Official Trade Thread - Part XXVII

[payitforward]

I still don't see why we need Gortat at all. We need to keep our flexibility because the only thing that can really help us moving forward is having cap space to obtain an all-star piece.

I'd love to get both Okafor and Jordan Hill on two year deals for a little above market value. Let Seraphin and Book walk, extend Gooden and Harrington.

Wall/Miller
Beal/Rice
Ariza/Webster/Porter
Nene/Gooden
Okafor/Hill

Honestly? That team should be locked into a 3 seed in the East. It's got more upside than signing Gortat long term and maintains more flexibility.

Wow, really disagree here. On principle, I think everyone has to at least consider the argument that committing a huge number to Gortat is less appealing than what could be had with the flexibility we get from not doing that (I prefer Gortat, but I respect the argument).

But I think your plan simultaneously underrates Gortat while also overrating the ability of Nene/Okafor to stay healthy over the next 2 years, especially when you're talking about going for third place in the East.

What my man lyricalrico said! Gortat has been terrific, and he's also gotten more and more productive w/ Nene out. Of course, you have to "consider" what you might get w/ the $$ you'd otherwise give him, but in fact I don't see anyone I'd rather have at $10m -- Monroe is younger, which is a big plus, but he's not as productive.

If you want to imagine Nene staying healthy, go right ahead. One can imagine anything. Ditto Okafor.

Everyone here underrates Booker -- a lot! He's been terrific and stayed healthy. For what he's likely to make, he's a tremendous bargain. And the better the players you have for *less* than what they should make, the more room you have to sign expensive guys.

Harrington, on the other hand, has not been good -- why do you like him, Dark Faze? But, because Orlando is in hock to him next year, we can keep him for the vet minimum. That's no money, so it's no decision to worry about -- not to mention that the league pays part of the vet minimum salary!

Jordan Hill? Sure. But we'd have to see whether he's affordable. Let Seraphin walk? Sure. We won't miss him.

[payitforward]

Because I don't understand the Harrington love or the way Booker is underrated, I thought I'd take a look to compare what these 2 guys do per 40 minutes on the floor.

Shooting -- Harrington gives you 3.9 more points off shots than Booker does every 40 minutes. However, to get those 3.9 extra points, Harrington takes 6.1 more shots. Please consider what that means: his TS% on those 6.1 extra shots is 32%. We'd be doing better if any other Wizard took those extra shots.

Overall TS% -- Harrington is at 47%. Booker is at 54%. Much much better, in other words.

During those same 40 minutes, Booker has snagged 6.3 defensive rebounds, and Harrington only 4.4. And much more importantly, Booker has grabbed 4.3 *offensive* rebounds, while Harrington has managed only 0.7.

In other words, while Harrington has provided 3.9 extra points for his team, Booker has provided 9.7 extra shots for his team. Assuming that the rest of the team overall hovers around a 50% TS%, Booker's work will have given the team just about 10 extra points -- i.e. easily zooming past the 3.9 points Harrington has given the team by shooting so much.

Now, Booker has also turned it over 1.6 times and only stolen it .9 times -- so he's a -.7 there. But Harrington has turned it over 2.8 times with only 1.3 steals -- so he's -1.5. That's another .8 extra shots Booker gives his team -- about another 1.5 points.

And Harrington has committed 5.8 fouls to Booker's 3.4.

Booker has more blocks, Harrington more assists. And Harrington does get the Wizards .2 extra points at the line.

Booker has been a key factor in the Wizards' success this year. People who only see a player as good if he takes a lot of jump shots and 3-pointers will miss that. Harrington has not been a factor; people who think a player is good if he takes a lot of shots -- whether he makes them or not -- will think Harrington has helped the Wizards win. But he hasn't. Missing shots, turning the ball over, fouling a lot, and terrible rebounding are things that help you lose not win.

[Illuminaire]

There is a potential argument that Harrington allows for more efficient offensive sets (by functioning as a "floor spacer"). I don't have the data needed to make that argument myself, though, and I agree with your points PIF.

It would be nice to have a break down of the Wizards offense by plays and efficiency, divided by the personnel on the floor. Sample sizes would be small though.

[payitforward]

I still don't see why we need Gortat at all. We need to keep our flexibility because the only thing that can really help us moving forward is having cap space to obtain an all-star piece.

