Wizards Sign Martell Webster

[fishercob]

From a "risk" standpoint, which is the greater risk vs reward option for a team.

A. 37% 3-pt shooting Vet player with injury history for 1-year $1.6 million

B. 46% 3-pt shooting college player for $475,000 (Lamb/Thompson)

Scenario B could include Barton or Crowder who have a lower 3-pt shooting %.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/5106/gamelog/

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/5068/

B.

We've got to do better than Jae Crowder as evidence of Ernie's missteps. I wanted as to draft him as much as the next WizFan (and was very convinced by Nivek's YODA score on him), but he's not an impact player in the NBA yet (or close).

His numbers this year are lovely in all of 7 minutes per game. His first two seasons were somewhere between pedestrian and below average. He's 24.

[Nivek]

I wouldn't use Crowder as evidence against Grunfeld. I do agree that he hasn't exactly set the league on fire with his play.

That said, last season he rated below average in PPA (81), but that's acceptable for an 8th/9th man. Compare with Martell Webster, who rated a 77 last season and played 900+ minutes more than Crowder did. At league minimum, Crowder was a bargain last season, and probably will be again this year.

If you want to use Crowder against Grunfeld, I guess you could argue that picking him might have led the Wizards to some different personnel decisions a couple offseasons ago. Maybe, instead of keeping Ariza, drafting Porter AND re-signing Webster, they'd have drafted Noel (or someone else), or swapped Ariza for a big man or something. But, that's kind of a stretch for me.

[Kanyewest]

I wouldn't use Crowder as evidence against Grunfeld. I do agree that he hasn't exactly set the league on fire with his play.

That said, last season he rated below average in PPA (81), but that's acceptable for an 8th/9th man. Compare with Martell Webster, who rated a 77 last season and played 900+ minutes more than Crowder did. At league minimum, Crowder was a bargain last season, and probably will be again this year.

If you want to use Crowder against Grunfeld, I guess you could argue that picking him might have led the Wizards to some different personnel decisions a couple offseasons ago. Maybe, instead of keeping Ariza, drafting Porter AND re-signing Webster, they'd have drafted Noel (or someone else), or swapped Ariza for a big man or something. But, that's kind of a stretch for me.

How much can we blame Eric Maynor/Garrett Temple for Webster's lowish PPA?

[Nivek]

How much can we blame Eric Maynor/Garrett Temple for Webster's lowish PPA?

Not much, I would think. When I looked at individual production trends last season, Webster's PPA was highest early in the season and declined throughout the year as Maynor played less and eventually got traded.

Here's the breakdown of Webster's minutes with various PGs last season:

- Wall: 1337
- Temple (probably some at SG too): 459
- Miller: 330
- Maynor: 139

Biggest things with Webster were a) his back, and b) the previous season was the best of his career by a significant margin.

[closg00]

I wouldn't use Crowder as evidence against Grunfeld. I do agree that he hasn't exactly set the league on fire with his play.

That said, last season he rated below average in PPA (81), but that's acceptable for an 8th/9th man. Compare with Martell Webster, who rated a 77 last season and played 900+ minutes more than Crowder did. At league minimum, Crowder was a bargain last season, and probably will be again this year.

If you want to use Crowder against Grunfeld, I guess you could argue that picking him might have led the Wizards to some different personnel decisions a couple offseasons ago. Maybe, instead of keeping Ariza, drafting Porter AND re-signing Webster, they'd have drafted Noel (or someone else), or swapped Ariza for a big man or something. But, that's kind of a stretch for me.

The off-season of 2012 is why I was recalling my post

Post#71 Re: Wizards Sign Martell Webster
Thu Aug 30, 2012 2:46 pm by closg00

My thinking then was that Webster was too-risky to give a contract and that we should use our 2nd rounder to give one of the other guys a try. Hollis Thompson went undrafted that year and I advocated signing him to a non-guaranteed contract (He is starting now I believe)

I hadn't thought about the rest of your domino scenario in-terms of subsequent drafts, but I would like to know if you think we would have been better-off financially and talent-wise, if we had skipped taking a risk on Webster and drafted Crowder 2nd round, or picked-up another FA like Hollis at the time. A bit much perhaps, but was is your conjecture under that scenario?

[closg00]

From a "risk" standpoint, which is the greater risk vs reward option for a team.

A. 37% 3-pt shooting Vet player with injury history for 1-year $1.6 million

B. 46% 3-pt shooting college player for $475,000 (Lamb/Thompson)

Scenario B could include Barton or Crowder who have a lower 3-pt shooting %.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/5106/gamelog/

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/5068/

B.

