a late first round pick to provide leverage and flexibility for the Dinwiddie sign and trade....

I just noticed this, doc. Did I miss something? Or, what do you have in mind that I'm not getting...?

How did trading #22 for Holiday & #31 help in the acquisition of Dinwiddie?


I've laid this out before a few different places but maybe it got eaten by the site reset.

With the trade for Westbrook on the table we had exactly ONE guard on the roster that was signed: Bradley Beal. No back up to him, no veteran PG to play next to him. Yes we wanted Dinwiddie, but no guarantees, to get him we would need to do a sign and trade. Free agency was not yet open, so while we might have a few options to get him, none were at all a sure thing, and some were better than others. It was not a done deal even if both Spencer and the Wizards wanted each other. Brooklyn still had to be convinced. It could easily all have fallen apart.

In fact this trade has been cited as one of the most complicated trades in NBA history. Dinwiddie said he was stressed waiting for it to come to a resolution because at any point any one of the players could back out. Kuzma had said he was 100% sure he was going to be traded to Sactown for Buddy Hield. That deal was all but inked before the Westbrook thing worked out... BUT. Apparently LeBJ preferred Westbrook over Hield.

At any rate, even if the Westbrook thing was possible, we had a 3-for-1 deal incoming, freighted with a lot of salary. Yes we would send out more than we were getting back, but were likely to still flirt with the luxury tax. Our roster was starting to fill up.

The Nets could not sign Dinwiddie because they are deep in lux tax. They wanted to send us DeAndre or another salary with him. No chance Tommy would want to do that, since that puts us in a similar boat. They also apparently wanted us to send a first round pick.

Now everybody in the league knows the Wizards are in a bind. We either make Beal happy and look like a contender, or he leaves, maybe for free. Mind you, this was before free agency, we had zero guards behind or next to Beal. No veteran PG, no back up 2G. KCP incoming IF we can swing the LA deal at the last minute. But no PG. If we sat down at the table saying: "we want Dinwiddie, he is our only plan" -- OR if we drafted a rookie PG and were hoping for them to carry the full weight of expectations, and Beal to be patient waiting on a guy to develop at the hardest position in the game -- then Brooklyn could lean on us harder. The longer those negotiations took, the fewer PGs would be on the market.

So Tommy looked through his rolodex of guards he likes, guards his analytics guys like, guys whose value may be suppressed right now, guys who have upside, guys who come cheap but have some experience in the league. Tommy liked Baby Holiday since his draft workouts. Indiana needed $ to sign their homegrown Jimmy Chitwood guy in TJ McConnell. Doubtless Shep phoned Beal and said "what do we think about trading for the little bro Holiday?". Beal, recalling his career .267 three-point percentage against Holiday said "Yeah, that's alright, I like that guy".

Then Tommy looked at a draft that was deep into the 2nd round and said: there will be a guy at the top of rd 2 that I like. Trading back doesn't hurt all that much. So he pulled the trigger. In the 2nd round you are not guaranteed a particular salary. There is flexibility in how it is structured. Trading to the top of round 2 gives Tommy wiggle room, or at least breathing space to get all other deals done and then say to the 2nd rounder's agent: "here is what we got left, how do we structure this so it works for everybody?"

Now. Recall this was LA's pick. Yes in theory it was ours, but it could have fallen apart. In theoretically trading back, we had to select a player at 22 that was agreeable both to LA and to Indiana. Indiana at 31 had to pick a guy that we both liked, in case the deal fell through.

Whatever the end result, Tommy didn't blink. We got Dinwiddie. Giving up only a TPE and 2nd round picks. And Hutchison.

The only 1st round pick we gave up was the one that we traded both for a veteran whose rep among players and analytics guys is better than his stats on paper --PLUS-- the first pick in the 2nd round in a deep year. LA and Indy were happy with Isaiah Jackson (if those parts of the deal did/did not work). The Wiz and Indy were happy with a project Big who could understudy for a couple years but had 1st round talent.

Washington did NOT have to take on additional salary from Brooklyn, and dodged the Lux tax. With the flexibility we even re-inked another +/- star from last year's free agency success in Raul Neto, as a 3rd string PG on an affordable deal.

In retrospect we could say HEY WE SHOULDA GOTTEN ALL THESE OTHER GUYS! But, we would have had to get Indiana and LA to agree. And at some point LA goes, "Hey LeBron, we are still the GM over here, you'll get Buddy Hield and be happy with it." Or the other players in the deal get fed up with the machinations, watching other teams add talent and make big deals (Chicago snatching Lonzo, etc). So Brooklyn panics and lines up another partner, and we are stuck with a disgruntled Westbrook and have to sign a billion players into the lux tax all on minimum deals. No chance we keep Beal on a team that is basically last year's team plus a mess of rookies and worse free agents.

Tommy had a ton of moving parts to make work. He got his guys, made a HOF player happy, made Beal happy, added youth and flexibility, didn't lose all that much. And he gambled on Aaron Holiday living up to his hunch, to Beal's approval, to his analytics guys analysis of his game effect.

