Wiz trade Shard and 2nd rounder for Okafor and Ariza

[leswizards]

And I see very little way around the fact that based upon what should be expected of Okafor and Ariza both are extremely overpaid and not really likely to elevate the overall quality of the team to any great degree.

Yep, Okafor and Ariza are very overpaid. No doubt about that. I don't have a list of all the superb NBA players who are both underpaid and actually available in trades, but I suspect the list is microscopically small.

The goal is not to overpay. The goal is to underpay players. There are 3 main ways to underpay players. The first is to draft stud rookies who play like all stars right out of the gate. The second way is to sign max contract players who would be paid even more if there were no such thing as max contracts. The third is to sign MLE players who are better than MLE quality but are limited in flexibility by not having enough teams under the cap to offer them fair market contracts. Much of the hate directed at this trade is because it takes away the possibility that the Wizards can underpay max contract players, and by pushing the Wizards closer to the luxury tax limits their ability to sign MLE players who should really be making more than the MLE.

[VictorPage44]

With $15 million of cap space, you should be able to secure a max-worthy player. I don't know if Okafor qualifies. Depends on his health. If he can't come back from his back injuries or re-injures it and is out for the season, we basically traded a one-year albatross contract for a two-year one.

dealing in reality, there are very few "max worthy" players. Anyone we wouldve given $15 million to wouldnt have been max worthy. the best option was to find the best available fit at the least risk for that $15 million. We did a pretty decent job at that, whatever the overall salary of incoming vs outgoing players was. In FA you have to overpay w/ longterm deals. This team isnt ready for that commitment because all we have for now is Wall and an 18 year old player coming in. Everyone else has potential to be a role player, but we had to fix the flaws in the team if Wall is going to develop into the player we need him to be. They just need to win now. The options are still open for next offseason.

I think Illyasova is a good player as well, but you have to ask yourself if he's worth commiting the 40-50 million it would take to land him when we already have vesely and booker on the team who not only play the same position, but do the same things (not as well yet). If Illyasova works out its nice, you trade book or ves, but if illyasova underperforms, that's how you really get stuck in an ATL Hawks cycle, paying Illyasova $10 mil thru 2017, when you already have Nene longterm.

[Spence]

If I were brought in as GM, I would look to move Nene for the best pick or young player could get towards the end of this season.

It would essentially be BOYDing ourselves--rather than trading Okafor because he's not worth his contract, we would be keeping him and moving the better player for positive value. That's my solution to the frontcourt logjam.

Interesting. My guess is that deals for our front court players, possibly several of them, will be available. Logjams for desirable big men usually don't last long.

[tontoz]

If I were brought in as GM, I would look to move Nene for the best pick or young player could get towards the end of this season.

It would essentially be BOYDing ourselves--rather than trading Okafor because he's not worth his contract, we would be keeping him and moving the better player for positive value. That's my solution to the frontcourt logjam.

That is certainly a viable option. Since we won't be in the free agent market and can't do BOYD deals the only option left (other than the draft) to improve the team is to make trades.

[Ruzious]

Great question by Barely - Do the Wiz have the MLE available to them - now that they're presumably over the cap? And if they do have it, would amnestying Blatche put them under the cap and not eligible to use the MLE?

[Rafael122]

Pretty level headed analysis here: http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2012/6/21/3 ... ariza-hook

I give the deal a C, FYI. It doesn't push us any closer to a title (and quite frankly only 5 teams in the league are legit contenders, everyone else is just fighting for 2nd best) but I wouldn't be surprised if we are in the hunt for a playoff spot.We're the 2nd worse team in the league, haven't been to the playoffs in 4 years, and all of a sudden it's a bad thing to try and compete for the 7th or 8th spot. I'd take that over a 18 win season.

[Spence]

The goal is not to overpay. The goal is to underpay players.

Indisputably correct. That's the goal of every team in every league in every sport. Very few seem to manage it, though. I wonder if that's because it is easier to say than to do.

There are 3 main ways to underpay players. The first is to draft stud rookies who play like all stars right out of the gate. The second way is to sign max contract players who would be paid even more if there were no such thing as max contracts. The third is to sign MLE players who are better than MLE quality but are limited in flexibility by not having enough teams under the cap to offer them fair market contracts. Much of the hate directed at this trade is because it takes away the possibility that the Wizards can underpay max contract players, and by pushing the Wizards closer to the luxury tax limits their ability to sign MLE players who should really be making more than the MLE.

All that's fair enough. I do wonder, though, if those opportunities are quite so abundant. The evidence, not just of the Wizards, but of most North American professional teams, seems to be that they are not.

[willbcocks]

And I see very little way around the fact that based upon what should be expected of Okafor and Ariza both are extremely overpaid and not really likely to elevate the overall quality of the team to any great degree.

Yep, Okafor and Ariza are very overpaid. No doubt about that. I don't have a list of all the superb NBA players who are both underpaid and actually available in trades, but I suspect the list is microscopically small.

