Official Trade Thread - Part XXX

[Ruzious]

My point was that it would be ultrafoolish to start from scratch in a year where we don't even have any draft picks and you do have cap room. You don't have the assets to start a rebuild, but you do have the cap room to make major improvements. Therefore, you have to make a stab at making the major improvements this offseason. Starting from scratch includes trading John Wall. Do you really want to do that this offseason?

That's not quite the right way of looking at things, as I reason it.

Not having draft picks this year isn't a consideration for blowing things up or not, because the results of this season are a sunk cost. They've happened and nothing we can do now will change them.

On the other hand, trying to patch together a semi-competitive (but ultimately futile) squad around Wall will impact draft picks to come, and thus the future of the team. For examples of this, see the career of Ernie Grunfeld.

As for your points about free agency and cap room, sure. As I said, take a shot, there's nothing to lose. But I would consider it foolish to plan for or rely on free agency this year. The NBA has never seen a situation where so many teams will be bidding big money for the same number of players. There are going to be insane contracts offered by desperate or poorly run teams... it's not a situation to bet your team's future on.

If you read my long post you will see that I advocate looking to make trades after free agency sweeps through and most teams are left broken hearted or picking for scraps among mediocre players. So again, make a case to the handful of difference makers... but if you can't land one of those (and there are not many!), the most reasonable course of action is to detonate the current roster.

Lastly, yes, I would absolutely trade Wall if the right offer was available. As I noted in my longer post, I would be patient with Wall and try to move Beal and Morris first. If it took until the deadline, that's fine; Denver was patient with Melo and that worked out fine for them (asset acquisition wise).

Well, if you don't even try to fashion a plan this offseason to try to build with the assets they have, you will lose whatever fan base you have - including me. Again, if they fail - then I could see breaking up the team and tanking - so you get a high pick which is vital to a rebuild, but recognize that's a disaster situation that's likely going to take several years to climb out of. Starting this offseason with the intention of trading Wall would be shooting yourself in the kneecap.

[Ruzious]

Lol Ill, I'm re-reading our posts, and I think both of us are guilty of poor communication skills. We're saying we disagree with each other while saying we'd do the same things. We're just emphasizing different things. I'm emphasizing this offseason, and you're talking about the trade deadline. I think that's where we started talking past each other instead of listening.

[payitforward]

It's pretty much a given that the Wiz will sign Beal. So, no it's not starting from scratch - because the 6 guys are going to be the bulk of what they build around. If you blow up the core of the roster, then you start from scratch. You could even make the case that as long as they have Wall, they're not starting from scratch. We "aren't" starting from scratch this offseason. AGAIN, it would be

Spoiler:

STUPID

to do so when you have no picks and you do have enough talent to take a shot with cap room.

I agree that it's very likely we sign Beal. For the max or something near it, I'd guess? Lets just plug in a figure for next year: $16m -- does that seem a likely number?

In that case, we have 6 players not 5, and we've got $60m committed. Where do the other 8-9 players come from? Well, lets assume we re-sign Dudley and Sessions. They've both been quite good; they're both unrestricted; there's *a lot* of $$ floating around this off season. This year they made @ a combined $6.5m -- that's going to go up, right? Maybe $9m for the two of them next year? Does that seem right? Temple will have played 2100 minutes this year (after 750 minutes last year), and he's played pretty well -- especially given how much he's played against starters. I think he's established himself and is likely to get $2m+ next year. It wouldn't be easy to replace him for any less.

That's $71m for 9 guys. Oh, and those guys have been the heart of a .500 team (if that). Same guys = same team. Except Porter, who was really good, will be even better. We have 2 point guards, 2 shooting guards, 3 SFs, 1 PF and 1 C.

Now what? Bring back Nene? We've played 73 games, and he just cracked 900 minutes. How much are you willing to pay him? How little will he take? The last 5 seasons he's taken in $65 million. Is he going to beat himself up for another $2m I wonder? OTOH, if he plays 1000 minutes, is he worth e.g. $5m to us? I can't see it. $4m? If I were Nene, I'd be retiring!

But lets assume he does come back. Whatever we bring him back for, with him we're still 10 guys from the same team that's 36-37 at this writing.

So, now we're at @ $75m, and we need 4 guys. I don't think Biyombo will take his $3m player option, do you? Suppose we sign him for $4.5m, and 2 other guys, whoever, for a total of $3m.

