Wizards 2019 Offseason Thread

[verbal8]

Another purpose I see, a possible purpose at least, is along the lines of your suggestion to perhaps sign Jabari Parker to see whether a still young and obviously gifted athlete will finally put it together. In the nature of things, that's a long shot, but there can be individual cases where the argument to do it is strong.

I think there is a good chance that Parker gets signed by the Wizards to a relatively high 1 year deal. He might want a multi-year deal, but I don't see any team being that interested in offering it. The Wizards will have luxury tax space and a big deal for Parker could be a way to use it.

[pcbothwel]

Another purpose I see, a possible purpose at least, is along the lines of your suggestion to perhaps sign Jabari Parker to see whether a still young and obviously gifted athlete will finally put it together. In the nature of things, that's a long shot, but there can be individual cases where the argument to do it is strong.

I think there is a good chance that Parker gets signed by the Wizards to a relatively high 1 year deal. He might want a multi-year deal, but I don't see any team being that interested in offering it. The Wizards will have luxury tax space and a big deal for Parker could be a way to use it.

See... Here is my issue with this line of thinking. Would you rather have Parker or Ariza on a 1 year deal for 8-10M?
The answer is clearly Ariza. Ariza is the better player and would be a great guide to Brown and our Rookie.
Parker plays zero defense and plays with poor instincts.... and for what upside?
If Parker breaks out we win 38 games instead of 35?
Its not like we'd get some discount in keeping him the following year either, so I guess I just dont see it.

Again, I'd be open to cheap deal, but I still think some team will overpay based on his age and hype.
Give my Ariza & Dekker for the same price and play some good basketball.

[DCZards]

See... Here is my issue with this line of thinking. Would you rather have Parker or Ariza on a 1 year deal for 8-10M?
The answer is clearly Ariza. Ariza is the better player and would be a great guide to Brown and our Rookie.
Parker plays zero defense and plays with poor instincts.... and for what upside?
If Parker breaks out we win 38 games instead of 35?
Its not like we'd get some discount in keeping him the following year either, so I guess I just dont see it.

Again, I'd be open to cheap deal, but I still think some team will overpay based on his age and hype.
Give my Ariza & Dekker for the same price and play some good basketball.

Here's an excerpt from an article about Parker on Bullets Forever:

The case for starting Jabari Parker

His on/off court number also tell an interesting story. The Wizards have a +4.4 net rating with Parker on the floor, and a -6.6 net rating with him off the floor since he has arrived. Surprising, right? And interestingly enough, the player who said “They don’t pay players to play defense”, has the second best defensive rating of the players on this team over that stretch.

There are caveats with all of this. We’re looking at nine games in a reserve role against lesser talent. It is fair to question if Parker would have the same impact in a starting role, but with 19 games left in the season and a team option on the horizon, shouldn’t the Wizards take a look?

The Wizards do not have a forward under contract for next season. Their current starters at the small and power forward, Trevor Ariza and Jeff Green, will enter their age 34 and 33 seasons respectively and will be unrestricted free agents this July. While perhaps a decision should not be made based on age alone, there could be a merit-based argument to play Parker in a more prominent role as the season winds down.

I’m not here to convince anyone that Jabari Parker will fulfill the potential that made him the second overall pick in the 2014 draft. He may not clean up the turnovers which are hindering his current play or get past the injuries which derailed the early part of his career. What I am here to say is that in his short time with the Wizards, the team has been better with him on the court than off. His unique skills are a welcome sight for a team that hasn’t always had an urgency to play downhill, pass-first basketball and has lacked a forward with his playmaking abilities.

https://www.bulletsforever.com/2019/3/5/18252058/jabari-parker-washington-wizards-starting-lineup

[Dat2U]

Another purpose I see, a possible purpose at least, is along the lines of your suggestion to perhaps sign Jabari Parker to see whether a still young and obviously gifted athlete will finally put it together. In the nature of things, that's a long shot, but there can be individual cases where the argument to do it is strong.

