Official 2023 Wizards OFFSEASON Thread

[NatP4]

We definitely need another C, preferably a young piece for the future though. Reid is about to turn 24.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

We definitely need another C, preferably a young piece for the future though. Reid is about to turn 24.

Yeah, 24 is so old!!

Trayce Jackson-Davis who was JUST DRAFTED is 23.

[gambitx777]

We can probably bring back Jay huff at a much lower price but I like nazz.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[joshuacf]

Reid resigned with the TWolves anyway. 3 years $42M.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Reid resigned with the TWolves anyway. 3 years $42M.

Nevermind.

[The Consiglieri]

Ditto, I find the preoccupation w/having enough guys in the front court, or back court, whose starting to be irrelevant. We're trying to take. We could have 15 PG's and I wouldn't give a ----, whichever strategy brings the best assets back in terms of prospect/draft capital is what I want, whats on the floor is irrelevant other than in its ability to ramp up the value of assets for trade.

IF we are acquiring assets to trade, as we did with Paul and maybe did with Tyus Jones, you are correct. If we are developing young players, you don't want 3 small guards out on the floor at the same time for long periods of time, you want them developing their guard skills, including defense. So, you try to work it so the guys you want to develop and/or showcase get their minutes.

We don't really have young players to develop, not many of them at all because of the botched rebuild. We have veteran point guards, a couple of other vets here and there as wings, a vet young center, but we are light on real tangible prospects to begin with.

I don't have a problem w/trying to construct a roster to help develop guys, it's necessary to have glue guys/vets mixed in, but we have to balance everything out with the idea of effective tanking. Even the idea of bad chemistry or instilling a losing mentality is largely irrelevant because very little that is here right here, right now, will be hear during our first speculative likely non-tanking season (probably '26-'27 if we're lucky).

[The Consiglieri]

Ditto, I find the preoccupation w/having enough guys in the front court, or back court, whose starting to be irrelevant. We're trying to take. We could have 15 PG's and I wouldn't give a ----, whichever strategy brings the best assets back in terms of prospect/draft capital is what I want, whats on the floor is irrelevant other than in its ability to ramp up the value of assets for trade.

I totally disagree with the approach you seem to be advocating.

You want young players to learn how to play as a team… to play the right way. Not as a bunch of disparate parts that don’t care whether they win or lose.

It’s not ONLY about assets. It’s also about player development.

But who are you developing? Who is going to be here '25-'26, '26-'27, '27-'28? I'm highly skeptical much of any of this is going to be around, what we pick up this offseason and the next 3? Sure, but right here, right now? Not really. That's my problem with that argument, chemistry, playing with a team, as guys who aren't going to be here in the first place beyond the next 1-3 years? Not sure what that accomplishes.

I get what you mean, which is why I'm open to it. I don't know how effectively you can build up the trade value of Poole so we can unload him in the next 1.5-2.5 years, same with Deni and Kispert without actually having a functional team operating around them, but you also have the problem of trying to tank, and of losing those players anyway. I know Im speculating with Kispert, but it's damn reasonable to think he's gone in 2 years or less. Technically he's a restricted FA, but considering how outspoken he already was about the team? I expect him to force a departure if he isn't traded before that RFA year comes along.

So yes, we need to build it, if for no other reason than to have a functional system and lockeroom that works as a showcase for sell offs of veteran assets and guys like Rui before the value of Rui completely collapsed so we can actually do proactive, rather than reactive trading. I get it, but all construction should be about maximizing the long term build, not maximizing results on the court over the next 3 years.

[joshuacf]

Ditto, I find the preoccupation w/having enough guys in the front court, or back court, whose starting to be irrelevant. We're trying to take. We could have 15 PG's and I wouldn't give a ----, whichever strategy brings the best assets back in terms of prospect/draft capital is what I want, whats on the floor is irrelevant other than in its ability to ramp up the value of assets for trade.

I totally disagree with the approach you seem to be advocating.

You want young players to learn how to play as a team… to play the right way. Not as a bunch of disparate parts that don’t care whether they win or lose.

It’s not ONLY about assets. It’s also about player development.

But who are you developing? Who is going to be here '25-'26, '26-'27, '27-'28? I'm highly skeptical much of any of this is going to be around, what we pick up this offseason and the next 3? Sure, but right here, right now? Not really. That's my problem with that argument, chemistry, playing with a team, as guys who aren't going to be here in the first place beyond the next 1-3 years? Not sure what that accomplishes.

