#3 for Ilyasova being discussed

[Dat2U]

Again, I like Iiyasova, but not for the 3rd pick. I don't think it gets any simpler than that.

I'd part with a 2014 pick for him. Ariza, Seraphin, Booker, Vesely or Singleton are all players I'd willingly give up to get him.

But the rumored 3rd & Okafor for Ilyasova, Udoh & Mbah A Moute is about a 1 on a scale of 1 to 10.

[Ruzious]

Again, I like Iiyasova, but not for the 3rd pick. I don't think it gets any simpler than that.

I'd part with a 2014 pick for him. Ariza, Seraphin, Booker, Vesely or Singleton are all players I'd willingly give up to get him.

But the rumored 3rd & Okafor for Ilyasova, Udoh & Mbah A Moute is about a 1 on a scale of 1 to 10.

Yeah, if they're willing to trade the 3rd and Okafor and not even get a pick back, at least go for someone like Bosh (not that I'm suggesting they go for Bosh) - don't settle for Ilyasova.

[verbal8]

But the rumored 3rd & Okafor for Ilyasova, Udoh & Mbah A Moute is about a 1 on a scale of 1 to 10.

I would rate it EG on a scale of 1 to 10.

[fishercob]

Just popping over from the Bucks board.

I don't have favorite players, but I do have a couple guys I enjoy arguing for, and Ilyasova's probably the top guy on the list. I think he's a sensational player and criminally underrated. So I'll offer my perspective over here. It's not meant to necessarily convince you that a deal should be made; I'll just present some numbers and observations and let you guys make of it what you will.

The first thing is there's a misconception that Ilyasova only started producing last spring, got hot, and subsequently got paid for three months of production. The fact is outside of his rookie year as a 19 year old, he's always been an above average producer on a per/minute basis. Every minute he's been on the court is a minute you're getting good positional defense, solid rebounding and smart, largely efficient offense.

What's happened in the last year and a half is he's seen a commitment to keeping him in the lineup night in and night out. On February 1st of 2012 he got his first 30+ minute game. From that game until the end of the season he averaged 30 mpg, 15.5 ppg and 9.7 rpg. You'll notice that those numbers are actually a little better than his career per 36. Instead of his numbers dropping on a per-36 basis, they went up.

At the start of the 2012-2013 the Bucks had a lame-duck coach who started dicking with player roles and minutes. Ilyasova saw more games in the teens for minutes (six) than he did in the 30s (three) over the first month of the season. Without a role, his play suffered. When Skiles was canned, the first move Boylan made was getting Ilyasova back in the lineup and getting minutes. The results under Boylan:

43 games:
30 mpg
16.1 ppg
8.2 rpg
46% 3FG%
57.6 TS%

It got even better once Redick, another smart basketball player on a team of idiots, and his numbers jumped to 17/9 with crazy efficiency. This, despite playing with the two dumbest guards in the league.

Ilyasova is a guy who will consistently get you 17+ points and 9+ rebounds if given starter minutes. He'll hit from an insane percentage from outside, and he doesn't take dumb shots. He'll take charges, sit picks and play good team defense. In short, he'll play winning basketball on one of the great bargain deals in the entire league.

I, personally, don't think it's likely that a player from this class will be as good as Ilyasova. I think there's a chance it happens, I just don't see it as a good chance. I definitely don't it being the case in the next four to five years.

You don't have to convince many people here that Ilyasova is a good player. We understand that his production is nothing new. Many here wanted to target him in free agency last summer. There was a lot of discussion here of trading our pick for him when the overwhelming likelihood held us picking 8th.

But now that the Basketball Gods have rewarded our collective virtue with the third pick, the equation has changed. No matter the purported "strength" or "weakness" of an entire draft class, high lottery picks are very seldom traded. We were the last team to trade a top-5 pick (in a draft that was thought to be "historically weak" after Blake Griffin, though Harden, Curry, Holiday, Lawson, et al would disagree), it was an unmitigated disaster. Our new owner has said publicly on multiple occasions that said trade never would have taken place on his watch, as he believes in building through the draft above all talent procurement avenues.