I think there is a good chance that Parker gets signed by the Wizards to a relatively high 1 year deal. He might want a multi-year deal, but I don't see any team being that interested in offering it. The Wizards will have luxury tax space and a big deal for Parker could be a way to use it.

Jabari may be young in age but he's got the wear and tear of much older player due to the significant injuries.

Watching him closely... I think the wild variance in his performances is related to how he's feeling. Somedays he's just looks just a little more explosive than others.

He's probably a guy you should be resting on back to backs. The new key phrase "load management" should apply here as well.

Being in a better shape would help as well. I wonder if his head is in the right place after big chunk of his career has been spent in rehab.

However even at his healthiest, two things he never did well: defend or shoot jumpers which always muted his impact.

So I don't know if he's worth the hassle.

[wco81]

For 2019 we need to bottom out.

I'd deal Beal for the highest pick possible. Could he get us Barrett or Morant? That's my target. A long term controllable and inexpensive talent that we can build around.

Roll into next season with Barrett (via Beal), Garland (via our own pick) with Sato, Bryant, Brown and begin a true rebuild.

Bring back Wall slowly. Maybe get him a handful of games at the end of the '19-'20 season.

In '20-'21 he should be on a strict minutes limit, the meantime we can continue the tank and add one more key pick.

If we've drafted right by the '21-22 we could have reloaded with 4 fairly high lottery picks.

Agreed. This is my preferred plan too. Trade Beal for picks and bottom out.

Unfortunately, all indications are that they intend to keep Beal. And if they intend to keep Beal, they intend to try and win games. And if they intend to try and win games, they're going to bring back much of the existing roster because the contracts of Wall, Beal and Mahinmi alone make rebuilding via free agency an impossibility.

Definitely a dilemma.

Wizards are 19th in attendance this year, at just under 86% capacity:

http://proxy.espn.com/nba/attendance

But they've been in the 80s in capacity in recent years. Looks like 2015 is the high water mark at 89.9%.

I can't imagine 3 or 4% greater capacity would translate to that much more revenues to cover for big contract extensions, unless the Wizards command real high ticket prices.

All those RFA guys are looking to make big money for the first time in their careers so maybe not much in the way of discounts?

Plus with Wall not expected to recover most of next season, expectations may not be high so players may jump at good offers.

[pcbothwel]

DC... I just dont buy it. His offense is as bad as ever with a number of Red flags.
Shooting: Poor FT and 3pt shooting kill his upside to me.
IQ/Creator: Decent passing in transition, but his TOV% is higher than his AST%.
Defense: Besides his 200 minutes here, he has been a terrible defender. Im not buying the SSS.

So I see a poor shooting, low IQ player with a questionable motor and work ethic... Yeah... No thanks.

Lets compare him to Dekker.
Shooting: Both below average from the FT line and 3. Mediocre TS of 54% is mostly due to easy buckets they get cutting or in transition... VERY SIMILAR
Passing / IQ: Dekker takes better care of the ball, even if he averages less assist.
Defense: Not close. Dekker is above average while Parker is below average to average AT BEST.
Age: Dekker is 24 and only 10 months older than Parker

So we have 2 non-shooting 4's with similar strengths and weaknesses, yet one of them has at least shown the ability to be a net positive on the floor with constant hustle (Cutting, Offensive rebounds, transition points) and the other has been a negative on the court and inconsistent with his performance, weight and injuries.

Again... If its Dekker and Ariza or Parker for the same price (Give or take 1M)... Im going the former, easy choice.

[payitforward]

Well... we'd obviously have to sign someone

But, why Ariza? ...Shouldn't we focus on younger players? ...turn our back to the past & start the next rebuild?

PIF... outside of a young player on a good contract, I would look any FA as a potential asset.
The reason I think Ariza is a good fit is simple.
Why for Wiz?...
- 2 way wings that can pass and shoot are great assets at the deadline to deal to a contender....

