Corey Kispert, Wizards Sniper.

[payitforward]

The ‘energy’ behind my critique has little to do with the Avdija trade in the way you think. Yes, it was dumb. Yes, it was rash. Yes, it continues a long line of chucking young players before they hit their prime....

What long line is that? I'm struggling to think of a single example. I guess that given Rui's unexpected improvement after he turned 25 could be called an exception. But, he'd been on the team for almost 4 years & had shown very little improvement if any. Bad coaching perhaps? But it had nothing to do with your description, & in any case I can't think of a single additional example in the last dozen years or more. What am I missing?

...my ‘energy,’ here, is that with the Avdija trade, there’s no player on the team (apart from Dawkins’s picks) who shouldn’t be sold off now....

If you mean that there's no player who shouldn't be available to be traded, I agree. But it has nothing to do with the Avdija trade or "Dawkin's picks." Every player should be available to be traded -- if the price is right. Whether you picked the player or not has no bearing on the question of whether you should trade him. Only *what you can get* has any bearing. Period.

Iow, any player should be moved if he fetches a price for which it's worth moving him -- i.e. if the deal is good enough. &, the inverse is true as well. No player should be traded for less than he's worth.

It's not complicated; you don't trade a quarter for a dime. & if someone offers you a quarter for your dime, you do the deal. Period. What can be complicated, obviously, is assessing the value of an offer.

& obviously... that's what is at work here, for you I mean.

There’s not one guy on the team, who was not selected this year or last, that they’re invested in — beyond trying... to build up his appeal.

Since the only "appeal" of an NBA player lies in the quality of his play now & in his projected future, "to build up his appeal" means to help him improve as a player. Hence, there should be no one on the team in whom they have any other interest than you suggest. Or any investment.

Thus, it seems to me that what's behind this is that you think Dawkins traded Deni because Deni wasn't "his guy," a player he'd picked.

Worse yet, you seem to believe, he took less for Deni than he should/could have gotten -- for the same reason: i.e. he undervalued Deni, because Deni wasn't his guy.

...It’s got to be obvious to every GM in the league. And value is being driven down....

I hate having to write the following, because (as you are perfectly aware) I value your intelligence, your input here, your work in other contexts, & so forth. But... alas this simply makes no sense at all. Or, rather, it's emotionalism wearing the costume of analysis.

You are unhappy with Deni having been traded, & these feelings seem to be shaping every one of your thoughts.

This notion of having vets around to mentor is cliche and also, I think, unfounded in this case. It’s not a team yet. It’s a bunch of players....

Yes, that's one value of vets; they can help a bunch of (young) players -- or, at least, that's the claim. How would I know whether or to what degree it's true?

[payitforward]

Maybe I should shut up? Hey, badinage -- what do you think?

[AFM]

Badinage, please say yes

[badinage]

The ‘energy’ behind my critique has little to do with the Avdija trade in the way you think. Yes, it was dumb. Yes, it was rash. Yes, it continues a long line of chucking young players before they hit their prime....

What long line is that? I'm struggling to think of a single example. I guess that given Rui's unexpected improvement after he turned 25 could be called an exception. But, he'd been on the team for almost 4 years & had shown very little improvement if any. Bad coaching perhaps? But it had nothing to do with your description, & in any case I can't think of a single additional example in the last dozen years or more. What am I missing?

...my ‘energy,’ here, is that with the Avdija trade, there’s no player on the team (apart from Dawkins’s picks) who shouldn’t be sold off now....

If you mean that there's no player who shouldn't be available to be traded, I agree. But it has nothing to do with the Avdija trade or "Dawkin's picks." Every player should be available to be traded -- if the price is right. Whether you picked the player or not has no bearing on the question of whether you should trade him. Only *what you can get* has any bearing. Period.

Iow, any player should be moved if he fetches a price for which it's worth moving him -- i.e. if the deal is good enough. &, the inverse is true as well. No player should be traded for less than he's worth.

