Summer 2012 Free Agents Thread - Part II

[Ruzious]

Hands, the whole point of our conversation was how the Lewis trade affects the future and your plan - and your plan as you ORIGINALLY stated would have been a viable plan - if not for that trade. That trade is why your original plan most likely won't happen. Again, they almost certainly won't be able to sign a big time free agent next offseason - and they won't have that cap space (which you cannot logically discount - even though you keep trying - it was potentially an enormous asset) to help make a huge trade. And again, the year after that is problematic because Wall will have to be paid most likely max dollars - for the forseeable future. With Wall and Nene all by themselves taking up half the cap, they won't have anywhere near the opportunity that they would have had in the 2013 offseason. They have severely limited their options in order to attempt to reach mediocrity.

Have they completely destroyed any chances to be a contender in the future? No. But they have the same GM who's had no success here in a decade and was basically ran out of town in Milwaukee after several years of mediocrity there. He's basically got nothing to show for the last 15 or so years as a GM. To assume he's going to lead this franchise back to anything more than mediocrity is to fly into the face of logic. I doubt there is any NBA analyst that believes Ernie Grunfeld is a good man for the job. If you choose to continue to ignore all that, because you want to be a shiney happy fan who feels fortunate to strive for mediocrity, then good for you.

[nate33]

Dat,

We only have Nene and players on rookie deals under contract for the '14 offseason. All our cap space is not going to be eaten up re-signing Wall, and you're ignoring the fact that we can go over the cap to keep him. You're just flat wrong there.

No. He isn't wrong. You are.

In 2014, our payroll will be $62M with just Nene, Wall (on a max deal), Beal, Vesely, Singleton, our 2013 draft pick, our 2014 draft pick; and accounting for the cap holds of Booker, Seraphin and Crawford. Renounce Crawford and our payroll is $57M - under the cap but not by more than the MLE. Renounce Crawford and Booker and our payroll is $51M, giving us just $7M in cap room (and I'd rather have the $5M MLE and Booker than $7M in cap room alone).

[jivelikenice]

Dat,

We only have Nene and players on rookie deals under contract for the '14 offseason. All our cap space is not going to be eaten up re-signing Wall, and you're ignoring the fact that we can go over the cap to keep him. You're just flat wrong there.

No. He isn't wrong. You are.

In 2014, our payroll will be $62M with just Nene, Wall (on a max deal), Beal, Vesely, Singleton, our 2013 draft pick, our 2014 draft pick; and accounting for the cap holds of Booker, Seraphin and Crawford. Renounce Crawford and our payroll is $57M - under the cap but not by more than the MLE. Renounce Crawford and Booker and our payroll is $51M, giving us just $7M in cap room (and I'd rather have the $5M MLE and Booker than $7M in cap room alone).

Nate, If I'm wrong I'm wrong but my point was there are a lot of assumptions there. So yes, we'd be against the cap if we signed Wall to a max deal prior to FA, had cap holds for the remaining 3 from the '10 draft class, and use our two first round picks over the next two years, but that's very unlikely. I've been working off the assumption that at most 2 out of the 4 rooks (likely Wall & Seraphin) would be kept on long-term deals. I'd be shocked if the roster as-is was intact in the '14 offseason w/o any other movement, so yes, in your "if we keep everyone and keep all our picks analysis, we'd have only the MLE available, but I'd be shocked if that were the case. And we're not locked in which is the greater point. At that time we can re-assess where we are and a roster direction will be determined.

I do have a question, can't Wall be re-signed after the FA period begins to open up cap space? Basically using his bird rights to go over the cap which would give us more $ for FA?

[jivelikenice]

Kevin, to clarify my point, we have a lot of young assets on this team and at some point we're going to have to consolidate those resources. During that process we're going to have the option have to have space if we choose to or re-sign some priority FAs. There are too many variables unknown to say whether we will or won't have cap space in the '14 offseason with any clarity, but maybe I should have originally said that if we want to have cap room in '14, it wouldn't be difficult to create. But if you can clarify the rules surrounding re-signing Wall, and if we can use bird rights to go over the cap I'd appreciate it.

