Grunfeld a Great GM. Proves Doubters Wrong

[dckingsfan]

Well Wall is clearly that on this team. He knows it and so do the vets that play with him. And thats when the team really started to gel and turn the corner.

But it did seem that it was Wall and Beal who were the ones not ready every game. But that shouldn't be all that much of a surprise given their ages. Specially Beal at 20. I think both Wall and Beal matured a lot this last year. Next year should be awesome.

The Wall and Beal maturation process is not their agenda. Their agenda is to fire Ernie and go from there.

Wait, it can't be both? Mutually exclusive?

We can't want Beal and Wall to become really good players and want EG gone?

We can't want to win and still have EG gone?

I know that is how I feel. Loved the playoff run. Love when Wall and Beal play well.

Still not buying those season tickets until EG is gone.

I guess I will have to reconsider - since I clearly can't do both.

[payitforward]

...I think both Wall and Beal matured a lot this last year. Next year should be awesome.

Right here, Hands points to the crux of the difference between two groups on this Forum; A) those who think Ernie has done a good job (creditable, ok, or for some people: terrific -- as in this thread's title) and B) those who think he's been an exceptionally bad GM.

What do I mean? Well, first off I'm sure both camps want Wall and Beal, and the team, to be "awesome" next year. We're all fans!

But those in A seem to think that 1) if Wall and Beal are outstanding, that proves something about Ernie as a GM, and 2) if those 2 guys are outstanding, that means we are getting better as a team in the sense that we are turning into a team with a solid hope to contend for a title in the Wall-Beal generation of players.

If I'm reading Hands right, for example, then -- leaving nuance aside -- that's what he's saying. E.g. "the plan was always around Wall and Beal", and statements to that effect. But only Hands knows what he really means, so I'm open to correction.

Still, I believe that 1 and 2 above are the essence of the Ernie-supporter group's claims. Subsidiary to that, tho still important, would be 3) the Okariza trade was the other main strut of our future -- it was a great move.

Camp B, on the other hand, says i) the picks of Wall and Beal were just a matter of making the default move, taking the guy every GM would have taken; Ernie gets no particular credit for them, any more than we give him props for the lucky ping pong ball bounce in 2010 that gave us a shot at Wall, and ii) trading cap room and future assets for solid veterans to win a little now was the kind of move that virtually guarantees we'll never contend.

Note that I've left out the disastrous 2011 draft -- no disagreements about that. And I'm eliding minor questions like 'how good/bad is Booker/Seraphin?' etc. And I've also left out the question of Nene. Trying to make this as simple/clear as possible.

So. Am I right about the essential differences? If I am, then next year will tell us a lot about who was and is right. If we do better next year than this, then e.g. Hands will be able to say "look, we are moving in the right direction; it's awesome", and I'm guessing we'll all be happy.

But, if it proves difficult to field a team next year that's even as good as this year's team (lose in round 2 in a very weak conference), then perhaps it will mean that Camp B has been right along.

I'm in Camp B, as you know -- but, I'd still be happier if Camp A turned out to be right. I just don't think it's likely.

[hands11]

John Wall to Sports Illustrated: 'We could've easily been a 55-win team

http://www.bulletsforever.com/2014/5/9/ ... -john-wall

Thats like me saying I could have easily have been a billionaire if I founded Google. Take that quote with a grain of salt.

No, its not like saying that. Not even close. Not even with salt.

[dckingsfan]

John Wall to Sports Illustrated: 'We could've easily been a 55-win team

http://www.bulletsforever.com/2014/5/9/ ... -john-wall

Thats like me saying I could have easily have been a billionaire if I founded Google. Take that quote with a grain of salt.

No, its not like saying that. Not even close.

Closer to:

If I had cheese

I could have a ham and cheese sandwich

If I had ham

[hands11]

...I think both Wall and Beal matured a lot this last year. Next year should be awesome.

Right here, Hands points to the crux of the difference between two groups on this Forum; A) those who think Ernie has done a good job (creditable, ok, or for some people: terrific -- as in this thread's title) and B) those who think he's been an exceptionally bad GM.

What do I mean? Well, first off I'm sure both camps want Wall and Beal, and the team, to be "awesome" next year. We're all fans!

But those in A seem to think that 1) if Wall and Beal are outstanding, that proves something about Ernie as a GM, and 2) if those 2 guys are outstanding, that means we are getting better as a team in the sense that we are turning into a team with a solid hope to contend for a title in the Wall-Beal generation of players.

