Woj: Deni to Portland for 14th pick and Brogdon

[montestewart]

Bill James wrote a persuasive argument that fan is not short for “fanatic,” but is in fact short for “fancier,” which makes sense based upon the time the term came into use. Basketball fancier. Sounds pretty bad ass.

[AFM]

This trade really brought out the worst in people

This trade was really stupid.

That’s first off.

Second off: burning cars after victories or losses, the horrors of soccer hooligans, the death threats and racist slurs faced by Bill Russell and others after title losses … that’s bringing out the worst in people.

This? This was venting on a sports fan (short for fanatic) board made for venting and sharing and speculating. No one was hurt. No slurs were lobbed. No harm was done.

All that you’re referring to took place in an alternate realm that is closer to a conversation at a bar than a chapter in a Malcolm Gladwell tome.

You’re right. No one was murdered or raped either. I guess I can’t use the word “worst”. Thank you so much for the constructive response.

[MDStar]

You guys are killing me with this Deni uproar as it completely lacks perspective. Do you want to be a championship contender or not? Deni is a good, young player on a great contract. No one is disagreeing with that. However, outside of Nate, most of us have agree that Deni at his best, would be a 3rd best player on a contending team. If that is true, how does he stack up to other 3rd options on current contenders.

Boston - Tatum, Brown, Jrue/Porz
Milwaukee - Giannis, Dame, Middleton
Philadelphia - Embid, Maxey, George
Knicks - Brunson, Anunoby, Randle/Bridges
OKC - Shai, Chet, J. Williams
Nuggets - Jokic, Murray, Gordon/Porter Jr.
Timberwolves - Edwards, Towns, Gobert/McDaniels
Dallas - Doncic, Irving, Klay/Lively
Suns - Durant, Booker, Beal

So even it we consider Deni being better than half of those 3rd options, not to mention his contract allows for a deeper roster behind him, we can also be real with the fact that the Wizards don't have anything close to the 1st two options that any of those teams have. So Deni, at this stage of the rebuild, without a true 1st or 2nd option, is more valuable to them as a piece to acquire more assets (with the hope of those assets becoming a 1 or 2), than he would be as the defacto best player on the Wizards over the next 3 seasons.

Yes, maybe he could've also continued his play into next season, potentially increasing his value more, but regardless, i think we can all agree that no matter how good Deni was next season, no lottery team is trading a 2025 lottery pick for him. So the best and earliest return that would've come from him at that point, would be either a non lottery 25 pick + other assets or a 26 potential lottery pick + other assets. Pushing our chances to find that star player even further out.

I believe they looked at the landscape and decided now was a good time for them to take a good deal, that was on the table for them now.

[Dark Faze]

The reality is Deni showed enough last year that there's equal chance of him improving as there is him regressing. If he regresses, you're obviously glad you took the deal. If he improves, chances of the deal working in your favor becomes lower.

Imagine Deni as a 19 and 8 player on good efficiency at the end of his contract. As you get closer to that time you can trade him to virtually any team in the league, as contracts at that time will be paying even end of bench guys enough of a salary to easily do a salary match. You would stand to bring back many many picks from a contending team because you're not just providing a playoff starter but you're providing a playoff starter that costs you only the very worst of the players you have on the roster in order to salary match. Comparably, a similar quality wing might be on a significantly higher deal that as a result might require including a valuable bench player in the swap.

It's all a gamble, we won't know who was right for some years.

[TheBlackCzar]

You guys are killing me with this Deni uproar as it completely lacks perspective. Do you want to be a championship contender or not? Deni is a good, young player on a great contract. No one is disagreeing with that. However, outside of Nate, most of us have agree that Deni at his best, would be a 3rd best player on a contending team. If that is true, how does he stack up to other 3rd options on current contenders.

Boston - Tatum, Brown, Jrue/Porz
Milwaukee - Giannis, Dame, Middleton
Philadelphia - Embid, Maxey, George
Knicks - Brunson, Anunoby, Randle/Bridges
OKC - Shai, Chet, J. Williams
Nuggets - Jokic, Murray, Gordon/Porter Jr.
Timberwolves - Edwards, Towns, Gobert/McDaniels
Dallas - Doncic, Irving, Klay/Lively
Suns - Durant, Booker, Beal

So even it we consider Deni being better than half of those 3rd options, not to mention his contract allows for a deeper roster behind him, we can also be real with the fact that the Wizards don't have anything close to the 1st two options that any of those teams have. So Deni, at this stage of the rebuild, without a true 1st or 2nd option, is more valuable to them as a piece to acquire more assets (with the hope of those assets becoming a 1 or 2), than he would be as the defacto best player on the Wizards over the next 3 seasons.