[hands11]

Hands, the whole point of our conversation was how the Lewis trade affects the future and your plan - and your plan as you ORIGINALLY stated would have been a viable plan - if not for that trade. That trade is why your original plan most likely won't happen. Again, they almost certainly won't be able to sign a big time free agent next offseason - and they won't have that cap space (which you cannot logically discount - even though you keep trying - it was potentially an enormous asset) to help make a huge trade. And again, the year after that is problematic because Wall will have to be paid most likely max dollars - for the forseeable future. With Wall and Nene all by themselves taking up half the cap, they won't have anywhere near the opportunity that they would have had in the 2013 offseason. They have severely limited their options in order to attempt to reach mediocrity.

Have they completely destroyed any chances to be a contender in the future? No. But they have the same GM who's had no success here in a decade and was basically ran out of town in Milwaukee after several years of mediocrity there. He's basically got nothing to show for the last 15 or so years as a GM. To assume he's going to lead this franchise back to anything more than mediocrity is to fly into the face of logic. I doubt there is any NBA analyst that believes Ernie Grunfeld is a good man for the job. If you choose to continue to ignore all that, because you want to be a shiney happy fan who feels fortunate to strive for mediocrity, then good for you.

Ruz

Give it a break buddy. You can say it is my plan all you want. I am not reporting my plan. I reported what I see they did and why I think they did it and where I see that putting them.

What you are framing the "whole point of the conversation" as is not the whole point of the conversation. This is not Fox Noise buddy. You don't get to chance what I said into something that suits you and then counter agree against some fictitious position I didnt take.

Regarding EG, I actually posted this.. I said Ted/EG have done well in turning the roster over. EGs contract is up in two years. Maybe Ted/EG won't be as good at building a winning as they were at accomplishing the stage 1 tear down. If so, in two years they will get a new GM who is better at building the next stages.

Stop the crap where you are assigning things to me that are not my position. What is wrong with you.

[payitforward]

The Wages of Wins guys make a strong case for Josh Childress; I was certainly a fan thru his first 4 years in the league. I'm starting to want him, especially at the minimum:

http://wagesofwins.com/2012/08/08/the-s ... childress/

Thoughts?

[fishercob]

The Wages of Wins guys make a strong case for Josh Childress; I was certainly a fan thru his first 4 years in the league. I'm starting to want him, especially at the minimum:

http://wagesofwins.com/2012/08/08/the-s ... childress/

Thoughts?

Nice find PIF. For the minimum or close, why not? I think he gets a lot of crap for being a wing that doesn't have a pretty jump shot, but he can contribute in some ways, right?

Ernie has been linked to him for years; I think Dan played with Chill at Stanford. And hey, if he plays well maybe it pushes ariza to opt out next summer. Bonus!

[Nivek]

Nate, If I'm wrong I'm wrong but my point was there are a lot of assumptions there. So yes, we'd be against the cap if we signed Wall to a max deal prior to FA, had cap holds for the remaining 3 from the '10 draft class, and use our two first round picks over the next two years, but that's very unlikely. I've been working off the assumption that at most 2 out of the 4 rooks (likely Wall & Seraphin) would be kept on long-term deals. I'd be shocked if the roster as-is was intact in the '14 offseason w/o any other movement, so yes, in your "if we keep everyone and keep all our picks analysis, we'd have only the MLE available, but I'd be shocked if that were the case. And we're not locked in which is the greater point. At that time we can re-assess where we are and a roster direction will be determined.

I do have a question, can't Wall be re-signed after the FA period begins to open up cap space? Basically using his bird rights to go over the cap which would give us more $ for FA?

No. Free agents have "cap holds" applied to the cap. The hold usually is 300% of the previous year's salary, or the maximum salary if 300% would exceed the max salary. In Wall's case, the cap hold would be the maximum salary.