I'd love to get both Okafor and Jordan Hill on two year deals for a little above market value. Let Seraphin and Book walk, extend Gooden and Harrington.

Wall/Miller
Beal/Rice
Ariza/Webster/Porter
Nene/Gooden
Okafor/Hill

Honestly? That team should be locked into a 3 seed in the East. It's got more upside than signing Gortat long term and maintains more flexibility.

Wow, really disagree here. On principle, I think everyone has to at least consider the argument that committing a huge number to Gortat is less appealing than what could be had with the flexibility we get from not doing that (I prefer Gortat, but I respect the argument).

But I think your plan simultaneously underrates Gortat while also overrating the ability of Nene/Okafor to stay healthy over the next 2 years, especially when you're talking about going for third place in the East.

Maybe you missed the part where I said to also bring in Jordan Hill?

Statistically speaking we were around .500 the second half of last year with Okafor playing C (including a terrible bench) but were a better defensive team. You replace Gortat with Okafor and throw in our new found bench and I don't see us losing much.

And that's without taking Jordan Hill into account. Hill has had some injury concerns but that's what lets you get both Okafor and Hill on the cheap. As well Gooden can double as a C as well as Nene if miraculously both guys go down.

Hill for the last two years has posted an ORTG of 113. He's been a 15 and 13 guy the last two seasons per 36 minutes. I really don't see how anyone can argue that Gortat is better than having both of those guys.

With the depth the center position has in the league all of a sudden in combination with Hill and Okafors injury history I think we can get them both for a little more than it would cost to just get Gortat. Give both guys around 7 a year for two seasons with a player option for the second year in case their stock looks amazing at the end of the summer and they want to test free agency.

If they want a little more we can always move Web for cap room.

Now that you explain it, it makes even less sense. For one thing, acquiring Hill is unrelated to signing Okafor vs. Gortat. For another, Dark Faze, the fact that you picture Okafor healthy in your mind doesn't change the fact in the real world, which is that he hasn't played healthy in some years and gets older and older. You have to factor in minutes played to know whether a guy is a bargain or expensive. You've pencilled him in as starter -- not going to happen.

Now, if what you think is we should acquire Jordan Hill on the cheap and make him our starting C, then actually I think that would be a good idea if -- and this is a big if -- he really is healthy.

He played 47 games his rookie year. I don't know whether injuries were a factor in that. He played 72 games his 2d year; ok. He played 39 games his 3d year and 29 his 4th year. This year he's played 58 games so far; again, that's ok.

Hill is a better player than Booker, and he is *way* better than Seraphin. I'd love to have him -- and Booker. But I can't see acquiring him in place of Gortat.

[payitforward]

Hmmm, thinking about this some more I find myself wanting to change perspective just a bit.

I have no interest whatever in signing Okafor -- unless for the veteran minimum or some really very very low salary, but I think he may do better than that somewhere else. Or, in fact, he may just decide to retire.

And I feel pretty sure that the Wizards will in fact re-sign Gortat -- or that if they don't it'll be to go after someone whom I don't feel confident will be an improvement. Maybe I just mean that they might have Monroe in mind as an alternative, and I can't quell my doubts about him. So, if it's a question of our optimal production next year, I think Gortat.

But, really, if it were a matter of continuing to build -- rather than wanting to see results now -- then, yeah, I view it differently. Lets get younger.

Jordan Hill is 26; he'll be 27 this Summer. He's a few months older than Trevor Booker. So he's not really a *young* player, but he's 2 1/2 years younger than Gortat. He seems to be almost altogether a defensive Center, so we'd be playing differently than we do now, but he is really productive. He puts up numbers that would help us win games, especially rebounding, and he doesn't put up unnecessary shots so, this year at least, he's posted a very good TS%.

If we used the cap room he gave us to get younger somewhere else on the roster, I'd be for signing Hill and willing to see Gortat depart (meaning we'd have flushed a R1 pick for a rental and likely just a few playoff games). But not if the other move is bringing in someone like Okafor, a player in his last couple of years.

