Official 2023 Wizards OFFSEASON Thread

[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

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.

Ok but here is the other side of the argument. Why? You had a front office put together a good young squad and the idea is to still win games. Next year's draft looks like as much of a crap shoot as any?

The goal is to have a good team if you made a good team why sell it off before you have to. Im not talking about past the time like you did with Beal. But there isn't any urgency.

Let's say Poole is playing like an all star.
If we are loosing keep him or sell him
If we are winning keep him or sell him?

I think the answer is different.
You go down the line. Same for every guy here.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[payitforward]

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?

What's this about? The new era of the Washington Wizards started about 2 weeks ago. Don't you think it's a bit early to be asking these kinds of questions? Or, for that matter, to be expressing skepticism about who or what any one of them can become?

A team's "results on court" are the exact function of how well the players perform.
How well the players perform is the complex result of how much talent & athleticism & BBIQ they possess plus what they've learned.

In this first 4 years in the league, Bradley Beal was no better than Poole has been. He wasn't as good as Kispert has been in his two years. Etc.

No need to look into the future & speculate.

[payitforward]

...I don't share your optimism on Poole....

Who the h\*ll knows about him or any of them? Nor are the young we've got so far going to be the last of the young guys we add -- far from it.

I remember this very board declaring Bradley Beal a bust starting about 3 months into his career. "His neck is too short," was one of my favorite dismissive comments!

...I think that the point should be to get the youngsters playing time and player development and not worry about a balanced line-up....

Shouldn't be too hard to get them playing time, since "youngsters" is almost entirely what we're going to have pretty soon.

[dobrojim]

So I was reading the WaPo piece by Golliver on winners and losers in the draft.
For a change, we were listed as winners! That's nice. I do agree that I think
the moves were good ones and overdue ones.

But I was wondering about by his statement that we we wouldn't win 35 games next year.
I then I was like oh yeah, they just blew up the team. Then I thought, 35 wins isn't that much.

So at this obviously very preliminary point in time, who thinks we will win:

Less than 20 games
21-25 games
26-30 games
31-35 games
36 - 40 games
or .500 or better.

Should we even be trying to win?

[9 and 20]

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.

Ok but here is the other side of the argument. Why? You had a front office put together a good young squad and the idea is to still win games. Next year's draft looks like as much of a crap shoot as any?

The goal is to have a good team if you made a good team why sell it off before you have to. Im not talking about past the time like you did with Beal. But there isn't any urgency.

Let's say Poole is playing like an all star.
If we are loosing keep him or sell him
If we are winning keep him or sell him?

I think the answer is different.
You go down the line. Same for every guy here.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

Nah, I'm selling if we get off to a good start. For the first time in Wiz history, we're going to try to sell high instead taking the 'wait and see' approach that has always ended up poorly - too many examples to count of us being too late to do something and then getting boxed in. Beal was only the latest example.

[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.

Ok but here is the other side of the argument. Why? You had a front office put together a good young squad and the idea is to still win games. Next year's draft looks like as much of a crap shoot as any?

The goal is to have a good team if you made a good team why sell it off before you have to. Im not talking about past the time like you did with Beal. But there isn't any urgency.

Let's say Poole is playing like an all star.
If we are loosing keep him or sell him
If we are winning keep him or sell him?

I think the answer is different.
You go down the line. Same for every guy here.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

The only why would be to maximize your return. In that case the only guys that should potentially be traded this year are Poole and Jones.

Jones because he’s already 27 and we’d have to give him a big contract to retain him (assuming he’s part of the reason we’re playing well).

I only trade Poole if he’s showing signs of hitting his ceiling. Which is just high volume scoring and not much else. Although it would be extremely difficult to gauge that this year.

[gambitx777]

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.

Ok but here is the other side of the argument. Why? You had a front office put together a good young squad and the idea is to still win games. Next year's draft looks like as much of a crap shoot as any?

The goal is to have a good team if you made a good team why sell it off before you have to. Im not talking about past the time like you did with Beal. But there isn't any urgency.

Let's say Poole is playing like an all star.
If we are loosing keep him or sell him
If we are winning keep him or sell him?

I think the answer is different.
You go down the line. Same for every guy here.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

The only why would be to maximize your return. In that case the only guys that should potentially be traded this year are Poole and Jones.

Jones because he’s already 27 and we’d have to give him a big contract to retain him (assuming he’s part of the reason we’re playing well).

I only trade Poole if he’s showing signs of hitting his ceiling. Which is just high volume scoring and not much else. Although it would be extremely difficult to gauge that this year.

So, Jones is actually extension eligible and it would be smart to lock him in if he would sign it to say something in the 2-3 year range and under 20 Mill a year.