I find the "this draft sucks and therefor Ilyasova is better than anyone who you might pick" to be an unbelievably intellectually lazy argument. Do you mean to tell me that no one in this draft class will ever deservedly make an All-Star game? Ilyasova hasn't and likely never will. Have you and those that make such a call scouted this draft class so extensively as to be sure? Are your scouting chops credible, and do you have a track record that says so? I have my doubts.

And this draft indeed sucks, then -- as has been asked by others -- why on earth would Milwaukee trade a good player for a high pick in said sucky draft? Why not keep your very good player, or trade him for another very good player?

We get it, Ilysasova is a good player. But sorry, he's not getting you the third pick without a major supplemental overpay on Milwaukee's part.

[deneem4]

Whats porter or bennet projected comparions?????
Please someone tell me...
Who do you see porter and bennet being like in the nba right now?

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Just popping over from the Bucks board.

I don't have favorite players, but I do have a couple guys I enjoy arguing for, and Ilyasova's probably the top guy on the list. I think he's a sensational player and criminally underrated. So I'll offer my perspective over here. It's not meant to necessarily convince you that a deal should be made; I'll just present some numbers and observations and let you guys make of it what you will.

The first thing is there's a misconception that Ilyasova only started producing last spring, got hot, and subsequently got paid for three months of production. The fact is outside of his rookie year as a 19 year old, he's always been an above average producer on a per/minute basis. Every minute he's been on the court is a minute you're getting good positional defense, solid rebounding and smart, largely efficient offense.

What's happened in the last year and a half is he's seen a commitment to keeping him in the lineup night in and night out. On February 1st of 2012 he got his first 30+ minute game. From that game until the end of the season he averaged 30 mpg, 15.5 ppg and 9.7 rpg. You'll notice that those numbers are actually a little better than his career per 36. Instead of his numbers dropping on a per-36 basis, they went up.

At the start of the 2012-2013 the Bucks had a lame-duck coach who started dicking with player roles and minutes. Ilyasova saw more games in the teens for minutes (six) than he did in the 30s (three) over the first month of the season. Without a role, his play suffered. When Skiles was canned, the first move Boylan made was getting Ilyasova back in the lineup and getting minutes. The results under Boylan:

43 games:
30 mpg
16.1 ppg
8.2 rpg
46% 3FG%
57.6 TS%

It got even better once Redick, another smart basketball player on a team of idiots, and his numbers jumped to 17/9 with crazy efficiency. This, despite playing with the two dumbest guards in the league.

Ilyasova is a guy who will consistently get you 17+ points and 9+ rebounds if given starter minutes. He'll hit from an insane percentage from outside, and he doesn't take dumb shots. He'll take charges, sit picks and play good team defense. In short, he'll play winning basketball on one of the great bargain deals in the entire league.

I, personally, don't think it's likely that a player from this class will be as good as Ilyasova. I think there's a chance it happens, I just don't see it as a good chance. I definitely don't it being the case in the next four to five years.

Thanks for posting, ReasonablySober!

I've been worried about a Milwaukee trade because of Ernie's total body work the past 5-6 years as Wizard GM. Your post has eased my worries quite a bit. Ilyasova is very talented, just the sort of stretch four John Wall asked for.

If a deal goes down Ernie might be able to simulate his best trade: Kwame Brown for Caron Butler. In that case he acquired a very good player in exchange for a player who never came close to realizing his potential despite being the #1 pick.

fishercob is correct in citing recent trades that worked against the Wizards. Also, I agree ther needs to be additional compensation from the Bucks and/or a third team.

[Ruzious]

Thanks for posting, Sober!

I've been worried about a Milwaukee trade because of Ernie's total body work the past 5-6 years as Wizard GM. Your post has eased my worries quite a bit. Ilyasova is very talented, just the sort of stretch four John Wall asked for.