The only way the Wizards could have cap room in 2014 would be to renounce players, decline options on rookie contracts, or trade away players without taking back future salaries.

The team effectively traded away cap space into the future for the "certainty" that Okafor and Ariza can provide for the next season or two.

[Nivek]

At a minimum salary, Childress would definitely be worth the money. I think the WoW writer went overboard calling Childress "great," and I think they have him at the wrong position (they kept saying he's a SG -- he's a SF; this matters in Wins Produced because of the position adjustment). In my stuff, he was below average last season, and not worth his salary. But he could be a rotation player with the Wizards.

[montestewart]

The Wages of Wins guys make a strong case for Josh Childress; I was certainly a fan thru his first 4 years in the league. I'm starting to want him, especially at the minimum:

http://wagesofwins.com/2012/08/08/the-s ... childress/

Thoughts?

Nice find PIF. For the minimum or close, why not? I think he gets a lot of crap for being a wing that doesn't have a pretty jump shot, but he can contribute in some ways, right?

Ernie has been linked to him for years; I think Dan played with Chill at Stanford. And hey, if he plays well maybe it pushes ariza to opt out next summer. Bonus!

opt out Ariza should become your motto

At the minimum, he'd definitely be a bargain and could be a significant contributor, assuming there's not an extreme dropoff from last year. Sad though that the Wizards would be three deep at SF with inconsistent outside shooters.

[montestewart]

Nate, If I'm wrong I'm wrong but my point was there are a lot of assumptions there. So yes, we'd be against the cap if we signed Wall to a max deal prior to FA, had cap holds for the remaining 3 from the '10 draft class, and use our two first round picks over the next two years, but that's very unlikely. I've been working off the assumption that at most 2 out of the 4 rooks (likely Wall & Seraphin) would be kept on long-term deals. I'd be shocked if the roster as-is was intact in the '14 offseason w/o any other movement, so yes, in your "if we keep everyone and keep all our picks analysis, we'd have only the MLE available, but I'd be shocked if that were the case. And we're not locked in which is the greater point. At that time we can re-assess where we are and a roster direction will be determined.

I do have a question, can't Wall be re-signed after the FA period begins to open up cap space? Basically using his bird rights to go over the cap which would give us more $ for FA?

No. Free agents have "cap holds" applied to the cap. The hold usually is 300% of the previous year's salary, or the maximum salary if 300% would exceed the max salary. In Wall's case, the cap hold would be the maximum salary.

The only way the Wizards could have cap room in 2014 would be to renounce players, decline options on rookie contracts, or trade away players without taking back future salaries.

The team effectively traded away cap space into the future for the "certainty" that Okafor and Ariza can provide for the next season or two.

And that gets to the heart of most people's objections to the trade. Not how good Ariza and Okafor are, or their value versus their salary, but how that move limits the Wizards' ability to make moves later on, moves geared not toward getting bodies now but toward adding significant pieces for the future before all the money is gone. The larger moves that people have suggested (if anyone actually signed with the Wizards) would have added long term pieces before the 2010 rookies are resigned. Some of the smaller moves could have added long term pieces as well, and would not have had the same hinderance regardless.

At the point Wall, Seraphin, and Booker are resigned, added to Nene, Vesely, Beal and two years worth of (hopefully) not very high draft picks, I'm not seeing a strong playoff team yet, not seeing a lot of wiggle room to do anything about it, and imagining Pringle's newfangled GM still running the show. Yikes!

[nate33]

Dat,

We only have Nene and players on rookie deals under contract for the '14 offseason. All our cap space is not going to be eaten up re-signing Wall, and you're ignoring the fact that we can go over the cap to keep him. You're just flat wrong there.

No. He isn't wrong. You are.

In 2014, our payroll will be $62M with just Nene, Wall (on a max deal), Beal, Vesely, Singleton, our 2013 draft pick, our 2014 draft pick; and accounting for the cap holds of Booker, Seraphin and Crawford. Renounce Crawford and our payroll is $57M - under the cap but not by more than the MLE. Renounce Crawford and Booker and our payroll is $51M, giving us just $7M in cap room (and I'd rather have the $5M MLE and Booker than $7M in cap room alone).