Yes, maybe he could've also continued his play into next season, potentially increasing his value more, but regardless, i think we can all agree that no matter how good Deni was next season, no lottery team is trading a 2025 lottery pick for him. So the best and earliest return that would've come from him at that point, would be either a non lottery 25 pick + other assets or a 26 potential lottery pick + other assets. Pushing our chances to find that star player even further out.

I believe they looked at the landscape and decided now was a good time for them to take a good deal, that was on the table for them now.

Who out of those 3rd options is he better than? The fact that you said half, I'd like to see how you can explain how he's better than most of these names much less half....

[MDStar]

You guys are killing me with this Deni uproar as it completely lacks perspective. Do you want to be a championship contender or not? Deni is a good, young player on a great contract. No one is disagreeing with that. However, outside of Nate, most of us have agree that Deni at his best, would be a 3rd best player on a contending team. If that is true, how does he stack up to other 3rd options on current contenders.

Boston - Tatum, Brown, Jrue/Porz
Milwaukee - Giannis, Dame, Middleton
Philadelphia - Embid, Maxey, George
Knicks - Brunson, Anunoby, Randle/Bridges
OKC - Shai, Chet, J. Williams
Nuggets - Jokic, Murray, Gordon/Porter Jr.
Timberwolves - Edwards, Towns, Gobert/McDaniels
Dallas - Doncic, Irving, Klay/Lively
Suns - Durant, Booker, Beal

So even it we consider Deni being better than half of those 3rd options, not to mention his contract allows for a deeper roster behind him, we can also be real with the fact that the Wizards don't have anything close to the 1st two options that any of those teams have. So Deni, at this stage of the rebuild, without a true 1st or 2nd option, is more valuable to them as a piece to acquire more assets (with the hope of those assets becoming a 1 or 2), than he would be as the defacto best player on the Wizards over the next 3 seasons.

Yes, maybe he could've also continued his play into next season, potentially increasing his value more, but regardless, i think we can all agree that no matter how good Deni was next season, no lottery team is trading a 2025 lottery pick for him. So the best and earliest return that would've come from him at that point, would be either a non lottery 25 pick + other assets or a 26 potential lottery pick + other assets. Pushing our chances to find that star player even further out.

I believe they looked at the landscape and decided now was a good time for them to take a good deal, that was on the table for them now.

Who out of those 3rd options is he better than? The fact that you said half, I'd like to see how you can explain how he's better than most of these names much less half....

You're emphasizing my point bro. I was conversationally conceding to the seemingly board majority, who view Deni as really, really good player, who the Wizards were stupid to trade away, because of you know, how good and how cheap he is.

Personally, I would probably only take him over the Middleton, Gordon/Porter Jr., and maybe Klay/Lively, but I really like Lively. So yeah, on a true contender, with other top options, this current version of Deni that played well over the final 30 games of the season, is more of a 4th option on a championship caliber team, which we don't have. Making a return of 2 1sts, 2 2nds and a decent expiring player, a really good return for that caliber player.

That is, if a Championship is the goal. If its not, then sure, keeping Deni, while not having a superstar or 2, keeps us at best, on the bubble for the play-in, in perpetuity.

[TheBlackCzar]

You guys are killing me with this Deni uproar as it completely lacks perspective. Do you want to be a championship contender or not? Deni is a good, young player on a great contract. No one is disagreeing with that. However, outside of Nate, most of us have agree that Deni at his best, would be a 3rd best player on a contending team. If that is true, how does he stack up to other 3rd options on current contenders.

Boston - Tatum, Brown, Jrue/Porz
Milwaukee - Giannis, Dame, Middleton
Philadelphia - Embid, Maxey, George
Knicks - Brunson, Anunoby, Randle/Bridges
OKC - Shai, Chet, J. Williams
Nuggets - Jokic, Murray, Gordon/Porter Jr.
Timberwolves - Edwards, Towns, Gobert/McDaniels
Dallas - Doncic, Irving, Klay/Lively
Suns - Durant, Booker, Beal

So even it we consider Deni being better than half of those 3rd options, not to mention his contract allows for a deeper roster behind him, we can also be real with the fact that the Wizards don't have anything close to the 1st two options that any of those teams have. So Deni, at this stage of the rebuild, without a true 1st or 2nd option, is more valuable to them as a piece to acquire more assets (with the hope of those assets becoming a 1 or 2), than he would be as the defacto best player on the Wizards over the next 3 seasons.