If a deal goes down Ernie might be able to simulate his best trade: Kwame Brown for Caron Butler. In that case he acquired a very good player in exchange for a player who never came close to realizing his potential despite being the #1 pick.

We don't have Kwame, but we could give them Vesely and Seraphin. Combined, they're almost as disappointing.

[Kanyewest]

Just popping over from the Bucks board.

I don't have favorite players, but I do have a couple guys I enjoy arguing for, and Ilyasova's probably the top guy on the list. I think he's a sensational player and criminally underrated. So I'll offer my perspective over here. It's not meant to necessarily convince you that a deal should be made; I'll just present some numbers and observations and let you guys make of it what you will.

The first thing is there's a misconception that Ilyasova only started producing last spring, got hot, and subsequently got paid for three months of production. The fact is outside of his rookie year as a 19 year old, he's always been an above average producer on a per/minute basis. Every minute he's been on the court is a minute you're getting good positional defense, solid rebounding and smart, largely efficient offense.

What's happened in the last year and a half is he's seen a commitment to keeping him in the lineup night in and night out. On February 1st of 2012 he got his first 30+ minute game. From that game until the end of the season he averaged 30 mpg, 15.5 ppg and 9.7 rpg. You'll notice that those numbers are actually a little better than his career per 36. Instead of his numbers dropping on a per-36 basis, they went up.

At the start of the 2012-2013 the Bucks had a lame-duck coach who started dicking with player roles and minutes. Ilyasova saw more games in the teens for minutes (six) than he did in the 30s (three) over the first month of the season. Without a role, his play suffered. When Skiles was canned, the first move Boylan made was getting Ilyasova back in the lineup and getting minutes. The results under Boylan:

43 games:
30 mpg
16.1 ppg
8.2 rpg
46% 3FG%
57.6 TS%

It got even better once Redick, another smart basketball player on a team of idiots, and his numbers jumped to 17/9 with crazy efficiency. This, despite playing with the two dumbest guards in the league.

Ilyasova is a guy who will consistently get you 17+ points and 9+ rebounds if given starter minutes. He'll hit from an insane percentage from outside, and he doesn't take dumb shots. He'll take charges, sit picks and play good team defense. In short, he'll play winning basketball on one of the great bargain deals in the entire league.

I, personally, don't think it's likely that a player from this class will be as good as Ilyasova. I think there's a chance it happens, I just don't see it as a good chance. I definitely don't it being the case in the next four to five years.

You don't have to convince many people here that Ilyasova is a good player. We understand that his production is nothing new. Many here wanted to target him in free agency last summer. There was a lot of discussion here of trading our pick for him when the overwhelming likelihood held us picking 8th.

But now that the Basketball Gods have rewarded our collective virtue with the third pick, the equation has changed. No matter the purported "strength" or "weakness" of an entire draft class, high lottery picks are very seldom traded. We were the last team to trade a top-5 pick (in a draft that was thought to be "historically weak" after Blake Griffin, though Harden, Curry, Holiday, Lawson, et al would disagree), it was an unmitigated disaster. Our new owner has said publicly on multiple occasions that said trade never would have taken place on his watch, as he believes in building through the draft above all talent procurement avenues.

I find the "this draft sucks and therefor Ilyasova is better than anyone who you might pick" to be an unbelievably intellectually lazy argument. Do you mean to tell me that no one in this draft class will ever deservedly make an All-Star game? Ilyasova hasn't and likely never will. Have you and those that make such a call scouted this draft class so extensively as to be sure? Are your scouting chops credible, and do you have a track record that says so? I have my doubts.

And this draft indeed sucks, then -- as has been asked by others -- why on earth would Milwaukee trade a good player for a high pick in said sucky draft? Why not keep your very good player, or trade him for another very good player?

We get it, Ilysasova is a good player. But sorry, he's not getting you the third pick without a major supplemental overpay on Milwaukee's part.

