Wiz trade Shard and 2nd rounder for Okafor and Ariza

[VictorPage44]

^
Okafor doesnt add anything? what about rebounding? Ariza is a competant wing, we didnt have any. People keep saying that we didnt add anything we didnt already have. That couldnt be further from the truth. You cant win with nene as the best rebounder and booker as the second best, it's just not possible. Now, at least, we have a chance.

...But perception of this trade is influenced by all the genius alternative ideas everyone had worked out in their minds.

Ariza sucks. Okafor can rebound but is a big downgrade offensively from Nene/Seraphin. He has seen his best days but will be taking time away from young guys who can actually get better.

Doing nothing is always better than doing a bad deal. Bad deals are what keep bad teams bad.

I'm not going back and forth with you on Ariza, you have your opinion, I have mine, we'll see who was right next season.

You need more than one rebounder, end of story. Now we could wait on "the guys we already have who are way better than these scrubs we brought in", who dont have track records as rebounders and are all undersized or we could acutally make a proactive move and bring someone in who already has rebounding skills.

And who's better overall doesnt really matter when you're talking about the 7-8th guy in the rotation, IT'S ALL ABOUT THE FIT. You think OKC would trade Sefolosha for someone like Derozan who's "better overall"? hell no. Boston traded Perkins for Green and basically gave away any shot at a title that year. Green is just as good overall as Perkins so why didnt that work out for them?

We had two undresized Jeff Green PFs in Book and Ves, we added a true center. They're not the same just because they play the same position.

And while we're over-rating our own players, please remember that we were the second worst team in the league last year. These guys got potential, and they're gonna need to reach a decent amount of it if they're gonna stick in the league.

While we're talking about building the OKC way, let me remind you that the past 30 NBA champions or so were not built like that. They're built with a couple stars (hopefully for us Wall & #3), and a bunch of VETERAN role players. We can still go out and get those VETERAN ROLE PLAYERS in two years when Wall and #3 are ready. For now, we wont completely suck.

[Spence]

It is completely defeatist to say why not make this deal because we wouldn't be able to do better.

That seems indisputably correct to me. Which leads one to the obvious query: What deal or deals did the Wizards pass up to make this deal? Relatively precise players and contracts would be necessary.

It's pretty easy to write that this deal is bad because better deals could be made. I suppose better deals can ALWAYS be made. At least in theory. I get that. Nothing works better on an Internet message board than theory. And I think we've nailed the theory part down. More interesting at this point, I think, is what should have happened IN DETAIL. I'm sure everyone can understand that complaining that a better deal could have been made is ultimately useless because it is so vague as to be, well, useless.

Details, please. What are the deals that should have been made? Players and contracts, please.

Thanks.

[Ruzious]

Meh, the obnoxious part is more of a colateral benefit than a purpose. But it's nice to know my work is appreciated.

Ruz, your work has always been appreciated by me, but you're pretty much a rank amateur in this area. Was thinking of others when I wrote that, but now you've got a goal to shoot for. I trust your shot selection is better than Ariza's.

I think Ted might beg to differ. My obnoxiousness with the e-mail might not have reached a 10, but I probably made up for it with lack of tact and subtlety. Hey, I gotta go with my strengths - whatever they might be.

[nate33]

Doing nothing is always better than doing a bad deal. Bad deals are what keep bad teams bad.

This is sig worthy. So true. So succinct.

[MJG]

Do you not realize how dumb this is? How many people saw the Nene deal coming? How many people saw Kwame for Butler? Kwame was then traded for Pau Gasol lol.

Good players can and frequently do come from trades that nobody saw coming.

Thanks, but you didn't even try to answer my question. Presumably, that's because you don't have the answer. No shame in that. Not sure anyone has the answer to my question, but since my question addresses the main complaint about the trade, it is something that probably ought to be considered.