In all, I'm pretty sure Tommy walks away from this deal with no qualms that he didn't also trade back for a half dozen rookies.
Frichuela
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,343
And1: 764
Joined: Feb 25, 2015
 

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#124 » by Frichuela » Sat Aug 21, 2021 6:26 pm

doclinkin wrote:
payitforward wrote:
doclinkin wrote:...We traded away a late first round pick to provide leverage and flexibility for the Dinwiddie sign and trade....

I just noticed this, doc. Did I miss something? Or, what do you have in mind that I'm not getting...?

How did trading #22 for Holiday & #31 help in the acquisition of Dinwiddie?


I've laid this out before a few different places but maybe it got eaten by the site reset.

With the trade for Westbrook on the table we had exactly ONE guard on the roster that was signed: Bradley Beal. No back up to him, no veteran PG to play next to him. Yes we wanted Dinwiddie, but no guarantees, to get him we would need to do a sign and trade. Free agency was not yet open, so while we might have a few options to get him, none were at all a sure thing, and some were better than others. It was not a done deal even if both Spencer and the Wizards wanted each other. Brooklyn still had to be convinced. It could easily all have fallen apart.

In fact this trade has been cited as one of the most complicated trades in NBA history. Dinwiddie said he was stressed waiting for it to come to a resolution because at any point any one of the players could back out. Kuzma had said he was 100% sure he was going to be traded to Sactown for Buddy Hield. That deal was all but inked before the Westbrook thing worked out... BUT. Apparently LeBJ preferred Westbrook over Hield.

At any rate, even if the Westbrook thing was possible, we had a 3-for-1 deal incoming, freighted with a lot of salary. Yes we would send out more than we were getting back, but were likely to still flirt with the luxury tax. Our roster was starting to fill up.

The Nets could not sign Dinwiddie because they are deep in lux tax. They wanted to send us DeAndre or another salary with him. No chance Tommy would want to do that, since that puts us in a similar boat. They also apparently wanted us to send a first round pick.

Now everybody in the league knows the Wizards are in a bind. We either make Beal happy and look like a contender, or he leaves, maybe for free. Mind you, this was before free agency, we had zero guards behind or next to Beal. No veteran PG, no back up 2G. KCP incoming IF we can swing the LA deal at the last minute. But no PG. If we sat down at the table saying: "we want Dinwiddie, he is our only plan" -- OR if we drafted a rookie PG and were hoping them to carry the full weight of expectations, and Beal to be patient waiting on a guy to develop at the hardest position in the game -- then Brooklyn could lean on us harder. The longer those negotiations took, the fewer PGs would be on the market.

So Tommy looked through his rolodex of guards he likes, guards his analytics guys like, guys whose value may be suppressed right now, guys who have upside, guys who come cheap but have some experience in the league. Tommy liked Baby Holiday since his draft workouts. Indiana needed $ to sign their homegrown Jimmy Chitwood guy in TJ McConnell. Doubtless Shep phoned Beal and said "what do we think about trading for the little bro Holiday?". Beal, recalling his career .267 three-point percentage against Holiday said "Yeah, that's alright, I like that guy".

Then Tommy looked at a draft that was deep into the 2nd round and said: there will be a guy at the top of rd 2 that I like. Trading back doesn't hurt all that much. So he pulled the trigger. In the 2nd round you are not guaranteed a particular salary. There is flexibility in how it is structured. Trading to the top of round 2 gives Tommy wiggle room, or at least breathing space to get all other deals done and then say to the 2nd rounder's agent: "here is what we got left, how do we structure this so it works for everybody?"

Now. Recall this was LA's pick. Yes in theory it was ours, but it could have fallen apart. In theoretically trading back, we had to select a player at 22 that was agreeable both to LA and to Indiana. Indiana at 31 had to pick a guy that we both liked, in case the deal fell through.

Whatever the end result, Tommy didn't blink. We got Dinwiddie. Giving up only a TPE and 2nd round picks. And Hutchison.

The only 1st round pick we gave up was the one that we traded both for a veteran whose rep among players and analytics guys is better than his stats on paper --PLUS-- the first pick in the 2nd round in a deep year. LA and Indy were happy with Isaiah Jackson (if those parts of the deal did/did not work). The Wiz and Indy were happy with a project Big who could understudy for a couple years but had 1st round talent.

Washington did NOT have to take on additional salary from Brooklyn, and dodged the Lux tax. With the flexibility we even re-inked another +/- star from last year's free agency success in Raul Neto, as a 3rd string PG on an affordable deal.

In retrospect we could say HEY WE SHOULDA GOTTEN ALL THESE OTHER GUYS! But, we would have had to get Indiana and LA to agree. And at some point LA goes, "Hey LeBron, we are still the GM over here, you'll get Buddy Hield and be happy with it." Or the other players in the deal get fed up with the machinations, watching other teams add talent and make big deals (Chicago snatching Lonzo, etc). So Brooklyn panics and lines up another partner, and we are stuck with a disgruntled Westbrook and have to sign a billion players into the lux tax all on minimum deals. No chance we keep Beal on a team that is basically last year's team plus a mess of rookies and worse free agents.

Tommy had a ton of moving parts to make work. He got his guys, made a HOF player happy, made Beal happy, added youth and flexibility, didn't lose all that much. And he gambled on Aaron Holiday living up to his hunch, to Beal's approval, to his analytics guys analysis of his game effect.