[verbal8]

And I feel pretty sure that the Wizards will in fact re-sign Gortat -- or that if they don't it'll be to go after someone whom I don't feel confident will be an improvement. Maybe I just mean that they might have Monroe in mind as an alternative, and I can't quell my doubts about him. So, if it's a question of our optimal production next year, I think Gortat.

But, really, if it were a matter of continuing to build -- rather than wanting to see results now -- then, yeah, I view it differently. Lets get younger.

Jordan Hill is 26; he'll be 27 this Summer. He's a few months older than Trevor Booker. So he's not really a *young* player, but he's 2 1/2 years younger than Gortat. He seems to be almost altogether a defensive Center, so we'd be playing differently than we do now, but he is really productive. He puts up numbers that would help us win games, especially rebounding, and he doesn't put up unnecessary shots so, this year at least, he's posted a very good TS%.

If we used the cap room he gave us to get younger somewhere else on the roster, I'd be for signing Hill and willing to see Gortat depart (meaning we'd have flushed a R1 pick for a rental and likely just a few playoff games). But not if the other move is bringing in someone like Okafor, a player in his last couple of years.

I would feel a lot better about the team long-term if there was a young big(or at least youngish) who was part of the core. I do think Booker is a helpful player, but if he is a starter or playing major minutes it is a significant disadvantage.

I think the situations in Detroit and Milwaukee are so bad for the young bigs that they will be more productive on another team. I also think that applies to Asik to a lesser degree. One path to acquiring a young big that may hurt in the short term would be to deal Nene for expirings or cap space.

[gambitx777]

The problem is no one wants nene, we are probably going to have to give them porter to sweeten the deal. Which I'd be ok with doing! Depending on what we got back in return.
I think this might be worth doing in the off season.
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=kvpyd7r

[verbal8]

The problem is no one wants nene, we are probably going to have to give them porter to sweeten the deal. Which I'd be ok with doing! Depending on what we got back in return.
I think this might be worth doing in the off season.
http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=kvpyd7r

Does Steven Adams have more trade value than Porter? I think he does and I think that would be a good deal for the Wizards. I think it does help OKC in the short term and that is really what they should be concentrating on.

I would probably be ok with dealing Nene for Perkins, Thabeet and Perry Jones. It would hurt short term, but Perry Jones could be a key piece and is low risk if he doesn't pan out.

[nate33]

I don't understand the goal of people trying to dump Nene, particularly when they are sacrificing assets to do so. What does it really accomplish to have Nene's salary off the books in 2015 rather than 2016?

It's the Underpants Gnome theory of team-building:
1. Dump Nene for 2015 expirings
2. ???
3. Contend for championship

It would only make sense if we first made a bold move in 2014 and decided to let Ariza and Gortat walk (or S&T them for the 2015 contracts). Then we would actually have cap room in 2015. But with EG having sacrificed a future 1st for Gortat, that's not gonna happen.

[Dat2U]

I don't understand the goal of people trying to dump Nene, particularly when they are sacrificing assets to do so. What does it really accomplish to have Nene's salary off the books in 2015 rather than 2016?

It's the Underpants Gnome theory of team-building:
1. Dump Nene for 2015 expirings
2. ???
3. Contend for championship

It would only make sense if we first made a bold move in 2014 and decided to let Ariza and Gortat walk (or S&T them for the 2015 contracts). Then we would actually have cap room in 2015. But with EG having sacrificed a future 1st for Gortat, that's not gonna happen.

To be honest, the Wizards look better overall without Nene, especially offensively. I especially hate when we run the offense through Nene as we do at times where Wall basically becomes a passive watcher. Nene's decline has been so steep since he's put on a Wizards uni, that he's no where close to the player he was when he first got to DC. His WS/48 has gone from .191 when he was acquired in '12, to .116 last season, to below average at .094 now. His TS% in his prime was .645, .631 & .657! Last three years in DC it's been .624, .538 & .524.

Truth is, were approaching the end of Nene's usefulness on a basketball court. Maybe he has one more season in him where he can still be somewhat useful but at $13 million for another two years, it's hard to envision paying that much for a guy that doesn't move the needle much any more and really doesn't fit with the personnel we have to begin with.

[nate33]

I don't understand the goal of people trying to dump Nene, particularly when they are sacrificing assets to do so. What does it really accomplish to have Nene's salary off the books in 2015 rather than 2016?

