Official 2023 Wizards OFFSEASON Thread

[dckingsfan]

Writing is difficult compared to speech (in person) to gauge the response. In person, you would see the facial expressions and make adjustments. Writing tends to be more of a logical exercise.

[doclinkin]

I'd certainly say that my tone is confident in the paragraphs you quote above, but I would never have identified them as condescending.

My man. We are friends and all. I appreciate you. But yeah you have made it clear that you believe you are generally smarter than most folks on here (or otherwise) and tend to approach dialogue from that perspective. Especially on this topic. Reference the 3 times now that you have challenged me with the "I submit that surely you have never taken advanced mathematics therefore why would you deem yourself qualified to question me" formulation. And this is to me, who defends you about as often as I give you the business. And who, you know, is well comfortable in my estimation of my own brainliness.

Yes, you speak fluent condescension. And it is in your accent when it is not directly your vernacular. That said, I personally appreciate it. It is your honest voice. You enjoy a bit of a dust-up. You can be prickly about it but generally appreciate a smart retort. It often amuses me when you get slippery and tend to drop a topic rather than admit when you are hemmed in. Or you let it slide a few days as though we might forget. I personally don't expect it to change. It adds content when people get pissed enough to bat that shuttlecock over the net a few times. Okay sometimes it'd be nice to see a different argument, or a bit of research exploring the counter-argument to your own firmly held faiths. And you know, maybe limit yourself a monthly maximum of one alternate-history trade-down redraft. Okay or one a week if that is impossible.

But nah. It's all good. Stubbornness can be a useful tool. Ego as well. And frankly sometimes those clouds need to behave themselves and stop floating all over your property bringing all that shade. Tell 'em bout it.

[DCZards]

PIF big ups to you. Whenever a poster calls you out for your condescending tone (which I’ve done on occasion) you don’t take offense…but instead you take it seriously and, typically, respond with an apology and a pledge to do better. I like that about you.

Most of us have been guilty at times of addressing other posters in a language and tone that comes across as condescending or a little mean-spirited.

As dckings points out, unlike what we say to someone in person, the stuff we write doesn’t have the benefit of displaying the “true” tone or intent of a remark. And, of course, there's no facial expression, body language, etc. to take into account.

That’s the main reason, imo, that misunderstandings occur…and why we should be particularly careful about what we say in writing and, most importantly, how we say it.

[9 and 20]

With the last few posts here, I'm reminded of the video of the angry old new york trumpet player yelling at a guy trying to play on the street. Actually I think about that clip a lot. I wish the trumpet guy had the opportunity to yell at Grunfeld to do better.

[doclinkin]

With the last few posts here, I'm reminded of the video of the angry old new york trumpet player yelling at a guy trying to play on the street. Actually I think about that clip a lot. I wish the trumpet guy had the opportunity to yell at Grunfeld to do better.

SALTY LANGUAGE WARNING. Hey it's New Yawk, whaddaya want:

Watch on YouTube

Ha! Never saw it before. Funny.

[AFM]

With the last few posts here, I'm reminded of the video of the angry old new york trumpet player yelling at a guy trying to play on the street. Actually I think about that clip a lot. I wish the trumpet guy had the opportunity to yell at Grunfeld to do better.

SALTY LANGUAGE WARNING. Hey it's New Yawk, whaddaya want:

Watch on YouTube

Ha! Never saw it before. Funny.

Classic vid...he was on TAFS recently:

Watch on YouTube

I don't think he realized TAFS is essentially satire

[payitforward]

...I had to ask you 3 times if Brandon Clarke was actually the 5th best player in the league before you responded. ...now I need you to explain WHY he isn't the 5th best player....

Fair question. I might as well give you a thorough answer -- one that fully expresses why he isn't the 5th-best player in the league, yet still confirms that a h#ll of a good player. In short, this is everything relevant to the question, given what I know, & as best I am able to understand it.I'm hoping that if I do so, we can put this whole subject behind us.

1. Obviously, methodologies like PER, Win Shares, Kevin Broom's PPA, WP48, & many others all work more or less the same way -- by weighing & totaling players' per-40-minutes numbers (positive & negative) to come up with (essentially) a single number that expresses the player's output & where it stands compared to others. However it's expressed, a bigger number is always better.

Each of them weighs different stats slightly differently, & some incorporate a position adjustment (to account for the very different kinds of numbers put up by guys at different positions). At least at the team level they all claim to have (& no doubt do have) pretty high statistical correlation with a team's record.