Nate, If I'm wrong I'm wrong but my point was there are a lot of assumptions there. So yes, we'd be against the cap if we signed Wall to a max deal prior to FA, had cap holds for the remaining 3 from the '10 draft class, and use our two first round picks over the next two years, but that's very unlikely. I've been working off the assumption that at most 2 out of the 4 rooks (likely Wall & Seraphin) would be kept on long-term deals. I'd be shocked if the roster as-is was intact in the '14 offseason w/o any other movement, so yes, in your "if we keep everyone and keep all our picks analysis, we'd have only the MLE available, but I'd be shocked if that were the case. And we're not locked in which is the greater point. At that time we can re-assess where we are and a roster direction will be determined.

That sounds great when you say it, but it really won't work out that way. All the guys on the team (save Nene, Okafor and Ariza) figure to be good players relative to their cost because all are on rookie deals. Any deal we make to unload those guys for cap space is likely to be a bad deal because we will be trading away/cutting one guy with a good production/cost ratio in exchange for cap space - and with cap space, we can only hope to find a guy with average production/cost ratio, or more likely, a bad production/cost ratio.

The ONLY realistic way we can have significant cap room in Summer 2014 is if we trade Nene for a shorter contract. While that might turn out to be our best move, it's a damn shame that we were forced to make it because of this stupid Okafor/Ariza acquisition.

[LyricalRico]

^ Umm, the 2014 situation isn't any different because of Okafor/Ariza because that's when their deals expire. Nene's contract and the extensions for Wall and others would have always meant no significant cap space in 2014. But by acquiring vets on shorter deals instead of signing an FA to a 3+ year deal, we can extend everyone without paying the luxury tax. And hopefully have 2 years where the young guys get a taste of winning some games in the process.

[Nivek]

^ Umm, the 2014 situation isn't any different because of Okafor/Ariza because that's when their deals expire. Nene's contract and the extensions for Wall and others would have always meant no significant cap space in 2014. But by acquiring vets on shorter deals instead of signing an FA to a 3+ year deal, we can extend everyone without paying the luxury tax. And hopefully have 2 years where the young guys get a taste of winning some games in the process.

Correct that Okafor/Ariza don't affect 2014 cap space. That's when using cap space wouldn't be an option because of the need (we hope) to re-sign Wall and other youngsters.

What they did with the Okafor/Ariza deal was end the possibility of using cap space to acquire players for the foreseeable future. They can still draft, trade (although with less flexibility because they won't have cap space), and use the MLE to bring in new players.

[nate33]

^ Umm, the 2014 situation isn't any different because of Okafor/Ariza because that's when their deals expire. Nene's contract and the extensions for Wall and others would have always meant no significant cap space in 2014. But by acquiring vets on shorter deals instead of signing an FA to a 3+ year deal, we can extend everyone without paying the luxury tax. And hopefully have 2 years where the young guys get a taste of winning some games in the process.

Correct that Okafor/Ariza don't affect 2014 cap space. That's when using cap space wouldn't be an option because of the need (we hope) to re-sign Wall and other youngsters.

What they did with the Okafor/Ariza deal was end the possibility of using cap space to acquire players for the foreseeable future. They can still draft, trade (although with less flexibility because they won't have cap space), and use the MLE to bring in new players.

Right. The Okafor/Ariza acquisition prevented us from acquiring a free agent in 2013 - which was our only window of opportunity to make a big impact in free agency.

[Nivek]

Just to be clear -- not just a free agent or free agents. The team would have had more flexibility in trades if they'd preserved cap space in 2013. If they had $8 million in cap room, they could have traded players on rookie deals for higher-salaried players and used the cap space to absorb the difference.

[truwizfan4evr]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8egPvVzcQlg nba 2k13 here a look at some of the rookie class from 2012. Game look so sick i was getting chills when i seen Beal in a wizards jersey on this game.