Interesting stuff. I will say though that the Bucks may be exploring to get the #3 and the Wizards may be willing to part with it because the best players available could be perimeter guys like Oladipo and McLemore. In term of a short term fit, someone like Illyasova would present more value to the Wizards rather than going small or in one sense drafting a 6th man off the bench. Perhaps the Wizards have Illyasova rated over guys like Zeller, Len, or Bennett which are the Wizards potential positional needs.

Still seems like the Bucks would be getting more value given the drop to 15. Although there is precedence for EG having sucess in trading for a old young player in Caron Butler, there was also the massive failure of trading the #5 pick for Miller and Foye. I would lean towards taking the BPA if it is a perimeter guy.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Thanks for posting, Sober!

I've been worried about a Milwaukee trade because of Ernie's total body work the past 5-6 years as Wizard GM. Your post has eased my worries quite a bit. Ilyasova is very talented, just the sort of stretch four John Wall asked for.

If a deal goes down Ernie might be able to simulate his best trade: Kwame Brown for Caron Butler. In that case he acquired a very good player in exchange for a player who never came close to realizing his potential despite being the #1 pick.

We don't have Kwame, but we could give them Vesely and Seraphin. Combined, they're almost as disappointing.

They weren't before the Okariza deal. I definitely want to send Singleton. Seraphin can also go, but he probably is much better than last season's numbers. I would not include him as a throw in. He's a C who can score and defend on the low post. Washington should get value in return for KS.

Vesely is not a good basketball player but for whatever reason I still see him as a useful sub. We certainly should trade him but I think 90% of his problem is fear or anxiety related.

[nate33]

Thanks for posting, Sober!

I've been worried about a Milwaukee trade because of Ernie's total body work the past 5-6 years as Wizard GM. Your post has eased my worries quite a bit. Ilyasova is very talented, just the sort of stretch four John Wall asked for.

If a deal goes down Ernie might be able to simulate his best trade: Kwame Brown for Caron Butler. In that case he acquired a very good player in exchange for a player who never came close to realizing his potential despite being the #1 pick.

We don't have Kwame, but we could give them Vesely and Seraphin. Combined, they're almost as disappointing.

They weren't before the Okariza deal. I definitely want to send Singleton. Seraphin can also go, but he probably is much better than last season's numbers. I would not include him as a throw in. He's a C who can score and defend on the low post. Washington should get value in return for KS.

Vesely is not a good basketball player but for whatever reason I still see him as a useful sub. We certainly should trade him but I think 90% of his problem is fear or anxiety related.

CCJ, the point is, the rumored Ilyasova trade is NOTHING like the Kwame trade. We're not talking about trading one of our recent draft picks who is still a disappointment after 3 years. We are talking about trading the #3 pick in the friggin draft.

Seraphin + Vesely for Ilyasova would be equivalent to Kwame for Butler.

[ReasonablySober]

firshercob, I completely understand your perspective. If you're picking at the top of the draft, you want to hit a home run and land a franchise changing player. Getting a "very good" player as opposed to a potential seven time all-star isn't the most sexy thing on the planet.

But I don't think you can simply dismiss quality of the class. Not all #3 picks are going to be equal. One year you could be looking at Carmelo Anthony, the next you could be looking at Adam Morrison. I'm certainly no professional scout; I'm simply going by what I see and what professionals happen to think. The overwhelming consensus is this is a draft without franchise changing talent at the top, but solid contributors throughout the first round.

Now all things being equal you you'd rather be picking #3 than #8 or #15. Sure, there will be guys taken in the teens that end up having better careers than someone taken in the top five. But you at least would like to have a chance at taking the guy instead of being left with guys that were passed on. But again, we're talking about a group of players that few envision making All-Star games, and that's if they reach their absolute high-end projections.

I know you know all this.

But again, here's my perspective, both regarding player value and my interests as a Bucks fan:

For one, I'm always going to favor bigs and point guards over wings. In my opinion, a wing needs to be special to help his team win more than a good point guard or big. Point guards have the ball in their hands more often, bigs represent the last line of defense to the hoop and can present interesting matchup problems. If I'm gonna take a wing over a big, they need to be able to compensate for what they don't offer elsewhere on the court.