Yes, any FA is an asset -- & anyway we'll have to sign FAs to get up to 14 players. & I do see your point that Ariza might be tradable.

Perhaps it would be more sensible to generalize it, however: if we sign an older FA to a one year deal, it would be smart to pick someone who is easy to trade to a contender -- presumably for a younger player, someone we could not have acquired when we signed that FA.

The logic of that is clear -- but even on that hypothesis, we should still be prioritizing a good younger player to sign longer term over an older guy whom we sign for a single year. After all, what if we can't trade that vet for a longer-term, younger asset? In that case, signing the guy brought no benefit.

Which brings us to Trevor Ariza. One thing that commonly happens in this kind of dialogue is that we substitute a name for a person. It's as if "Trevor Ariza" were some abstract substance with a set of built-in qualities. But, no, he is an actual person -- a guy who will be 34 next year, who isn't providing all that much positive impact even this year, even on a bad team, & who is very likely to decline. He's likely to be worse next year.

IOW, I'm questioning how tradable he is likely to be. I don't know the answer, but without taking into account his age & somewhat likely decline your hypothesis is in doubt.

[payitforward]

I can think of no other purpose. What am I missing? Given the situation we are in I'd rather add cheap young players who might have a shot to improve.

You are missing that a player on a one-year deal can be useful ballast in a trade, and if you manage to negotiate a cost effective deal, he can actually be a trade asset at the deadline to trade to a win-now team.

The bottom line, assuming all else is equal, come the Trade Deadline next February, I'd rather have a 15-man roster that costs $128M and includes Ariza on a one-year $8M contract, than have a 14-man roster that costs $120M. We would have more flexibility to do stuff. Maybe someone would trade us a worthless player and a late 2nd for Ariza.

Yes, you are right -- I did miss that, as I also realized, & mentioned, in responding to pcbothwei.

OTOH, $$ does enter in; we can buy two R2 draft picks, pretty early ones I think, for that $8m. Still, you are right: that's another reason to carry a player who has some value, even if he doesn't make the difference between lottery & playoffs for your team.

I assume you say "late 2nd" b/c you see him being traded to a good team wanting to optimize its chance of going deep into the playoffs. But, of course, a good team may also own an early R2 pick, so perhaps we would be able to do better than that late one.

[payitforward]

Another purpose I see, a possible purpose at least, is along the lines of your suggestion to perhaps sign Jabari Parker to see whether a still young and obviously gifted athlete will finally put it together. In the nature of things, that's a long shot, but there can be individual cases where the argument to do it is strong.

I think there is a good chance that Parker gets signed by the Wizards to a relatively high 1 year deal. He might want a multi-year deal, but I don't see any team being that interested in offering it. The Wizards will have luxury tax space and a big deal for Parker could be a way to use it.

See... Here is my issue with this line of thinking. Would you rather have Parker or Ariza on a 1 year deal for 8-10M?
The answer is clearly Ariza. Ariza is the better player and would be a great guide to Brown and our Rookie.
Parker plays zero defense and plays with poor instincts.... and for what upside?
If Parker breaks out we win 38 games instead of 35?
Its not like we'd get some discount in keeping him the following year either, so I guess I just dont see it.

Again, I'd be open to cheap deal, but I still think some team will overpay based on his age and hype.
Give my Ariza & Dekker for the same price and play some good basketball.

Agreed. & just b/c we have room to overpay doesn't mean we should overpay!

[payitforward]

DC... I just dont buy it. His offense is as bad as ever with a number of Red flags.
Shooting: Poor FT and 3pt shooting kill his upside to me.
IQ/Creator: Decent passing in transition, but his TOV% is higher than his AST%.
Defense: Besides his 200 minutes here, he has been a terrible defender. Im not buying the SSS.

So I see a poor shooting, low IQ player with a questionable motor and work ethic... Yeah... No thanks.