If I'm reading Hands right, for example, then -- leaving nuance aside -- that's what he's saying. E.g. "the plan was always around Wall and Beal", and statements to that effect. But only Hands knows what he really means, so I'm open to correction.

Still, I believe that 1 and 2 above are the essence of the Ernie-supporter group's claims. Subsidiary to that, tho still important, would be 3) the Okariza trade was the other main strut of our future -- it was a great move.

Camp B, on the other hand, says i) the picks of Wall and Beal were just a matter of making the default move, taking the guy every GM would have taken; Ernie gets no particular credit for them, any more than we give him props for the lucky ping pong ball bounce in 2010 that gave us a shot at Wall, and ii) trading cap room and future assets for solid veterans to win a little now was the kind of move that virtually guarantees we'll never contend.

Note that I've left out the disastrous 2011 draft -- no disagreements about that. And I'm eliding minor questions like 'how good/bad is Booker/Seraphin?' etc. And I've also left out the question of Nene. Trying to make this as simple/clear as possible.

So. Am I right about the essential differences? If I am, then next year will tell us a lot about who was and is right. If we do better next year than this, then e.g. Hands will be able to say "look, we are moving in the right direction; it's awesome", and I'm guessing we'll all be happy.

But, if it proves difficult to field a team next year that's even as good as this year's team (lose in round 2 in a very weak conference), then perhaps it will mean that Camp B has been right along.

I'm in Camp B, as you know -- but, I'd still be happier if Camp A turned out to be right. I just don't think it's likely.

Close PIF but more like this.

First off, I think the title of the thread saying "Great" is over stating it and I had suggested to Milli to change it. I think saying

"Ted/Grunfeld Proves Doubters Wrong" would be more appropriate. I think having it about EG and saying Great is wrong and only going to piss off people that can't see anything good in what Ted/EG have done. And it did. Actually the lost their flipping minds. LOL. But the thread provided another place to start posting about the positives.

Now what might end up being true would be...

Ted/EG .. A great front office prove doubters wrong.

But this was the counter thread to the "Count Down to EG getting fired" which was started years ago so it was the place to post a more moderate or positive view when the board was dominated by years of the opposite. And as it was from its inception, that other thread has proven to be a huge failure of views considering it was created when it was. My take was, Ted extended EG 2 years. I understood why. I expect it and even felt it made sense. Once that happened, EG was going to get two years. I said it at the time and that is what happened. And the team did make vast improvements over those two years. So Ted/EG have gotten results. And keeping EG made sense for Ted. He was a new owner of the team. He was familiar with EG. He had a more insiders view of what decisions EG made vs which were mandated, influenced or made by Abe then anyone here has.

So he was comfortable that, with Ted as owner and his input/direction, he felt he and EG could get things turned around. And they did. Which is what I expected. I even started a thread on it. And its been a constant mantra of min. Its Owner and GM that get it done. Way to many poster miss how that works.

[hands11]

As for the main focus being Wall and Beal. Yeah. It become very clear that was the case. I feel strongly that their view this year and last was, we have to many projects all at once. The future of this teams stability is anchored to Wall and Beal getting better ASAP and that means getting them the right vets to grow with to grow their games. And it really all started with that #1 pick being Wall. Then getting Gil out of here so Wall could breath. Then getting Wall, Beal to run with. And clean up anything that doesn't fit with those two as you can. This year it was, get them to the playoff now so they can start to really anchor this team. They missed out on that last year because of injuries and they were going to have that happen again. I think its easy to believe they made that decision and that explains a lot of moves and minutes. And for me, I think its hard to argue against what they did. There were other options but other options have their risk as well. You can speculate about more cap, more picks, and different players, younger bigs vs Nene, but its got to fit and a team needs to start to win with its core talent. Look at other team like CLE, SAC, etc.

Now some teams can clear the slate, get pick, cap and put it all back together again. Boston is a team like that. LA might be able to pull it off but its looking shaky. PHI is going to give it a try, but lets see. Teams that can do this aren't teams with crap reputations for a long as the Wizards had under Abe. Other situations are all other situations. Each it unique. The Wizards where the Wizards. They have a ton of challenges unique to being the Wizards.

