Official Trade Thread - Part XLIV

[CntOutSmrtCrazy]

Blows my mind we are still talking about Bryant who once again is starting due to injuries or little depth on a bottom 5 defense.

Bryant has always been able to put the ball in the hoop, it's keeping other players from doing the same that is his issue.

[Frichuela]

Prediction - Zingus gets the boot and they bring in John Collins to play next to Kuz and Gafford.

It's true that it's been rumored that the Wizards have "enquired" about John Collins' availability in the past. Such trade would probably need a 3rd party, maybe the Knicks?

Wizards get Quickley+Collins+Wiz 2023 pick back+DET Lottery protected 1st
Hawks get Toppin+Fournier+DAL 2023 1st
Knicks get Porzingis+Morris

This works in the trade machine...

Wizards roster for the 2023-24 campaign:

Quickley/Wright/
Beal/Goodwin/Johnny the Bust Davis
Kuzma/Kispert/
Collins/Deni/Gill
Gafford/Carey/FA

Plus our 2023 1st and 2nd round picks....

[payitforward]

I would just like to remind everyone .... Look at what rebuild got them. That's situation is terrible.]

Huh?

The Rockets had no draft picks in 2020 -- but traded something for the lowly #52 pick & came away with Kenyon Martin Jr, one of the best young players in the league. He turned 22 less than 3 weeks ago.
The Rockets had the 3d pick in '21 & picked Jalen Green. He hasn't even turned 21 yet!
The Rockets also acquired the #16 pick in '21 from OKC & selected Alperen Sengun. He won't turn 21 until July.
The Rockets also had the #23 pick in '21 & chose Usman Garuba. He's still 20 years old.
The Rockets also had the #24 pick in '21 & chose Josh Christopher -- he turned 21 7 weeks ago.
They also picked up Daishen Nix undrafted & converted him to a regular contract. He'll turn 21 in about 4 months.
The Rockets had the 3d pick in '22 & picked Jabari Smith. He's still 19!
The Rockets had the 17th pick in '22 & picked Tari Eason. He's 21.
The Rockets acquired the 29th pick in '22 & picked TyTy Washington. He turned 21 a couple of months ago.

In addition, of course, the Rockets also have Kevin Porter, Jr. -- still only 22 & a tremendous talent but with a history of personal problems you can only hope he's gotten past.

Those 10 guys average 20 years of age.

The 5 other guys on the team are Eric Gordon, Bobo Marjonovic, Garrison Mathews, Bruno Fernando & Jae'Sean Tate.

I'd happily trade rosters with Houston -- top to bottom.
Especially if I could also trade Front Offices!

[payitforward]

Given that the Wiz are telling teams that Kuzma is not available in a trade right now, here's an interesting question:

is Kyle Kuzma worth more in a trade right now, or might we conceivably do better in a sign-&-trade in the off-season? Or, third option, does it really make no difference?

Any thoughts? nate? you the guru!

4th option. Sign him. Feature him. And still quietly listen to trade offers. Broker a mega-deal eventually with one of the teams who bid up his asking price. So long as you don't give him a no trade clause my feeling is you get a better return on investment if you do ink him to a longer term deal, trade him later to the proper team.

Hadn't considered that.
If we sign him & then get a new FO together that knows what it's doing, that might work well.

[pcbothwel]

Given that the Wiz are telling teams that Kuzma is not available in a trade right now, here's an interesting question:

is Kyle Kuzma worth more in a trade right now, or might we conceivably do better in a sign-&-trade in the off-season? Or, third option, does it really make no difference?

Any thoughts? nate? you the guru!

Assuming a 3+ year contract, Tommy probably assumes that Kuz will have positive value at ~25M in 2025/2026 when the cap looks to make another significant jump.
So he could move in a SnT, or a couple years down the line. I think the SnT is risky as the Pacers, Rockets, Spurs, Pistons (Hometown), etc. all have cap space to sign him.

Tommy is a slick customer, so I think he is trying to sell the fans on Beal & Kuz with Deni as the up-and-coming prospect... But then he'll move KP for picks/Filler so he can push the window out.

