GT #37: Hornets @ Zards 7 PM

[FAH1223]

So, Bryant and Sato are restricted. Is Dekker restricted?

I guess it doesn't really matter unless one of Wall, Porter or Beal is traded. I would think we can't sign them all given our cap situation.

And I am guessing Wall is untradeable now. Guessing teams that want to win this season would be wary of Porter as well.

'They're all restricted.

Luxury Tax line will be $133M, thats the magic number give or take a million or two.

Salary cap? Forget about having cap space until 2021.

[payitforward]

...Kieff being out helps the D but hurts the O.

? No. Kieff is posting a below average TS% this year (as he has every year but 2 of his career). He also gets a below average # of offensive boards & only .1 more steals than average (per 40 minutes), so he isn't increasing our offensive possessions either.

[Dat2U]

So, Bryant and Sato are restricted. Is Dekker restricted?

I guess it doesn't really matter unless one of Wall, Porter or Beal is traded. I would think we can't sign them all given our cap situation.

And I am guessing Wall is untradeable now. Guessing teams that want to win this season would be wary of Porter as well.

'They're all restricted.

Luxury Tax line will be $133M, thats the magic number give or take a million or two.

Salary cap? Forget about having cap space until 2021.

I'm not buying Dekker quite yet. His jump shot ranges from passable to worst in the league depending on the week.

I would not make an offer to him. If he comes back on a minimum salaried deal, that's a different story.

[nate33]

So, Bryant and Sato are restricted. Is Dekker restricted?

I guess it doesn't really matter unless one of Wall, Porter or Beal is traded. I would think we can't sign them all given our cap situation.

And I am guessing Wall is untradeable now. Guessing teams that want to win this season would be wary of Porter as well.

'They're all restricted.

Luxury Tax line will be $133M, thats the magic number give or take a million or two.

Salary cap? Forget about having cap space until 2021.

I'm not buying Dekker quite yet. His jump shot ranges from passable to worst in the league depending on the week.

I would not make an offer to him. If he comes back on a minimum salaried deal, that's a different story.

Agreed. Dekker has a $3.9M qualifying offer. That seems a little rich based on his career so far. I'd try and sign him for something like $3M a year with the second year a team option.

[montestewart]

'They're all restricted.

Luxury Tax line will be $133M, thats the magic number give or take a million or two.

Salary cap? Forget about having cap space until 2021.

I'm not buying Dekker quite yet. His jump shot ranges from passable to worst in the league depending on the week.

I would not make an offer to him. If he comes back on a minimum salaried deal, that's a different story.

Agreed. Dekker has a $3.9M qualifying offer. That seems a little rich based on his career so far. I'd try and sign him for something like $3M a year with the second year a team option.

I can't remember, have the Wizards managed a team option in any recent deals?

[payitforward]

I'm not buying Dekker quite yet. His jump shot ranges from passable to worst in the league depending on the week.

I would not make an offer to him. If he comes back on a minimum salaried deal, that's a different story.

Agreed. Dekker has a $3.9M qualifying offer. That seems a little rich based on his career so far. I'd try and sign him for something like $3M a year with the second year a team option.

Dekker doesn't shoot the 3 well at all. OTOH, he is over 59% on 2's -- for his career!

Is this guy a 3 or a 4? If he's a 3, his career numbers look really good. If he's a 4, he's below average.

Either way, he's been terrific for us so far -- tho that's only 118 minutes. But, if he plays out the season at the same level you won't get him for $3m.

I might reframe the question: it's not so much whether $3.9m is "a little rich" for Dekker, it's more... who are we going to get to play on the team next year? If you wanted a better forward than Sam who will cost under $4m next year, who is that going to be? How are we going to acquire him?

[payitforward]

I might point out that, on his career, Sam Dekker has put up significantly better numbers than Jeff Green. &, obviously, Green will go downhill while Dekker has a chance to get better.