Unfortunately, I think this draft is lacking in high impact bigs at the top (though I think if reports of Zeller being a true stretch-four are legit he goes to the top of my ranking, and I think Len has some Bogut in him), and I think it'll be tough for any of the PGs to break into the top 15 in the NBA. I do think there are some nice wings. McLemore has got some VC in his game, and like Carter I think he's got a chance to be much better as a pro. But his inconsistency would scare me quite a bit. I also like to see more assertiveness as opposed to a guy who'll sit back and let others get theirs.

My other point is with regards to the Bucks: I want this team to lose. I have for the better part of a decade. There are some that believe that the Bucks could surround Henson, Sanders and Ilyasova with **** players and they'd still be able to tank. This is completely illogical because they had **** players around them this season and managed to back-door their way into the playoffs. They were winning games because of Sanders and Ilyasova, and at the expense of terrible guard play. It's difficult envisioning a scenario where those three players are retained and managing to be worse in '13-'14.

So from my perspective the Bucks could do one of three things:

1 - Keep the frontline, take a guy at #15 that probably doesn't contribute much, sign some B and C level free agents and make a push for .500.

2 - Dump Ilyasova (for the #3 in this example), draft a wing or PG, win fewer games but too many to bottom out.

3 - Go for an all-out tank. Trade the two most productive players, the ones responsible for the wins the last two years, and go young for a couple years. I don't see Noel ever having the impact of Sanders. I don't think a wing at #3 ever has the impact Ilyasova will provide during the duration of his contract. The Bucks would be bad.

Of those three choices, I easily come down on #3. The Bucks haven't been relevant in a decade as they've tried to accomplish option #1. They're long overdue for a change in strategy. But that means making sacrifices in talent and wins. I'm fine with it, despite being a clear admirer of what Ilyasova and Sanders do on the court.

Lastly, this gets back to numbers, but I'm a fan of WS/48. No catch all stat is perfect, but I do like it because it cuts through the typical box score bulls*** (PPGZ AND REBOUNDZZ!1!) and measures what might not be evident. Generally the best performers by this metric are the same ones who all would agree are the best in the NBA.

Over the last two seasons the top ten players in WS/48 are:

1 - LeBron
2 - Paul
3 - Durant
4 - Harden
5 - Chandler

The rest of the top twenty are littered with the usual names like Parker, Wade, Gasol, Duncan, Curry and Anthony. It's not a perfect stat, but I think it's a good one.

Of players that logged more than 27 minutes a game over the last two seasons, Ilyasova comes in at #20, right behind Chris Bosh. If you removed his disastrous start to this season when he was getting dicked around by Skiles, he'd be just outside of the top ten players in the league. He's been that kind of producer.

Now, do I think he's a top twenty player in the league? No. I do think you could come to understand why he's ranked that high on the list once you factor in all he does and the efficiency to which he performs. He's an incredibly unique player in the NBA right now, and he hasn't even peaked.

So, while some look at the basic box score stats and season averages and think he's an average role player (or worse, a contract that should be unloaded. Christ.) a closer look reveals a guy that's going to help tremendously with wins.

Unfortunately for the Bucks, they need losses a lot more right now.

[TGW]

So the guy who originally reported this is saying that the deal is dead.

No surprise there...not even Ernest is dumb enough to give up a top-3 pick for Ersan Ilyasova.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

We don't have Kwame, but we could give them Vesely and Seraphin. Combined, they're almost as disappointing.

They weren't before the Okariza deal. I definitely want to send Singleton. Seraphin can also go, but he probably is much better than last season's numbers. I would not include him as a throw in. He's a C who can score and defend on the low post. Washington should get value in return for KS.

Vesely is not a good basketball player but for whatever reason I still see him as a useful sub. We certainly should trade him but I think 90% of his problem is fear or anxiety related.

CCJ, the point is, the rumored Ilyasova trade is NOTHING like the Kwame trade. We're not talking about trading one of our recent draft picks who is still a disappointment after 3 years. We are talking about trading the #3 pick in the friggin draft.