So why can't we simply say that the guy with the highest total, say the highest PER (or whichever of the other schemes you prefer), in the NBA is the "best player in the league"?? In the same way, if a guy is at position "n" on the list, why can't we simply say he's the nth best player in the league?

One reason is that there is simply no need to. You don't add anything to what you know by as it were "declaring a winner" followed by a runner up, etc. Plus, that's not really what any of these methodologies is designed for. They are intended as ways to assess & compare the productive output of multiple individual players. Find the players you're interested in, compare their numbers up & down the list, look at how they did last year in each of those areas, & come to judgement (as a fan or a FO person) on how interested you might be (or your team should be) in acquiring the player, or how much he should be paid, or how he compares to others you might also be interested in, etc.

Not to mention that, after all, "best player" is something that you'd expect to have legs. To remain the same from season to season over some period. To make a call on that, you'd have to look at multiple years, figure out how to weight the past against the present, against future potential, etc.

Not to mention that we already know who the best player in the league is. It's Nikola Jokic. Not only that but he's a mile ahead of everyone. All in all, he might just have had the best season anyone's ever had in the NBA.

Overall, as well, it's a lot less complicated than what something like epm attempts to do -- to create an accurate ordered list of best to worst from 1 to 4XX. In the case of WP48 all you do is present a n ordered list that comes from the data itself & is based on easily checked public stats, there is as it were nothing behind the curtain. It's just numbers. Unless you question the weighting of different stats, the list is unambiguous. If you do question the weighting of stats, then fine... that methodology is not for you. Or for that matter, you can weight them somewhat differently & recalculate yourself.

IOW, what epm attempts is far more difficult than any of the counting-stats-based methodologies.

Few teams are interested to know whether the top 5 guys are ordered correctly -- they have specific lists of players about whom they want to deepen their understanding. That overall number representing as it were "where the player stands" is very important to teams -- it impacts their decisions about how much to pay to acquire the guy, how much to pay him in a contract, is he high value at his current salary, etc. etc. etc.

In shor, if the WP48 list (w/ Clarke at 5) were intended as an ordered list of NBA players from the very best on down, it wouldn't be useful. In fact, it would be silly. It's because it is NOT so intended that it's useful

So, that's why Brandon Clarke is not "the 5th best player in the league" despite sitting at #5 in WP48. That's not what it means for him to sit there.

OTOH, don't get me wrong, Brandon Clarke is certainly a very good player. If a guy...

scores 13.4% more points than average for his position
at a TS% almost 20% better than average at his position
& gets 68% more defensive boards than average at his position
plus 240% more offensive boards than average at his position
in addition to blocking 266% more shots than average at his position

...the guy is a very good player -- duh! & even if he also

is only average in steals & turnovers
& even somewhat below average in assists & fouls.

Nor is it just in WP48 that he looks good. Clarke's
PER this year was 20. On his career, it's 20.4.

For comparison, KP's PER this year was 23. His PER in 17 games with us last year was 27.7.
Kyle Kuzma's PER this year was 14. On his career it's 13.9.

[payitforward]

..that Porzingis is better than Walker Kessler.

I'd call this a good example of the difference between reporting numbers vs drawing "better/worse" conclusions.

What we know about Walker Kessler as an NBA player is that he had one hell of a good rookie year. In 1700+ minutes too, so a nice sample size. In fact, overall, his rookie year was as good as Nikola Jokic's rookie year! Somewhat different -- but as good overall. In about the same number of minutes.

Does that mean he'll be as good as Nikola Jokic?
Of course not!

Does that mean he'll be as good as Kristaps Porzingis?
Of course not!

If Jokic was a rookie this year & put up the numbers he did put up as a rookie, would we say: "that Jokic kid is going to wind up better than KP?"
Of course not!

But he did.

Does that mean Kessler will too?
Of course not!

Is it possible that he will?
Of course it is. But so what?

All the same, he sure had a good rookie year!

Far as it goes. Makes zero sense to compare him to Porzingis.

[9 and 20]

With the last few posts here, I'm reminded of the video of the angry old new york trumpet player yelling at a guy trying to play on the street. Actually I think about that clip a lot. I wish the trumpet guy had the opportunity to yell at Grunfeld to do better.

SALTY LANGUAGE WARNING. Hey it's New Yawk, whaddaya want:

Watch on YouTube

Ha! Never saw it before. Funny.

There it is. That's the good stuff. We need to hire that man to yell at Terd when he has bad ideas. Mid build??? Who the f are you????