I think it's because the only person who can answer your question is someone who meets all the following criteria:

1. Comes from an alternate timeline in which we did not make this trade.
2. Has the ability to jump from the alternate timeline to our current timeline.
3. Has traveled back in time from a couple of years in the future of this alternate timeline.
4. Has high level NBA connections that grants them knowledge of what trade opportunities were presented to the Wizards over the course of those next couple of years.
5. Decides to make use of the powers outlined in 1-4 to respond to posts on message boards.

[tontoz]

Do you not realize how dumb this is? How many people saw the Nene deal coming? How many people saw Kwame for Butler? Kwame was then traded for Pau Gasol lol.

Good players can and frequently do come from trades that nobody saw coming.

Thanks, but you didn't even try to answer my question. Presumably, that's because you don't have the answer. No shame in that. Not sure anyone has the answer to my question, but since my question addresses the main complaint about the trade, it is something that probably ought to be considered.

I don't need to try. It is obvious that trades can happen that nobody forsees. Just because we can't forsee a deal doesn't mean it can't happen.

For example Memphis is probably going to be looking to cut costs. Rudy Gay is a top 10 player at his position and could probably be had. I could go on and on and on but it is pointless. I could say that Eric Gordon could have been available if we hadn't taken the Hornets bad contracts off their hands.

Any trade scenario, not matter how logical, can be easily shot down. And trades that help the team can come from anywhere.

[willbcocks]

Spence: Why don't we just trade 4 future picks and this year's #3 for Amare?

It's impossible to provide precise details of who will be available and where we will be picking, but unless we have exact details, we couldn't possibly assume something better than Amare, who we know will at least score 15 points and only costs 20 million per year.

You are taking this argument about predicting the future to unreasonable extremes. It is not unreasonable to suppose that the Wizards could have landed significantly better value over the next two years in other trades--in fact I don't think anyone is even disputing that. I think those who are defending the trade tend to be saying, well, the value's not great, but it improves the team for two years, which will help our picks develop, and we can then sign new guys to replace these ones.

Why are you harping on this?

[Spence]

I think it's because the only person who can answer your question is someone who meets all the following criteria:

1. Comes from an alternate timeline in which we did not make this trade.
2. Has the ability to jump from the alternate timeline to our current timeline.
3. Has traveled back in time from a couple of years in the future of this alternate timeline.
4. Has high level NBA connections that grants them knowledge of what trade opportunities were presented to the Wizards over the course of those next couple of years.
5. Decides to make use of the powers outlined in 1-4 to respond to posts on message boards.

Either there are people on this board who can do those things [and what's more, have already done those things] or they're assuming a lot of facts not in evidence. I'm a generous person so I'll let you and others decide which is the case.

[tontoz]

I think it's because the only person who can answer your question is someone who meets all the following criteria:

1. Comes from an alternate timeline in which we did not make this trade.
2. Has the ability to jump from the alternate timeline to our current timeline.
3. Has traveled back in time from a couple of years in the future of this alternate timeline.
4. Has high level NBA connections that grants them knowledge of what trade opportunities were presented to the Wizards over the course of those next couple of years.
5. Decides to make use of the powers outlined in 1-4 to respond to posts on message boards.

Either there are people on this board who can do those things [and what's more, have already done those things] or they're assuming a lot of facts not in evidence. I'm a generous person so I'll let you and others decide which is the case.

Please do list the facts not in evidence that we are assuming.

[Ed Wood]

Ah yes well then, stands to reason that the only fair criticism of anything must be delayed until after every detail of alternative and quantifiably superior options to the decision has been vetted to within an inch of its anthropomorphic life.

This is an unreasonable standard Spence, as always we're operating with imperfect information and we're allowed to make judgments within those limits if we're using what we have sensibly.

[Ruzious]

I agree with tontoz here. One thing EG is very good at is secrecy. In very few cases does he let rumors leak out. I don't know if that's been because of the lameness of the local media, but either way - most of his moves had very little warning. So we don't hear about the opportunities that might be available to him. But just because we don't hear about them, doesn't mean there aren't good viable opportunities. And with the kind of cap space the Wiz had, I think it's a safe assumption that there would have been better opportunities than 2 offensively challenged way overpaid veterans.