It's not complicated; you don't trade a quarter for a dime. & if someone offers you a quarter for your dime, you do the deal. Period. What can be complicated, obviously, is assessing the value of an offer.

& obviously... that's what is at work here, for you I mean.

There’s not one guy on the team, who was not selected this year or last, that they’re invested in — beyond trying... to build up his appeal.

Since the only "appeal" of an NBA player lies in the quality of his play now & in his projected future, "to build up his appeal" means to help him improve as a player. Hence, there should be no one on the team in whom they have any other interest than you suggest. Or any investment.

Thus, it seems to me that what's behind this is that you think Dawkins traded Deni because Deni wasn't "his guy," a player he'd picked.

Worse yet, you seem to believe, he took less for Deni than he should/could have gotten -- for the same reason: i.e. he undervalued Deni, because Deni wasn't his guy.

...It’s got to be obvious to every GM in the league. And value is being driven down....

I hate having to write the following, because (as you are perfectly aware) I value your intelligence, your input here, your work in other contexts, & so forth. But... alas this simply makes no sense at all. Or, rather, it's emotionalism wearing the costume of analysis.

You are unhappy with Deni having been traded, & these feelings seem to be shaping every one of your thoughts.

This notion of having vets around to mentor is cliche and also, I think, unfounded in this case. It’s not a team yet. It’s a bunch of players....

Yes, that's one value of vets; they can help a bunch of (young) players -- or, at least, that's the claim. How would I know whether or to what degree it's true?

The long line for me is not the last dozen or so years. It’s the last three dozen or so. Webber for Richmond and Thorpe. Wallace for Ike Austin. Hamilton for Stackhouse. Sheed for Strickland.

And the fact that I loved having Deni Avdija, and that I think this trade was a colossal blunder, has little bearing on my ability to assess what’s going on. I can think the trade was awful, and still like Bub — as just one “for instance.” The moves that have been made have been, on the whole, very … mid. I don’t think that’s a hot take. Some nice little gets — JV, Bub definitely, I like George, we’ll see about Bey … and some that SO FAR seem to me to be enh, or worse. I get it: foundation is being laid; the real talent isn’t coming for another year. All reasonable. But the moves so far? They don’t have me feeling that these young execs are special.

As for the Avdija trade: I don’t think he, Dawkins, got hosed. I do think he was rash. I do think giving up on young talent before it’s peaked is foolish.

More to the point: I do think it means that no one on the team apart from the rookies this year and last really matters. And so they ought to sell everyone off, and get what (little) they can. And not make an effort to try to field a legit team. Play hard, compete, all that — but I don’t want this team to win games. I would be fine if they won 4 games this season. (Well, no, I actually wouldn’t be fine; that would be a joke, and kind of awful; but I mean, what difference does it make at this point? Let’s tank, and tank hard and shamelessly.)

[payitforward]

I don't think we'll have any trouble tanking!

Overall, I suppose, I'm frustrated with the high-intensity responses (not just yours) to the new FO's work so far, because I really don't see that Will has had nearly time enough that any judgment whatever is warranted.

This franchise had been a god-awful, utterly mismanaged mess for almost two decades, first by Ernie & then, sadly, by Tommy Shephard -- a nice guy I was really hoping would succeed.

But what was his remit? Note that he was fired for "not making the playoffs." An idiotic performance metric if ever I saw one!

Obviously, Winger talked straight with Ted. Hiring Winger was the only smart thing I've seen Ted Leonis do. & Winger hiring Will continued the trend.

So, hallelujah!, we've started over! & if you only applied your radical logic ("sell 'em all while you can!") to the Avdija trade you'd be in the logical frame again. If we don't need the other guys, why do we need Avdija?

To put it another way, if we're not a team yet, as you wrote, then why would we all of a sudden be one if we still had Deni? & if we wouldn't be one with Deni, then why wouldn't your radical "sell em all" logic still apply? Including to Deni?

& that's where the logic fails.