Ok, at @$82m, we've got 13 guys. We're exactly the same team as this year, except Biyombo makes us somewhat better (assuming Ernie has the brains to sign Biyombo -- which I imagine you and I both doubt).

We're all set to sign our top-shelf FA. The guy that is going to take the same team as this year's .500 team and rocket us to the rafters.

Hmmm, how much cap room do we really have I wonder? Was my addition incorrect? Are we going to get Beal for less?

Anyway, who is that guy -- who is rocket man? The guy who is not just there to give us "a jolt" but to give us... what? I know -- A Mega Jolt!

Who's Mr. Mega Jolt? Anyone have an idea?

[Illuminaire]

To answer this question, I started a spreadsheet: http://tinyurl.com/jm6hshx

The site I pulled the agent lists from seems to have a few errors - I think it's ignoring player or team options. Which means there are fewer available free agents than this, but I haven't had time to cross reference another list and find out which.

I highlighted the handful of guys that could make the team significantly better. You will notice it is not a very long list. I would also point out that the Wizards can only realistically get one target player... and they'd be filling out the rest of the roster with scrubs. So for everyone who thinks free agency is a viable means to correct EG's mistakes this season, I think you are destined for disappointment.

I added 2017 guys in other tabs but haven't messed with them at all yet. Will do that after I cull the players with options from all the lists.

[Ruzious]

PIF, I would assume we don't re-sign Dudley unless he's willing to play for the minimum, and I likely wouldn't pay more than 3 mil for Sessions. The Wiz should have over 30 mil to fill the 7 to 9 roster spots. When I have time, I'll try to come up with a plan on how I'd spend it.

[Illuminaire]

Yeah, but... why?

They need a significant improvement in the talent base. The players who can do that will take a max offer. So that 30 million dollars for 7-9 players rapidly becomes more like 8 million for 6-8 dudes.

Sorry if I seem negative to your ideas Ruz. I don't think we're actually that far apart, except that when I look at the Wizard's roster construction I see no reasonable hope with the current setup. It really is Durant or bust at this point - and even with Durant, it would take until the second year or a really smart Beal sign-and-trade to fill out the roster.

[payitforward]

Ruz: look forward to seeing the plan. There are probably some posters here who don't enjoy this kind of stuff -- but I do. Maybe we should have a "post your plan" thread? Call it something like "The Wiz: From Here to Where?"

Dudley: I don't think you can get players for the minimum who produce at his level and will give you the almost 2200 minutes we'll have gotten from him; I think that's unrealistic. I probably overestimate what he'll earn in my post above, but it'll likely be *more* not less than he earned this year.

Play him at the 3, and he is considerably above average. In fact, he's played some 2 for a good part of his career. If he were the primary backup at both wing positions, we could hardly do better. We've played him mostly at the 4, which makes no sense.

Had we signed Biyombo last off season, and not bothered w/ Anderson or Neal, and not made the trade for Morris, we'd have had roster room for a young 4 like Alan Williams, we'd have been a better team and had a better record, and we'd have a mid-R1 pick in the upcoming draft.

It's amazing how quickly the soup tastes bad once Ernie starts p#ssing in it.

[popper]

I'd like to sign and trade Beal in return for a young big with upside and a first round pick.

[LyricalRico]

I'd like to sign and trade Beal in return for a young big with upside and a first round pick.

You and me both, but in order for it to work we have to find a team with max cap space that is willing to give up a young because they feel they are a SG away from being good. Not sure who that is. Maybe Beal to the Kings for WCS+Collison+McLemore+pick?

[gambitx777]

I'd like to sign and trade Beal in return for a young big with upside and a first round pick.

You and me both, but in order for it to work we have to find a team with max cap space that is willing to give up a young because they feel they are a SG away from being good. Not sure who that is. Maybe Beal to the Kings for WCS+Collison+McLemore+pick?

I think the kings are a good place for Beal, but I also think that and I have been saying this for about a year. 76ers ! They need a young established high caliber guy, they need a first option they need a guy like beal. Noel and a pick (maybe 2 if they are late rounders) would probably get the job done. They need to start turning all these picks and young guys into something.