[doclinkin]

Given that the Wiz are telling teams that Kuzma is not available in a trade right now, here's an interesting question:

is Kyle Kuzma worth more in a trade right now, or might we conceivably do better in a sign-&-trade in the off-season? Or, third option, does it really make no difference?

Any thoughts? nate? you the guru!

4th option. Sign him. Feature him. And still quietly listen to trade offers. Broker a mega-deal eventually with one of the teams who bid up his asking price. So long as you don't give him a no trade clause my feeling is you get a better return on investment if you do ink him to a longer term deal, trade him later to the proper team.

Hadn't considered that.
If we sign him & then get a new FO together that knows what it's doing, that might work well.

I dunno. Tommy may be ADHD with no strategic vision, but he has been able to trade impossible contracts for value twice in his short tenure as Wiz GM. I think he figures having an asset under control is better than a panic move. Trusts Future Tommy to handle the problems handed him by Now Tommy.

As an asset: There are teams interested in Kuzma. He plays a position of value in the 'positionless' era. He was a key player in a championship team. He is a fairly high profile face that fans of other teams can recognize. Looks to me like he could be worth more in trade than he is in on court production. But unless he re-signs with us he is not an asset under our control.

The problem is Beal receiving the NTC means the ante has been upped on 'loyalty' when asking players to re-sign with us. I think Kuz is using this team to drive up his value elsewhere. If he signs with us solely for the money, I expect he's also going to want control where he won't be shipped to a losing team like John Wall was. And with the front office bailing on their top 10 draft pick to make room for Kuz, and making noises on their intent to re-sign the forward (likely barking loudly to drive off unserious bidders) Kuz' agent has been given the other end of the leash. Whatever team drives up the price, if DC offers a dollar more, I expect the Kuz team will want the same sort of say-so as Beal gets. Is this a Big 3 or what? Or a Big 1 plus a couple guys. Beal and the Not-Beals. Ego plays a role in this I expect.

[80sballboy]

Read on Twitter

?s=20&t=VNVZUFEfc2ZPyrbXGhDlwQ

[payitforward]

Blows my mind we are still talking about Bryant who once again is starting due to injuries or little depth on a bottom 5 defense.

Bryant has always been able to put the ball in the hoop, it's keeping other players from doing the same that is his issue.

There's no longer much reason to debate Thomas Bryant's skills & productivity here; he's a Laker not a Wizard.

That said, it's pretty typical to read a remark like the above that indicates little attention either to what is good about Bryant at his best or to what is bad about him at his limits but instead just repeats a generalized conclusion.

I'm still waiting for a single piece of data to support the idea that "other players" "put the ball in the hoop" either more often or at a higher FG% when they play against Bryant than against other Centers. Maybe they do. OTOH, if they don't, then the critique is meaningless.

For that matter, Bryant's not starting due to injuries, the Lakers are not a bottom 5 defense, the kid is playing his a$$ off in ways other than scoring. (while also scoring at a high clip).

In fairness, OTOH, CntOutSmrtCrazy's first sentence also reflects his sharing the question in my first sentence -- why are we talking about Bryant?

I guess one useful reason might be to compare him to Kristaps Porzingis, who for some unknown reason everybody seems to think is having some kind of "really good" season -- when in fact he's not playing well at all, at least not overall (he's had some terrific games, obviously).

[CntOutSmrtCrazy]

Blows my mind we are still talking about Bryant who once again is starting due to injuries or little depth on a bottom 5 defense.

Bryant has always been able to put the ball in the hoop, it's keeping other players from doing the same that is his issue.

There's no longer much reason to debate Thomas Bryant's skills & productivity here; he's a Laker not a Wizard.

That said, it's pretty typical to read a remark like the above that indicates little attention either to what is good about Bryant at his best or to what is bad about him at his limits but instead just repeats a generalized conclusion.