Lets compare him to Dekker.
Shooting: Both below average from the FT line and 3. Mediocre TS of 54% is mostly due to easy buckets they get cutting or in transition... VERY SIMILAR
Passing / IQ: Dekker takes better care of the ball, even if he averages less assist.
Defense: Not close. Dekker is above average while Parker is below average to average AT BEST.
Age: Dekker is 24 and only 10 months older than Parker

So we have 2 non-shooting 4's with similar strengths and weaknesses, yet one of them has at least shown the ability to be a net positive on the floor with constant hustle (Cutting, Offensive rebounds, transition points) and the other has been a negative on the court and inconsistent with his performance, weight and injuries.

Again... If its Dekker and Ariza or Parker for the same price (Give or take 1M)... Im going the former, easy choice.

1000% -- & you don't even mention what might be the single most important point: Dekker is an effective & efficient player whom you can sew up for several years for a few $m a year. In Parker's case, we'd only give him a 1-year deal, obviously. The better he played the less likely we'd be able to keep him!

[Ruzious]

I think there is a good chance that Parker gets signed by the Wizards to a relatively high 1 year deal. He might want a multi-year deal, but I don't see any team being that interested in offering it. The Wizards will have luxury tax space and a big deal for Parker could be a way to use it.

See... Here is my issue with this line of thinking. Would you rather have Parker or Ariza on a 1 year deal for 8-10M?
The answer is clearly Ariza. Ariza is the better player and would be a great guide to Brown and our Rookie.
Parker plays zero defense and plays with poor instincts.... and for what upside?
If Parker breaks out we win 38 games instead of 35?
Its not like we'd get some discount in keeping him the following year either, so I guess I just dont see it.

Again, I'd be open to cheap deal, but I still think some team will overpay based on his age and hype.
Give my Ariza & Dekker for the same price and play some good basketball.

Agreed. & just b/c we have room to overpay doesn't mean we should overpay!

So why would you agree to pay Ariza and his .494 eFG 8 to 10 mil? Not wanting to overpay Parker makes sense, but it doesn't mean you have to overpay Ariza, right?

[verbal8]

I think there is a good chance that Parker gets signed by the Wizards to a relatively high 1 year deal. He might want a multi-year deal, but I don't see any team being that interested in offering it. The Wizards will have luxury tax space and a big deal for Parker could be a way to use it.

See... Here is my issue with this line of thinking. Would you rather have Parker or Ariza on a 1 year deal for 8-10M?
The answer is clearly Ariza. Ariza is the better player and would be a great guide to Brown and our Rookie.
Parker plays zero defense and plays with poor instincts.... and for what upside?
If Parker breaks out we win 38 games instead of 35?
Its not like we'd get some discount in keeping him the following year either, so I guess I just dont see it.

Again, I'd be open to cheap deal, but I still think some team will overpay based on his age and hype.
Give my Ariza & Dekker for the same price and play some good basketball.

Agreed. & just b/c we have room to overpay doesn't mean we should overpay!

I meant this more as something likely to happen, not as something that is the best idea for the Wizards.

[payitforward]

Here's an excerpt from an article about Parker on Bullets Forever:

[b]The case for starting Jabari Parker

His on/off court number also tell an interesting story. The Wizards have a +4.4 net rating with Parker on the floor, and a -6.6 net rating with him off the floor since he has arrived....

Actually, his on/off numbers in 233 minutes don't tell any story whatsoever.

Jabari is also blocking twice as many shots for us as his career average. & he's rebounding at a 30% higher rate than on his career. Do those two facts tell a story too?

If so, how about the fact that he's turning the ball over at twice his career average: does that also tell a story?

What tells a story about Jabari Parker is a) his numbers over his career, b) the fact that when given a $20m make-good contract by the Bulls, he managed to work himself completely out of the rotation, & c) whatever else is true about him there is no question that he's had two ACL tears.