[Ruzious]

Ruz: look forward to seeing the plan. There are probably some posters here who don't enjoy this kind of stuff -- but I do. Maybe we should have a "post your plan" thread? Call it something like "The Wiz: From Here to Where?"

Dudley: I don't think you can get players for the minimum who produce at his level and will give you the almost 2200 minutes we'll have gotten from him; I think that's unrealistic. I probably overestimate what he'll earn in my post above, but it'll likely be *more* not less than he earned this year.

Play him at the 3, and he is considerably above average. In fact, he's played some 2 for a good part of his career. If he were the primary backup at both wing positions, we could hardly do better. We've played him mostly at the 4, which makes no sense.

Had we signed Biyombo last off season, and not bothered w/ Anderson or Neal, and not made the trade for Morris, we'd have had roster room for a young 4 like Alan Williams, we'd have been a better team and had a better record, and we'd have a mid-R1 pick in the upcoming draft.

It's amazing how quickly the soup tastes bad once Ernie starts p#ssing in it.

Agreed - it can be a fun exercise. I'm not a Dudley fan, and one of the problems with this year's team is that it relied on Dudley for those nearly 2,200 minutes. I don't think he helps teams win. He manages to combine the qualities of being both under-sized and painfully unathletic - not normally found in one individual. He also doesn't have a position. At PF, he's the single worst rebounder in the NBA and doesn't begin to have the length I'd look for. At SF, he's better than at PF, but he's still way too slow, imo. And if you just look at his efficiency stats, you get mislead, because he doesn't do enough to be productive. At a higher rate of usage, he'd be much less efficient. Instead, he passes up shots unless he's completely wide open.

As for plan, remember I've said several times - If we have a terrible offseason, then I do agree we should blow it up. But to just give up and not try to do something this offseason would not be forgiven by the declining fan base - and rightly so, imo.

[payitforward]

...Dudley: I don't think you can get players for the minimum who produce at his level and will give you the almost 2200 minutes we'll have gotten from him; I think that's unrealistic. I probably overestimate what he'll earn in my post above, but it'll likely be *more* not less than he earned this year.

Play him at the 3, and he is considerably above average. In fact, he's played some 2 for a good part of his career. If he were the primary backup at both wing positions, we could hardly do better. We've played him mostly at the 4, which makes no sense.

Had we signed Biyombo last off season, and not bothered w/ Anderson or Neal, and not made the trade for Morris, we'd have had roster room for a young 4 like Alan Williams, we'd have been a better team and had a better record...

...I'm not a Dudley fan, and one of the problems with this year's team is that it relied on Dudley for those nearly 2,200 minutes. I don't think he helps teams win. He manages to combine the qualities of being both under-sized and painfully unathletic - not normally found in one individual. He also doesn't have a position. At PF, he's the single worst rebounder in the NBA and doesn't begin to have the length I'd look for. At SF, he's better than at PF, but he's still way too slow, imo. And if you just look at his efficiency stats, you get mislead, because he doesn't do enough to be productive. At a higher rate of usage, he'd be much less efficient. Instead, he passes up shots unless he's completely wide open....

We're not that far apart, but I think you mischaracterize the problem in re: Dudley. The problem is that we played him at the 4, where, as you point out, he can't be effective overall. But, season after season after season, he's been extremely effective at the 3 (and sometimes at the 2).

That's where I was going w/ my point about Biyombo. Nene's minutes move to PF, Dudley's to SF/SG, Temple plays a lot less, ditto Neal/Thornton/whoever, and in effect you've replaced what below average SGs produce with what Biyombo produces. You're a better team -- by a lot (not to mention that you haven't traded for a non-entity PF like Morris to clog up your roster -- and you still have a R1 pick).

As to efficiency stats being misleading -- I can't see that. The game is won by efficiency. Period. Neither size nor athleticism matter at all -- in themselves (tho Dudley does look like he should be playing in the accountant's league -- I can't deny it -- ).

I *like* that Dudley only shoots when he's open. He's posting a .60 TS%. He only shoots 9.3 times per 40 minutes, but you get 10.8 points out of those shots! Only two SFs have a better TS% than Dudley -- Durant and Leonard.

Not trying to over-sell him -- my point is that you won't find more production for the $$ you'd spend on him.