Then you have teams like CLE. All those #1s. But look where they were headed this year. ADDING VETS. Trying to stabilize the rebuild and get some roots. That team is still a float and it could all come crashing down and they can lose the picks/talent to other team. The pieces their still don't fit. Even the wrong #1 this year could keep them anchorless. They should take Embiid. CHA adding Al Jefferson has helped to anchor that them. Look at SAC. They are now starting to try the same. Cousins was a great talent but he isn't the ANCHOR and leader that a John Wall is. And the did a crap job of developing him into one, if that was possible.

Stabilizing a franchise that has little to no roots or league wide identity as such is really important and not so easy to do. The Wizards have done that. Or at least taken a huge step toward doing that. And that chances everything. You can now build from an identity. You can attract FA. Even pick up seasoned vet for nothing like Gooden or AH. Like they got Webster. And thats just the start of it. They can now attract even better. They missed on Nate's and Collison's last off season. Well after this year, you think they are in a better or worse position to get those kinds of players? Clearly better. They can now attract a much wider group of players and they can pick the ones that fit their identity because they now have one.

The identify is.. they have a TEAM. A good locker room. They play for each other. They are a team defense first team. They share the ball. And they have two young star. Some say, the future best back court in the league. And they are a team that made the 2nd round of the playoff in their first appearance with Wall and Beal. That something that gets league wide attention.

Vets that played here are publically saying, "any player would be stupid to not consider coming here" Now think back 3-4 years ago to player demanding buy out after getting traded here because the team was full of knickheads. HUGE DIFFERENCE.

People might say Wall was a no brainer, but it could have been a Cousins pick. Some here wanted that and still do. Well Cousin is not a franchise anchor. He is an interesting talent. He might become an elite big in the game in a few more years. But are you hooking your anchor to him to do a rebuild starting in 2010 ? I wouldn't. Was Evan Turner that player? Nope. Ask Phili. He went #2. Favors ? Again, another nice talent but I haven't see that he is a Wall type leader. And that takes us to Wall being a no brainer.

I had some serious concerns about Wall early on. Getting him was one thing but he was very raw. I know it would take years to develop him and there was a good chance it wouldn't work out like they needed. Actually, I thought getting Blodsoe in the same draft would have helped but maybe that is wrong thinking and it would have hurt. Growing him into what he is today is something totally different then what they drafted. And to that, you have to give Ted/EG credit. Wall didn't just grow like this on his own. He struggled. He hero balled. He only had one speed. He couldn't shoot. He didn't focus on D. He didn't show up for games. He wasn't the franchise leader at 20 even though they throw that title on him. Nothing like he is now. Not even close.

They DEVELOPED HIM. Yes DEVELOPED

Sam. The Vets. Okafor talking to him. Nene. Trevor A. Webster. Now Gortat and A Miller. Thats where trades like Okafor/TA for Lewis come in. Hell, thats where Lewis for Gil come in. It was all about Wall and building the team. Recovering from Gungate. And getting the best you could given that situation. Things you know you could get. Not pipe dreams of cap space for players that likely wouldn't come here.

And that brings it full circle. They focused on getting and developing Wall and Beal. And the moves they made supported that.

Moving the knuckheads.. Nick and McGee for Nene.

Dismissing the Wall pick as a non brainer is missing the boat. It wasn't the Wall pick. It was all the moves they made around him to develop him into the Wall we think of today. Look at Kyrie. Great talent but not John Wall.

And the Beal pick wasn't a non brainer. People wanted and still think Drummond was better. It could have been Thomas Robinson or Dion Waiters or Barnes. They were all legit option up there at the time. People wanted MKG big time here but my view was, hell no.. MKG is not what Beal is and Beal if what they need. But they went Beal and I was never happier. I locked into Beal as the right pick for them when he was still way down the board. He was perfect for this team and for Wall. The right skills and the right person. I loved how mature for his age. And with Wall and Beal, you have the two young talents and personalities they you can transform a franchise with. I always point out, its not all about talent, its about the person and need/fit

And like they committed to developing Wall, they did the same with Beal. They did it so much that it drove me nuts. I didn't get/agree with it at the time. They though him out there game one with no PG. I said bring him off the bench and bring him along. Get Crawford out there to start the year. Let Crawford be PG with Beal even. But no, they through him to the wolves and he struggled. There was no Wall at the time, he was injured. If you remember, Beal couldn't even shoot well at the time. And even this year we saw tons of Beal dribbling around and it drove lots of us crazy, but they were committed to developing his skills as a #2. They wanted him to be able to run the offense and come playoff time, I think that investment paid off. This team needed another ball handler. Their SF aren't that. They are 3 point shooters to spread the floor and TA is a top defender to drives the team defense. That meant Beal needed to be able to dribble better as an option. So they grow the Wade side of his game vs the Ray Allen side.