I'm still waiting for a single piece of data to support the idea that "other players" "put the ball in the hoop" either more often or at a higher FG% when they play against Bryant than against other Centers. Maybe they do. OTOH, if they don't, then the critique is meaningless.

For that matter, Bryant's not starting due to injuries, the Lakers are not a bottom 5 defense, the kid is playing his a$$ off in ways other than scoring. (while also scoring at a high clip).

In fairness, OTOH, CntOutSmrtCrazy's first sentence also reflects his sharing the question in my first sentence -- why are we talking about Bryant?

I guess one useful reason might be to compare him to Kristaps Porzingis, who for some unknown reason everybody seems to think is having some kind of "really good" season -- when in fact he's not playing well at all, at least not overall (he's had some terrific games, obviously).

The data is he plays at the most important defensive position on the floor and has never once in his career been on a good defensive team despite starting more than half his career games. So okay based on defensive ratings, he's technically on 21st rated team so still in bottom third in the league this is marginally better than the 22nd, 23rd, and 24th, but I'll cede that point.

So there's no need for a bureaucratic debate about data supporting it when we had 155 games to watch him play on the Wizards. Now were there other members that contributed to crappy team defensive (and overall)? Absolutely. It wasn't just him, there were a litany of other bad actors that led to that. Thing is, he wasn't moving things in the right direction and that's putting it nicely.

As to why we are talking about Bryant, probably the same reason the same things are consistently talked about to nauseum on this board because some people just have to tell the whole world they are right, and frankly, as pathetic as this franchise is we have nothing else better to talk about except rue in the middling successes of past players, that we believe some how could have turned out better here had it not been for the idiots running the franchise. Which is fair, I get it.

[Dat2U]

Bryant simply can't defend the C position. Whatever else he does is largely irrelevant. Despite the fact he runs the floor, crashes the board and is relatively skilled. You can't hide him on D or play him at PF. Keeping him would not have made a difference in the Wizards win total.

[payitforward]

Blows my mind we are still talking about Bryant who once again is starting due to injuries or little depth on a bottom 5 defense.

Bryant has always been able to put the ball in the hoop, it's keeping other players from doing the same that is his issue.

There's no longer much reason to debate Thomas Bryant's skills & productivity here; he's a Laker not a Wizard.

That said, it's pretty typical to read a remark like the above that indicates little attention either to what is good about Bryant at his best or to what is bad about him at his limits but instead just repeats a generalized conclusion.

I'm still waiting for a single piece of data to support the idea that "other players" "put the ball in the hoop" either more often or at a higher FG% when they play against Bryant than against other Centers. Maybe they do. OTOH, if they don't, then the critique is meaningless.

For that matter, Bryant's not starting due to injuries, the Lakers are not a bottom 5 defense, the kid is playing his a$$ off in ways other than scoring. (while also scoring at a high clip).

In fairness, OTOH, CntOutSmrtCrazy's first sentence also reflects his sharing the question in my first sentence -- why are we talking about Bryant?

I guess one useful reason might be to compare him to Kristaps Porzingis, who for some unknown reason everybody seems to think is having some kind of "really good" season -- when in fact he's not playing well at all, at least not overall (he's had some terrific games, obviously).

The data is he plays at the most important defensive position on the floor and has never once in his career been on a good defensive team despite starting more than half his career games. So okay based on defensive ratings, he's technically on 21st rated team so still in bottom third in the league this is marginally better than the 22nd, 23rd, and 24th, but I'll cede that point.

So there's no need for a bureaucratic debate about data supporting it when we 155 games to watch him play on the Wizards. Now were there other members that contributed to crappy team defensive (and overall)? Absolutely. It wasn't just him, there were a litany of other bad actors that led to that. Thing is, he wasn't moving things in the right direction and that's putting it nicely.

As to why we are talking about Bryant, probably the same reason the same things are consistently talked about to nauseum on this board because some people just have to tell the whole world they are right, and frankly, as pathetic as this franchise is we have nothing else better to talk about accept rue in the middling successes of past players, that we believe some how could have turned out better here had it not been for the idiots running the franchise. Which is fair, I get it.