[Spence]

Spence: Why don't we just trade 4 future picks and this year's #3 for Amare?

Knock it off before you give Ernie ideas.

It's impossible to provide precise details of who will be available and where we will be picking, but unless we have exact details, we couldn't possibly assume something better than Amare, who we know will at least score 15 points and only costs 20 million per year.

That's absolutely correct. I think you got my point perfectly, but I'm not sure you drew the correct conclusion from it. My point was that instead of automatically assuming much better deals were available, a bit of humility might have been in order. Assuming facts not in evidence is kryptonite to humility. One of the first things they teach you in law school. Expensive education, but at least it taught me that one important lesson.

You are taking this argument about predicting the future to unreasonable extremes.

Of course. I'm responding to the unreasonable extremes people are going to to attack the trade. Surely you will concede that unreasonable extremity shouldn't be a weapon to be wielded by one side only.

It is not unreasonable to suppose that the Wizards could have landed significantly better value over the next two years in other trades--in fact I don't think anyone is even disputing that.

I'm disputing it. As I've written previously, it's not unreasonable to think the Wizards might have done better, but to be absolutely certain of it, as so many here seem to be, is another matter. If you're absolutely certain you're correct, you should have some concrete details to support your position. Absolute certainty in the absence of supporting evidence impresses the easily-impressed, but I'm afraid I just find it laughable.

I think those who are defending the trade tend to be saying, well, the value's not great, but it improves the team for two years, which will help our picks develop, and we can then sign new guys to replace these ones.

That's a legitimate argument. Not sure I buy it, but I recognize its value.

Why are you harping on this?

I suppose because grabbing a torch and joining the mob just isn't my thing. The bigger and angrier the mob, the more questions I have.

[closg00]

The very simple reason to not like this trade comes down to two words: opportunity cost.

BOYD deals, front-loaded contracts, opportunistic trades, amnesty signings, FA targets -- all of those things are significantly impeded by a move that would seem at first glance to carry little upside. So that stings.

Both closg00 and hands11 made mention of the fact that this trade is somehow reflective of Ted being cheap. This is simply preposterous.He agreed to pay and additional $30M and be at or above the salary cap for the next two seasons. Foolish? Maybe. Cheap? Absolutely not.

Ted made the point in his blog post about him liking this deal because free agency requires longer term commitments to players (and thus carries bigger risks), so in essence, he's cool with overpaying these two guys because it's only two years. But let me ask you this -- lets say it took a MAX deal to sign Batum and have Portland not match. That's a clear overpay -- but isn't it LESS of an overpay that what we're giving Ariza and Oak -- and at least Batum is coming into his prime and really good? Overpaying a FA could be equally as bad, I suppose. It could get ugly in the out years and his next contract would be really ugly, so I don't know.

As nate said, I think Okafor could be movable for a better fit -- especially if the team is going well. That seems to inflate guys' value. The other thing is that I think there's at least a reasonable chance that Ariza doesn't exercise his player option next year. Jameer Nelson just walked away from $8.5M because he wanted to choose his team rather than be traded. Ramon Sessions just opted out, as did Gerald Wallace. This is Ariza's 5th team in what will be his 8th season. He's a west coast guy and he may not want to go into next season as an expiring contract, a la Nelson. If he opts out he won't get the same starting salary that he'd be walking away from, but he'll get more guaranteed money via a multi-year deal. Plus, he'll have earned $37M over his career, so a marginal few million bucks might not be the only thing guiding his decision (family, location, etc.)

We all, myself included, spend so much time playing arm chair GM that we sometimes lose site of the "fan" aspect of things. I do think that on a night to night basis this coming season, the Wizards are going to be more fun -- entertaining -- to watch. I think they'll look like a credible NBA team and that the romper room shenanigans are a way of the past. That is not to say that I like this trade (I don't), but the act of watching and attending games should be more enjoyable next year.