In all, I'm pretty sure Tommy walks away from this deal with no qualms that he didn't also trade back for a half dozen rookies.


Great post. Very well put. Agreed.
User avatar
Chocolate City Jordanaire
RealGM
Posts: 49,360
And1: 7,418
Joined: Aug 05, 2001
Location: Mililani, Hawaii (Oahu)
Contact:
       

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#125 » by Chocolate City Jordanaire » Sat Aug 21, 2021 9:22 pm

Dat2U wrote:
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:
thinker07 wrote:I have some general observations

Over time I have become super persuaded that PIF's theory of it almost always is better to trade down for multiple picks.

Doclinkin's notion that you should consider moves in the sequence and time context that they were made in is also super smart.

Although I doubt Ernie ever had deeply thought out plans. But it seems like Tommie does. So I think it's important to recognize that generally outside observers are having to critique the team's moves without knowing what the nuances of the plan are.

So in the sequence, did Tommie trade for AH because he wasn't sure how the SD trade would play out as doclinkin proposes? That makes sense.

We also know that when Tommie likes a guy and doesn't get him, then he covets him and waits for the chance to get him. We know that was the case with Jerome Robinson, with Mo Wagner, Ish Smith and now AH.

I would also propose that it's at least possible that when the AH part of the trade was made Tommie was focused on getting a backup point guard WITHOUT have to use one of the MLE or BAE and getting Todd at a lower guaranteed number than the #22 pick would have received.

I also think that the Wiz almost 100% certainly were able to scout Todd more extensively because he was in the GLeague. Scouting one-and-dones this past years had to be hellacious because of COVID etc. etc. Also given what the roster was expected to look like at the time of the trade (overweighted with PF's) they could more readily take a bigger gamble on upside that might take a bit to develop because there was virtually no chance a rookie PF would play this year.
Tommy is playing chess. I don't know what his rating is but I know he ain't playing no damn checkers


Tommy might be playing Chinese checkers. It damn sure ain't no chess tho.


Dat, you are one funny man! :D

https://www.wikihow.com/Win-at-Chinese-Checkers

Chinese checkers is a relatively simple game, but that doesn't mean it's easy to win. Like any game, the more you play the better you'll get at it. However, it is also helpful to consider some basic and advanced strategies so that you have a leg up on your opponents.
After the Wizards GM really went and did it by having an imaginative, strong, draft day. I totally feel this as well;

AFM wrote:Don't sleep on these white bois. That's all I'm saying.
User avatar
Chocolate City Jordanaire
RealGM
Posts: 49,360
And1: 7,418
Joined: Aug 05, 2001
Location: Mililani, Hawaii (Oahu)
Contact:
       

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#126 » by Chocolate City Jordanaire » Sat Aug 21, 2021 9:23 pm

penbeast0 wrote:
Dat2U wrote:
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:Tommy is playing chess. I don't know what his rating is but I know he ain't playing no damn checkers


Tommy might be playing Chinese checkers. It damn sure ain't no chess tho.


He didn't say he was playing chess very well. :clown:


:nod:

There's certainly levels to the game of chess. I'm playing about 1400 these days (Blitz) ... was MUCH better 40 years ago.
After the Wizards GM really went and did it by having an imaginative, strong, draft day. I totally feel this as well;

AFM wrote:Don't sleep on these white bois. That's all I'm saying.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 17,249
And1: 5,623
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#127 » by payitforward » Sat Aug 21, 2021 9:56 pm

doclinkin wrote:
payitforward wrote:
doclinkin wrote:...We traded away a late first round pick to provide leverage and flexibility for the Dinwiddie sign and trade....

I just noticed this, doc. Did I miss something? Or, what do you have in mind that I'm not getting...?

How did trading #22 for Holiday & #31 help in the acquisition of Dinwiddie?


I've laid this out before a few different places ...

I wasn't questioning anything -- just didn't connect the dots.

But, of course you make a totally solid point! Having traded Russ, & with the deal for Dinwiddie still in process & therefore not a sure thing, there were all the reasons anyone would need to acquire another veteran PG.

There might have been other ways to do it -- or there might not have been! -- but obviously he wasn't going to take a chance on having to do it later & with fewer options.

Add this into the equation, & the trade makes a whole lot of sense.

doclinkin wrote:...Then Tommy looked at a draft that was deep into the 2nd round ....
Tommy had a ton of moving parts to make work. ...In all, I'm pretty sure Tommy walks away from this deal with no qualms that he didn't also trade back for a half dozen rookies.

Let's put it slightly differently: all the moves Tommy made that day took a lot of time & focus. Did he miss an opportunity? Sure he did! He could have traded #31 for #34 & #36. In this draft, that was one hell of a deal. Almost certainly he'd have done it if the deal had been in front of him! But... Tommy & his gang were kind of busy!
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
doclinkin
RealGM
Posts: 11,038
And1: 3,211
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: .wizuds.

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#128 » by doclinkin » Sat Aug 21, 2021 11:02 pm

payitforward wrote:Let's put it slightly differently: all the moves Tommy made that day took a lot of time & focus. Did he miss an opportunity? Sure he did! He could have traded #31 for #34 & #36. In this draft, that was one hell of a deal. Almost certainly he'd have done it if the deal had been in front of him! But... Tommy & his gang were kind of busy!