:)

[gambitx777]

The Chris Paul playoff injury messed up the Rockets. Then there was Russ v Harden bad blood. Then fat Harden.

Houston also IIRC let their GM go .

Look at what rebuild got them. That's situation is terrible. And I'm not saying Tommy should be safe, or that he's good. I'm just saying he does something's well with in what he's told.

This is a critical point. If some one offers kuz more or matches and he walks and KP says see ya. It's more than likely Tommy's head. I am optimistic that if kuz just flat out says get me out of here.... Tommy moves him imidiatly. I think Tommy has been given reason to believe Kuz wants to stay. If Kuz pulls one over on him that's **** on Kuz. But , Tommy should also not be such a dummy.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

Gamby: I saw a guy walk across the street & get hit by a car, so whatever you do... don't walk across the street!

CCJ: But... the place we need to go to get what we need is on the other side of the street!

Gamby: I'm just sayin'....

I'm not saying don't rebuild I'm saying that even that could go badly of done badly.
I've seen puffs post but I think the general thought is that rebuild is looking bleek unless some of these guys make huge leaps.


Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[badinage]

Can’t speak for you, but, yes, the DC I know and hang out in (which is primarily African American) is indeed hip, well-educated…and very culturally aware. And I see many of those faces at Zards games.

Though a lot of the faces you see at Wizards games are cheering for the wrong team. Which also goes into lifestyle considerations. Players want the respect of their peers. Being part of a winning atmosphere and the chemistry that comes from the backing of a fanatic fanbase are part of those calculations. You can sell more merch and reach more people if you are winning. If you are on national broadcasts. If you are in the highlight reels.

DC could be a great media market. Though the local media is primarily centered on politics. The area is always a sleeping giant for a basketball fanbase. You'd imagine with a string of wins, postseason success, or winning the trophy, maybe we get a surge of basketball pride that carries forward. Oddly the only championships that seemed to stick were the football wins back in the day. We have had recent champs in hockey, baseball, and I guess the baseball pride has stuck around but I don't know that people would say this is a baseball town, like. I honestly do not know why football is king here. The team has sucked for so long, and been a congealed clot of infectious waste on our sports landscape under the current ownership. And yet even when the product is terrible, football leads local coverage. Okay maybe the Gary Williams terps or Big John Hoyas had a lasting fanbse for a bit there.

But yeah. Basketballwise as far as lifestyle is concerned, we are not a destination team. We are not a showcase team. We don't bring fans to opposing homecourts wearing our jerseys. Agent Zero and the Hibachis did for a minute there, but in general yeah, nobody in other buildings is showing up in a Bradley Beal shirt. We aren't in the promos to sell the games, we are not selling out our own building much less other houses. For a player who is conscious of having eyes on his brand, this brand of Wizards is not in the spotlight, that's all.

Agree with pretty much all of this, especially the part about the Zards needing to win to truly have a loyal (and fanatic) fan base, national exposure and all those things that go with success.

I disagree that football is king in the DC metro area. This really is much more of a bball town but you’re not gonna see that if the local teams are mediocre…as has been the case with the Zards and the Terps and Hoyas for the last decade or more.

The reality is that a lot of the football team’s fan base is from outside of the immediate DC area, like the Tidewater VA area, which goes back to the days when there were not NFL teams south of DC.

Football leads the sports coverage in most towns, primarily because it’s the nation’s most popular sport by far.

I don’t think this is a sports town, period.

This *was* a Skins town.

But other than that great run of 20 years, it’s largely been a bandwagon town. Not a Boston or a Philly or a NY; places where they live for their teams and die for their teams, where the papers are filled with vitriol when times are bad.

This is a deeply complacent city.

And a deeply conservative one, too. No surprise — it’s a seat of government. Things don’t originate here, other than legislation. Yeah, go-go, straight-edge punk, but look at the clothes women wear. Look at the restaurants. Look at the architecture (or actually, don’t look). Look at the theater scene, dominated by Shakespeare lol.