So look at all that Ted/EG did in that context. Look at their big picture plan. Ignoring the plan removes the framing for the decisions. It was always about Wall and once they got Beal it was about Wall and Beal. That means cutting your loses once that was clear. That meant burying Ves on the bench behind Okafor and Nene. Ves was not a priority. Wall and Beal were. They even traded Ves for Miller because Wall needed a vet PG to help him learn and Maynor wasn't it. They risked the #1 pick this year for Gortat because Wall and Beal needed a center to get to the playoff. Which matches their priorities. Even if they lose Gortat, they would risk the first pick for that. A pick that ended up being the #18. So no, the world didn't end with that pick like so many projected. And it still might turn into 2nd round appearance, two wins AND Gortat.

And with Wall and Beal on the paths they are, the vets around them, and the repaired franchise reputation, they now are anchored and the window to build the franchise has expanded. Wall is signed. Beal is going no where. They have options. Both are young. And now they get to see if Otto hit in as #3 next year.

Thats why you give Ted credit and you give Ted/EG credit. From 29 win to 2nd round 2 wins and the Wall and Beal we have today, all in 4 years. A total franchise transformation. From crap to legit future established winning franchise.

That earns them an A

[doclinkin]

Bump. Because we might as well have all the Grunfeld threads. All of them. Fill the front page. Woo!~

[dobrojim]

Thats like me saying I could have easily have been a billionaire if I founded Google. Take that quote with a grain of salt.

No, its not like saying that. Not even close.

Closer to:

If I had cheese

I could have a ham and cheese sandwich

If I had ham

and a couple slices of bread

[dckingsfan]

Bump. Because we might as well have all the Grunfeld threads. All of them. Fill the front page. Woo!~

ha - too funny!!!

[milellie111]

I am pleased to see Ernie Grunfeld here for another year and Randy Wittman extended. This young team needs stability and we are on the right track.

[payitforward]

As for the main focus being Wall and Beal. Yeah. It become very clear that was the case. I feel strongly that their view this year and last was, we have to many projects all at once. The future of this teams stability is anchored to Wall and Beal getting better ASAP and that means getting them the right vets to grow with to grow their games. And it really all started with that #1 pick being Wall. Then getting Gil out of here so Wall could breath. Then getting Wall, Beal to run with. And clean up anything that doesn't fit with those two as you can. This year it was, get them to the playoff now so they can start to really anchor this team. They missed out on that last year because of injuries and they were going to have that happen again. I think its easy to believe they made that decision and that explains a lot of moves and minutes. And for me, I think its hard to argue against what they did. There were other options but other options have their risk as well. You can speculate about more cap, more picks, and different players, younger bigs vs Nene, but its got to fit and a team needs to start to win with its core talent. Look at other team like CLE, SAC, etc.

Now some teams can clear the slate, get pick, cap and put it all back together again. Boston is a team like that. LA might be able to pull it off but its looking shaky. PHI is going to give it a try, but lets see. Teams that can do this aren't teams with crap reputations for a long as the Wizards had under Abe. Other situations are all other situations. Each it unique. The Wizards where the Wizards. They have a ton of challenges unique to being the Wizards.

Then you have teams like CLE. All those #1s. But look where they were headed this year. ADDING VETS. Trying to stabilize the rebuild and get some roots. That team is still a float and it could all come crashing down and they can lose the picks/talent to other team. The pieces their still don't fit. Even the wrong #1 this year could keep them anchorless. They should take Embiid. CHA adding Al Jefferson has helped to anchor that them. Look at SAC. They are now starting to try the same. Cousins was a great talent but he isn't the ANCHOR and leader that a John Wall is. And the did a crap job of developing him into one, if that was possible.

Stabilizing a franchise that has little to no roots or league wide identity as such is really important and not so easy to do. The Wizards have done that. Or at least taken a huge step toward doing that. And that chances everything. You can now build from an identity. You can attract FA. Even pick up seasoned vet for nothing like Gooden or AH. Like they got Webster. And thats just the start of it. They can now attract even better. They missed on Nate's and Collison's last off season. Well after this year, you think they are in a better or worse position to get those kinds of players? Clearly better. They can now attract a much wider group of players and they can pick the ones that fit their identity because they now have one.