Yes, maybe he could've also continued his play into next season, potentially increasing his value more, but regardless, i think we can all agree that no matter how good Deni was next season, no lottery team is trading a 2025 lottery pick for him. So the best and earliest return that would've come from him at that point, would be either a non lottery 25 pick + other assets or a 26 potential lottery pick + other assets. Pushing our chances to find that star player even further out.

I believe they looked at the landscape and decided now was a good time for them to take a good deal, that was on the table for them now.

Who out of those 3rd options is he better than? The fact that you said half, I'd like to see how you can explain how he's better than most of these names much less half....

You're emphasizing my point bro. I was conversationally conceding to the seemingly board majority, who view Deni as really, really good player, who the Wizards were stupid to trade away, because of you know, how good and how cheap he is.

Personally, I would probably only take him over the Middleton, Gordon/Porter Jr., and maybe Klay/Lively, but I really like Lively. So yeah, on a true contender, with other top options, this current version of Deni that played well over the final 30 games of the season, is more of a 4th option on a championship caliber team, which we don't have. Making a return of 2 1sts, 2 2nds and a decent expiring player, a really good return for that caliber player.

That is, if a Championship is the goal. If its not, then sure, keeping Deni, while not having a superstar or 2, keeps us at best, on the bubble for the play-in, in perpetuity.

my bad for misunderstanding....

[dckingsfan]

The reality is Deni showed enough last year that there's equal chance of him improving as there is him regressing. If he regresses, you're obviously glad you took the deal. If he improves, chances of the deal working in your favor becomes lower.

Imagine Deni as a 19 and 8 player on good efficiency at the end of his contract. As you get closer to that time you can trade him to virtually any team in the league, as contracts at that time will be paying even end of bench guys enough of a salary to easily do a salary match. You would stand to bring back many many picks from a contending team because you're not just providing a playoff starter but you're providing a playoff starter that costs you only the very worst of the players you have on the roster in order to salary match. Comparably, a similar quality wing might be on a significantly higher deal that as a result might require including a valuable bench player in the swap.

It's all a gamble, we won't know who was right for some years.

Yep. It is a gamble. You are gambling that Carrington and a late '29 pick are going to be better than Den and you couldn't get more for Deni in a year (or two).

Now, if you absolutely had to have Carrington 'cause he was your GUY. Then okay. If not. meh, maybe.

[badinage]

Bill James wrote a persuasive argument that fan is not short for “fanatic,” but is in fact short for “fancier,” which makes sense based upon the time the term came into use. Basketball fancier. Sounds pretty bad ass.

Wow, Monte, I’m intrigued to learn more about this. Who knew? (Bill James, apparently).

[badinage]

Listen: trading him because he’s not a no. 1 or no. 2 — this is perfectly understandable.

But getting what they got, is not.

And rushing, is not.

And intimating that it’s about timeline — also not.

[badinage]

This is what it kinda comes down to …

Would you rather have:

A) Deni and Bub, but no George (pick 26) and no Kuzma and no FRP in 2029. [Kuz + 26 is shipped out for a mid-first pick from SAC, a deal that reportedly was on the table]

B) Bub and Kuzma and George and a FRP in 2029

Give me A.

[montestewart]

Bill James wrote a persuasive argument that fan is not short for “fanatic,” but is in fact short for “fancier,” which makes sense based upon the time the term came into use. Basketball fancier. Sounds pretty bad ass.

Wow, Monte, I’m intrigued to learn more about this. Who knew? (Bill James, apparently).

I’m pretty sure I read it in the Bill James Historical Baseball Encyclopedia, and that he cited contemporaneous newspaper stories that used the word “fancier” regarding baseball fans. I forget the exact timeframe, but late 19th century or early 20th century.

[leswizards]

When I was in college (some 30 years ago), there was an economic study that claimed that if you were to take a white nba player and a African American player with identical skill sets and production, the white player would receive 18% more in salary.

All of this hatred for this trade reminds me of that study, because I can’t help but wonder if the hatred mainly stems from the fact that Deni was white and Jewish. I liked him, and would have loved to keep him, but the hatred for the trade to me seems out of proportion to what deni actually produced as a player.

[nate33]

When I was in college (some 30 years ago), there was an economic study that claimed that if you were to take a white nba player and a African American player with identical skill sets and production, the white player would receive 18% more in salary.