Here is actually what was posted.

You know-what fella's? It's because Ted/Ernie would rather have Okafor and Ariza rather than pay Shard to walk. Blatche isn't going anywhere either.

I figured Ted was going to try to do something with Lewis's contract. I wasn't a fan of the idea. I would have rather he just bought him out instead of using the cap space this way.

But am I shocked. Nope. Ted is so far proving to be a little bit of a cheapo.

As of right now. Not liking this one bit. I liked the team I composed better with just using the picks, adding Kirk and paying Lewis to leave.

Hands made the cheap comment.

[AWIZZINGBULLET]

Spence: Why don't we just trade 4 future picks and this year's #3 for Amare?

It's impossible to provide precise details of who will be available and where we will be picking, but unless we have exact details, we couldn't possibly assume something better than Amare, who we know will at least score 15 points and only costs 20 million per year.

You are taking this argument about predicting the future to unreasonable extremes. It is not unreasonable to suppose that the Wizards could have landed significantly better value over the next two years in other trades--in fact I don't think anyone is even disputing that. I think those who are defending the trade tend to be saying, well, the value's not great, but it improves the team for two years, which will help our picks develop, and we can then sign new guys to replace these ones.

Why are you harping on this?

Not quite. Contracts being left out, the value is good. It's more like the trade improves the team this year, makes it more competitive and gives the Wizards a real chance at positioning themselves to make the playoffs this season and down the road. This upcoming season's as good as any season to begin at taking that next step. And no I don't think the addition of Ariza and Okafor helps Vesely develop.

[Spence]

Ah yes well then, stands to reason that the only fair criticism of anything must be delayed until after every detail of alternative and quantifiably superior options to the decision has been vetted to within an inch of its anthropomorphic life.

I'll address that point when I see fair criticism of the deal. So far it's pretty much just white hot anger and unsupported assertions that much better deals would have been available if only the front office were run by people on this board.

This is an unreasonable standard Spence, as always we're operating with imperfect information and we're allowed to make judgments within those limits if we're using what we have sensibly.

You're allowed to do pretty much anything you want. The issue is what value your judgment is if you're making blanket assertions based on grotesquely incomplete information.

I guess one of the points I'm trying to make is that most of the critics of this deal -- though not all -- have no interest in seeing this team actually play. They've already decided the deal is terrible because the team won't improve enough and we could have had Dwight Howard or someone like that if we'd only just waited for the offer to come. Maybe that's correct, but I just don't see the evidence for it.

I'm keen to see the team play. I believe transactions should ultimately be judged by the product performance.

[dandridge 10]

The very simple reason to not like this trade comes down to two words: opportunity cost.

BOYD deals, front-loaded contracts, opportunistic trades, amnesty signings, FA targets -- all of those things are significantly impeded by a move that would seem at first glance to carry little upside. So that stings.

Both closg00 and hands11 made mention of the fact that this trade is somehow reflective of Ted being cheap. This is simply preposterous. He agreed to pay and additional $30M and be at or above the salary cap for the next two seasons. Foolish? Maybe. Cheap? Absolutely not.

Ted made the point in his blog post about him liking this deal because free agency requires longer term commitments to players (and thus carries bigger risks), so in essence, he's cool with overpaying these two guys because it's only two years. But let me ask you this -- lets say it took a MAX deal to sign Batum and have Portland not match. That's a clear overpay -- but isn't it LESS of an overpay that what we're giving Ariza and Oak -- and at least Batum is coming into his prime and really good? Overpaying a FA could be equally as bad, I suppose. It could get ugly in the out years and his next contract would be really ugly, so I don't know.