The goal is not to overpay. The goal is to underpay players. There are 3 main ways to underpay players. The first is to draft stud rookies who play like all stars right out of the gate. The second way is to sign max contract players who would be paid even more if there were no such thing as max contracts. The third is to sign MLE players who are better than MLE quality but are limited in flexibility by not having enough teams under the cap to offer them fair market contracts. Much of the hate directed at this trade is because it takes away the possibility that the Wizards can underpay max contract players, and by pushing the Wizards closer to the luxury tax limits their ability to sign MLE players who should really be making more than the MLE.

Although I am very much against the trade, I object to this point about the MLE. I don't think it often generates good value, AND I don't think this trade affects the Wizards ability to use it (they're only signed for two years, and the Wizards could only have used the MLE or cap space the first year), AND I don't think the Wizards should have used it before the trade or after the trade, as I think cap space is far preferable to the MLE as a tool for rebuilding teams because of the awesome flexibility it provides.


ETA: Clarifying why the MLE wasn't useful to the Wiz, we would have been under the cap this year without the trade, hence we would not have used the MLE. We could have used it next year, so one time, but we still can without hitting the luxury tax. Then when both players expire, we can use it again. It's not a consideration here.

[tontoz]

In other words you were just talking out of your ass. That is what i thought.

I expect the team to improve a lot next year but not because of this lousy deal. Okafor and Ariza have been in the league for years. Their track records are common knowlege.

Chris Singleton sucks but he shot better from 3 as a rookie than Ariza has done in any season of his career. 2nd year Seraphin had a better PER this season than Okafor.

Their records speak for themselves. It isn't like they are draft prospects. The Wizards are paying a lot of money for guys who aren't that good. That is not an assumption.

Okay, I think we're done here because I'm fairly certain I can debate this trade with people who are not abusive twerps. If you prefer to regard my withdrawal as a surrender, that's fine by me.

Virtually all of your posts in this thread have been ad hominem nonsense. Instead of talking about the deal you want to talk about the posters. On top of that you just make stuff up an pretend it is true.

I never said anything about the team not improving but you just make it up so you can pretend like you are making sense.

[Spence]

With $15 million of cap space, you should be able to secure a max-worthy player. I don't know if Okafor qualifies. Depends on his health. If he can't come back from his back injuries or re-injures it and is out for the season, we basically traded a one-year albatross contract for a two-year one.

dealing in reality, there are very few "max worthy" players. Anyone we wouldve given $15 million to wouldnt have been max worthy. the best option was to find the best available fit at the least risk for that $15 million. We did a pretty decent job at that, whatever the overall salary of incoming vs outgoing players was. In FA you have to overpay w/ longterm deals. This team isnt ready for that commitment because all we have for now is Wall and an 18 year old player coming in. Everyone else has potential to be a role player, but we had to fix the flaws in the team if Wall is going to develop into the player we need him to be. They just need to win now. The options are still open for next offseason.

I think Illyasova is a good player as well, but you have to ask yourself if he's worth commiting the 40-50 million it would take to land him when we already have vesely and booker on the team who not only play the same position, but do the same things (not as well yet). If Illyasova works out its nice, you trade book or ves, but if illyasova underperforms, that's how you really get stuck in an ATL Hawks cycle, paying Illyasova $10 mil thru 2017, when you already have Nene longterm.

+1

[Spence]

Pretty level headed analysis here: http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2012/6/21/3 ... ariza-hook

I give the deal a C, FYI. It doesn't push us any closer to a title (and quite frankly only 5 teams in the league are legit contenders, everyone else is just fighting for 2nd best) but I wouldn't be surprised if we are in the hunt for a playoff spot.We're the 2nd worse team in the league, haven't been to the playoffs in 4 years, and all of a sudden it's a bad thing to try and compete for the 7th or 8th spot. I'd take that over a 18 win season.

That IS a level-headed analysis. Thanks for posting it. Your own analysis seems pretty good, too.

[7-Day Dray]

I've taken a day to cool off and try to rationally justify this trade, but I just can't. It's so bad it's hard to get my mind around it.

The ONLY justification is that we turned deadweight salary into relatively competent (albeit absurdly overpriced) players. Instead of paying Rashard Lewis $13.7M to go away, we will pay Okafor and Ariza $42M to be average players. So at best, it's like paying $15M a year for two average players for 2 years. That's pretty bad but I suppose it could be worse.

The real problem is that the players, Okafor in particular, aren't any better than what we've already got at the position. We are paying $15M a year for two average players who don't add anything.

What gives me a small amount of hope is the fact that Okafor is probably movable. Competent big men are so rare in this league that some teams are willing to pay a ton for them. If Okafor can be traded for a shooter (preferably Kevin Martin) then it might not be such an unmitigated disaster. One can justify paying $15M a year for two average players if those players at least fill a need.