Poole, if he balls out and is efficient. Shows some kind of defence. I'd consider keeping him. Idk I'm just of this mind set of the idea is to be good and when will dockins said we got better. I think he A meant it and B might be right. Tyus Jones is a better PG than anyone we have on the team, when ja is out he plays up to a starter level. Is Poole that much worse than Beal at almost half the price? PBJ looks a lot like Kuzma. We didn't really replace KP but Deni, kispert, Rollins, Bilal, Vuk are all going to get honest chances to play. One of them could step up, then are we truly that far off what we were last year? No that team was trash I think right now the young core and some solid vets is probably honestly a better team than last year. Maybe I'm optimistic, but I don't think tanking should be the goal. Being bad is a general common occurrence when you rebuild but it shouldn't be the goal. The goal should be to rebuild. If you some how do that in a summer dope keep building but I don't think the goal should be oh we are too good let's get bad.

Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[FAH1223]

Watch on YouTube

[J-Ves]

Another aspect of this rebuild is we're really going to find out what we have with Coach Wes. No more just rolling out the predetermined roles and lineups. He's really going to be coaching this year, developing players, making adjustments, building this team from scratch.

He’s done. He was hired as a win now coach and the job has completely changed. The new FO is eager to change as much as possible. The only reason WUJ is still here is Ted said he wouldn’t be fired when Tommy got the ax but a lot has changed since then. WUJ will be gone within a year

BS.
He wasn't "hired as a win-now coach;" there is no such thing as a win-now coach. The better your players the more games you win. Duh. As to the line-ups he has been "rolling out," feel free to suggest what his alternatives were.

In a sustained, long-term effort, Ted Leonsis's front office people turned this franchise into a joke. It's taken Winger & Dawkins slightly more than two weeks to put that entire pathetic multi-decade era behind us.

& it is. It's gone. Over.
To create something new & worthwhile, on the other hand, is going to take years.

Well the new front office is going to want to install “their” guy as HC. So yeah WUJ is done.

What can WUJ do to save his job anyway? Win games? That’s not happening. Develop a young core? We don’t have one yet. He’s a placeholder

[nate33]

Per ESPN:

After opting into his player option last week, Gallinari is headed to Washington as part of the blockbuster trade. He is joined by Tyus Jones and Mike Muscala as newcomers to the Wizards roster. After missing the entire 2022-23 season due to a torn ACL in his left knee it's likely that Gallinari will make a full recovery and be good to go for the 2023-24 campaign. However, it's unclear where the soon-to-be-35-year-old will fit in on a Wizards team that appears to be embracing a rebuild. Gallinari's contract is set to expire after this season, so it's very possible that Washington facilitates a trade to send the Italian wing to a more appealing situation.

What can we get back for Gallinari and Monte Morris?

Also, seems to me our roster could use a guy like Naz Reid. He’s only 23 and is a UFA.

I'd assume Reid is going to get a deal in the $10M AAV range. Since we already have Gafford and Vukčević, I'm not sure if Reid really fits. He's a good player though.

In terms of what we could get for Gallinari and Monte, Gallinari is a negative asset at this point. Maybe we could trade him for an even more negative asset though. We could try something like Gallo for Robert Covington and a second-round pick swap.

Mavs make a lot of sense for a Monte package, they need a backup PG and they aren't going to have cap space if they bring back Kyrie and sign another FA. We could do Maxi Kleber plus draft capital for Monte. Now Kleber's contract is terrible, so I'd hope to get back at least a protected FRP.

I understand we're rebuilding. But the way we're clearing the decks, cap room is not an issue. And I expect Monte & Gallo to be moved. IMO Delon & Muscala are good vets to keep on board this season, and are expiring.

But we can certainly still add a FA that makes sense. And I think that could be Naz Reid. He's a UFA, only 23 so fits in with the rebuild, wont cost that much, and we just dont have anyone on the roster like him right now. He definitely fills a need.

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

Reid is a good player, but he is exactly the type of player we should NOT go after at the moment. The problem with Reid is that he is not really a starter. He is quality depth. Quality depth is the type of thing that keeps you from tanking properly, but doesn’t really add to your eventual ceiling as a contender.

If we signed Reid right now, he would make us 3 games better in the next 3 seasons, so instead of winning 17, 19 and 23 games in the next 3 years respectively, we would win 20, 22 and 26. What does that accomplish other than make our draft picks a little lower? By the time that we actually cared about having quality depth, Reid’s contract would be up and we’d have to resign him to a market-value deal anyhow.

We should be focusing on acquiring picks and moving up in the draft. That’s it. The only veterans we should look to acquire are reclaimation projects of talented youngish players whose stock has fallen dramatically for whatever reason, enough that they can be acquired at virtually no cost. Jordan Poole is a fair example of that. So was Porzingis, for that matter. Ben Simmons could be another (though it would take some inside knowledge of what is going on in his head).