It's the Underpants Gnome theory of team-building:
1. Dump Nene for 2015 expirings
2. ???
3. Contend for championship

It would only make sense if we first made a bold move in 2014 and decided to let Ariza and Gortat walk (or S&T them for the 2015 contracts). Then we would actually have cap room in 2015. But with EG having sacrificed a future 1st for Gortat, that's not gonna happen.

To be honest, the Wizards look better overall without Nene, especially offensively. I especially hate when we run the offense through Nene as we do at times where Wall basically becomes a passive watcher. Nene's decline has been so steep since he's put on a Wizards uni, that he's no where close to the player he was when he first got to DC. His WS/48 has gone from .191 when he was acquired in '12, to .116 last season, to below average at .094 now. His TS% in his prime was .645, .631 & .657! Last three years in DC it's been .624, .538 & .524.

Truth is, were approaching the end of Nene's usefulness on a basketball court. Maybe he has one more season in him where he can still be somewhat useful but at $13 million for another two years, it's hard to envision paying that much for a guy that doesn't move the needle much any more and really doesn't fit with the personnel we have to begin with.

I don't really disagree with any of this. I've believed all season and continue to believe that Nene is best suited to be the main man on the 2nd unit. I think he can still dominate second string players, and it'll minimize the amount of time he shares the floor with Wall where he clogs up driving lanes. If he's got it rolling that night, go ahead and play Nene in crunch time. If he's not feeling it, play Gortat.

My point is that I don't see the logic in trading Nene for, say, Kendrick Perkins just for the purpose of dumping Nene's contract a year early. It doesn't gain us anything on the court or under the cap. It just makes us worse for 2 years. (This assumes we keep Gortat.)

[deneem4]

I don't understand the goal of people trying to dump Nene, particularly when they are sacrificing assets to do so. What does it really accomplish to have Nene's salary off the books in 2015 rather than 2016?

It's the Underpants Gnome theory of team-building:
1. Dump Nene for 2015 expirings
2. ???
3. Contend for championship

It would only make sense if we first made a bold move in 2014 and decided to let Ariza and Gortat walk (or S&T them for the 2015 contracts). Then we would actually have cap room in 2015. But with EG having sacrificed a future 1st for Gortat, that's not gonna happen.

To be honest, the Wizards look better overall without Nene, especially offensively. I especially hate when we run the offense through Nene as we do at times where Wall basically becomes a passive watcher. Nene's decline has been so steep since he's put on a Wizards uni, that he's no where close to the player he was when he first got to DC. His WS/48 has gone from .191 when he was acquired in '12, to .116 last season, to below average at .094 now. His TS% in his prime was .645, .631 & .657! Last three years in DC it's been .624, .538 & .524.

Truth is, were approaching the end of Nene's usefulness on a basketball court. Maybe he has one more season in him where he can still be somewhat useful but at $13 million for another two years, it's hard to envision paying that much for a guy that doesn't move the needle much any more and really doesn't fit with the personnel we have to begin with.

I don't really disagree with any of this. I've believed all season and continue to believe that Nene is best suited to be the main man on the 2nd unit. I think he can still dominate second string players, and it'll minimize the amount of time he shares the floor with Wall where he clogs up driving lanes. If he's got it rolling that night, go ahead and play Nene in crunch time. If he's not feeling it, play Gortat.

My point is that I don't see the logic in trading Nene for, say, Kendrick Perkins just for the purpose of dumping Nene's contract a year early. It doesn't gain us anything on the court or under the cap. It just makes us worse for 2 years. (This assumes we keep Gortat.)

Cause could've gotten a pick or young player on the process that can make us better...
it's like say we trade nene for amare, we might be able to get iman along with him which gives us trade bait or a quality bench player...
or if we would've traded nene for Kristen humpries way back when...we would've been 3rd in the east right now, considering how well humpries been playing and the fact he's been healthy all year..nene isn't working contract wise no orrotation wise...when he comes back wwe'll have to start Gooden cause there's no wway he's taking Gooden 2nd unit mintues...but that leaves booker who's been playing solid with limited minutes

[nate33]

Cause could've gotten a pick or young player on the process that can make us better...
it's like say we trade nene for amare, we might be able to get iman along with him which gives us trade bait or a quality bench player...
or if we would've traded nene for Kristen humpries way back when...we would've been 3rd in the east right now, considering how well humpries been playing and the fact he's been healthy all year..nene isn't working contract wise no orrotation wise...when he comes back wwe'll have to start Gooden cause there's no wway he's taking Gooden 2nd unit mintues...but that leaves booker who's been playing solid with limited minutes

That's different. I'm not opposed to trading Nene for a better player, or for a worse player (with a short contract) plus a quality asset.