The identify is.. they have a TEAM. A good locker room. They play for each other. They are a team defense first team. They share the ball. And they have two young star. Some say, the future best back court in the league. And they are a team that made the 2nd round of the playoff in their first appearance with Wall and Beal. That something that gets league wide attention.

Vets that played here are publically saying, "any player would be stupid to not consider coming here" Now think back 3-4 years ago to player demanding buy out after getting traded here because the team was full of knickheads. HUGE DIFFERENCE.

People might say Wall was a no brainer, but it could have been a Cousins pick. Some here wanted that and still do. Well Cousin is not a franchise anchor. He is an interesting talent. He might become an elite big in the game in a few more years. But are you hooking your anchor to him to do a rebuild starting in 2010 ? I wouldn't. Was Evan Turner that player? Nope. Ask Phili. He went #2. Favors ? Again, another nice talent but I haven't see that he is a Wall type leader. And that takes us to Wall being a no brainer.

I had some serious concerns about Wall early on. Getting him was one thing but he was very raw. I know it would take years to develop him and there was a good chance it wouldn't work out like they needed. Actually, I thought getting Blodsoe in the same draft would have helped but maybe that is wrong thinking and it would have hurt. Growing him into what he is today is something totally different then what they drafted. And to that, you have to give Ted/EG credit. Wall didn't just grow like this on his own. He struggled. He hero balled. He only had one speed. He couldn't shoot. He didn't focus on D. He didn't show up for games. He wasn't the franchise leader at 20 even though they throw that title on him. Nothing like he is now. Not even close.

They DEVELOPED HIM. Yes DEVELOPED

Sam. The Vets. Okafor talking to him. Nene. Trevor A. Webster. Now Gortat and A Miller. Thats where trades like Okafor/TA for Lewis come in. Hell, thats where Lewis for Gil come in. It was all about Wall and building the team. Recovering from Gungate. And getting the best you could given that situation. Things you know you could get. Not pipe dreams of cap space for players that likely wouldn't come here.

And that brings it full circle. They focused on getting and developing Wall and Beal. And the moves they made supported that.

Moving the knuckheads.. Nick and McGee for Nene.

Dismissing the Wall pick as a non brainer is missing the boat. It wasn't the Wall pick. It was all the moves they made around him to develop him into the Wall we think of today. Look at Kyrie. Great talent but not John Wall.

And the Beal pick wasn't a non brainer. People wanted and still think Drummond was better. It could have been Thomas Robinson or Dion Waiters or Barnes. They were all legit option up there at the time. People wanted MKG big time here but my view was, hell no.. MKG is not what Beal is and Beal if what they need. But they went Beal and I was never happier. I locked into Beal as the right pick for them when he was still way down the board. He was perfect for this team and for Wall. The right skills and the right person. I loved how mature for his age. And with Wall and Beal, you have the two young talents and personalities they you can transform a franchise with. I always point out, its not all about talent, its about the person and need/fit

And like they committed to developing Wall, they did the same with Beal. They did it so much that it drove me nuts. I didn't get/agree with it at the time. They though him out there game one with no PG. I said bring him off the bench and bring him along. Get Crawford out there to start the year. Let Crawford be PG with Beal even. But no, they through him to the wolves and he struggled. There was no Wall at the time, he was injured. If you remember, Beal couldn't even shoot well at the time. And even this year we saw tons of Beal dribbling around and it drove lots of us crazy, but they were committed to developing his skills as a #2. They wanted him to be able to run the offense and come playoff time, I think that investment paid off. This team needed another ball handler. Their SF aren't that. They are 3 point shooters to spread the floor and TA is a top defender to drives the team defense. That meant Beal needed to be able to dribble better as an option. So they grow the Wade side of his game vs the Ray Allen side.

So look at all that Ted/EG did in that context. Look at their big picture plan. Ignoring the plan removes the framing for the decisions. It was always about Wall and once they got Beal it was about Wall and Beal. That means cutting your loses once that was clear. That meant burying Ves on the bench behind Okafor and Nene. Ves was not a priority. Wall and Beal were. They even traded Ves for Miller because Wall needed a vet PG to help him learn and Maynor wasn't it. They risked the #1 pick this year for Gortat because Wall and Beal needed a center to get to the playoff. Which matches their priorities. Even if they lose Gortat, they would risk the first pick for that. A pick that ended up being the #18. So no, the world didn't end with that pick like so many projected. And it still might turn into 2nd round appearance, two wins AND Gortat.