But #31 was not the Wizard's pick. That was Indiana's pick. Contingent on them receiving the LA pick. So they had to make a pick at both 22 and at 31 that would satisfy Indiana. The 22 had to satisfy LA and Indy. The 31 had to satisfy Indy and the Wizards both. Just in case the deal fell through. So no, he could only have traded down from 31 if Indy was happy with both of the players selected at 34/36.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 17,249
And1: 5,623
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#129 » by payitforward » Sun Aug 22, 2021 1:24 pm

I.e. if the Westbrook trade fell through? In which case, obviously, we don't have the #22 to give Indy for Holiday & the #31. Hence that deal also falls through. Absolutely correct -- but... I thought the Westbrook trade was approved by the time the draft kicked off. I'm probably wrong about that.

But, there's a larger point: suppose that trade between the Knicks & OKC (32 for 34/36) was actually negotiated the day before the draft? In that case as well, I can't just say Tommy should have made that same trade using 31 -- he didn't have 31 to trade the day before the draft!

Thus, in general, my point that trading 31 (& all the more if it's 32 instead) for 34 & 36 in this draft was one hell of a deal. But, that doesn't mean one can criticize Tommy for not making that trade. It was the optimal way to extract value, but he may not have had that option to do it.
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
doclinkin
RealGM
Posts: 11,038
And1: 3,211
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: .wizuds.

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#130 » by doclinkin » Sun Aug 22, 2021 2:18 pm

payitforward wrote:I.e. if the Westbrook trade fell through? In which case, obviously, we don't have the #22 to give Indy for Holiday & the #31. Hence that deal also falls through. Absolutely correct -- but... I thought the Westbrook trade was approved by the time the draft kicked off. I'm probably wrong about that.


No. The Westbrook trade was also the Dinwiddie trade. The rough sketch was done on draft day, but it could have fallen through at any point before free agency. That part had to wait because it involved a sign and trade, so the entire deal was in limbo until we found a taker for Hutchison's salary (plus a round 2 pick) to make the numbers work. If it fell through, then the picks revert to their original owners.

One can argue later if it was worth all the work, if it was a masterful piece of work to remain a mediocre team. But it's hard to argue that Tommy didn't finesse a very difficult deal. Hard to ask him to loop in one more team ON DRAFT DAY with this many moving parts. The picks were not finalized until 2 days later.

Wizards receive:
Spencer Dinwiddie (via BKN)
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope (via LAL)
Montrezl Harrell (via LAL)
Kyle Kuzma (via LAL)
Aaron Holiday (via IND)
Draft rights to No. 31 pick Isaiah Todd (via IND)
Cash considerations (via IND)

Nets receive:
Most favorable of MEM/WAS 2024 second-round pick (via WAS)
2025 GSW/WAS second-round pick swap (via WAS)
$11.5 million trade exception
Rights to 2015 first-round pick Nikola Milutinov (via SAS)

Spurs receive:
Chandler Hutchison (via WAS)
Most favorable of CHI/LAL/DET 2022 second-round pick (via WAS)

Lakers receive:
Russell Westbrook
2023 CHI second-round pick (via WAS)
Least favorable of WAS/MEM 2024 second-round pick (via WAS)
2028 WAS second-round pick (via WAS)

Pacers receive:
Draft rights to No. 22 pick Isaiah Jackson (via LAL)

--I think there must also be a Trade Player Exception from the Spurs to the Wiz in the amount of Chandler Hutchison's contract. Unless that also got shuffled elsewhere.
pcbothwel
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,102
And1: 2,079
Joined: Jun 12, 2010
     

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#131 » by pcbothwel » Sun Aug 22, 2021 2:44 pm

doclinkin wrote:
payitforward wrote:I.e. if the Westbrook trade fell through? In which case, obviously, we don't have the #22 to give Indy for Holiday & the #31. Hence that deal also falls through. Absolutely correct -- but... I thought the Westbrook trade was approved by the time the draft kicked off. I'm probably wrong about that.


No. The Westbrook trade was also the Dinwiddie trade. The rough sketch was done on draft day, but it could have fallen through at any point before free agency. That part had to wait because it involved a sign and trade, so the entire deal was in limbo until we found a taker for Hutchison's salary (plus a round 2 pick) to make the numbers work. If it fell through, then the picks revert to their original owners.

One can argue later if it was worth all the work, if it was a masterful piece of work to remain a mediocre team. But it's hard to argue that Tommy didn't finesse a very difficult deal. Hard to ask him to loop in one more team ON DRAFT DAY with this many moving parts. The picks were not finalized until 2 days later.