[Dat2U]

And what exactly does Minnesota have to show for getting Batum to sign an offer sheet? You'd be apoplectic if the Wizards had cap space and then signed Kirilenko to the deal that Minnesota did. Anderson, also restricted, cost New Orleans a decent young piece as well in Ayon. You hate overpaying mediocre players in free agency and you hate not going after free agents because you're don't think your enough of a destination for guys to sign reasonable deals to come here. There's not a lot of room in between.

First off, your changing the argument. I've heard ad nauseum that no one would sign with the Wizards. That's what I was specfically arguing.

Secondly, your taking my point and looking at it from a generic perspective. I still hate the idea of overpaying for mediocre free agents and Landry Fields, Jeff Green, Omer Asik were perfect examples of this. I had my targets in free agency. Guys like Ersan Illyasova, Ryan Anderson, Lou Williams, Danny Green and Patty Mills and they all signed for very reasonable deals considering their production. Especially Williams (3 yrs at MLE) and Ilyasova (Only $34 mil guaranteed). Ryan Anderson got S&T'd for a backup PF (Gustavo Ayon). There where opportunities to add core level talent at decent $.

The truth hurts, I guess. As a proponent of brutal honesty, this should resonate with you. Front office swagger is meaningless. Going aggressively after free agents and making a big show of it is meaningless. Who they actually land and for how much is what matters. Results matter. Minnesota doesn't get any points in the standings for providing Batum with the leverage to get the money he wanted from Portland.

I couldn't disagree with you more. The younger generation calls it swagger, I call it confidence. Confidence matters in everything we do. Without confidence there's 0% at succeeding. The Wizards front office are a perfect example of this. Ernie & Ted didn't believe they could sign anyone. And the crazy thing is they actually admitted it. To me, that's just sad. You've lost before you even played the game because you were too scared to even try. Shame on Ernie for lacking vision, creativity and the golatas to take any sort of risk. A desperate man trying to save his career. And double the shame on Teddy Leonsis, for eating the slop that Pringles served him, then smiling in the camera afterwards like it's the best thing he's ever tasted.

Maybe they are right in thinking they couldn't sign anyone. But only because they believe it.

We've been called the Clippers East for the last two decades. Look at the Clips now. Even with a crappy owner, Neil Oshay (before leaving for Portland this offseason) didn't make a similar excuse. Much like the Wizards, the Clips have been a place where players go to fail. Much like the Wizards, they struck lottery fortune a found a potential star. Much UNLIKE the Wizards, they didn't act like a 80 yr old lady that mistakenly walks into a Gucci Mane video shoot when it came to free agency and the trade market. They were bold. They actually pursued LeBron. And while everyone snickered, especially in the media, LeBron met with them. And going forward, it set the table that this is a franchise that is serious about not just competiting but contending. The aggressively pursued trades until they landed Chris Paul. Now their a relevant franchise on the basketball landscape. We're ready to buy into the excitement in possibly losing less than 50 games this year. You can think big or think small and it really does make all the difference in the world.

One or both of those guys could opt out after this season. Even if neither do, they'd both be expiring contracts and at worst marginally competent veterans with good attitudes in a year. I don't think we are going to miss out on any key acquisitions because of lack of cap room. And by the way, even if we did have cap room, who from this list would be a desirable and attainable difference maker?

The chances of either opting out is slim to none. Unless one pulls a Byron Russell and I don't think anyone here is hoping the situation turns so toxic that either feels the need to "get the hell out of dodge".

And yes, we could potentially miss out on key acquisitions because of a lack of cap room. It's not just about free agency. The ability to make trades without worrying about matching up salaries. The opportunity to take on additional long term salary which teams are usually willing to pay a price for (unless they're dealing with Ernie of course).