And with Wall and Beal on the paths they are, the vets around them, and the repaired franchise reputation, they now are anchored and the window to build the franchise has expanded. Wall is signed. Beal is going no where. They have options. Both are young. And now they get to see if Otto hit in as #3 next year.

Thats why you give Ted credit and you give Ted/EG credit. From 29 win to 2nd round 2 wins and the Wall and Beal we have today, all in 4 years. A total franchise transformation. From crap to legit future established winning franchise.

That earns them an A

First off, stop calling your friends here "obsessed", "flipped out", "crazy", or any other words to that effect, ok? Did I call you crazy? I'd like not to see that any more.

Secondly -- you and Millie may be the only two people in the known universe who would give Ernie an "A" -- and, no, going from where we were 4 years ago to where we are now in 4 years is not a particularly great achievement, sorry. Not with a #1 overall pick, two #3 overall picks, a #6 overall pick, and a half dozen other quite valuable R1 and high R2 picks. And especially not for the guy who created the problem in the first place!

Moreover, you in particular giving him an "A" is especially ridiculous -- not 3 months ago you were volubly anti-Ernie, upset as H#ll about our not keeping the talented PG who came in the Gortat trade, hating the way he handled your then fave Jordan Crawford, unhappy that he didn't acquire the backup PG you wanted, etc. etc. etc.

Moreover, your "not quite" is what's "not quite." As I wrote, if we are improved next year, then you can say what you want. If we have trouble fielding a team that's even as good as this year's was, then... well it's obvious.

Note that I didn't call you crazy in the above? Nor obsessed? Not "flipped out" either? One more like that and I'm putting you on ignore, ok? And I like you, so don't make me do it, please.

[hands11]

Thats why you give Ted credit and you give Ted/EG credit. From 29 win to 2nd round 2 wins and the Wall and Beal we have today, all in 4 years. A total franchise transformation. From crap to legit future established winning franchise.

That earns them an A

Not him.

[montestewart]

Thats why you give Ted credit and you give Ted/EG credit. From 29 win to 2nd round 2 wins and the Wall and Beal we have today, all in 4 years. A total franchise transformation. From crap to legit future established winning franchise.

That earns them an A

Not him.

And thats why you give Abe credit and you give Abe credit. From 25 wins to 45 wins and a 2nd round series against the Heat (a much better team than this year's Pacers, NBA champs the following year) and the Arenas we had, all in 1 year. A total franchise transformation. From crap to legit future established winning franchise. Abe was the man. Leonsis is a cookie cutter suit with a frequent tanner card and a next-to-last generation van dyke.

That earns Abe an A+. A+ Abe. The man who made all the decisions.

PS: Hope Wall doesn't get injured, cause this one's got that house-of-cards look too.

[doclinkin]

First off, stop calling your friends here "obsessed", "flipped out", "crazy", or any other words to that effect, ok? Did I call you crazy? I'd like not to see that any more.

...

Note that I didn't call you crazy in the above? Nor obsessed? Not "flipped out" either? One more like that and I'm putting you on ignore, ok? And I like you, so don't make me do it, please.

Eh. From a guy with 2000 posts in 2 years on an obscure message board regarding a mostly-hapless 3rd tier franchise in the 5th most popular sport in the nation (NFL, MLB, NCAA Football, and Auto racing ahead of it) to a guy who's got 22,000 posts in nearly 10 years -- I think it's fair to say 'takes one to know one' when we talk about being obsessed, flipped out and crazy on any particular topic relating to this team.

[Zonkerbl]

Hm, this line of reasoning troubles me. In order to contend for a championship, you need elite players. You can only get elite players (in their prime, if we forget about Lebron for a second) with high draft picks, because of the way the CBA is constructed. And yet EG doesn't get any credit for drafting Wall and Beal. I understand the logic but I think it is a tad unfair. It's not EG's fault the system is set up the way it is.

The system is set up so that the lousy teams get the good players, and get to keep those good players for at least eight years.

[Dat2U]

Thats why you give Ted credit and you give Ted/EG credit. From 29 win to 2nd round 2 wins and the Wall and Beal we have today, all in 4 years. A total franchise transformation. From crap to legit future established winning franchise.