Wizards receive:
Spencer Dinwiddie (via BKN)
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope (via LAL)
Montrezl Harrell (via LAL)
Kyle Kuzma (via LAL)
Aaron Holiday (via IND)
Draft rights to No. 31 pick Isaiah Todd (via IND)
Cash considerations (via IND)

Nets receive:
Most favorable of MEM/WAS 2024 second-round pick (via WAS)
2025 GSW/WAS second-round pick swap (via WAS)
$11.5 million trade exception
Rights to 2015 first-round pick Nikola Milutinov (via SAS)

Spurs receive:
Chandler Hutchison (via WAS)
Most favorable of CHI/LAL/DET 2022 second-round pick (via WAS)

Lakers receive:
Russell Westbrook
2023 CHI second-round pick (via WAS)
Least favorable of WAS/MEM 2024 second-round pick (via WAS)
2028 WAS second-round pick (via WAS)

Pacers receive:
Draft rights to No. 22 pick Isaiah Jackson (via LAL)

--I think there must also be a Trade Player Exception from the Spurs to the Wiz in the amount of Chandler Hutchison's contract. Unless that also got shuffled elsewhere.


Doc. I have to disagree. Look at the assets and where they came from. LAL didn’t send anything the BKN. Or SAS.
This was a series of trades that we combined for compliance purposes.

By incorporating the holiday trade into the LAL Russ trade, our potential TPE (or in our case, the additional salary we could take back) decreased by 4M as we sent out no additional salary. Doing this then made it non compliant to take on Dinwiddie outright.
That is why we then followed up with the Hutch salary dump (same salary as Holiday).

Meaning. If we bypassed the holiday trade and instead traded 22 for 2 early seconds, then we wouldn’t have had to dump Hutch and give up the Detroit 2nd.

Plain and simple. It was a poor trade. We elected pick 31 & Holiday over pick 34, 36, and the Detroit 2nd.

Unless you are a top 4 seed or a team flush with picks (OKC), there is no excuse to make this trade.
Even if holiday outperforms his career to date. He is a FA next summer and then we are right back to where we were. No legit backup to Dinwiddie.

Big TS fan, but he was handed a great deal by Russ being proactive and forcing the trade. He simply gets a C for the follow up
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 17,249
And1: 5,623
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#132 » by payitforward » Sun Aug 22, 2021 6:21 pm

pcbothwel wrote:...Doc. I have to disagree. Look at the assets and where they came from. LAL didn’t send anything the BKN. Or SAS.
This was a series of trades that we combined for compliance purposes.

By incorporating the holiday trade into the LAL Russ trade, our potential TPE (or in our case, the additional salary we could take back) decreased by 4M as we sent out no additional salary. Doing this then made it non compliant to take on Dinwiddie outright.
That is why we then followed up with the Hutch salary dump (same salary as Holiday).

Meaning. If we bypassed the holiday trade and instead traded 22 for 2 early seconds, then we wouldn’t have had to dump Hutch and give up the Detroit 2nd.

Plain and simple. It was a poor trade. We elected pick 31 & Holiday over pick 34, 36, and the Detroit 2nd.

Unless you are a top 4 seed or a team flush with picks (OKC), there is no excuse to make this trade.
Even if holiday outperforms his career to date. He is a FA next summer and then we are right back to where we were. No legit backup to Dinwiddie.

Big TS fan, but he was handed a great deal by Russ being proactive and forcing the trade. He simply gets a C for the follow up

But, the description above (large) doesn't describe my point.

There was no reason to trade 22 for 2 early seconds. That's not enough value for the #22.

In principle, we could have made the trade for Holiday & the #31 and then traded the #31 for those "2 early seconds" -- namely the #34 & the #36. The evidence for this possibility is simple: the Knicks traded the following pick, the #32, for the #34 & #36.

I say "in principle," because, who knows?, maybe the Knicks<>OKC trade had been concluded the previous day, maybe it included a handshake agreement between the GMs on some other exchange of favors, maybe... whatever -- it's impossible to know.

Obviously, nonetheless, exchanging the #31 for the #34 & #36 would have been far better than using it to pick Todd -- esp. since Todd was quite likely to be there at #34 anyway! & even if he hadn't been, focusing on one guy is primitive.

Whether to acquire Holiday at all, whether to trade that #22, is a separate question.
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
doclinkin
RealGM
Posts: 11,038
And1: 3,211
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: .wizuds.

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#133 » by doclinkin » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:50 am

pcbothwel wrote:Doc. I have to disagree. Look at the assets and where they came from. LAL didn’t send anything the BKN. Or SAS.
This was a series of trades that we combined for compliance purposes.

By incorporating the holiday trade into the LAL Russ trade, our potential TPE (or in our case, the additional salary we could take back) decreased by 4M as we sent out no additional salary. Doing this then made it non compliant to take on Dinwiddie outright.
That is why we then followed up with the Hutch salary dump (same salary as Holiday).

Meaning. If we bypassed the holiday trade and instead traded 22 for 2 early seconds, then we wouldn’t have had to dump Hutch and give up the Detroit 2nd.

Plain and simple. It was a poor trade. We elected pick 31 & Holiday over pick 34, 36, and the Detroit 2nd.

Unless you are a top 4 seed or a team flush with picks (OKC), there is no excuse to make this trade.
Even if holiday outperforms his career to date. He is a FA next summer and then we are right back to where we were. No legit backup to Dinwiddie.


You skip over the reasoning for the Holiday trade: that it reduces the leverage of Brooklyn in what they can demand for Dinwiddie, and gives us a plausible vet PG with upside to stick next to Beal. You may deem him as worthless, but it matters less what you think than what Bradley Beal thinks. Bradley Beal could give a rip about a future 2nd rounder some time in the life of his career. We on these boards fixate on such things.