[nate33]

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

It’s a rather pointless exercise because I am 100% certain we won’t flirt with 35 wins, much less .500 ball. But for argument’s sake, what you are suggesting is exactly what happened to Utah last year. Utah traded Mitchell and Gobert in an effort to tank, but accidentally managed to play .500 ball thanks to the heroics of Markkanen, Kessler, and some of their over-the-hill veterans playing well (Conley, Crawford).

Well, if we were in that situation, I’d do exactly what Utah did. I’d trade any veterans who were responsible for winning just as Utah traded Conley. (I’m betting they will move Crawford too.). And then just hope that Markkanen and Kessler, with no help from any vets, aren’t good enough to keep you out of the lottery. So for us, that would mean trading all of our veteran PG’s and possibly Gafford too.

[Hidden Eye]

Off-season post but I hope they change the jerseys this upcoming season, it's been a decade they had same jerseys. Tired of looking at them and the two tone wood homecourt looks ugly. Mixing light and dark wood does not look appealing.

[FAH1223]

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

It’s a rather pointless exercise because I am 100% certain we won’t flirt with 35 wins, much less .500 ball. But for argument’s sake, what you are suggesting is exactly what happened to Utah last year. Utah traded Mitchell and Gobert in an effort to tank, but accidentally managed to play .500 ball thanks to the heroics of Markkanen, Kessler, and some of their over-the-hill veterans playing well (Conley, Crawford).

Well, if we were in that situation, I’d do exactly what Utah did. I’d trade any veterans who were responsible for winning just as Utah traded Conley. (I’m betting they will move Crawford too.). And then just hope that Markkanen and Kessler, with no help from any vets, aren’t good enough to keep you out of the lottery. So for us, that would mean trading all of our veteran PG’s and possibly Gafford too.

You mean Jordan Clarkson?

[payitforward]

...Should we even be trying to win?

Of course we should! If you're going to play a game, try to win it!

Moreover, wins & losses give you information about your players -- & about your FO choices.

The more games you win, the more positive all of that is.

For that matter, even "tanking" doesn't mean you're not trying to win. It means you've put yourself in a position where you simply aren't *going to* win.

Maybe better say that the expression "tanking" is a way to reframe the fact that your team is awful & you need to start over. Since losing helps get you a higher pick, it's a positive spin to say you're tanking.

But when the ball goes up, your guys on the floor are trying to win. At least they had better be!

[payitforward]

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.

It’s a rather pointless exercise because I am 100% certain we won’t flirt with 35 wins, much less .500 ball. But for argument’s sake, what you are suggesting is exactly what happened to Utah last year. Utah traded Mitchell and Gobert in an effort to tank, but accidentally managed to play .500 ball thanks to the heroics of Markkanen, Kessler, and some of their over-the-hill veterans playing well (Conley, Crawford).

Well, if we were in that situation, I’d do exactly what Utah did. I’d trade any veterans who were responsible for winning just as Utah traded Conley. (I’m betting they will move Crawford Clarkson too.). And then just hope that Markkanen and Kessler, with no help from any vets, aren’t good enough to keep you out of the lottery. So for us, that would mean trading all of our veteran PG’s and possibly Gafford too.

Makes perfect sense -- & of course doing so much better than you expected would not make you regret the incredible jump Markkanen made, nor would it make you wish you'd made a worse draft choice than Kessler!

OTOH, it also wouldn't make you regret having traded Mitchell, i.e. having decided to rebuild.

Worth noting that this unpredictable success still left them with the 9th worst record in the league at 37-45.

Moreover, trading Clarkson is likely to make them better not worse!

[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?

What's this about? The new era of the Washington Wizards started about 2 weeks ago. Don't you think it's a bit early to be asking these kinds of questions? Or, for that matter, to be expressing skepticism about who or what any one of them can become?

A team's "results on court" are the exact function of how well the players perform.
How well the players perform is the complex result of how much talent & athleticism & BBIQ they possess plus what they've learned.

In this first 4 years in the league, Bradley Beal was no better than Poole has been. He wasn't as good as Kispert has been in his two years. Etc.

No need to look into the future & speculate.

HA! Of course there is - this is a speculation board at its finest and essence.

[FAH1223]

Watch on YouTube

[tleikheen]

Countdown to Kuzma joining Rui,Beal ,KP on the best teams competing for the championship against the Nuggets this upcoming yr.
All of them becoming key players for other teams .

[TGW]

Fansided is predicting that Kuzma resigns with the Wizards. It's possible if Kuzma can't get the money he's looking for in FA.

[NatP4]

I cannot watch Poole and Kuzma jacking up 50 shots a game combined. Talk about the wrong way to build a culture.