Yup,

We've got to do better than Jae Crowder as evidence of Ernie's missteps. I wanted as to draft him as much as the next WizFan (and was very convinced by Nivek's YODA score on him), but he's not an impact player in the NBA yet (or close).

His numbers this year are lovely in all of 7 minutes per game. His first two seasons were somewhere between pedestrian and below average. He's 24.

Yup, the context was the Webster signing after the 2012 draft, Crowder was the name kicked around the summer of 2012 thanks to Kevin.

[Nivek]

My thinking then was that Webster was too-risky to give a contract and that we should use our 2nd rounder to give one of the other guys a try. Hollis Thompson went undrafted that year and I advocated signing him to a non-guaranteed contract (He is starting now I believe)

I hadn't thought about the rest of your domino scenario in-terms of subsequent drafts, but I would like to know if you think we would have been better-off financially and talent-wise, if we had skipped taking a risk on Webster and drafted Crowder 2nd round, or picked-up another FA like Hollis at the time. A bit much perhaps, but was is your conjecture under that scenario?

I would rather have had Crowder than Webster on a 3-4 year MLE contract. I didn't rate Hollis Thompson very well as a prospect. He may be starting, but it's for Philly.

I thought -- and continue to think -- their 2013 offseason was questionable. They needed frontcourt depth and a backup PG, and spent the MLE on Webster, drafted Porter and Rice, and used the BAE on Maynor.

I think the Webster contract may have been as much to show agents and players that they'd reward guys who came in and played well for them. My view is that thinking that way -- especially with an established and entrenched front office -- is a mistake. By now, everyone knows (or should know) what they're about and how they do business.

This summer was the first offseason they've had in many years I've actually kinda liked. I say "kinda" because I thought getting Humphries and Blair on cheap contracts was good. I didn't like getting older with the Pierce signing, but I thought/think he'd be a good bridge from Ariza to Porter (or Someone Else, if Porter doesn't work out for some reason). They signed Gortat to a market deal. I didn't see the point in bringing back Seraphin. (And now that the season is underway, I'm baffled by the decision to play him.)

[Kanyewest]

Man- retrospect 2012 draft is painful since the Wizards could have taken Draymond Green. Then again, the Warriors took Harrison Barnes over Andre Drummond in the 2012 draft. Still not sure how many people rated Green highly to begin with.

As for the Crowder/Webster debate- Webster certainly won the portion of the 2012-2013 season by a lot. The contract right now isn't looking too hot right now though- but it was also probably tied to the John Wall extension. IIRC Wall and Webster have the same agent. BTW, insurance is paying for Webster's contract at this point, right?

Jae Crowder is ok - looks better than guys like Singleton and Vesely. Could end up being a good player but as of right now, he seems to be out of Dallas's rotation. His PER is pretty good when he's played.

I can't be too envious of the position that Dallas has taken especially since they locked down Chandler Parsons to that contract when they could have easily gone after Trevor Ariza.

[dckingsfan]

I didn't see the point in bringing back Seraphin. (And now that the season is underway, I'm baffled by the decision to play him.)

Yep, the Seraphin signing + the previous Webster signing weren't good and could easily have been predicted. But the two contracts together are only $9,280,442.

[Kanyewest]

I didn't see the point in bringing back Seraphin. (And now that the season is underway, I'm baffled by the decision to play him.)

Seraphin outplayed Blair in the preseason which isn't saying much. Blair was great in the postseason against the Spurs. But in the preseason, Blair couldn't create his shot - more often blocked, he was turnover prone, and fouled at an incredibly high rate. I think Blair will get another chance to showcase his talents. In the past, Blair has been a better player than Seraphin but perhaps adjusting to Wittman vs playing under great coaches like Pop and Carlisle will take some time to adjust.

[Nivek]

I didn't see the point in bringing back Seraphin. (And now that the season is underway, I'm baffled by the decision to play him.)

Seraphin outplayed Blair in the preseason which isn't saying much. Blair was great in the postseason against the Spurs. But in the preseason, Blair couldn't create his shot - more often blocked, he was turnover prone, and fouled at an incredibly high rate. I think Blair will get another chance to showcase his talents. In the past, Blair has been a better player than Seraphin but perhaps adjusting to Wittman vs playing under great coaches like Pop and Carlisle will take some time to adjust.

Well...Seraphin did play better than Blair in the preseason, but Seraphin was still terrible. It's just that Blair was even worse. But...it's preseason. And, both guys have been in the league for a few years, so there's plenty of information about both of them and how they produce. Blair has been better. A lot better. Like, not close.