As to the rhetorical flourish -- "giving up on young talent before it's peaked" -- trading a player is NOT "giving up" on him. They aren't even related.

[doclinkin]

Spoiler:

Trading a player before they’ve peaked means giving up on them *if* you believe you’d get better value for them if you waited.

I doubt it. I think having Deni and Sarr and Bilal means one will be starved of developmental minutes. They play too-similar roles even if Deni is the best of the bunch.

At the point where they knew they were taking Sarr (the mistake IMO) they were shopping a forward. Otherwise teams know you’re forced to sell low. And chemistry suffers.

The market wasn’t there for anybody else on the roster. Clearly. We will see if Kuz gets shipped for value. The front office says they want two 1sts. Deni got that. Plus two seconds. Plus whatever we get from Brogdon. Either in production or mentorship or trade. Or all 3.

I guess the point in a Kispert thread is how do you build a team. I think you do have to look at roster balance so that you’re trying to build the squad you want then upgrade at each position. Redundancy prevents growth and suppresses value. If you can spread your depth with vets and rooks at all spots maybe you can grow and sustain a team.

I think you want two-way players in each of these roles:

Tall ball handling lead guard.
Shooter who defends and passes. Plays well off ball.
Switchable forwards who defend well outside and in.
Low post heavy who deters penetration and scores efficiently down low. Has good chemistry with skill players in pick and roll sets.

If you get the above then you look to upgrade at each spot. Draft him ideally so you have him cheaper and longer under contract control. Especially with a go-to scorer since high usage scorers are the most expensive players in the game.

We had one quality starter off that list in Deni. He was just developing the offense. Sucks to lose him.

If Kispert were playable as a starting guard then maybe we could count him too. But so far no, particularly on defense. I think he might surprise this year and break out. Go on a scoring streak. If either or both of Bilal and Sarr prove playable on defense, ideally next to Jonas, then Kispert’s skill set may look good.

Brogdan/Bub
Corey
Kuzma
Sarr/Bilal
Valanciunas

Has a lot of size. Maybe enough defense that Kispert is playable. Enough firepower ranged shooting & playmaking, that we might show well against teams that are sleepwalking through the regular season.

Nobody will be loading up to stop Kispert since Brogdon & Kuzma will be the scouting focus and you can’t leave Jonas alone underneath. Valanciunas in screen roll action is a problem. So Kispert should again have incandescent scoring percentages from wide open shots off catch and shoot and sudden cuts to the inside.

AND THEREFORE he’ll be the player most likely to draw interest in trade. Especially given I see him in a leadership role for Coach Keefe. The potential next Deni in terms of a fan favorite who gets swapped out for picks.

There a chance though they keep him long enough to draft his replacement. He fits with any team and has been a good soldier no matter what his role or minutes. You never saw him sulk even though he was pointedly candid in interviews and exit assessments.

Personally he’s one of the players I’m looking forward to seeing this season. He’s sneaky in improving every year. I’m curious where that goes. Hopefully it goes to improving this team, and not to being shipped out.

[Frichuela]

Spoiler:

Trading a player before they’ve peaked means giving up on them *if* you believe you’d get better value for them if you waited.

I doubt it. I think having Deni and Sarr and Bilal means one will be starved of developmental minutes. They play too-similar roles even if Deni is the best of the bunch.

At the point where they knew they were taking Sarr (the mistake IMO) they were shopping a forward. Otherwise teams know you’re forced to sell low. And chemistry suffers.

The market wasn’t there for anybody else on the roster. Clearly. We will see if Kuz gets shipped for value. The front office says they want two 1sts. Deni got that. Plus two seconds. Plus whatever we get from Brogdon. Either in production or mentorship or trade. Or all 3.

I guess the point in a Kispert thread is how do you build a team. I think you do have to look at roster balance so that you’re trying to build the squad you want then upgrade at each position. Redundancy prevents growth and suppresses value. If you can spread your depth with vets and rooks at all spots maybe you can grow and sustain a team.