As nate said, I think Okafor could be movable for a better fit -- especially if the team is going well. That seems to inflate guys' value. The other thing is that I think there's at least a reasonable chance that Ariza doesn't exercise his player option next year. Jameer Nelson just walked away from $8.5M because he wanted to choose his team rather than be traded. Ramon Sessions just opted out, as did Gerald Wallace. This is Ariza's 5th team in what will be his 8th season. He's a west coast guy and he may not want to go into next season as an expiring contract, a la Nelson. If he opts out he won't get the same starting salary that he'd be walking away from, but he'll get more guaranteed money via a multi-year deal. Plus, he'll have earned $37M over his career, so a marginal few million bucks might not be the only thing guiding his decision (family, location, etc.)

We all, myself included, spend so much time playing arm chair GM that we sometimes lose site of the "fan" aspect of things. I do think that on a night to night basis this coming season, the Wizards are going to be more fun -- entertaining -- to watch. I think they'll look like a credible NBA team and that the romper room shenanigans are a way of the past. The days of Drew Gooden, Elton Brand, Big Baby, Jason Maxiell and Kris Humphries et al going for their season or career highs on us are over. That is not to say that I like this trade (I don't), but the act of watching and attending games should be more enjoyable next year.

Good post Fish. I also think Prada wrote a good piece on BulletsForever. Ultimately, it all comes down to whether you want certainty or uncertainty. Although I can understand the reasons Ted and EG wanted certainty here, I think the reason why I can't fully support this trade is because I would rather have the opportunity cost. I was "all in" in Ted's vision for rebuilding the team....build through the draft and maintain financial flexibility so we can add key pieces when we were ready to make a move for contender status. It seems like he has moved off this plan or at least delayed it for another 2 years. While it is true that the Wizards might not have found any deals in the next two years to add better players, Okafor and Ariza aren't good enough for me to like scrapping that dream. In other words, ultimately I think I would have been more happy to have a worse record over the next 2 years with the HOPE that we could add "key" pieces for our future during this time period, than add 2 players that will not be "key" pieces for our future in order to barely make the playoffs (while at the same time reducing our chances over the next 2 years in finding our "key" pieces).

[Spence]

Please do list the facts not in evidence that we are assuming.

That's already been done, but I think it is fair to point out that others who agree with you have already acknowledged very incomplete information. They just think they're capable of making a final pronouncement on the deal without that information.

As noted previously, part of that incomplete information is how the team actually plays when next season begins. I'm interested in that information. I'm a bit surprised that so many seem completely uninterested in that information, though perhaps I shouldn't be surprised by that at all.

[Cramer]

Being a Wiz fan is hard damn work.

[VictorPage44]

I think it's because the only person who can answer your question is someone who meets all the following criteria:

1. Comes from an alternate timeline in which we did not make this trade.
2. Has the ability to jump from the alternate timeline to our current timeline.
3. Has traveled back in time from a couple of years in the future of this alternate timeline.
4. Has high level NBA connections that grants them knowledge of what trade opportunities were presented to the Wizards over the course of those next couple of years.
5. Decides to make use of the powers outlined in 1-4 to respond to posts on message boards.

Either there are people on this board who can do those things [and what's more, have already done those things] or they're assuming a lot of facts not in evidence. I'm a generous person so I'll let you and others decide which is the case.

apparently we have a lot of "five tool posters" on this board.

That's what this board is here for though, the only thing I disagree with is extreme negativity. It has caused people to drastically underrate the guys we just got, and our squad for next season. They'll be here two seasons, so relax, this doesnt handicap us against the cap unless you wanted to overpay for Eric Gordon or Rudy Gay. Illyasova is another stretch 4. Danny Green isnt as good as Ariza, and he cant guard as many positions. If Ariza or Okafor play well, other teams will want them as expiring players.

Making no move at all would have been dumb. For now, we cant make any moves next offseason, but who says there arent more trades to come? For all the trades anyone can speculate on that would have been better than this one, I can speculate on trades that we can make next offseason now that we've made this trade.

[Spence]

Being a Wiz fan is hard damn work.

That's one thing I think absolutely everyone here can agree upon.

BTW, good to see you, Cramer. The board needs your humor now more than ever.