Texas Chuck wrote:If Washington had young potential stars in place, sure. Keep Deni and his good contract to be one of the vets who helps guide them forward and is still young enough to be a key cog when the team is good. But the team doesn't have that, and they don't have cap space to lure a good veteran or trade assets, other than their own picks which they shouldn't be dealing. So the Deni contract is just going to be wasted on a team going nowhere. And he's not so special of a player that you worry about losing him. So I see zero justification for punting this much value just because we like the kid.
Opportunities like this never actually come so if it did, Washington would have to jump on it IRL. It's about not diluting their value by attaching Poole. It's about they aren't worth much if any more than the picks on their own, and you get to dump Poole for nothing? Yeah, you have to. And Washington would if this was offered.
I know its hard because we love the guys we draft and develop. But very very few players spend a 3rd contract with one team.
I guess I still disagree and it has nothing to do with
loving a player the team drafted. I'd honestly be happy for any of these guys to get out of this dumpster fire. Deni in particular I think could have a lot of success as a glue guy on a good team.
I don't see it as whether Deni, or Kispert, are part of the veteran core moving forward. By the time this team is ready to compete, they probably won't be in Washington. I see them both as assets that are not likely to decline in value this season. In fact, they both appear to be improving so that value could
potentially increase, particularly as Deni's contract declines and becomes a lower % of the cap.
The team is not going to lure a good veteran that is going to become part of the core moving forward without a massive overpay. At that point we're talking about a negative value when the goal (or even option) is not to win now. The team
does have cap space to take on bad contracts. Even with Jordan Poole they are only at 126m next season, with plenty of room below the tax. Landry Shamet's 11m is a team option. In future years they have significantly more cap space to work with. They also have over 30m in various TPE's that can be utilized. There are plenty of avenues to accept bad contracts for assets without first giving up assets.
The Wizards would love to add draft picks. Deni Avdija and Corey Kispert are absolutely available, but Washington is in no rush to make a move. They are going to be patient and keep a (unreasonably) high asking price. They are likely to believe they can do better in separate trades by not attaching Poole's contract and eating that themselves. He is a massive negative on the court but is not preventing them from making other moves. Paying assets to unload a contract just to create the possibility of acquiring assets by taking on bad contracts is nonsensical.
People shouldn't be allowed to open new threads after heavy drinking.
Goodness knows I'm wrong enough on my own merits. I don't need anyone helping me be wrong by totaling changing what I'm saying into something else. Why do that?