All of this hatred for this trade reminds me of that study, because I can’t help but wonder if the hatred mainly stems from the fact that Deni was white and Jewish. I liked him, and would have loved to keep him, but the hatred for the trade to me seems out of proportion to what deni actually produced as a player.

I think it is likely true that, 30 years ago, white players got paid more than black players with similar production. That's because, 30 years ago, the fan base was a lot more white and teams were trying to sell tickets. I haven't researched the issue, but I'm fairly certain that the fan base of the NBA is a lot less white than in used to be so my guess is that that pay disparity has declined (though not necessarily to zero).

I also suspect that there is a little racism that goes the other way as well. White players are assumed to be poor defenders because they are white. My guess is that Deni actually suffers from this anti-White bias to some degree.

As to the impact of his Jewishness, I'm not certain there is one. Certainly the fact that he is the only prominent Israeli in the NBA is relevant to the Israeli fan base that have frequented our board in the Deni era. So perhaps there is an emotional attachment from a few specific posters for nationalistic reasons, but I don't think it's religion-based.

For me, I'm just frustrated that we traded away our best home-grown development success story since Bradley Beal. And I really like two-way players. I don't think it has anything to do with race. For example, I'm fully open-minded to a Corey Kispert trade. And I would have been really upset if we traded Deni for a package headlined by Josh Giddey.

[dckingsfan]

This is what it kinda comes down to …

Would you rather have:

A) Deni and Bub, but no George (pick 26) and no Kuzma and no FRP in 2029. [Kuz + 26 is shipped out for a mid-first pick from SAC, a deal that reportedly was on the table]

B) Bub and Kuzma and George and a FRP in 2029

Give me A.

So this.

[doclinkin]

This is what it kinda comes down to …

Would you rather have:

A) Deni and Bub, but no George (pick 26) and no Kuzma and no FRP in 2029. [Kuz + 26 is shipped out for a mid-first pick from SAC, a deal that reportedly was on the table]

B) Bub and Kuzma and George and a FRP in 2029

Give me A.

So this.

Except A) is entirely speculative.

The question is would you rather have:

A) Deni and Sarr and George.
B) Bub (*) and Sarr and George. And Brogdon, a future 1RP, and 2 2RP.

We have no evidence that anything of value was offered for Kuzma. We have sniffed a lot of smoke about Kuzma trades, but nothing has materialized. You can't assume the truth is the best deal you have heard about on the internet. Take one rumor and run with it. If so you also have to assume the FO had access to more info than you, the full story of all the possible offers and non offers. And have a better sense of what the locker room dynamics are, etc.

Kuzma has a pricier contract. With a 15% trade kicker, unless he wants to waive it to go to a team he likes. Has been the captain of a losing team for the time that he has been here. Other front offices can evaluate a player's data too. They aren't all mouthbreathing know-nothings. Kuzma's contract gets easier to trade in the future as it declines, and if the team actually plays better.

Who do you offer a better package for: Deni on the best contract in the league? Or Kuzma. Both were key players on a 15 win squad. But Kuzma used more possessions and had a bigger role in those losses.

(*) You can quibble and say the pick was made before the draft. And you'd be right that it was a wildass gamble. You can figure they either had enough intel on the players likely to be taken, were focused on Bub and were praying that he fell. Or you can say they might have been targeting a guy who was taken earlier and Bub was plan B or C. Or you can say they made the trade knowing they liked the upside potential of a few of the guys that were sure to be available and said it was worth the risk.

But if you like Bub then you have to say it was a ballsy move that worked. They guessed right. Me I like rooting for a Front Office that makes bold moves that work. Keeps things interesting as a fan. I'll happily critique this group. I didn't like the Sarr selection. Didn't like the George selection, especially not the trade up to get him. Happy to criticize the FO on that front. I didn't like the Deni trade at the time, especially if it was kicked off by the likely selection of Sarr.

But it's hard to hate a smart gamble that pays off. I think the FO was stung by the reaction to the Deni trade. They've kinda kept their heads down since then. Are letting Bub's performance speak for them. So far I'm liking the kid. And it's odd given how I felt on draft night, that the move that pissed me off the most is the one I am actually coming to respect the most, the more I think about it.

[dckingsfan]

This is what it kinda comes down to …

Would you rather have:

A) Deni and Bub, but no George (pick 26) and no Kuzma and no FRP in 2029. [Kuz + 26 is shipped out for a mid-first pick from SAC, a deal that reportedly was on the table]

B) Bub and Kuzma and George and a FRP in 2029

Give me A.