I just object to those who are talking about sacrificing assets (like Porter) just to dump Nene for a shorter contract. I don't see the rationale. Nene is still a pretty good player, even if he is declining. It's not like he makes us worse when he is on the court.

[Dat2U]

Nene is still a pretty good player, even if he is declining. It's not like he makes us worse when he is on the court.

At the rate he's declining, I'm not sure it's a given he's still a pretty good player. This year he looked like your average NBA player (which means he's a below average big). Next year? Who knows, we could be looking at a TS% in the .500 range and a WS/48 of .090 or below.

I wouldn't trade him for Perkins but if a team offered modest incentive for taking on a bad contract or were able to add a piece to get a better fit in return then it should be looked at.

In fact it should have been done a year or two ago when Nene still had more left in the tank. I was screaming for it then because what were seeing now was pretty obvious to anyone looking long term.

[Ruzious]

Like it or not, the team is in bed with Nene performing (maybe different words...). When he plays, he's - by miles - the best defensive PF on the team, and offensively provides a needed play-maker up front. If they want to live for today (like the Grass Roots), he's gotta play when it matters.

[deneem4]

Like it or not, the team is in bed with Nene performing (maybe different words...). When he plays, he's - by miles - the best defensive PF on the team, and offensively provides a needed play-maker up front. If they want to live for today (like the Grass Roots), he's gotta play when it matters.

Nah I think Gooden is our best pf honestly...n he's goin to be counting on a strong playoff performance to get another deal

[CntOutSmrtCrazy]

Can I get a raise of hands of those who thought that trading for Taj Gibson would have been another EG blunder? Dude continues to just kill it.

[CntOutSmrtCrazy]

Like it or not, the team is in bed with Nene performing (maybe different words...). When he plays, he's - by miles - the best defensive PF on the team, and offensively provides a needed play-maker up front. If they want to live for today (like the Grass Roots), he's gotta play when it matters.

Nah I think Gooden is our best pf honestly...n he's goin to be counting on a strong playoff performance to get another deal

Gooden has been exceptional for what we got him for but you have to consider defense as well. Not to mention the fact that Nene is a good facilitator.

[verbal8]

Cause could've gotten a pick or young player on the process that can make us better...
it's like say we trade nene for amare, we might be able to get iman along with him which gives us trade bait or a quality bench player...
or if we would've traded nene for Kristen humpries way back when...we would've been 3rd in the east right now, considering how well humpries been playing and the fact he's been healthy all year..nene isn't working contract wise no orrotation wise...when he comes back wwe'll have to start Gooden cause there's no wway he's taking Gooden 2nd unit mintues...but that leaves booker who's been playing solid with limited minutes

That's different. I'm not opposed to trading Nene for a better player, or for a worse player (with a short contract) plus a quality asset.

I just object to those who are talking about sacrificing assets (like Porter) just to dump Nene for a shorter contract. I don't see the rationale. Nene is still a pretty good player, even if he is declining. It's not like he makes us worse when he is on the court.

I didn't see the deal as dumping Porter. I think at this point Adams has more trade value than Porter. In fact I think that part may even be a deal breaker for OKC.

I admit that Perry Jones is a risk, but he seems to be an asset at this point. And with a small contract, the risk is pretty low. Just getting Perry Jones won't make the Wizards a contender, but replacing aging declining players with younger talented ones, is the key to building a contender from the current team. In some cases it will mean taking on dead weight like Perkins' contract.

[Ruzious]

Adams and Perry Jones are very talented athletes, but they're not skilled basketball players at this point. Both have very low production numbers. Jones didn't do well in 2 years of college, and Adams looked very raw at Pitt. They both could develop, but I wouldn't count on either being a starter. Adams has a better chance - but I'm guessing it'll happen for him after his rookie contract.