The Knicks and Bulls had expressed interest in Dinwiddie. It was never a done deal. The mandate Tommy has been given has been: put a plausible winner around Beal that fits his career arc. Beal has played with rookies. They take a while to season. Loading up on rooks, especially at floor general, is not the timeline of the team that Tommy has been tasked to build. Aaron Holiday does fit that timeline. Remains to be seen if Tommy's scouting on Holiday is better than, I dunno, yours --or history I suppose-- but again, the person whose opinion matters most is Beal. And picking up Holiday first means that we appeared less needy to Sean Marks and crew and could hold firm on not taking back added salary or sending them the First round picks they were asking for. And since the Holiday deal was looped into the trades, picks had to be made that served both Indiana and LA at 22 and 31.

Would I personally have preferred to take extra picks or make a selection at 22 and not trade down? Yes. But I have powerful valence on Beal in 2 directions: he's a good guy, and has gotten better every year of his career, but have serious doubts he will be truly worth the contract it would take to sign him. Still, once he is on that contract, he will have value still and should be a useful asset inked and under our control. Health allowing. BUT. I am going to be a long term fan of the team well past Beal's career I expect. And as a draft-head I love the potential in clever picks etc. I personally don't have to care about what Beal thinks or especially, what Ted thinks. Tommy does. I am simply saying I see what he was working with, and under those instructions he did a remarkable job.
User avatar
doclinkin
RealGM
Posts: 11,038
And1: 3,211
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: .wizuds.

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#134 » by doclinkin » Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:03 am

payitforward wrote:In principle, we could have made the trade for Holiday & the #31 and then traded the #31 for those "2 early seconds" -- namely the #34 & the #36. The evidence for this possibility is simple: the Knicks traded the following pick, the #32, for the #34 & #36.

I say "in principle," because, who knows?, maybe the Knicks<>OKC trade had been concluded the previous day, maybe it included a handshake agreement between the GMs on some other exchange of favors, maybe... whatever -- it's impossible to know.

Obviously, nonetheless, exchanging the #31 for the #34 & #36 would have been far better than using it to pick Todd -- esp. since Todd was quite likely to be there at #34 anyway! & even if he hadn't been, focusing on one guy is primitive.


Except that those were not officially our picks until 48 hours later. Indiana clearly wanted an upside Big. They would have gotten one of Isaiah Jackson or Todd. Both are lanky athletic 6'10" guys, more raw than polished.

LA had to be okay with Jackson in case they went with the Buddy Hield deal instead of the Westbrook one. That pick was not ours to trade officially until 2 days later.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 17,249
And1: 5,623
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#135 » by payitforward » Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:36 am

doclinkin wrote:
payitforward wrote:In principle, we could have made the trade for Holiday & the #31 and then traded the #31 for those "2 early seconds" -- namely the #34 & the #36. The evidence for this possibility is simple: the Knicks traded the following pick, the #32, for the #34 & #36.

I say "in principle," because, who knows?, maybe the Knicks<>OKC trade had been concluded the previous day, maybe it included a handshake agreement between the GMs on some other exchange of favors, maybe... whatever -- it's impossible to know.

Obviously, nonetheless, exchanging the #31 for the #34 & #36 would have been far better than using it to pick Todd -- esp. since Todd was quite likely to be there at #34 anyway! & even if he hadn't been, focusing on one guy is primitive.


Except that those were not officially our picks until 48 hours later. Indiana clearly wanted an upside Big. They would have gotten one of Isaiah Jackson or Todd. Both are lanky athletic 6'10" guys, more raw than polished.

LA had to be okay with Jackson in case they went with the Buddy Hield deal instead of the Westbrook one. That pick was not ours to trade officially until 2 days later.

I'm not sure why you are belaboring this. I grant you any point you want to make about the temporal turning points & dependencies -- without wanting to unpack enough baggage to discover the step-by-step empirical truth. There's nothing at stake -- nothing whatever except your insistence on some sense, one which escapes me, in which you are & must be "right." About what you are "right" is unclear.

There are 2 points here that interest me. The first is that any idiot would prefer the #34 & #36 in this draft to the #31 pick alone. Thus, under any circumstance, & for any team in the league except OKC who seems to have wanted Robinson-Earl enough to have traded in this manner to insure they got him, the trade would have been desirable. Perhaps OKC is an exception precisely because they already have so many picks that a single extra one has smaller value for them than for any other team. But that's speculation.

The second is an obvious one -- we can look at a situation & provide a reasoned opinion as to what would be the best decision in that situation, what would provide the best result, but we cannot know every element constraining that decision for the person who is charged with making it. Thus we can't use our reasoned opinion to criticize the person who made the non-optimal decision.

Thus, suggesting that a better result would have been achieved by swapping 31 for 34 & 36, a thesis so obviously true that even you can't find a basis on which to deny it, does not suggest that failing to swap 31 for 34 & 36 means Tommy is a dummheit. Among other things, as I've now pointed out multiple times, the trade of 32 for 34/36 (which is what underlies the possibility of swapping 31 for 34/36) may already have taken place.