So far this season, Seraphin has show a good percentage from the floor, but his rebounding is as bad as ever, he's a rampant fouler (still), and he's a turnover machine. Plus, he doesn't get to the FT line, and he's not a good defender.

But...yay points, I guess. Except, for their careers, Blair actually scores MORE (and better) than Seraphin. So...yay...something.

[JWizmentality]

I didn't see the point in bringing back Seraphin. (And now that the season is underway, I'm baffled by the decision to play him.)

Seraphin outplayed Blair in the preseason which isn't saying much. Blair was great in the postseason against the Spurs. But in the preseason, Blair couldn't create his shot - more often blocked, he was turnover prone, and fouled at an incredibly high rate. I think Blair will get another chance to showcase his talents. In the past, Blair has been a better player than Seraphin but perhaps adjusting to Wittman vs playing under great coaches like Pop and Carlisle will take some time to adjust.

Well...Seraphin did play better than Blair in the preseason, but Seraphin was still terrible. It's just that Blair was even worse. But...it's preseason. And, both guys have been in the league for a few years, so there's plenty of information about both of them and how they produce. Blair has been better. A lot better. Like, not close.

So far this season, Seraphin has show a good percentage from the floor, but his rebounding is as bad as ever, he's a rampant fouler (still), and he's a turnover machine. Plus, he doesn't get to the FT line, and he's not a good defender.

But...yay points, I guess. Except, for their careers, Blair actually scores MORE (and better) than Seraphin. So...yay...something.

That's what runs through Randy's head as he dons a "F*ck Analytics" t-shirt.

[Kanyewest]

Well...Seraphin did play better than Blair in the preseason, but Seraphin was still terrible. It's just that Blair was even worse.

Yup, and that's why Seraphin has beaten out Blair in the rotation. Wittman, isn't one to reward players for past success. For instance, Webster was better than Ariza in 2012-13, but that didn't stop Wittman from playing Ariza over Webster.

It may be that Blair is learning a new system and new teammates. Seraphin in the meantime has been coached by Wittman, either as an assistant of a head coach since he's been in the NBA. Again, Blair may eventually get another chance because Seraphin isn't playing lights out basketball.

[Nivek]

Yup, and that's why Seraphin has beaten out Blair in the rotation. Wittman, isn't one to reward players for past success.

This is bad decision-making, though. You don't just ignore 4-5 years worth of information because of a handful of games that don't mean anything -- especially when one guy's performance is an aberration, and the other's is basically the same thing he's always done.

For instance, Webster was better than Ariza in 2012-13, but that didn't stop Wittman from playing Ariza over Webster.

Not that great an example. In 2012-13, the two were (at least in my analysis) about the same. Webster rated slightly better, but not anything significant. In that case, a more comprehensive look at the two would have suggested playing Ariza ahead of Webster because Ariza had been the better and more consistent producer. Webster was coming of the best season of his career.

It may be that Blair is learning a new system and new teammates. Seraphin in the meantime has been coached by Wittman, either as an assistant of a head coach since he's been in the NBA. Again, Blair may eventually get another chance because Seraphin isn't playing lights out basketball.

That may be. Point is: with all those "advantages," Seraphin has continued to play poorly. It's possible that Blait could be even worse, although that seems unlikely given his history.

Actually, what I wouldn't mind seeing is them starting Humphries and bringing Nenê off the bench as the third big. That would essentially render the Seraphin or Blair decision moot.

[dckingsfan]

At this point the FC should be Nene, Humphries, Gortat, Gooden and PP. That is all - IMO.

[Nivek]

At this point the FC should be Nene, Humphries, Gortat, Gooden and PP. That is all - IMO.

I think I'd drop Gooden from that list, for the most part. Gooden is an AWFUL defender. Maybe break the minutes down something like:

C: Gortat -- 32
C: Nenê -- 16
PF: Humphries -- 28
PF: Nenê -- 8
PF: Pierce -- 12

More or less. That opens more SF time for Porter too.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I didn't see the point in bringing back Seraphin. (And now that the season is underway, I'm baffled by the decision to play him.)

Seraphin outplayed Blair in the preseason which isn't saying much. Blair was great in the postseason against the Spurs. But in the preseason, Blair couldn't create his shot - more often blocked, he was turnover prone, and fouled at an incredibly high rate. I think Blair will get another chance to showcase his talents. In the past, Blair has been a better player than Seraphin but perhaps adjusting to Wittman vs playing under great coaches like Pop and Carlisle will take some time to adjust.

I am almost to the point of hoping Blair requests a trade.