So this.

Except A) is entirely speculative.

The question is would you rather have:

A) Deni and Sarr and George.
B) Bub (*) and Sarr and George. And Brogdon, a future 1RP, and 2 2RP.

We have no evidence that anything of value was offered for Kuzma. We have sniffed a lot of smoke about Kuzma trades, but nothing has materialized. You can't assume the truth is the best deal you have heard about on the internet. Take one rumor and run with it. If so you also have to assume the FO had access to more info than you, the full story of all the possible offers and non offers. And have a better sense of what the locker room dynamics are, etc.

Kuzma has a pricier contract. With a 15% trade kicker, unless he wants to waive it to go to a team he likes. Has been the captain of a losing team for the time that he has been here. Other front offices can evaluate a player's data too. They aren't all mouthbreathing no nothings. Kuzma's contract gets easier to trade in the future as it declines, and if the team actually plays better.

Who do you offer a better package for: Deni on the best contract in the league? Or Kuzma. Both were key players on a 15 win squad. But Kuzma used more possessions and had a bigger role in those losses.

(*) You can quibble and say the pick was made before the draft. And you'd be right that it was a wildass gamble. You can figure they either had enough intel on the players likely to be taken, were focused on Bub and were praying that he fell. Or you can say they might have been targeting a guy who was taken earlier and Bub was plan B or C. Or you can say they made the trade knowing they liked the upside potential of a few of the guys that were sure to be available and said it was worth the risk.

But if you like Bub then you have to say it was a ballsy move that worked. They guessed right. Me I like rooting for a Front Office that makes bold moves that work. Keeps things interesting as a fan. I'll happily critique this group. I didn't like the Sarr selection. Didn't like the George selection, especially not the trade up to get him. Happy to criticize the FO on that front. I didn't like the Deni trade at the time, especially if it was kicked off by the likely selection of Sarr.

But it's hard to hate a smart gamble that pays off. I think the FO was stung by the reaction to the Deni trade. They've kinda kept their heads down since then. Are letting Bub's performance speak for them. So far I'm liking the kid. And it's odd given how I felt on draft night, that the move that pissed me off the most is the one I am actually coming to respect the most, the more I think about it.

Give me Deni, Bub and Sarr. Don't give me excuses and whatabouts. Make it happen and don't be weak FO about the trades thinking you have no leverage and always trying to make friends with other FOs.

And yes, I didn't like the CPIII trade for Poole. I didn't like the Sarr choice. I didn't like the Deni trade. I think they got less than fair value on Porzingis and on Gafford. I LOVED the Beal trade. I like the Bub draft. I am indifferent on George. I like the Bilal pick as well.

And I very much like that they have kicked off the rebuild. I think they are making mistakes which is going to drag out the rebuilding process - that is my point. Daring but not all that...

[doclinkin]

Give me Deni, Bub and Sarr.

LOL. Okay.

The "I WANT my ICE CREAM NOW! NANANA I'm NOT LISTENING" formulation.

Show me the link that says we had a deal for the 14 without Deni.

The longer we go without trading Kuzma the more you got to figure nobody has offered diddley for the Kuz.
And if you tick through our roster, who else do we have that anybody would want?
Show me a plausible trade, anybody we got for a lottery pick.

[AFM]

Yeah they've moved on to the "well a GOOD FO would have found a way to keep Deni AND get Bub" argument

[dckingsfan]

Give me Deni, Bub and Sarr.

LOL. Okay.

The "I WANT my ICE CREAM NOW! NANANA I'm NOT LISTENING" formulation.

Show me the link that says we had a deal for the 14 without Deni.

The longer we go without trading Kuzma the more you got to figure nobody has offered diddley for the Kuz.

And if you tick through our roster, who else do we have that anybody would want?

Show me a plausible trade, anybody we got for a lottery pick.

That's fair. But I think we should have found a way without trading Deni. Or, we should have waited.

Or better yet, give me Deni and Bub and trade down from Sarr. Or maybe do the trade with Sac but don't insist on 2 picks.

Put it another way. If we didn't trade Deni - no one is complaining or having to justify the trade.

You are putting a nail on the problem. And that goes with Kuz, Poole, Kispert, Brogdon, Bagley and Holmes (and now Jonas, IMO). This FO was in a tough position to start - but at least they started the rebuild in earnest - kind of.