[gambitx777]

Beal to Miami or NY for expiring contacts and a young player and picks might just be on the table for either team if they don't win a ring this year.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[Rafael122]

Listening to the BS pod this morning, something to keep an eye on, if Jaylen Brown is on the All-NBA team, he is eligible for an extension worth up to $270 million. Just pointing it out because Celtics look like they're on the ropes, and I think Boston would be one of the handful of teams Beal would drop his NTC for. Beal has $207 million remaining on his contract, assuming he picks up the player option, so they're saving about $63 million just on salary + whatever they would save on tax.

Beal for Brown and White, who says no?

[payitforward]

I'd certainly say that my tone is confident in the paragraphs you quote above, but I would never have identified them as condescending.

My man. We are friends and all. I appreciate you. But yeah you have made it clear that you believe you are generally smarter than most folks on here (or otherwise) and tend to approach dialogue from that perspective.... Yes, you speak fluent condescension.... And it is in your accent when it is not directly your vernacular. That said, I personally appreciate it. It is your honest voice. You enjoy a bit of a dust-up. You can be prickly about it but generally appreciate a smart retort. It often amuses me when you get slippery and tend to drop a topic rather than admit when you are hemmed in. Or you let it slide a few days as though we might forget. I personally don't expect it to change. It adds content when people get pissed enough to bat that shuttlecock over the net a few times. Okay sometimes it'd be nice to see a different argument, or a bit of research exploring the counter-argument to your own firmly held faiths. And you know, maybe limit yourself a monthly maximum of one alternate-history trade-down redraft. Okay or one a week if that is impossible.

But nah. It's all good. Stubbornness can be a useful tool. Ego as well. And frankly sometimes those clouds need to behave themselves and stop floating all over your property bringing all that shade. Tell 'em bout it.

Thanks, doc. There are a lot of very thoughtful & knowledgeable people posting on this Board, & I learn far more than I could ever contribute -- from you & many others.

In particular, I'll mention nate, who knows about a hundred times more about basketball than I ever will!

If it's obvious that I'm confident of my intelligence, I hope it's equally obvious that I don't mind being criticized. There's a huge gulf between being "smart" & being "right."

&, as they say, you can't be right unless you are willing to be wrong! Given the frequency with which I'm wrong, I hope it's obvious that I'm willing!

[payitforward]

PIF big ups to you. Whenever a poster calls you out for your condescending tone (which I’ve done on occasion) you don’t take offense…but instead you take it seriously and, typically, respond with an apology and a pledge to do better. I like that about you.

Most of us have been guilty at times of addressing other posters in a language and tone that comes across as condescending or a little mean-spirited.

As dckings points out, unlike what we say to someone in person, the stuff we write doesn’t have the benefit of displaying the “true” tone or intent of a remark. And, of course, there's no facial expression, body language, etc. to take into account.

That’s the main reason, imo, that misunderstandings occur…and why we should be particularly careful about what we say in writing and, most importantly, how we say it.

Many thanks, Zards!! I appreciate it -- a lot!

[payitforward]

Btw, if any of the rest of you would like to weigh in with praise for how terrific I am -- no problem!

Feel free. Now's the time!

[bsilver]

Beal to Miami or NY for expiring contacts and a young player and picks might just be on the table for either team if they don't win a ring this year.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

Sounds good to me, and could interest Miami. Kyle Lowry is playing well, but really old, so they might think they're better off with Beal.

But Lowry is the only expiring big contract, so we'd have to take another big contract they'd like to shed. Certainly, Robinson and Oladipo, and maybe Herro. It would be nice to get Nikola Jovic from Miami somehow.

[bsilver]

Listening to the BS pod this morning, something to keep an eye on, if Jaylen Brown is on the All-NBA team, he is eligible for an extension worth up to $270 million. Just pointing it out because Celtics look like they're on the ropes, and I think Boston would be one of the handful of teams Beal would drop his NTC for. Beal has $207 million remaining on his contract, assuming he picks up the player option, so they're saving about $63 million just on salary + whatever they would save on tax.

Beal for Brown and White, who says no?

Boston
Even if it was just Brown. He's younger, bigger, and a better defender. Beal may have the offensive edge.
White is terrific. 2nd team all defense.
Losing Brown/White for Beal would change Boston from a good defensive team to average.

[badinage]

Btw, if any of the rest of you would like to weigh in with praise for how terrific I am -- no problem!

Feel free. Now's the time!

I think you’re terrific.