Of course it's tempting to think that we somehow picked up some kind of surprise asset, some developing young-ish player with a future. Just as it was tempting to think that about Austin Rivers as well.

But who a player is... that's not a secret. It's right there in his numbers -- if the numbers are a statistically meaningful sample size. When you look at Jabari's numbers over any such stretch, they show that he is a terrible player. Just as the same exercise showed that Austin Rivers is a terrible player.

[payitforward]

See... Here is my issue with this line of thinking. Would you rather have Parker or Ariza on a 1 year deal for 8-10M?
The answer is clearly Ariza. Ariza is the better player and would be a great guide to Brown and our Rookie.
Parker plays zero defense and plays with poor instincts.... and for what upside?
If Parker breaks out we win 38 games instead of 35?
Its not like we'd get some discount in keeping him the following year either, so I guess I just dont see it.

Again, I'd be open to cheap deal, but I still think some team will overpay based on his age and hype.
Give my Ariza & Dekker for the same price and play some good basketball.

Agreed. & just b/c we have room to overpay doesn't mean we should overpay!

So why would you agree to pay Ariza and his .494 eFG 8 to 10 mil? Not wanting to overpay Parker makes sense, but it doesn't mean you have to overpay Ariza, right?

Agreed once again. I fail to understand the fascination with Trevor.

[nate33]

Agreed. & just b/c we have room to overpay doesn't mean we should overpay!

So why would you agree to pay Ariza and his .494 eFG 8 to 10 mil? Not wanting to overpay Parker makes sense, but it doesn't mean you have to overpay Ariza, right?

Agreed once again. I fail to understand the fascination with Trevor.

Assuming we have already paid Sato and Bryant, as well as utilized the full MLE on Player X, we still would have substantial luxtax room available and no exceptions left to use it... other than the Bird Exceptions on Ariza, Parker and Portis. I think over the short term, Ariza is the best of those 3 guys.

Important note:
I just realized that we have an $8.6M Trade Exception from the Markieff Morris trade. We can't use it to sign a free agent, but we can use it anytime this upcoming season to trade for another player. With that in mind, it would probably behoove us to retain at least $8.6M in luxtax space if at all possible. If nothing else, it will allow us to absorb someone else's dead weight contract at the Trade Deadline (while receiving a pick as compensation).

[Ruzious]

So why would you agree to pay Ariza and his .494 eFG 8 to 10 mil? Not wanting to overpay Parker makes sense, but it doesn't mean you have to overpay Ariza, right?

Agreed once again. I fail to understand the fascination with Trevor.

Assuming we have already paid Sato and Bryant, as well as utilized the full MLE on Player X, we still would have substantial luxtax room available and no exceptions left to use it... other than the Bird Exceptions on Ariza, Parker and Portis. I think over the short term, Ariza is the best of those 3 guys.

Important note:
I just realized that we have an $8.6M Trade Exception from the Markieff Morris trade. We can't use it to sign a free agent, but we can use it anytime this upcoming season to trade for another player. With that in mind, it would probably behoove us to retain at least $8.6M in luxtax space if at all possible. If nothing else, it will allow us to absorb someone else's dead weight contract at the Trade Deadline (while receiving a pick as compensation).

Great point. I remember seeing that and thinking there's no chance we can use that because at about that same time, Ted laughed at an interviewer who asked if they might trade any of the big 3.

[nate33]

I'm assuming we resign Sato and Bryant. And Howard sticks around. That make our rotation look something like this:

PG Sato/Brown
SG Beal/Brown
SF ???/???
PF ???/???
C Bryant/Howard/Mahinmi

I figure we draft someone to start at forward, or maybe Brown starts and we draft his backup. But there are three other forward spots. One hopefully goes to Dekker on a cheap contract, but he's ideally a backup. We can use the MLE to find the other guy. But who? What forward is out there that might sign for the full MLE that we'd actually be comfortable starting?