Now, Green is a veteran minimum player. But as a 10 year veteran he's making $2.4m this year. I'd a good deal rather have Sam Dekker at $4m than Jeff at $2.4m.

[dckingsfan]

I might point out that, on his career, Sam Dekker has put up significantly better numbers than Jeff Green. &, obviously, Green will go downhill while Dekker has a chance to get better.

Now, Green is a veteran minimum player. But as a 10 year veteran he's making $2.4m this year. I'd a good deal rather have Sam Dekker at $4m than Jeff at $2.4m.

And he does seem to be improving over time - barely played in 2015-16 and then:

Code: Select all

Season   Age   MP     TS%     AST%   TOV%   USG%   DRB%   STL%   BLK% DRTG
2016-17   22   1419   0.549   7.7    8.2    14.9   14.6   1.3    1.2  110
2017-18   23   883    0.534   6.2   10.4    15.5   16.0   1.3    0.9  111
2018-19   24   324    0.576   8.2    7.9    16.9   16.5   3.2    0.8  112


[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I have to think that Brooks was not playing Brown as an FU to Ernie since Brooks probably won't be around next season and is not interested in developing people even if Brown is better than the alternative of Ron Baker. Now he basically has no choice with Wall done. I mean he has a choice but Baker couldn't make a jumper if you gave him 10 tries and nobody guarding him.

I like Brown. I think Baker will fit in off the bench but is NOT a good player. NO EXCUSE for playing Baker over Brown except dullard coach prefers veterans. Thus, Satoransky almost never got to play his first season as a Wizard.

[Dat2U]

I'm not buying Dekker quite yet. His jump shot ranges from passable to worst in the league depending on the week.

I would not make an offer to him. If he comes back on a minimum salaried deal, that's a different story.

Agreed. Dekker has a $3.9M qualifying offer. That seems a little rich based on his career so far. I'd try and sign him for something like $3M a year with the second year a team option.

Dekker doesn't shoot the 3 well at all. OTOH, he is over 59% on 2's -- for his career!

Is this guy a 3 or a 4? If he's a 3, his career numbers look really good. If he's a 4, he's below average.

Either way, he's been terrific for us so far -- tho that's only 118 minutes. But, if he plays out the season at the same level you won't get him for $3m.

I might reframe the question: it's not so much whether $3.9m is "a little rich" for Dekker, it's more... who are we going to get to play on the team next year? If you wanted a better forward than Sam who will cost under $4m next year, who is that going to be? How are we going to acquire him?

The way Dekker shoots, he has to be a 4 right? Unless you got marksmen at the 4 & 5. His defense is meh at best too. I think hes a 5th forward. I wouldn't be ready to trust him as a rotation player on a playoff team but he can eat up minutes when needed.

As far as acquiring a better forward then Sam, they got Sam as a throw in for a salary dump of Jason Smith. It doesn't sound completely impossible.

[payitforward]

Fair enough. & I don't mean to be making some big case for Sam Dekker. But, at least for us so far, I'm sure you'll agree that he's been pretty good for a salary dump! Especially if you consider that this is a team with a 13-23 record & a payroll that is way over the luxury tax line!

Not to mention that we gave a lottery pick for a guy, Kieff, who isn't as good as Dekker -- that is, his career numbers aren't nearly as good, & he's not putting up numbers right now that are nearly as good. It's not even close.

In a way that's my point: we've got $111m guaranteed to 5 guys next year. That may change, but for the moment it means we have @$25m to add 9 guys. The only player among those 5 who's in any sense a PF is Porter. A decision about whether/what to offer Sam Dekker has to be made in that context.

Final point: names don't win games. Numbers win games. Sam Dekker has been about a zillion times better than Trevor Ariza since he arrived. Don't react; go look at their numbers.

[dckingsfan]

Game is about to start! Same starting lineup as last night.

Let's lose Wizards! Tank for Zion!

Sadly Eli - you need to start this game thread. Then again, it might be a curse if you don't akin to the curse of Millie...