I think you want two-way players in each of these roles:

Tall ball handling lead guard.
Shooter who defends and passes. Plays well off ball.
Switchable forwards who defend well outside and in.
Low post heavy who deters penetration and scores efficiently down low. Has good chemistry with skill players in pick and roll sets.

If you get the above then you look to upgrade at each spot. Draft him ideally so you have him cheaper and longer under contract control. Especially with a go-to scorer since high usage scorers are the most expensive players in the game.

We had one quality starter off that list in Deni. He was just developing the offense. Sucks to lose him.

If Kispert were playable as a starting guard then maybe we could count him too. But so far no, particularly on defense. I think he might surprise this year and break out. Go on a scoring streak. If either or both of Bilal and Sarr prove playable on defense, ideally next to Jonas, then Kispert’s skill set may look good.

Brogdan/Bub
Corey
Kuzma
Sarr/Bilal
Valanciunas

Has a lot of size. Maybe enough defense that Kispert is playable. Enough firepower ranged shooting & playmaking, that we might show well against teams that are sleepwalking through the regular season.

Nobody will be loading up to stop Kispert since Brogdon & Kuzma will be the scouting focus and you can’t leave Jonas alone underneath. Valanciunas in screen roll action is a problem. So Kispert should again have incandescent scoring percentages from wide open shots off catch and shoot and sudden cuts to the inside.

AND THEREFORE he’ll be the player most likely to draw interest in trade. Especially given I see him in a leadership role for Coach Keefe. The potential next Deni in terms of a fan favorite who gets swapped out for picks.

There a chance though they keep him long enough to draft his replacement. He fits with any team and has been a good soldier no matter what his role or minutes. You never saw him sulk even though he was pointedly candid in interviews and exit assessments.

Personally he’s one of the players I’m looking forward to seeing this season. He’s sneaky in improving every year. I’m curious where that goes. Hopefully it goes to improving this team, and not to being shipped out.

Good stuff Doc.

I think George is seen as Kispert's replacement in the eyes of the FO and, as such, he is likely to be traded by the deadline.

[doclinkin]

Right. It remains to be seen. They are trying to upgrade. Losing Deni is one step back. We ship a player with talent who has proven himself and is developing. Replaced with 3 prospects who may eventually be as good or better would be 3 steps forward, if it works. George is longer, shoots well. May be a better passer? Could defend better if he got in shape? The tools are there.

I just see what they are doing, I think. Despite the argument that there is no single player to build around yet, they are trying to build a team, not just a collection of talent. Then upgrade by position. Redundancy in a single slot reduces the asset value of all at the position. But if you basically have playable guys in each position, even with guys coming up behind them, then you have sketched out what everybody's role is and don't have to completely readjust when the next guy steps in.

Ace Bailey or Cooper Flagg can take over the Kuzma spot.
Aalijah Arenas can take the Kispert/Poole slot.
Cam Boozer can bump aside whomever is in the frontcourt Big role by next year.

So Bub or whomever won't have to reinvent the wheel, since the guy he has coming in already plays that role, only better in theory than the guy he is displacing. If Corey is good enough to hold the place for KGeorge, but the young'n grows into the role, then hey we have a tradable asset who is still producing for us. Or a youngish vet who has shown he can play a useful role off the bench.

And every year we do the same, with the extra draft picks, recruit the replacement of the guy in front of them, teach them up, grow our own on the cheap.

Still, if Kuz is traded then Kispert is the longest tenured player on the team. Aside from Gill I guess. Personally I'd like to see who Corey becomes in his prime, see if there is any upside there while players like George develop and learn the offball skills and savvy that Kispert game into the league with.

[nate33]

We have a thread dedicated to this, but I'm posting this here as well just to maintain a record of it in the Kispert thread.

Read on Twitter

[J-Ves]

I would probably do something like 3/$36 million. Shooters get paid, he'd easily get the MLE from a team like Orlando.

I'd go 4/$50M with descending annual salaries.