Looking at the potential free agents, and assuming we want a younger guy, there aren't a lot of exciting names. There's Justice Winslow, Kelly Oubre, Kent Bazemore, Tyreke Evans, JaMychal Green, Bobby Portis, Noah Vonleh...

Of that group, I think Vonleh might be the best fit. Sign Vonleh and draft Hunter and start them at forward. Bring Dekker and Green off the bench (both on vet minimum deals). The defense and rebounding should be much improved.

[wco81]

Winslow signed an extension.

[verbal8]

I'm assuming we resign Sato and Bryant. And Howard sticks around. That make our rotation look something like this:

PG Sato/Brown
SG Beal/Brown
SF ???/???
PF ???/???
C Bryant/Howard/Mahinmi

I figure we draft someone to start at forward, or maybe Brown starts and we draft his backup. But there are three other forward spots. One hopefully goes to Dekker on a cheap contract, but he's ideally a backup. We can use the MLE to find the other guy. But who? What forward is out there that might sign for the full MLE that we'd actually be comfortable starting?

Looking at the potential free agents, and assuming we want a younger guy, there aren't a lot of exciting names. There's Justice Winslow, Kelly Oubre, Kent Bazemore, Tyreke Evans, JaMychal Green, Bobby Portis, Noah Vonleh...

Of that group, I think Vonleh might be the best fit. Sign Vonleh and draft Hunter and start them at forward. Bring Dekker and Green off the bench (both on vet minimum deals). The defense and rebounding should be much improved.

Laid out this way it is a bit scary having EG as GM.

Bascially he has to fill the Forward positions in free agency. Overpaying some combination of Portis/Ariza and Parker seems the "classic EG" move in this situation. Basically a combination of panic and laziness.

Given the not great situation, I think getting a guy like Vonleh could be the best of a lot of not great options. It is a pretty low upside move, but the "floor" is pretty low also. Also given that it is obvious he won't be a star, their is potential for the deal to be slightly team friendly.

[bsilver]

I'm assuming we resign Sato and Bryant. And Howard sticks around. That make our rotation look something like this:

PG Sato/Brown
SG Beal/Brown
SF ???/???
PF ???/???
C Bryant/Howard/Mahinmi

I figure we draft someone to start at forward, or maybe Brown starts and we draft his backup. But there are three other forward spots. One hopefully goes to Dekker on a cheap contract, but he's ideally a backup. We can use the MLE to find the other guy. But who? What forward is out there that might sign for the full MLE that we'd actually be comfortable starting?

Looking at the potential free agents, and assuming we want a younger guy, there aren't a lot of exciting names. There's Justice Winslow, Kelly Oubre, Kent Bazemore, Tyreke Evans, JaMychal Green, Bobby Portis, Noah Vonleh...

Of that group, I think Vonleh might be the best fit. Sign Vonleh and draft Hunter and start them at forward. Bring Dekker and Green off the bench (both on vet minimum deals). The defense and rebounding should be much improved.

I could see some issues with re-signing Sato and Bryant even though it's important to do it.
Sato -
He's been disrespected by Brook every year. He hides it well but has to resent it.
Probably would like to play on a decent team, which won't happen here.
Maybe wants (or not) to get out of the political spot light. Saw he just refused to meet with the Czech prime minister.
Wizards may draft another PG. That's not a bad idea, but Sato wouldn't appreciate.
Maybe gets a good offer in Europe if Wiz won't let him go to another NBA team.

Bryant -
Again, disrespected by Brooks. Crazy that he's our best center and not getting enough PT.
Howard will come back, and Bryant sees what will happen. Again relegated to the bench in favor of Brook's favored veteran.
Maybe would like to play on a good team.
Others disagree, but I think that he'll cost about 12M. He's not a traditional center but more along the lines of the Capella/Siakams, who are so valuable these days.

Great team -
PG - ?,?
SG - Beal, ?
SF - Brown, ?
PF - ?,?
C - Howard, Mahinmi