[montestewart]

Great post, Dat2U. I especially liked:

Shame on Ernie for lacking vision, creativity and the golatas to take any sort of risk. A desperate man trying to save his career. And double the shame on Teddy Leonsis, for eating the slop that Pringles served him, then smiling in the camera afterwards like it's the best thing he's ever tasted.

That's practically poetry thread-worthy

[DMVleGeND]

And what exactly does Minnesota have to show for getting Batum to sign an offer sheet? You'd be apoplectic if the Wizards had cap space and then signed Kirilenko to the deal that Minnesota did. Anderson, also restricted, cost New Orleans a decent young piece as well in Ayon. You hate overpaying mediocre players in free agency and you hate not going after free agents because you're don't think your enough of a destination for guys to sign reasonable deals to come here. There's not a lot of room in between.

First off, your changing the argument. I've heard ad nauseum that no one would sign with the Wizards. That's what I was specfically arguing.

Secondly, your taking my point and looking at it from a generic perspective. I still hate the idea of overpaying for mediocre free agents and Landry Fields, Jeff Green, Omer Asik were perfect examples of this. I had my targets in free agency. Guys like Ersan Illyasova, Ryan Anderson, Lou Williams, Danny Green and Patty Mills and they all signed for very reasonable deals considering their production. Especially Williams (3 yrs at MLE) and Ilyasova (Only $34 mil guaranteed). Ryan Anderson got S&T'd for a backup PF (Gustavo Ayon). There where opportunities to add core level talent at decent $.

The truth hurts, I guess. As a proponent of brutal honesty, this should resonate with you. Front office swagger is meaningless. Going aggressively after free agents and making a big show of it is meaningless. Who they actually land and for how much is what matters. Results matter. Minnesota doesn't get any points in the standings for providing Batum with the leverage to get the money he wanted from Portland.

I couldn't disagree with you more. The younger generation calls it swagger, I call it confidence. Confidence matters in everything we do. Without confidence there's 0% at succeeding. The Wizards front office are a perfect example of this. Ernie & Ted didn't believe they could sign anyone. And the crazy thing is they actually admitted it. To me, that's just sad. You've lost before you even played the game because you were too scared to even try. Shame on Ernie for lacking vision, creativity and the golatas to take any sort of risk. A desperate man trying to save his career. And double the shame on Teddy Leonsis, for eating the slop that Pringles served him, then smiling in the camera afterwards like it's the best thing he's ever tasted.

Maybe they are right in thinking they couldn't sign anyone. But only because they believe it.

We've been called the Clippers East for the last two decades. Look at the Clips now. Even with a crappy owner, Neil Oshay (before leaving for Portland this offseason) didn't make a similar excuse. Much like the Wizards, the Clips have been a place where players go to fail. Much like the Wizards, they struck lottery fortune a found a potential star. Much UNLIKE the Wizards, they didn't act like a 80 yr old lady that mistakenly walks into a Gucci Mane video shoot when it came to free agency and the trade market. They were bold. They actually pursued LeBron. And while everyone snickered, especially in the media, LeBron met with them. And going forward, it set the table that this is a franchise that is serious about not just competiting but contending. The aggressively pursued trades until they landed Chris Paul. Now their a relevant franchise on the basketball landscape. We're ready to buy into the excitement in possibly losing less than 50 games this year. You can think big or think small and it really does make all the difference in the world.

One or both of those guys could opt out after this season. Even if neither do, they'd both be expiring contracts and at worst marginally competent veterans with good attitudes in a year. I don't think we are going to miss out on any key acquisitions because of lack of cap room. And by the way, even if we did have cap room, who from this list would be a desirable and attainable difference maker?

The chances of either opting out is slim to none. Unless one pulls a Byron Russell and I don't think anyone here is hoping the situation turns so toxic that either feels the need to "get the hell out of dodge".

And yes, we could potentially miss out on key acquisitions because of a lack of cap room. It's not just about free agency. The ability to make trades without worrying about matching up salaries. The opportunity to take on additional long term salary which teams are usually willing to pay a price for (unless they're dealing with Ernie of course).

HOF post.