Seraphin's been Randy's player for 4 seasons, counting when Wittman was an assistant coach. Humphries has more size and fills backup PF. Gooden is also a guy Randy is loyal to. He came to the Wizards for cheap and gave them a boost to make the playoffs. Those guys are ahead of Dejuan Blair in the pecking order. Blair is never going to have the height to shine in the eye test as a C. He doesn't score like Seraphin, although he actually can score when in rhythm. DJB does get his shot blocked. Blair also has a high foul rate, but no worse than Kevin. Still, Randy like Kevin at C. Gortat rightfully deserves the bulk of minutes at C. What's Blair to do?

I wonder if Don Newman and Blair are close from time in San Antonio? He might be able to withstand a protracted stay on the bench if he's content or has a friend on the coaching staff. Otherwise, the guy is playing for virtual peanuts and he isn't getting playing time. That cannot feel good for him right now.

[Kanyewest]

I am almost to the point of hoping Blair requests a trade.

Seraphin's been Randy's player for 4 seasons, counting when Wittman was an assistant coach. Humphries has more size and fills backup PF. Gooden is also a guy Randy is loyal to. He came to the Wizards for cheap and gave them a boost to make the playoffs. Those guys are ahead of Dejuan Blair in the pecking order. Blair is never going to have the height to shine in the eye test as a C. He doesn't score like Seraphin, although he actually can score when in rhythm. DJB does get his shot blocked. Blair also has a high foul rate, but no worse than Kevin. Still, Randy like Kevin at C. Gortat rightfully deserves the bulk of minutes at C. What's Blair to do?

I wonder if Don Newman and Blair are close from time in San Antonio? He might be able to withstand a protracted stay on the bench if he's content or has a friend on the coaching staff. Otherwise, the guy is playing for virtual peanuts and he isn't getting playing time. That cannot feel good for him right now.

Blair ended up taking the bigger paycheck here rather than staying in Dallas. It's not the first time a guy has taken more money to be in a less than ideal situation.

Blair is simply going to have to wait. Seraphin has outplayed so far in preseason and the regular season- and maybe even in practice. I think low sample size has more to do with than loyalty to Seraphin. Gooden/Al Harriongton got minutes over Seraphin, Vesley, and Singleton.

Blair will get his chance if Seraphin starts shooting with less efficiency (62.5 TS% is solid). Or maybe when Washington loses a couple of games when the competition gets tougher- and Wittman will look to make adjustments.

BTW, Blair should have an inherent advantage of being coached by both Pop and Carlisle - two of the best coaches in the NBA. Seraphin would probably be considered a more competent player if he was coached from the start in the Spurs system.

[nate33]

Well...Seraphin did play better than Blair in the preseason, but Seraphin was still terrible. It's just that Blair was even worse. But...it's preseason. And, both guys have been in the league for a few years, so there's plenty of information about both of them and how they produce. Blair has been better. A lot better. Like, not close.

So far this season, Seraphin has show a good percentage from the floor, but his rebounding is as bad as ever, he's a rampant fouler (still), and he's a turnover machine. Plus, he doesn't get to the FT line, and he's not a good defender.

But...yay points, I guess. Except, for their careers, Blair actually scores MORE (and better) than Seraphin. So...yay...something.

Blair played well on a unique Dallas Mavericks team that had Dirk and/or Wright spreading the floor. Blair's lack of an outside shot wasn't such a liability. On the Wizards, he doesn't have the luxury. Play him at PF and there goes our pick and roll game and Wall's ability to penetrate. Play him at C and we have no rim protection whatsoever on defense.

I'm not convinced that Blair's poor preseason performance relative to Seraphin was a fluke. I think Blair is a really bad fit on this roster. I don't blame Wittman for playing Seraphin in front of him. Indeed, once Wittman started giving Seraphin regular minutes (starting in our 4th game, against NY), Seraphin has been half-decent. Over those 5 games, he is posting an ORtg of 108 and the team is +13 with him on the floor.

I really wish he could rebound though. Playing alongside Humphries should help compensate a bit.

[DCZards]

Actually, what I wouldn't mind seeing is them starting Humphries and bringing Nenê off the bench as the third big. That would essentially render the Seraphin or Blair decision moot.

Totally agree on starting Hump over Nene. While there's a lot to like about the chemistry that's developed between Gortat and Nene, there's even more to like about the rebounding, toughness and athleticism (at least compared to Nene) that Hump would bring to the starting lineup. It would also reduce Nene's minutes and the wear-and-tear on his aging body.

And bringing Nene off the bench would give the Zards a scoring big man off the bench and, as you say, lessen the need to play Seraphin.