[Ruzious]

...Dudley: I don't think you can get players for the minimum who produce at his level and will give you the almost 2200 minutes we'll have gotten from him; I think that's unrealistic. I probably overestimate what he'll earn in my post above, but it'll likely be *more* not less than he earned this year.

Play him at the 3, and he is considerably above average. In fact, he's played some 2 for a good part of his career. If he were the primary backup at both wing positions, we could hardly do better. We've played him mostly at the 4, which makes no sense.

Had we signed Biyombo last off season, and not bothered w/ Anderson or Neal, and not made the trade for Morris, we'd have had roster room for a young 4 like Alan Williams, we'd have been a better team and had a better record...

...I'm not a Dudley fan, and one of the problems with this year's team is that it relied on Dudley for those nearly 2,200 minutes. I don't think he helps teams win. He manages to combine the qualities of being both under-sized and painfully unathletic - not normally found in one individual. He also doesn't have a position. At PF, he's the single worst rebounder in the NBA and doesn't begin to have the length I'd look for. At SF, he's better than at PF, but he's still way too slow, imo. And if you just look at his efficiency stats, you get mislead, because he doesn't do enough to be productive. At a higher rate of usage, he'd be much less efficient. Instead, he passes up shots unless he's completely wide open....

We're not that far apart, but I think you mischaracterize the problem in re: Dudley. The problem is that we played him at the 4, where, as you point out, he can't be effective overall. But, season after season after season, he's been extremely effective at the 3 (and sometimes at the 2).

That's where I was going w/ my point about Biyombo. Nene's minutes move to PF, Dudley's to SF/SG, Temple plays a lot less, ditto Neal/Thornton/whoever, and in effect you've replaced what below average SGs produce with what Biyombo produces. You're a better team -- by a lot (not to mention that you haven't traded for a non-entity PF like Morris to clog up your roster -- and you still have a R1 pick).

As to efficiency stats being misleading -- I can't see that. The game is won by efficiency. Period. Neither size nor athleticism matter at all -- in themselves (tho Dudley does look like he should be playing in the accountant's league -- I can't deny it -- ).

I *like* that Dudley only shoots when he's open. He's posting a .60 TS%. He only shoots 9.3 times per 40 minutes, but you get 10.8 points out of those shots! Only two SFs have a better TS% than Dudley -- Durant and Leonard.

Not trying to over-sell him -- my point is that you won't find more production for the $$ you'd spend on him.

Efficiency combined with production wins. Low usage players don't impress me much - as some country singer used to say. And generally speaking you don't get production and efficiency with someone as physically limited as Duds.

I'll agree with you to the extent that he's not as bad at SF as he is at PF. Anyway, I don't think either of us is budging on this.

[Illuminaire]

To be fair, I think Ruz' point is that you can't lean on Dudley for more. He plays within himself (which is great) but those limits are fairly narrow.

Personally, Dudley is exactly the kind of player I'd want coming off the bench. Just not a key starter.

[gesa2]

I would still look to trade Beal to a place like Philly, Boston, Kings, LAC something like that where you can get a decent player and maybe a pick in return for a sign and trade. Kings might take him and give us bellnelli and their first for him? Noel and a first from philly, (they have like picks 3-4 this year) Boston ( maybe that nets pick and micky or something a little less like their late pick and Kelly O ) LAC J.J. and a Pick?

I understand the frustration with Beal because I've had it with him as well. But even the pure analytics folks say next year is really the pivotal year. He doesnt need to be the next great SG, but simply the next Khris Middleton or Klay Thompson. Both of whom struggled until they broke out in their 3rd year at 23.

Again, If we assume that Beal takes the next leap as a SG, Otto continues his improvements (though not as pronounced), We replace Gortat with Whiteside, and we add Satoransky... Then I think that is a strong team in the East. This also includes no real improvement from Wall. He would simply improve by taking less shots with Satoransky and an improved Beal/Otto.

As I've said before with Beal. There are 4 general outcomes with him going foward as a player.
1) He takes big leap and becomes top tier SG.
2) He takes gradual leap each of the next 2 years and becomes Wes Mathews/Kris Middleton (AS conversation, but not elite).
3) He becomes marginally better, but not note worthy and essentially becomes role player
4) He makes no improvement and has continuing injuries.