I get what you mean, which is why I'm open to it. I don't know how effectively you can build up the trade value of Poole so we can unload him in the next 1.5-2.5 years, same with Deni and Kispert without actually having a functional team operating around them, but you also have the problem of trying to tank, and of losing those players anyway. I know Im speculating with Kispert, but it's damn reasonable to think he's gone in 2 years or less. Technically he's a restricted FA, but considering how outspoken he already was about the team? I expect him to force a departure if he isn't traded before that RFA year comes along.

So yes, we need to build it, if for no other reason than to have a functional system and lockeroom that works as a showcase for sell offs of veteran assets and guys like Rui before the value of Rui completely collapsed so we can actually do proactive, rather than reactive trading. I get it, but all construction should be about maximizing the long term build, not maximizing results on the court over the next 3 years.

I think there are a number of guys who could be here for a long time.

Poole
Deni
Kispert
JD
Bilal
Vukčević
Rollins
Baldwin Jr.
Gafford
Huff
Jackson

Are all guys who I could see being around in 4 years, with varying degrees of certainty. It all depends on how they develop, but all of them are 25 and under. Will all of them be around? No. Will 3-6 be around? I think so.

[dckingsfan]

I totally disagree with the approach you seem to be advocating.

You want young players to learn how to play as a team… to play the right way. Not as a bunch of disparate parts that don’t care whether they win or lose.

It’s not ONLY about assets. It’s also about player development.

But who are you developing? Who is going to be here '25-'26, '26-'27, '27-'28? I'm highly skeptical much of any of this is going to be around, what we pick up this offseason and the next 3? Sure, but right here, right now? Not really. That's my problem with that argument, chemistry, playing with a team, as guys who aren't going to be here in the first place beyond the next 1-3 years? Not sure what that accomplishes.

I get what you mean, which is why I'm open to it. I don't know how effectively you can build up the trade value of Poole so we can unload him in the next 1.5-2.5 years, same with Deni and Kispert without actually having a functional team operating around them, but you also have the problem of trying to tank, and of losing those players anyway. I know Im speculating with Kispert, but it's damn reasonable to think he's gone in 2 years or less. Technically he's a restricted FA, but considering how outspoken he already was about the team? I expect him to force a departure if he isn't traded before that RFA year comes along.

So yes, we need to build it, if for no other reason than to have a functional system and lockeroom that works as a showcase for sell offs of veteran assets and guys like Rui before the value of Rui completely collapsed so we can actually do proactive, rather than reactive trading. I get it, but all construction should be about maximizing the long term build, not maximizing results on the court over the next 3 years.

I think there are a number of guys who could be here for a long time.

Poole
Deni
Kispert
JD
Bilal
Vukčević
Rollins
Baldwin Jr.
Gafford
Huff
Jackson

Are all guys who I could see being around in 4 years, with varying degrees of certainty. It all depends on how they develop, but all of them are 25 and under. Will all of them be around? No. Will 3-6 be around? I think so.

Do you see any of them being all-stars? How about top 50 players? Otherwise are you developing them to be "possible" starters or bench players?

Or are we thinking that the "big 3" will come from outside this group?

[WallToWall]

I can see Kispert as a Bertans level. On good days, he will be a sniper. Avdija May turn out to be good as well. Jury is out on everyone else.

[penbeast0]

I don't see any likely All-Pros out of the guys we are bringing back; Poole may get an All-Star nomination if he's scoring 25+ but he's still a one dimensional undersized shooter unless he develops PG skills and that's the one position where we have real incumbents. However, in terms of developing solid depth, rotation players, guys that someone may give us a 1st rounder for, etc., a lot of guys have the opportunity to play and showcase something. You don't make an NBA team without real skills of some sort, but yes, our next big 3 is likely to come from draft picks and maybe a FA signing after we get a couple of good young guys people want to play with if we can maintain some financial flexibility.

[joshuacf]

But who are you developing? Who is going to be here '25-'26, '26-'27, '27-'28? I'm highly skeptical much of any of this is going to be around, what we pick up this offseason and the next 3? Sure, but right here, right now? Not really. That's my problem with that argument, chemistry, playing with a team, as guys who aren't going to be here in the first place beyond the next 1-3 years? Not sure what that accomplishes.

I get what you mean, which is why I'm open to it. I don't know how effectively you can build up the trade value of Poole so we can unload him in the next 1.5-2.5 years, same with Deni and Kispert without actually having a functional team operating around them, but you also have the problem of trying to tank, and of losing those players anyway. I know Im speculating with Kispert, but it's damn reasonable to think he's gone in 2 years or less. Technically he's a restricted FA, but considering how outspoken he already was about the team? I expect him to force a departure if he isn't traded before that RFA year comes along.