Hip, dczards? Hip? Educated, I’ll grant you. Well-traveled, sure. But hip? This might be the least hip city in the country — and that goes for white as well as for black.

[FAH1223]

Read on Twitter

[nate33]

Blows my mind we are still talking about Bryant who once again is starting due to injuries or little depth on a bottom 5 defense.

Bryant has always been able to put the ball in the hoop, it's keeping other players from doing the same that is his issue.

There's no longer much reason to debate Thomas Bryant's skills & productivity here; he's a Laker not a Wizard.

That said, it's pretty typical to read a remark like the above that indicates little attention either to what is good about Bryant at his best or to what is bad about him at his limits but instead just repeats a generalized conclusion.

I'm still waiting for a single piece of data to support the idea that "other players" "put the ball in the hoop" either more often or at a higher FG% when they play against Bryant than against other Centers. Maybe they do. OTOH, if they don't, then the critique is meaningless.

For that matter, Bryant's not starting due to injuries, the Lakers are not a bottom 5 defense, the kid is playing his a$$ off in ways other than scoring. (while also scoring at a high clip).

In fairness, OTOH, CntOutSmrtCrazy's first sentence also reflects his sharing the question in my first sentence -- why are we talking about Bryant?

I guess one useful reason might be to compare him to Kristaps Porzingis, who for some unknown reason everybody seems to think is having some kind of "really good" season -- when in fact he's not playing well at all, at least not overall (he's had some terrific games, obviously).

The data is he plays at the most important defensive position on the floor and has never once in his career been on a good defensive team despite starting more than half his career games. So okay based on defensive ratings, he's technically on 21st rated team so still in bottom third in the league this is marginally better than the 22nd, 23rd, and 24th, but I'll cede that point.

To back up CntOutSmrtCrazy's point, let's go through some numbers:

In 2017-18, before Bryant's arrival, the Wizards ranked 15th in DRtg. This was Gortat's last year, and he had lost a step defensively, but Brooks coached them up. Ian Mahinmi actually played 1100 minutes and helped the defense quite a bit.

In 2018-19, Bryant's first big-minute season with the Wizards, they ranked 28th in DRtg.

In 2019-20, Bryant's second big-minute season, they ranked 30th in DRtg.

In 2020-21, his third season, he played the first 10 games. In those 10 games, the Wizards ranked 27th in DRtg. In the remaining 72, they ranked 17th. And that's with journeymen Brook Lopez and Alex Len replacing him (and eventually Gafford after the Trade Deadline).

In 2021-22, the Wizards ranked 25th in DRtg. Bryant didn't play much, but they instead featured known defensive sieve Montrez Harrell at center half the time. Gafford was still pretty raw, blocking shots but fouling too much.

This year, with a starting center who is actually good defensively, plus Gafford who is improving, they have the 16th best defense. Nobody else on the team other than Avdija (and Wright for 19 games) is a plus defender.

[payitforward]

I don't know why we're still talking about Bryant, but if so let's at least talk sense about him.

For starters, I agree that Thomas Bryant is a below-average defensive Center. Did I ever write otherwise?

But, what would be of real interest is the question how good is Bryant overall.

To answer that question (about Bryant or any player) requires an analyst to look at all aspects of Bryant's game -- not just his defense. & it also requires specific, focused, data-driven points -- not the kinds of inane, over-generalized over-statements which were the only things that I was reacting to.

Now... in fairness, it's a lot easier to provide "focused, data-driven points" about a player's offense than about his defense. & since those offensive numbers in TB's case would prove without any doubt that Thomas Bryant is a way above average offensive Center, it's especially important to support the counter-case about defense with something beyond vapid generalizations.

That said, let's look at your remarks

1. I agree that data from 2018-19 & 2019-20 is relevant, nate. The offensive data & the data about his defense. But, not the next two years. Ten games isn't a reasonable sample, so forget '20-21, & he was obviously pretty much useless the following year -- he hadn't really recovered from his injury.

2. Plus, sheesh..., you know better than to sift with such a coarse sieve, nate, in comparing the Wizards on defense in 2017-18 with the following year! The changes in personnel were enormous between those 2 years!