Seraphin + Vesely for Ilyasova would be equivalent to Kwame for Butler.

That's insanely bad because the Bucks already have better young players than Vesely or Seraphin. The Lakers thought they were getting an elite defender and frontline stud.

Ilyasova is a much better rebounder and shooter at near the same size as Vesely and Seraphin.

[fishercob]

firshercob, I completely understand your perspective. If you're picking at the top of the draft, you want to hit a home run and land a franchise changing player. Getting a "very good" player as opposed to a potential seven time all-star isn't the most sexy thing on the planet.

But I don't think you can simply dismiss quality of the class. Not all #3 picks are going to be equal. One year you could be looking at Carmelo Anthony, the next you could be looking at Adam Morrison. I'm certainly no professional scout; I'm simply going by what I see and what professionals happen to think. The overwhelming consensus is this is a draft without franchise changing talent at the top, but solid contributors throughout the first round.

Now all things being equal you you'd rather be picking #3 than #8 or #15. Sure, there will be guys taken in the teens that end up having better careers than someone taken in the top five. But you at least would like to have a chance at taking the guy instead of being left with guys that were passed on. But again, we're talking about a group of players that few envision making All-Star games, and that's if they reach their absolute high-end projections.

I know you know all this.

But again, here's my perspective, both regarding player value and my interests as a Bucks fan:

For one, I'm always going to favor bigs and point guards over wings. In my opinion, a wing needs to be special to help his team win more than a good point guard or big. Point guards have the ball in their hands more often, bigs represent the last line of defense to the hoop and can present interesting matchup problems. If I'm gonna take a wing over a big, they need to be able to compensate for what they don't offer elsewhere on the court.

Unfortunately, I think this draft is lacking in high impact bigs at the top (though I think if reports of Zeller being a true stretch-four are legit he goes to the top of my ranking, and I think Len has some Bogut in him), and I think it'll be tough for any of the PGs to break into the top 15 in the NBA. I do think there are some nice wings. McLemore has got some VC in his game, and like Carter I think he's got a chance to be much better as a pro. But his inconsistency would scare me quite a bit. I also like to see more assertiveness as opposed to a guy who'll sit back and let others get theirs.

My other point is with regards to the Bucks: I want this team to lose. I have for the better part of a decade. There are some that believe that the Bucks could surround Henson, Sanders and Ilyasova with **** players and they'd still be able to tank. This is completely illogical because they had **** players around them this season and managed to back-door their way into the playoffs. They were winning games because of Sanders and Ilyasova, and at the expense of terrible guard play. It's difficult envisioning a scenario where those three players are retained and managing to be worse in '13-'14.

So from my perspective the Bucks could do one of three things:

1 - Keep the frontline, take a guy at #15 that probably doesn't contribute much, sign some B and C level free agents and make a push for .500.

2 - Dump Ilyasova (for the #3 in this example), draft a wing or PG, win fewer games but too many to bottom out.

3 - Go for an all-out tank. Trade the two most productive players, the ones responsible for the wins the last two years, and go young for a couple years. I don't see Noel ever having the impact of Sanders. I don't think a wing at #3 ever has the impact Ilyasova will provide during the duration of his contract. The Bucks would be bad.

Of those three choices, I easily come down on #3. The Bucks haven't been relevant in a decade as they've tried to accomplish option #1. They're long overdue for a change in strategy. But that means making sacrifices in talent and wins. I'm fine with it, despite being a clear admirer of what Ilyasova and Sanders do on the court.

Lastly, this gets back to numbers, but I'm a fan of WS/48. No catch all stat is perfect, but I do like it because it cuts through the typical box score bulls*** (PPGZ AND REBOUNDZZ!1!) and measures what might not be evident. Generally the best performers by this metric are the same ones who all would agree are the best in the NBA.