So yes, we need to build it, if for no other reason than to have a functional system and lockeroom that works as a showcase for sell offs of veteran assets and guys like Rui before the value of Rui completely collapsed so we can actually do proactive, rather than reactive trading. I get it, but all construction should be about maximizing the long term build, not maximizing results on the court over the next 3 years.

I think there are a number of guys who could be here for a long time.

Poole
Deni
Kispert
JD
Bilal
Vukčević
Rollins
Baldwin Jr.
Gafford
Huff
Jackson

Are all guys who I could see being around in 4 years, with varying degrees of certainty. It all depends on how they develop, but all of them are 25 and under. Will all of them be around? No. Will 3-6 be around? I think so.

Do you see any of them being all-stars? How about top 50 players? Otherwise are you developing them to be "possible" starters or bench players?

Or are we thinking that the "big 3" will come from outside this group?

Potential All-Stars:
Bilal, Poole

Potential top 50 players:
JD (potential, I'm not saying I think he's going to end up as a top 50 player)

Even beyond them, It's important to develop non-AS starters and bench players. And I'm not sure what the argument against trying to develop players is. How do you know that these guys on the roster won't be around in 4 years if you don't try to develop them?

We are going to be plenty bad enough without intentionally playing incongruent lineups for the sake of being as terrible as possible. I totally reject the idea that we should do things that will seriously stunt our players' development, just in the hope of getting a couple more losses a year. Even if you believe that there isn't a single player on this year's roster who could be a part of a "big 3" (I don't believe this, but for the sake of the argument), you still don't want to create a culture of chaos. No future draft pick is going to want to come to a team with a dysfunctional culture.

Should we lower our best players' minutes in March and rest them in April in order to lose some games we otherwise might have won? Sure. Should we, from game 1 of the NBA season, play mismatched lineups that we know will create losing basketball but also severely hurt our player's ability to develop? Absolutely not.

[dckingsfan]

I think there are a number of guys who could be here for a long time.

Poole
Deni
Kispert
JD
Bilal
Vukčević
Rollins
Baldwin Jr.
Gafford
Huff
Jackson

Are all guys who I could see being around in 4 years, with varying degrees of certainty. It all depends on how they develop, but all of them are 25 and under. Will all of them be around? No. Will 3-6 be around? I think so.

Do you see any of them being all-stars? How about top 50 players? Otherwise are you developing them to be "possible" starters or bench players?

Or are we thinking that the "big 3" will come from outside this group?

Potential All-Stars:
Bilal, Poole

Potential top 50 players:
JD (potential, I'm not saying I think he's going to end up as a top 50 player)

Even beyond them, It's important to develop non-AS starters and bench players. And I'm not sure what the argument against trying to develop players is. How do you know that these guys on the roster won't be around in 4 years if you don't try to develop them?

We are going to be plenty bad enough without intentionally playing incongruent lineups for the sake of being as terrible as possible. I totally reject the idea that we should do things that will seriously stunt our players' development, just in the hope of getting a couple more losses a year. Even if you believe that there isn't a single player on this year's roster who could be a part of a "big 3" (I don't believe this, but for the sake of the argument), you still don't want to create a culture of chaos. No future draft pick is going to want to come to a team with a dysfunctional culture.

Should we lower our best players' minutes in March and rest them in April in order to lose some games we otherwise might have won? Sure. Should we, from game 1 of the NBA season, play mismatched lineups that we know will create losing basketball but also severely hurt our player's ability to develop? Absolutely not.

I wasn't trying to argue for or against a balanced line-up or for player development. And in the case of player development, quite the opposite.

Rather, I was trying to measure what others thought of our current group of young players. I don't share your optimism on Poole. We will see on the other two.

I think that the point should be to get the youngsters playing time and player development and not worry about a balanced line-up. At least for the short term until you can compete. I have no problem having 4 or 5 PGs on the roster if you are waiting to package them for more assets (at a more favorable time).

My 1/2 cent.

[joshuacf]

Do you see any of them being all-stars? How about top 50 players? Otherwise are you developing them to be "possible" starters or bench players?

Or are we thinking that the "big 3" will come from outside this group?

Potential All-Stars:
Bilal, Poole

Potential top 50 players:
JD (potential, I'm not saying I think he's going to end up as a top 50 player)

Even beyond them, It's important to develop non-AS starters and bench players. And I'm not sure what the argument against trying to develop players is. How do you know that these guys on the roster won't be around in 4 years if you don't try to develop them?

We are going to be plenty bad enough without intentionally playing incongruent lineups for the sake of being as terrible as possible. I totally reject the idea that we should do things that will seriously stunt our players' development, just in the hope of getting a couple more losses a year. Even if you believe that there isn't a single player on this year's roster who could be a part of a "big 3" (I don't believe this, but for the sake of the argument), you still don't want to create a culture of chaos. No future draft pick is going to want to come to a team with a dysfunctional culture.