I mean huge! 15 players logged minutes for the Wizards in '18-19 who had not been there the year before! Bryant was a small part of that. Not to mention that only 2 of those 15 new Wizards 2 (Bryant & Mahinmi) were also on the team the following year!

Fortunately, we have access to at least some data that will help us to understand the effect of having Bryant on the floor.

What were Bryant's on-off numbers in 2018-19 & 2019-20? Isn't that a logical place to start in trying to determine "how good Bryant is overall"?

& as to Bryant this season, Bryant as a Laker, well... it's hard to see how a guy who's posting a .701 TS% on 19% usage, while grabbing 13 rebounds per 40 minutes might be hurting his team.

Still, those are just numbers. If a person has the ability to pronounce ex cathedra on who is good & who not -- because, well... it's just something that the person knows with certainty, because he is gifted that way -- then there's no reason at all to look at any numbers.

[deneem4]

We know Bryant strengths and weakness, jus saying knowing we had KP and gafford on the roster, he should’ve been a good pairing for both considering KP doesn’t like to bang inside sometimes and gafford has not outside game, but it’s the wizards we just tried experimenting KP and gafford together like a week ago

[deneem4]

M. Morris
D. Wright
J. Goodwin

B. Beal
K. Nunn

D. Avdija
C. Kispert
W. Barton

K. Kuzma
T. Gibson
A. Gill

K. Porzingis
D. Gafford
V. Carey Jr.

what’s next, we know deni isn’t getting traded so your idea moves and if you do have a deni trade, what are we getting

[FAH1223]

https://open.substack.com/pub/marcstein/p/the-latest-nba-trade-winds?r=1lykpo&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

When my reporting is imprecise and needs to be polished, I am determined to fix it. So here goes: League sources confirm that the Wizards and Suns began discussing Rui Hachimura trade concepts in December, as I reported at the time, but one source with knowledge of the talks says I erred by printing the sourced notion that Phoenix turned down a package headlined by Hachimura. The consistent impediment to those talks, according to the source, was Washington's desire to move Jae Crowder on to Milwaukee in a three-way trade without taking back long-term salary. The Wizards were prepared for Crowder's inclusion only if they could move him on at a minimal cost. The Bucks' interest in trading for Crowder has likewise never wavered and remains strong, sources say, but Milwaukee and Phoenix could not assemble a three-way deal to Washington's liking. As the aforementioned Mr. Fischer reported earlier this week, those three teams were still talking as of last weekend when the Lakers, offering three future second-round picks packaged with Kendrick Nunn's expiring contract, swooped in with the trade package that the Wizards were looking for in exchange for Hachimura. As I also reported Monday, Hachimura ultimately requested a trade out of Washington before the deal with the Lakers materialized.

[deneem4]

https://open.substack.com/pub/marcstein/p/the-latest-nba-trade-winds?r=1lykpo&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

When my reporting is imprecise and needs to be polished, I am determined to fix it. So here goes: League sources confirm that the Wizards and Suns began discussing Rui Hachimura trade concepts in December, as I reported at the time, but one source with knowledge of the talks says I erred by printing the sourced notion that Phoenix turned down a package headlined by Hachimura. The consistent impediment to those talks, according to the source, was Washington's desire to move Jae Crowder on to Milwaukee in a three-way trade without taking back long-term salary. The Wizards were prepared for Crowder's inclusion only if they could move him on at a minimal cost. The Bucks' interest in trading for Crowder has likewise never wavered and remains strong, sources say, but Milwaukee and Phoenix could not assemble a three-way deal to Washington's liking. As the aforementioned Mr. Fischer reported earlier this week, those three teams were still talking as of last weekend when the Lakers, offering three future second-round picks packaged with Kendrick Nunn's expiring contract, swooped in with the trade package that the Wizards were looking for in exchange for Hachimura. As I also reported Monday, Hachimura ultimately requested a trade out of Washington before the deal with the Lakers materialized.

Watch on YouTube