Over the last two seasons the top ten players in WS/48 are:

1 - LeBron
2 - Paul
3 - Durant
4 - Harden
5 - Chandler

The rest of the top twenty are littered with the usual names like Parker, Wade, Gasol, Duncan, Curry and Anthony. It's not a perfect stat, but I think it's a good one.

Of players that logged more than 27 minutes a game over the last two seasons, Ilyasova comes in at #20, right behind Chris Bosh. If you removed his disastrous start to this season when he was getting dicked around by Skiles, he'd be just outside of the top ten players in the league. He's been that kind of producer.

Now, do I think he's a top twenty player in the league? No. I do think you could come to understand why he's ranked that high on the list once you factor in all he does and the efficiency to which he performs. He's an incredibly unique player in the NBA right now, and he hasn't even peaked.

So, while some look at the basic box score stats and season averages and think he's an average role player (or worse, a contract that should be unloaded. Christ.) a closer look reveals a guy that's going to help tremendously with wins.

Unfortunately for the Bucks, they need losses a lot more right now.

I feel your pain; the Bucks bear a striking resemblance to the Abe Pollin Wizards. They are ill-suited to compete in today's NBA and strive for and celebrate mediocrity. My sincere hope for Bucks fans like my buddy Ruzious is that once Kohl (who, like Pollin, may be a lovely man and a hell of a human being) passes on, a better owner takes hold that can inject some life into the franchise.

I agree that Milwaukee's best course is to tank hard. If I ran that team I'd keep Sanders and Henson and turn everything else on that roster into assets; trade Ilyasova, S&T Jennings, let Ellis walk if I couldn't S&T him -- hoard picks for 2014 and '15 and maintain maximum cap flexibility. Ownership can sell a fanbase on tanking (they did it here, even though the execution was pretty flawed) a lot more than they can sell them on "let's get into the playoffs and see what happens!"

I agree with you characterization about the importance of defensive bigs. This is one small ding on Ilyasova for me. While he can be a piece to a defensive puzzle, he's not going to anchor a defense and he's not going to lock up any great offensive players. I also disagree with your characterization of this draft; there are many more center prospects than usual with significant defensive upside -- Noel, Len, Adams, Hobert, Noguiera, Dieng and Withey are all projected to be first round picks. Zeller and Olynyk are too, though they're projected as more offensive players (and part of why I'm not thriled with either as a prospect -- your bigs need to play great D).

Given where the likes of Sanders, Noah, Hibbert, Marc Gasol, Splitter, Kendrick Perkins, Deandre Jordan, McGee, etc were picked, I'm pretty confident that some of the bigs I listed are going to turn out to be good players. I'm hoping that the Wizards can use #38, #55 and another small asset to move into the late first to pick one of them. I don't believe we need to give up #3 to do so.

[Ruzious]

It is amazing how similar Senator Kohl and Abe Pollin were. Ernie Grunfeld's family will likely be supported for several generations thanks to both of them.

As far as getting a mid 1st rounder, I'd have no problem with the Wiz trading next year's 1st - as long as it's top 10 protected - and this year's high 2nd rounder for Dallas' pick at 13 or Portland's pick at 10 - both rumored for sale. And get a solid big man who can be developed to take Okafor's spot - so there'd be no need to spend 10 mil a year or so after next season for an ok veteran center.

[RandyBreuer]

You guys really under-estimate how good ERS is. He is better than Porter will ever be. Have fun with the 3 pick in one of the worst years to have a good pick in the draft.

You have embarrassed yourself and the Bucks board. Wizards fans I apologize and please don't hold him against logical Bucks fans.

[fishercob]

It is amazing how similar Senator Kohl and Abe Pollin were. Ernie Grunfeld's family will likely be supported for several generations thanks to both of them.

As far as getting a mid 1st rounder, I'd have no problem with the Wiz trading next year's 1st - as long as it's top 10 protected - and this year's high 2nd rounder for Dallas' pick at 13 or Portland's pick at 10 - both rumored for sale. And get a solid big man who can be developed to take Okafor's spot - so there'd be no need to spend 10 mil a year or so after next season for an ok veteran center.