Should we lower our best players' minutes in March and rest them in April in order to lose some games we otherwise might have won? Sure. Should we, from game 1 of the NBA season, play mismatched lineups that we know will create losing basketball but also severely hurt our player's ability to develop? Absolutely not.

I wasn't trying to argue for or against a balanced line-up or for player development. And in the case of player development, quite the opposite.

Rather, I was trying to measure what others thought of our current group of young players. I don't share your optimism on Poole. We will see on the other two.

I think that the point should be to get the youngsters playing time and player development and not worry about a balanced line-up. At least for the short term until you can compete. I have no problem having 4 or 5 PGs on the roster if you are waiting to package them for more assets (at a more favorable time).

My 1/2 cent.

Well, the point of a balanced lineup is to replicate what the players would be doing if the game mattered. Playing a mismatched lineup may allow players to develop as individuals, but it wouldn't allow them to develop as parts of a unit. A big part of these guys' development is learning how to play team basketball at the NBA level.

It's fair to grade Poole lower than I do. Really, it's impossible to know how these guys will turn out unless we give them the playing time and coaching that they need to develop. I'm just excited to see how the young guys perform this season.

[Endless Loop]

Here’s my two cents on what the Wiz should start to do this off-season.

Ted should stop being Small Ball Ted and instead become Big Balls Ted.

Ted so far has taken the small-minded approach to owning the Wiz. Spend right at the league average, try to have an average team, take the cliched route of marketing the nearest available excellent player to fill the seats. This approach is guaranteed to be profitable because the NBA is a monopoly with guaranteed profits. Cost of goods sold is fixed due to mutually beneficial labor agreements. You’d have to be a real nitwit not to make money with this setup. Ted has further maximized profitability by having a cheap, undersized training facility (that he was one of the last owners to build), and never firing staff even when the product on the floor sucked. Because it just didn’t matter. Plus, he’s all in on gambling (no comment here).

That approach made the Wiz a decent local brand, completely insignificant outside of the Beltway, except for Japan for a moment, and maybe Israel. Well, to be fair the Wiz have sort of built a national brand as the epitome of mediocrity, I suppose that’s a brand of some sort. It takes real effort to avoid winning 50 games for every year since 1978. (And just by the way- after all that’s happened after the end of the season, that Rui trade is looking REALLY bad now from a brand development, basketball and financial standpoint.)

But Ted can do so- so- so much more. What he should do is build a global brand, not a local brand, or even a national brand.

I’ve been a basketball fan for a long time, starting in the 80s. During that period, a few teams have built a brand that people outside their markets- even outside the US- loved. Most of the teams did it through sustained excellence for many years: the Bulls, Lakers and Celtics in particular. The Heat have started to build a different kind of viral brand, based more on an awesome team culture. Point is, those brands are national, even global. The merchandise, TV and ticket revenue for those teams has been much larger than for local brands like the Wiz.

By deciding to be good, which the Wizards are doing now, it’s possible for them to build a decent national brand also, in a few years. They might even make the conference finals in, say, 2029. Ho hum.

Ah, but there’s so much more they can do to speed things along. Becoming excellent instead of mediocre should be just the start. Ted should start to build Monumental Sports as the country’s number one performance development brand.

Monumental Sports is pretty uniquely positioned, due to vertical and horizontal integration, to achieve scale in building an engine for more general sports-related excellence. Ted should close the DC training facility for the Wiz, get the Caps out of the attic in their empty shopping mall in Arlington (how terrible is THAT??), and stick the Caps, Wiz, Mystics and GoGo all together on a big campus- the Monumental Sports campus. The teams can all benefit from much of the infrastructure, such as medical care, training facilities, specialized staff, video centers and so on. The campus should also host performance research, maybe in conjunction with a local university, and training for other teams and (paying) amateurs. It should be open to season ticket holders for special events. It could be so cool. The biggest, best sports center of excellence in the US.

Make it BIG, Ted. Don’t underbuild because you got a great deal on a small piece of land that just won’t do the job.

From this, Monumental can build a brand for developing sports training methods that it can market and productize with media, supplements, educational products and so on. And of course they can create all kinds of content for the Monumental network.

For example, think about supplements. The sports nutrition market, loosely defined, is upwards of $40 billion a year. Ted, maybe you don’t like selling supplements, but really if you’re promoting gambling, who are you to criticize? And btw, your supplements would in fact be the best. Sports nutrition is dominated by influencers and mysterious manufacturers. You’d kill it in this business.