Over the 4 seasons, that would be:
2025-26 $14.2M
2026-27 $13.1M
2027-28 $11.9M
2028-29 $10.8M

Four years from now when we are hopefully good, it'll be nice to have a guy like Kispert coming off the bench making just $11.9M at a time when the MLE is $16.9M.

Nice call

[payitforward]

I'll say!

[payitforward]

I think we all like Kispert, & this is certainly a good move. At the same time, it's worth noting that picking Kispert in '21 was an example of the things Tommy did to get himself fired.

Jalen Johnson -- whom some of us wanted (Zards & I, for example) -- just got a $150m 2d contract.
Alperen Sengun -- whom a few of us wanted -- just got a $185m 2d contract.
Trey Murphy -- whom another set of us wanted -- just got a $112m 2d contract.
etc. etc. etc.

(In fairness, some other guys we liked are out of the league!)

[pcbothwel]

If Kispert takes even a moderate step offensively, then those last two years at 6% of the Cap is HUGE Steal.
Thats Connaughton/Kennard/Tre Jones Money.... Great Deal

Read on Twitter

[nate33]

The descending schedule makes sense. Since his last year is a team option, there was less motivation to go out of our way to make it continue to descend.

I probably would have gone:
Year 1 $14.75M
Year 2 $13.66M
Year 3 $12.56M
Year 4 $13.05M (team option)

That's the same total guaranteed money over the first 3 years, and the same team option money in Year 4, just with maximum descending over the first 3 years. But ultimately we are talking about a very small difference. The bottom line is that it descends a little bit, making the contract more valuable as time goes on, which is what we want.

[AFM]

About time to rename this thread. Sniper my ass, more like a drunk kid with his fathers gun

[doclinkin]

Yeah he's floundering in a Guard role. Not skilled or athletic enough to make his own offense. BK's scheme wants everybody with the ball and able to initiate. That's not Kispert's strength. I always hoped he could play 2-guard but turns out: nope. Or leastways not with the ball in his hands. He needs to be off ball and able to make opportunistic cuts or open jumpers when the defense is focused elsewhere. Keefe's offense has no sets that feature him running off screens etc.

[Benjammin]

As Doc eloquently delineated he's being used in ways that aren't his strengths. My guess is he'll be fine without the ball in his hands as much.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[9 and 20]

Corey seems like a decent dude and he seems to care about and think about the game. All good things. Playing like trash though!! Corey Trashbert these past several games.

[AWIZZINGBULLET]

About time to rename this thread. Sniper my ass, more like a drunk kid with his fathers gun

Appreciate it!!!

Folks around here are too funny. This guy's been playing horribly for the majority of the season, yet prior to your comment the last comment on guy dated back to October 22 as if buddy has been a constant positive contributor.

Meanwhile, folks in here wanna keep going on and on about our rookies, trying to find anything they can to raise doubt about their future potential.

People go on and on about Hachimura and Deni's ceiling, talking about how they maxed it out, but have the audacity to not do same for Corey Kispert as if he's some spring chicken that's lighting the league on fire with his "sniper" work.

Corey Kispert is utterly average and completely replaceable. This guy's never been a sharpshooter in the league and he won't be. Not to mention, he doesn't have this high basketball IQ that people love to credit him with having as evidenced by his inability to find a way to mitigate his defensive deficiencies.

Trade this guy to whatever organization is buying these claims of him being a sharpshooter with a high IQ, and do it quick!

A lot of bogus posters in here.

[payitforward]

I'd be happy to trade Kispert. He's a few months from turning 26, which means there's no real chance that he is significant to our rebuild.

The rest of what you write isn't true, however. There's no question he can shoot a high %. Last year, Kispert's TS% was 60.2%. The year before it was 63.7%.

Those numbers qualify him as "a sharpshooter." One who's in a slump, however -- no question about it.

As to your having it in for other posters on the board... I don't get why. I think we're all excited about the rookies & Bilal.