That earns them an A

Not him.

A total franchise transformation or after having sooooooooo many assets from being soooooooo bad the last five years, the Wizards finally managed to win more than half their games, mainly off the backs of two FREE AGENT veterans bought in because of the failures to manage and develop many of those assets.

What's lost in your argument is that beyond Wall & Beal, there's nothing to show but expensive injury plagued vets who most of us would like to trade (Nene & Webster), free agents that decisions have to be made on (Gortat, Ariza, Gooden, Booker, Harrington, Temple) and 4 recent draft picks that rotted on the bench last season (Porter, Rice, Seraphin & Singleton). I guess you can also throw 37 yr old Andre Miller in their for kicks as well.

This doesn't look like a total franchise transformation, this looks like rehash from an old Ernie Grunfeld blueprint on how to construct a basketball team. Maybe this version will get a little farther as long as John Wall doesn't ruin his knee like Gilbert did. But the expensive capped out roster lead by a mediocre coach... while going all in for 45 wins, we've been here before...

[leswizards]

Hm, this line of reasoning troubles me. In order to contend for a championship, you need elite players. You can only get elite players (in their prime, if we forget about Lebron for a second) with high draft picks, because of the way the CBA is constructed. And yet EG doesn't get any credit for drafting Wall and Beal. I understand the logic but I think it is a tad unfair. It's not EG's fault the system is set up the way it is.

The system is set up so that the lousy teams get the good players, and get to keep those good players for at least eight years.

It is not unfair. The only reason that the Wizards had those picks were because the team he put together under Abe blow up on him, and then they got lucky in order to get even higher picks than they could have expected. Then, EG made the obvious picks in both circumstances. EG did absolutely nothing to help the Wizards get Wall and Beal. Why should anybody give him credit for those picks?

To get credit, EG actually needs to add value, which he has absolutely failed to do. If you want to understand how EG can get credit, imagine the following hypothetical. Let us suppose that EG used the 6th pick that he blow on Vesely, the 17th pick that he blew on Seraphin, and 18th pick that he blew on Singleton to get more talented players. Then imagine he packaged those players into a high pick in this year's draft with which that the Wizards used to add another elite player. Under those circumstances, EG's critics would have to acknowledge that EG added value. But with Wall and Beal, EG did absolutely nothing to help the Wizards draft them, and he should get absolutely no credit for drafting them.

[TGW]

I don't agree with the notion that you can only get elite players with high draft picks. Paul George is elite, and wasn't taken with a high pick. Kevin Love is available in trade, and he's an elite player. Our best player in the last 10 years wasn't drafted by this team.

There are other ways to obtain great players...it's just that Grunfeld hasn't been successful at doing it on any level.

[leswizards]

Additionally, if you want another example of how EG can get credit consider John Nash's drafting of Tom Gugliotta. It was a very controversial pick, and was actually booed when it was announced at the arena. It was not the obvious pick, but in hindsight, it was probably the best pick available. So, you have to give John Nash credit for making it.

[montestewart]

Hm, this line of reasoning troubles me. In order to contend for a championship, you need elite players. You can only get elite players (in their prime, if we forget about Lebron for a second) with high draft picks, because of the way the CBA is constructed. And yet EG doesn't get any credit for drafting Wall and Beal. I understand the logic but I think it is a tad unfair. It's not EG's fault the system is set up the way it is.

The system is set up so that the lousy teams get the good players, and get to keep those good players for at least eight years.

It is not unfair. The only reason that the Wizards had those picks were because the team he put together under Abe blow up on him, and then they got lucky in order to get even higher picks than they could have expected. Then, EG made the obvious picks in both circumstances. EG did absolutely nothing to help the Wizards get Wall and Beal. Why should anybody give him credit for those picks?

To get credit, EG actually needs to add value, which he has absolutely failed to do. If you want to understand how EG can get credit, imagine the following hypothetical. Let us suppose that EG used the 6th pick that he blow on Vesely, the 17th pick that he blew on Seraphin, and 18th pick that he blew on Singleton to get more talented players. Then imagine he packaged those players into a high pick in this year's draft with which that the Wizards used to add another elite player. Under those circumstances, EG's critics would have to acknowledge that EG added value. But with Wall and Beal, EG did absolutely nothing to help the Wizards draft them, and he should get absolutely no credit for drafting them.

Maybe OP was satirical?