In essence, the Monumental Group would use its valuable brands (Wiz, Caps, etc) to create an even more valuable umbrella brand.

Monumental should aspire to being THE center in the US for sports performance excellence. If they do that, the Wiz, Caps, Mystics and GoGo would all benefit greatly.

Also an aside, I’d note here that whereas the individual pro franchises that make up the Monumental Group have to revenue share with their leagues, the Group itself wouldn’t have to share any of the revenue from its other activities as a center for sports excellence.

I’m critical of Ted, and he’s deserved the criticism, but IMO nobody gets to be a billionaire by being an idiot. Ted sold Abe on building the DC arena and he had the vision to build a local sports empire in Monumental. I’m really surprised he hasn’t thought bigger. But I’m optimistic he will.

[DCZards]

I agree with joshuacf about the importance of developing the players currently on the team because we really don’t know who will be on the roster 4-5 years from now. I don’t see why we would do otherwise.

I can’t quite wrap my head around this idea that somehow having structure and real lineups don’t matter and that oncourt cohesion is unimportant. In fact, I would say the opposite is true when you’re trying to develop young players.

[gambitx777]

So let's say we aren't as bad as we think we are. Let's say Jordan Poole balls out and plays average defence. Jones shows he's a true starter. Deni takes a leap, Bilal shows up further along than we thought, gaff learns how to play 30 minutes a night.

What if we are better than we think. What do we do. Do we build around this or do we sell everything off. The idea is to get better right? If 20 games into the season we are 10-10 or 13 and 7 what do we do?

I'm not saying this teams gonna be good. I'm just putting the thought experiment out there.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[smoothSeph]

So let's say we aren't as bad as we think we are. Let's say Jordan Poole balls out and plays average defence. Jones shows he's a true starter. Deni takes a leap, Bilal shows up further along than we thought, gaff learns how to play 30 minutes a night.

What if we are better than we think. What do we do. Do we build around this or do we sell everything off. The idea is to get better right? If 20 games into the season we are 10-10 or 13 and 7 what do we do?

I'm not saying this teams gonna be good. I'm just putting the thought experiment out there.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

If this team is somehow over .500 at the deadline it will be because of Jones, Poole and Deni.

In this case I'd 100% trade Jones. Gauge the market on Poole (selling for minimum 2 1sts). Extend Deni before he hits FA. We don't have any other young centers on the roster but if Gafford has a great start I'd consider moving him too while his contract is a bargain.

[doclinkin]

I agree with joshuacf about the importance of developing the players currently on the team because we really don’t know who will be on the roster 4-5 years from now. I don’t see why we would do otherwise.

I can’t quite wrap my head around this idea that somehow having structure and real lineups don’t matter and that oncourt cohesion is unimportant. In fact, I would say the opposite is true when you’re trying to develop young players.

And even if we field the best possible line-ups, we are unlikely to win ourselves out of a lotto pick. We are deep in quality back-up PG's but otherwise have nobody that would start on a winning playoff team. Try to build a line-up with what we have and you will see the issue.

Roster
Tyus/Morris/Wright/Rollins
Poole/Shamet/Davis/QJackson (2W)
Bilal/Kispert/Cooks
Gallo/Deni/Vukcevi/Gill/Baldwin
Gafford/Muscala/Jay Huff (2W)

Veterans line up (4+ years of experience):
Wright 10yrs/Tyus 8yrs/Morris 6yrs
Shamet 5yrs/Poole 4yrs
------------/(Deni 3yrs/)
Gallo 14yrs/
Muscala 10yrs/Gafford 4yrs

Defensive Line-up
Wright
Davis
Bilal?
Deni
Gafford

Score at all costs
Poole
Shamet
Kispert
Gallo
Gafford?

Long range shooters
Poole/Monte
Shamet
Kispert
Gallo/Vukcevic
Huff

Juggling any combination of the players we do have, I don't see any iteration that gives us a positive mismatch against any team in the East. If you look around, every other Eastern team's best player is better than our best player. Which is who. Poole I guess? Tyus Jones? A healthy Gallinari?

It's likely our best player will be Bilal, eventually. But a rookie from a foreign league will surely struggle.

Anyway, seems to me we should mix veterans and young players to provide organization and guidance AND so that the coaching staff can teach from the bench before they sub in.

[DCZards]

Ted sold Abe on building the DC arena and he had the vision to build a local sports empire in Monumental. I’m really surprised he hasn’t thought bigger. But I’m optimistic he will.

What makes you think Ted Leonsis sold Abe Pollin on building a downtown DC arena? My recall is that it was Pollin's brainchild.