I like people who have their own minds, and who push. And I also like when, along the way, I learn a lot of other things, having nothing to do with hoop.

So, yeah: I appreciate you. Don’t stop posting. Don’t hold back. (Though if you could ease up juuuust a bit on telling us that whether a player was a good pick has nothing to do with whether the pick was used well [though I will say — that distinction never occurred to me, and has influenced my thinking!])

[pcbothwel]

Listening to the BS pod this morning, something to keep an eye on, if Jaylen Brown is on the All-NBA team, he is eligible for an extension worth up to $270 million. Just pointing it out because Celtics look like they're on the ropes, and I think Boston would be one of the handful of teams Beal would drop his NTC for. Beal has $207 million remaining on his contract, assuming he picks up the player option, so they're saving about $63 million just on salary + whatever they would save on tax.

Beal for Brown and White, who says no?

Boston
Even if it was just Brown. He's younger, bigger, and a better defender. Beal may have the offensive edge.
White is terrific. 2nd team all defense.
Losing Brown/White for Beal would change Boston from a good defensive team to average.

Beal is a better, more complete offensive player. Full stop. There is no "may have" about it.
That said, Boston adding white would be an overpay.

I actually think a 3-way trade with Boston getting Beal, NYK getting brown, and us getting assets is the best fit

[payitforward]

Btw, if any of the rest of you would like to weigh in with praise for how terrific I am -- no problem!

Feel free. Now's the time!

I think you’re terrific.

I like people who have their own minds, and who push....

thanks -- & back at you too!

And I also like when, along the way, I learn a lot of other things, having nothing to do with hoop....

Uh oh... I bet some people rolled their eyes reading that! An invitation for me to pontificate...? No worries, tho: I'll try not to!

whether a player was a good pick has nothing to do with whether the pick was used well [though I will say — that distinction never occurred to me, and has influenced my thinking!])

That's not quite what I have in mind when I make that distinction.

Obviously, if you make a pick then the better the player turns out to be the better the pick you made. OTOH, if you could have traded the pick down instead & gotten two players at least one of whom was better than the guy you took, so much the better.

My point is only that having a draft pick is like having some capital to invest. There are multiple options & multiple strategies for what you do with the pick. &, as with capital, every decision involves some risk.

[Silvie Lysandra]

We are going to be mediocre until we get a tent pole star. Beal and Zinger are when at their best, fair #2s or 3s. True title contenders need even more than that. It’s really simple and most of us agree on this - we need to luck into a top 15 player or rebuild. Anything else is a repeat of the last 5 years, doomed to mediocrity as consigliere’s post describes

A few musings on this.

You *can* contend if you have 5 players that are around Beal/KP level + 3 more players that are starter level/borderline starter level. So 3 players at roughly Kyle Kuzma's level, then 3 more players at roughly Deni Avidja's level. The problem is that it is a lot harder to build that kind of team. Why? Because due to the way talent is spread out around the league, as well as the max contract, you have to pay Bradley Beal the same amount of money as Nikola Jokic or Joel Embiid to keep him on your team (and if you don't, someone will). One of the most perverse incentives in the NBA is that you have to underpay the best players in the NBA to be a contender, but you have to [i]overpay[i] guys like Bradley Beal to keep them, so the option of "well, we don't have one of the top 30 players of all time (Seriously - non-Detroit title winning franchise players since 1990: Jordan, Hakeem, Duncan, Kobe, Shaq, Wade, LeBron, Curry, Giannis, Dirk - Dirk is the *worst* player on that list probably) with another All-Star or two as a sidekick, but we could assemble 2 All-Stars, 3 fringe All-Stars and a deep bench and contend that way?" just isn't available. The Pistons were a contender (and won one) this way for close to a decade, but a team trying to do the same just can't be successful unless they either sign an extreme late bloomer like Billups to a team friendly deal AND draft well, or fleece another team's talent, and then you have to have an amazing fit to boot.

I think a team of say, KP, Jaren Jackson Jr. OG Anouby, Bradley Beal and Markelle Fultz (who i legitimately think could be the next Billups - bust high draft pick that turns out to be a late bloomer), with Kuzma, Gafford and Jordan Poole (who sucks ass for his contract but on a reasonable salary would be an ideal microwave guy in 20 mpg) off the bench, could at minimum win 50-55 games a season, and make a few semi or conference finals runs. If you luck into an ATG coach? Maybe more. But it's even more impractical to build that kind of team than it is to keep hoping a superstar falls into your lap.