As to the claim that, had the trade fallen through, Indy would have "gotten... Todd," you made it up. You haven't the faintest notion of what Indy would have done had the pick been theirs. & no GM, not Tommy nor any other, would have made that pick under the constraint that he had to take the guy Indy wanted. That's a particularly ridiculous idea.

Arrête alors -- ça suffit!
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
User avatar
doclinkin
RealGM
Posts: 11,038
And1: 3,211
Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Location: .wizuds.

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#136 » by doclinkin » Mon Aug 23, 2021 2:52 am

payitforward wrote:I'm not sure why you are belaboring this.
...


HA!

(Better believe I'm going to quote you on this).

Researching draft day trades that fell through where teams ended up with a guy the other team picked. I'll get back to you. I was thinking it was the 6ers but can't recall what/who. There was an interview with the GM where the teams conferred and agreed on the players. I'll find it though.
Ruzious
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 45,859
And1: 10,100
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#137 » by Ruzious » Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:02 pm

doclinkin wrote:
pcbothwel wrote:Doc. I have to disagree. Look at the assets and where they came from. LAL didn’t send anything the BKN. Or SAS.
This was a series of trades that we combined for compliance purposes.

By incorporating the holiday trade into the LAL Russ trade, our potential TPE (or in our case, the additional salary we could take back) decreased by 4M as we sent out no additional salary. Doing this then made it non compliant to take on Dinwiddie outright.
That is why we then followed up with the Hutch salary dump (same salary as Holiday).

Meaning. If we bypassed the holiday trade and instead traded 22 for 2 early seconds, then we wouldn’t have had to dump Hutch and give up the Detroit 2nd.

Plain and simple. It was a poor trade. We elected pick 31 & Holiday over pick 34, 36, and the Detroit 2nd.

Unless you are a top 4 seed or a team flush with picks (OKC), there is no excuse to make this trade.
Even if holiday outperforms his career to date. He is a FA next summer and then we are right back to where we were. No legit backup to Dinwiddie.


You skip over the reasoning for the Holiday trade: that it reduces the leverage of Brooklyn in what they can demand for Dinwiddie, and gives us a plausible vet PG with upside to stick next to Beal. You may deem him as worthless, but it matters less what you think than what Bradley Beal thinks. Bradley Beal could give a rip about a future 2nd rounder some time in the life of his career. We on these boards fixate on such things.

The Knicks and Bulls had expressed interest in Dinwiddie. It was never a done deal. The mandate Tommy has been given has been: put a plausible winner around Beal that fits his career arc. Beal has played with rookies. They take a while to season. Loading up on rooks, especially at floor general, is not the timeline of the team that Tommy has been tasked to build. Aaron Holiday does fit that timeline. Remains to be seen if Tommy's scouting on Holiday is better than, I dunno, yours --or history I suppose-- but again, the person whose opinion matters most is Beal. And picking up Holiday first means that we appeared less needy to Sean Marks and crew and could hold firm on not taking back added salary or sending them the First round picks they were asking for. And since the Holiday deal was looped into the trades, picks had to be made that served both Indiana and LA at 22 and 31.

Would I personally have preferred to take extra picks or make a selection at 22 and not trade down? Yes. But I have powerful valence on Beal in 2 directions: he's a good guy, and has gotten better every year of his career, but have serious doubts he will be truly worth the contract it would take to sign him. Still, once he is on that contract, he will have value still and should be a useful asset inked and under our control. Health allowing. BUT. I am going to be a long term fan of the team well past Beal's career I expect. And as a draft-head I love the potential in clever picks etc. I personally don't have to care about what Beal thinks or especially, what Ted thinks. Tommy does. I am simply saying I see what he was working with, and under those instructions he did a remarkable job.

While I didn't care for the draft picks (I would have traded down from 15 and gotten Weiskamp and one of the PGs - Cooper or McBride or Ayo - and probably taken TJ Thor at 31 or traded that pick for a future 1st), the trade itself was a work of art - considering how many parts there were to it and the sizes of those parts. I think most GM's wouldn't have been able to pull that off. If he had then done the picks right, he'd be a GM of the year candidate. I don't even have a problem with the Holiday part of the trade - because Tommy obviously believes in him.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 17,249
And1: 5,623
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#138 » by payitforward » Mon Aug 23, 2021 12:22 pm

There's no point in doing the research, doc; I'm sure you are correct.

For the umpteenth time, you insist on debating a point that I agree can't be debated. As in every other human activity, I am quite sure that at one time or another, many times in fact, the intention to do "A" has resulted in "B" instead -- with every other possible result for that matter.

In this situation there are only 2 questions of interest to me:

1. Was Aaron Holiday plus the #31 pick in the 2021 draft a good value return for the #22 pick in the draft?
2. Should a person have preferred to own the #31 pick in the 2021 NBA draft or, instead, the #34 & #36 pick in the same draft?

In large part the answer to the first question will depend on how good Aaron Holiday turns out to be. But, it has nothing whatever to do with how good either of the guys named Isaiah who wound being taken at #22 & #31 turn out to be. It's the picks that were traded, not the players. One could have done a variety of things with either of the picks -- use them in different trades (e.g. for other players than Holiday, exchange them for other picks in the same or other drafts, take different players, etc.