If he gets a 4-year max (4/96M), then he is a positive asset in scenarios 1 and 2, somewhat neutral asset in scenario 3, and a negative asset in scenario 4. If we take out the two extremes (Scenarios 1 & 4), then our real downside appears to be a player that would have to be dumped on one of the many losers in the 2017 FA period. I can live with that, but I can't watch us let him walk and feel the way Detroit or Utah did about letting Middleton and Mathews go.

I still agree with this. The odds of our current talent led by a new, competent GM, getting to contention are better over the next 5 years than they would be by blowing it up again. We need to find budget talent to help, though, along the lines of Portland signing Wes Matthews for the MLE or hitting a second rounder. And GMEG ain't getting us there.

Great to see you back on the board more Illuminaire, missed you. I still remember you pushing for Kawhi for our 6th pick. Most prescient board prediction I've seen.

[payitforward]

Efficiency combined with production wins. Low usage players don't impress me much - as some country singer used to say. And generally speaking you don't get production and efficiency with someone as physically limited as Duds.

I'll agree with you to the extent that he's not as bad at SF as he is at PF. Anyway, I don't think either of us is budging on this.

No worries -- just tell me who we could get for e.g. $4-5m who would give us more.

Edit: High usage, high efficiency players are stars -- that's more or less by definition. No one wants to call Dudley a star. Terrific guy to have on your team, however.

And you expressed yourself as only willing to retain Dudley for the minimum salary. That's what I take issue with. You really sticking with that?

[thricethefun]

Would you guys want to do a Beal sign and trade for Love this summer?

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Am I the only one that would seriously consider blowing up the team entirely at this point? The only thing that makes me disinclined to do so are Wall's age, and the cap situations for summer '16 and '17. As currently constructed this team will not become a second tier contender in the East, let alone a legit contender. I'd be very tempted to trade virtually everything of value away over the coming two years if not for Wall's age, Beal's impending potential FA, and those cap dollars.

Anyone else getting to the point where blowing up the team wouldn't bother them at all?

At this point I would trade Wall for the rights to Kris Dunn, expiring deals and a future first.

I would let Beal walk. He's fragile and not worth a max deal.

[sashae]

Would you guys want to do a Beal sign and trade for Love this summer?

I'd do it in a heartbeat, even if Love's future production is unsure. There is no possible way I'd max out Beal, and I'd bet dollars to donuts someone with fat pockets is paying him 15-18m+ this offseason just due to the huge amount of available funds chasing a small amount of players.

[payitforward]

...The odds of our current talent led by a new, competent GM, getting to contention are better over the next 5 years than they would be by blowing it up again. We need to find budget talent to help, though, along the lines of Portland signing Wes Matthews for the MLE or hitting a second rounder...

"Our current talent" -- I'm starting to wonder whether I'm the only one who sees how little we actually have: Oubre, who like any 20 year old is a question mark; Gortat who isn't someone to project for his performance 5 years from now; Morris, who's a nonentity; Beal, who is a complete riddle -- and we have two guys who are outstanding (but certainly not superstars): Wall and Porter.

We have no picks this year - neither R1 nor R2 - and we have no R2 pick next year (so much for "hitting a second rounder"). Nor do we have nearly the cap room people seem to think we do: we've got $45.5m committed to only 5 players.

We need 9 more players than that! Beal will either be back for a lot of $$ or, if not, he is the only asset we have to work with in a trade. If he's back for, say, $16m then we'll have $61m going to 6 guys -- the same guys who got us to 36-38 this year -- and still need 8 players, some of whom are supposed to make us much better ("getting to contention"). Salaries will jump next year all the way up and down the list, and we're going to be buying lots of guys at the new retail. Good luck!

This will be a *much* harder rebuild than the last one, where we had tons of assets to work with -- lots of high picks, lots of cap space, etc. -- and Ernie blew that one.

Right now, the Wizards look like a team on the way down, unfortunately, not a team on the way up.

Now... I could be wrong: if we retain Beal and he turns into a star, if Porter takes as big a jump next year as he did this year, if Oubre develops quickly and becomes the force that his athleticism makes seem possible, if Satoransky actually comes over (season after next) and is a tremendous player, etc. etc. etc., then we will be a meaningful presence in the East -- not contend for a championship but at least be good. But... that's a lot of "ifs" and IMO it's still a failure: we'll watch teams that were behind us do the title contending.