If we traded Okafor plus Crawford for Kevin Martin, and drafted Beal, our lineup would look like this:

PG Wall/Mack
SG Martin/Beal
SF Ariza/Crowder/Singleton
PF Booker/Vesely/Singleton
C Nene/Seraphin

That's a pretty good team.

Nate: You're probably not understanding the importance of acquiring players who will be contractually obligated to play for the Wizards for the next two seasons. It's huge because there's no guarantee that a player NOT contractually obligated to play for the Wizards would ever want to play for the Wizards. Why, the mere thought of such a thing is laughable. HA-HA-HA. See? I just laughed at the thought myself. No one could be enticed to play for a team like the Wizards for a piddling thing like a Brinks truck filled with money. Much better to acquire guys with existing contracts. Then they can be forced to play for the Wizards.

Looked at properly, this is a genius move.

[Ruzious]

Well yeah, if any highly paid player under-performs, it hurts. But you have to pay good players that aren't on rookie contracts. That's part of the deal of doing business in the NBA. If you're not willing to take any chances, you have no chance. And I believe the new CBA limits UFA's to 4 years max when signing with other teams.

[tontoz]

Pretty level headed analysis here: http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2012/6/21/3 ... ariza-hook

I give the deal a C, FYI. It doesn't push us any closer to a title (and quite frankly only 5 teams in the league are legit contenders, everyone else is just fighting for 2nd best) but I wouldn't be surprised if we are in the hunt for a playoff spot.We're the 2nd worse team in the league, haven't been to the playoffs in 4 years, and all of a sudden it's a bad thing to try and compete for the 7th or 8th spot. I'd take that over a 18 win season.

I agree that playoffs is a possibility. However i thought that before this deal.

[Spence]

Well yeah, if any highly paid player under-performs, it hurts. But you have to pay good players that aren't on rookie contracts. That's part of the deal of doing business in the NBA. If you're not willing to take any chances, you have no chance.

All correct, but one couldn't tell from that if you're in favor of the deal or not.

[Ed Wood]

That's hard to dispute. However much or little immediate sense the deal makes it does have the saving grace (which seems to be a fairly consistent theme under the Leonsis regime) of having a fairly short half life and of inflicting no real long term damage.

Also between Okafor, Nene, Seraphin and Vesely we have to have one of the upper echelon nice guy frontcourts in the league, I imagine that those team building field trips will continue to be popular. And Andray will likely be even more thoroughly embarrassed to take his shirt off in the locker room, which is a plus.

[closg00]

From the ESPN board comments on the trade

specs230308
Hornets must of thought they were dreaming when they were able to unload both thoe contracts and keep all their picks.
1 Hour Ago

And don't forget us throwing-in our 46th pick just for extra laughs.

[Rafael122]

Pretty level headed analysis here: http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2012/6/21/3 ... ariza-hook

I give the deal a C, FYI. It doesn't push us any closer to a title (and quite frankly only 5 teams in the league are legit contenders, everyone else is just fighting for 2nd best) but I wouldn't be surprised if we are in the hunt for a playoff spot.We're the 2nd worse team in the league, haven't been to the playoffs in 4 years, and all of a sudden it's a bad thing to try and compete for the 7th or 8th spot. I'd take that over a 18 win season.

I agree that playoffs is a possibility. However i thought that before this deal.

If we had kept the same team, and only made minor changes and added Beal, we probably wouldn't win 25 games next year. So now hopes would have turned to the draft lottery and see if we have a chance at drafting Nerlens noel. That cycle needs to stop. We haven't won 100 games in 4 seasons and yet people are complaining that this doesn't push us anywhere but mediocrity, as if the alternative (what we've seen the last few years) is so much better. Short term, I'd rather win 40-45 games than to sit here next here debating on who to draft at #4.

[Ruzious]

Well yeah, if any highly paid player under-performs, it hurts. But you have to pay good players that aren't on rookie contracts. That's part of the deal of doing business in the NBA. If you're not willing to take any chances, you have no chance.

All correct, but one couldn't tell from that if you're in favor of the deal or not.

In favor of signing Iyasova to a 4/40 deal vs trading for Okafor and Ariza? I'd definitely favor signing Ilyasova if those were the only alternatives.

[nate33]

If we had kept the same team, and only made minor changes and added Beal, we probably wouldn't win 25 games next year. So now hopes would have turned to the draft lottery and see if we have a chance at drafting Nerlens noel. That cycle needs to stop. We haven't won 100 games in 4 seasons and yet people are complaining that this doesn't push us anywhere but mediocrity, as if the alternative (what we've seen the last few years) is so much better. Short term, I'd rather win 40-45 games than to sit here next here debating on who to draft at #4.

Ridiculous. First of all, we would have won more than 25 games this year because the team post McGee trade is better than that. Plus Wall, Vesely and Seraphin are likely to show substantial improvement in the offseason.

Secondly, the idea that Okafor and Ariza will help this team win an additional 15-20 games is outrageous. They won't really help at all because they're not notably better than the people they are replacing.

If the Wizards win 40-45 games, it won't be because of the trade.