The answer to the second question seems obvious. Once again, this has nothing to do with how good the particular players are who wound up being chosen in any of the 3 spots. A different angle on the same question would ask: "would you have traded the #34 & #36 pick in the 2021 pick for the #31 pick in the same draft?"

That's it. Nothing else of interest here.

In particular, the idea that acquiring Holiday helped hold down the price of acquiring Dinwiddie is without substance. The Nets took the best offer they got for the guy. If someone had offered more than we did, assuming Spencer had been willing to sign with that team, they'd have taken that offer instead of ours. Period.
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
payitforward
RealGM
Posts: 17,249
And1: 5,623
Joined: May 02, 2012
Location: On the Atlantic

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#139 » by payitforward » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:00 pm

Ruzious wrote:While I didn't care for the draft picks (I would have traded down from 15 and gotten Weiskamp and one of the PGs - Cooper or McBride or Ayo - and probably taken TJ Thor at 31 or traded that pick for a future 1st), the trade itself was a work of art - considering how many parts there were to it and the sizes of those parts. I think most GM's wouldn't have been able to pull that off. If he had then done the picks right, he'd be a GM of the year candidate. I don't even have a problem with the Holiday part of the trade - because Tommy obviously believes in him.

I agree with this point for point.

The only question would be "traded down from 15" with what other team? If we'd been able to trade the #15 to the Knicks for #21 & #32, as discussed here, we could have wound up with an extraordinary haul.

1. Trade #21 to Clips for #25 & a future R2 pick (as the Knicks did).
2. Make Holiday trade.
3. Pick BPA at #25 (Grimes would be a posssibility)
4. Trade #31 this year for a future low R1 pick (speculative but should be fairly straightforward/easy to do)
5. Trade #32 to OKC for #34 & 36 (as the Knicks did).
6. Take BPA at #34 (McBride would be my choice)
7. Take BPA at #36 (JT Thor would be fine).

We would have (penciling in names):

Aaron Holiday
Quentin Grimes (or whoever you'd have preferred)
Miles McBride
Wieskamp
a future low R1 pick
a future R2 pick.

instead of:

Aaron Holiday
Corey Kispert
Isaiah Todd.

Love Isaiah Todd? Must have Isaiah Todd? Ok -- cancel trade of #31 pick. In that case, we have:

Aaron Holiday
Quentin Grimes (or whoever you'd have preferred)
Isaiah Todd.
Miles McBride
Wieskamp
a future R2 pick.

instead of:

Aaron Holiday
Corey Kispert
Isaiah Todd.

Only 1 problem... the Knicks had other plans; we didn't/couldn't trade 15 to the Knicks for 21 & 32. :(
Remember -- if you don't like the post above: blame Doc not me.
Ruzious
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 45,859
And1: 10,100
Joined: Jul 17, 2001
       

Re: Wizards trade for Aaron Holiday 

Post#140 » by Ruzious » Mon Aug 23, 2021 1:22 pm

payitforward wrote:
Ruzious wrote:While I didn't care for the draft picks (I would have traded down from 15 and gotten Weiskamp and one of the PGs - Cooper or McBride or Ayo - and probably taken TJ Thor at 31 or traded that pick for a future 1st), the trade itself was a work of art - considering how many parts there were to it and the sizes of those parts. I think most GM's wouldn't have been able to pull that off. If he had then done the picks right, he'd be a GM of the year candidate. I don't even have a problem with the Holiday part of the trade - because Tommy obviously believes in him.

I agree with this point for point.

The only question would be "traded down from 15" with what other team? If we'd been able to trade the #15 to the Knicks for #21 & #32, as discussed here, we could have wound up with an extraordinary haul.

1. Trade #21 to Clips for #25 & a future R2 pick (as the Knicks did).
2. Make Holiday trade.
3. Pick BPA at #25 (Grimes would be a posssibility)
4. Trade #31 this year for a future low R1 pick (speculative but should be fairly straightforward/easy to do)
5. Trade #32 to OKC for #34 & 36 (as the Knicks did).
6. Take BPA at #34 (McBride would be my choice)
7. Take BPA at #36 (JT Thor would be fine).

We would have (penciling in names):

Aaron Holiday
Quentin Grimes (or whoever you'd have preferred)
Miles McBride
Wieskamp
a future low R1 pick
a future R2 pick.

instead of:

Aaron Holiday
Corey Kispert
Isaiah Todd.

Love Isaiah Todd? Must have Isaiah Todd? Ok -- cancel trade of #31 pick. In that case, we have:

Aaron Holiday
Quentin Grimes (or whoever you'd have preferred)
Isaiah Todd.
Miles McBride
Wieskamp
a future R2 pick.

instead of:

Aaron Holiday
Corey Kispert
Isaiah Todd.

Only 1 problem... the Knicks had other plans; we didn't/couldn't trade 15 to the Knicks for 21 & 32. :(

For purposes of this discussion, it really doesn't matter with who(m). Weiskamp was the 41st pick. Of the 3 PG's I mentioned, McBride went 36th, Ayo 38th, and Cooper 48th. There were all kinds of ways to get Weiskamp and 1 of those PG's with the 15th pick - especially since Cooper was my favorite of the 3 PG's.

Edit: I accidentally left off Jared Butler (40) from the list of PG's available, so there were 4.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams

Return to Washington Wizards