Draft Porter at 3.

Trade #38 + '14 first, lotto protected for #13. Draft Adams

S&T Ariza for Millsap.

Okafor/Nene/Adams
Millsap ($10M)/Nene
Porter/Webster
Beal/Webster
Johnny Ballgame

If we declined Vesely and SIngleton, we'd have more than MLE money next summer, yes?

[TGW]

Completely agree with Ruzious—this is a great year to pick up a replacement for Okafor so that we don't have to drop 10 mil a year, or whatever ridiculous amount of money, bringing back a 32 year old center.

Len
Adams
Gobert
Dieng
Zeller
Olynyk
Noguiera
Withey
Muscala

These kids are all deserving of being picked IMO. Honestly, the best bang-for-the-buck player is Dieng. He can contribute immediately on the boards and on the defensive side of the ball. He's supposed to be available in the 20's...to me that's a no brainer. Add Porter and Dieng and you just the two of the top 5 best defenders in the class (Dipo, Noel, Len are the other 3).

IMO this draft is littered with quality 7 footers that will make an NBA roster. We need to get one.

[nate33]

It is amazing how similar Senator Kohl and Abe Pollin were. Ernie Grunfeld's family will likely be supported for several generations thanks to both of them.

As far as getting a mid 1st rounder, I'd have no problem with the Wiz trading next year's 1st - as long as it's top 10 protected - and this year's high 2nd rounder for Dallas' pick at 13 or Portland's pick at 10 - both rumored for sale. And get a solid big man who can be developed to take Okafor's spot - so there'd be no need to spend 10 mil a year or so after next season for an ok veteran center.

Draft Porter at 3.

Trade #38 + '14 first, lotto protected for #13. Draft Adams

S&T Ariza for Millsap.

Okafor/Nene/Adams
Millsap ($10M)/Nene
Porter/Webster
Beal/Webster
Johnny Ballgame

If we declined Vesely and SIngleton, we'd have more than MLE money next summer, yes?

That's a great plan! It's pretty simple and it sets us up well for the long term. I also wonder if Utah might prefer Vesely plus Singleton rather than Ariza. Next year is a rebuilding year for them so they might prefer Vesely's "potential" to the 1-year rental of Ariza. If Utah goes with Favors and Kanter, they're still lacking in a mobile weakside defender - something that Vesely could theoretically become.

[fishercob]

It is amazing how similar Senator Kohl and Abe Pollin were. Ernie Grunfeld's family will likely be supported for several generations thanks to both of them.

As far as getting a mid 1st rounder, I'd have no problem with the Wiz trading next year's 1st - as long as it's top 10 protected - and this year's high 2nd rounder for Dallas' pick at 13 or Portland's pick at 10 - both rumored for sale. And get a solid big man who can be developed to take Okafor's spot - so there'd be no need to spend 10 mil a year or so after next season for an ok veteran center.

Draft Porter at 3.

Trade #38 + '14 first, lotto protected for #13. Draft Adams

S&T Ariza for Millsap.

Okafor/Nene/Adams
Millsap ($10M)/Nene
Porter/Webster
Beal/Webster
Johnny Ballgame

If we declined Vesely and SIngleton, we'd have more than MLE money next summer, yes?

That's a great plan! It's pretty simple and it sets us up well for the long term. I also wonder if Utah might prefer Vesely plus Singleton rather than Ariza. Next year is a rebuilding year for them so they might prefer Vesely's "potential" to the 1-year rental of Ariza. If Utah goes with Favors and Kanter, they're still lacking in a mobile weakside defender - something that Vesely could theoretically become.

Thank you!

I can see Utah fans taking a shine to Vesely; they'll squint and convince themselves that SLC can bring out his inner Kirilenko.

Ariza v. Vesely doesn't matter for them cap wise because they're under it, right?

Could Ariza get any minutes if Web, Porter, Millsap were all healthy and playing their normal roles? I can see him really not wanting to be here under those circumstances.