Wizards 2019 Offseason Thread

[nate33]

Jaxson Hayes (1st round pick)
Thomas Bryant
Bobby Portis
Jeff Green
Jabari Parker
Sam Dekker
Trevor Ariza
Wesley Johnson
Troy Brown
Bradley Beal
Tomas Satoransky
Jerian Grant (free agent signing)
Jaylen Hands (2nd round pick)


I'm more or less thinking out loud.... But I like this as a roster, is this something from a salary cap / lux tax situation that would even be feasible ??

Is moving Wall possible ??

No, moving Wall is not possible.

Hayes is a fine prospect. But how many resources should we invest into the C positon?

I think our F situation is wretched. Are we really keeping both Ariza & Green and expecting them to start next year? If Brown is our 3rd guard were looking at a bare slate.

Parker & Portis are not playable together. Lots of evidence of this.

Wesley Johnson should not return.

Why can't they play together? Depending on matchups, Jaxson Hayes eventually would start at C, with Portis and Parker at the 4 and 3 respectively. Parker looks out of shape from all the injuries, I expect he can shed significant body fat this offseason. Hayes gives you a rim protector behind them, I'd also look at Fernando.

Bryant, Green, Ariza would come off the bench. Again, this is all based on matchups... You could certainly see Portis 5, Parker 4, at times, Ariza at 3, or Dekker, etc. Or maybe Ariza starts and Parker is 6th man, that's fine. I see Green off the bench unless injury forces him into the starting spot.

Because this isn't 2005. Nobody plays big anymore. Defenses essentially play zone now, which limits post up opportunities and reduces the ability of tall players to offensively exploit their size advantage over smaller players. The way to counter effective zone defenses is with outside shooting and having multiple ball-handlers who can attack close-outs and make good decisions. Skill is way more important than size today.

In today's game, Portis is a 5. That's it. He can't handle and make decisions well enough to be a 4. Likewise, Parker is a 4, (although I could at least imagine him playing some 3 if he lost a bit of weight and improved his 3-point shot).

Another issue is that teams just don't need many true centers. At most, you need 48 minutes of center play a night, and it's usually a bit less because teams go small in certain situations. On a team financially saddled by Wall's contract, we can't afford to devote so many resources (picks, cap room) to a position where we only need a total of 36-48 minutes a game.

It's different for a position like small forward. These days, small forwards can spend some time at shooting guard or power forward and it doesn't make much difference. So a team can devote the resources to have two or three good small forwards on the roster because you can find them minutes. With that in mind, I think it's really bad resource management to be going after a center right now. We have a good young guy in Bryant, and we have $21M devoted to his backups: Howard and Mahinmi. Frankly, I don't think we should even resign Portis, much less also pursue Hayes in the draft. We need to spend what little money we have at other positions.

[nate33]

Trade Wall + 2020 1st round pick + Aaron White to Sacramento for Bogdonovic\Bjelica + 2019 2nd round pick (40).


https://basketball.realgm.com/tradechecker/saved_trade/7184385



Jaxson Hayes (1st round pick)
Thomas Bryant
Bobby Portis
Nemanja Bjelica (trade)
Jabari Parker
Sam Dekker
Trevor Ariza
Bogdan Bogdanovic (trade)
Troy Brown
Bradley Beal
Tomas Satoransky
Jerian Grant (free agent signing)
Jaylen Hands (2nd round pick)


Also with this scenario letting Green and Johnson go, replaced by Bjelica and Bogdanovic.

Wall is untradeable right now. Don't even devote a moment of time to consider it. It's not happening.

We can discuss Wall trades a year from now after he has proven that he is healthy and at least 90% of his former self.

[nate33]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that we should not resign Portis. He's a 5, not really a 4/5. And since we already have Bryant as a future starter, and we're stuck with Howard and Mahinmi, we have higher priorities than another center. As I've outlined before, assuming Sato and Bryant are retained, we'll have maybe $24M in luxtax room, and no small forwards and power forwards on the roster (except perhaps our draft pick).

It's not that Portis is a bad player. In the abstract, Portis for, say, $8-10M could be a valuable contract on the right team. It's just that this is the wrong year for Portis to hit free agency if his desire is to stay with the Wizards. If this was 2020 and Howard and Mahinmi were departing, then retaining Portis could make sense.

The only scenario where retaining Portis makes any sense is if Howard agrees to depart.

[payitforward]

...I don't mean to over-value Sam Dekker on an absolute scale... Sam is just a tremendous bargain for the $ he'll command....

Considering the Fs currently on our roster, Dekker is the only one that probably should be back. I'm still not sold on him but were rebuilding anyway and he's the only F that could possibly amount to something in the future, especially if were looking at Troy Brown Jr as a guard going forward.

Right. Except that he's already amounted to *something.* No one would suggest that you build around him, but Dekker has shown at least that he's a good bench player at a good price -- something every team needs. & he's young enough that he may well have more development in him. Esp. given that his numbers have improved year by year.

[nate33]

...I don't mean to over-value Sam Dekker on an absolute scale... Sam is just a tremendous bargain for the $ he'll command....

Considering the Fs currently on our roster, Dekker is the only one that probably should be back. I'm still not sold on him but were rebuilding anyway and he's the only F that could possibly amount to something in the future, especially if were looking at Troy Brown Jr as a guard going forward.

Right. Except that he's already amounted to *something.* No one would suggest that you build around him, but Dekker has shown at least that he's a good bench player at a good price -- something every team needs. & he's young enough that he may well have more development in him. Esp. given that his numbers have improved year by year.

A month ago, I was pretty ho-hum about resigning him. Sure, for the vet minimum, I'd love to have him back, but I questioned the wisdom of investing more.

Now, I think I'd pay a bit more. I'd definitely offer him something like 3 years at $3M per year and try to lock him up long term for cheap.

[DCZards]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that we should not resign Portis. He's a 5, not really a 4/5. And since we already have Bryant as a future starter, and we're stuck with Howard and Mahinmi, we have higher priorities than another center. As I've outlined before, assuming Sato and Bryant are retained, we'll have maybe $24M in luxtax room, and no small forwards and power forwards on the roster (except perhaps our draft pick).

It's not that Portis is a bad player. In the abstract, Portis for, say, $8-10M could be a valuable contract on the right team. It's just that this is the wrong year for Portis to hit free agency if his desire is to stay with the Wizards. If this was 2020 and Howard and Mahinmi were departing, then retaining Portis could make sense.

The only scenario where retaining Portis makes any sense is if Howard agrees to depart.

I’m pretty much in agreement with your recent posts regarding Portis. When the trade for Portis and Parker took place I thought Bobby would be the one you’d want to try to resign. And I do like what he’s done as a Zard, especially his ability to stretch the floor. But you’re absolutely right when you stress that the last thing the Zards need to do is spend money on another center when it’s very likely that Howard, Ian and, hopefully, Bryant will be on the roster next season.

Given the Zards dearth of forwards under contract for next season, I’m now more inclined to try to resign Jabari. While he needs to cut down on the turnovers and the tendency to play too fast and out of control, I like what I’ve seen from him offensively, especially his passing and versatility on that end of the court.

And Parker is still young enough to improve on his offensive shortcomings, like his 3pt shooting. Jabari has been in the NBA so long I think we forget that he's just turning 24 this week.

I’d seriously consider signing Parker to a reasonable contract—say 2yrs/10mil with a team option the second year—and make him commit to spending the offseason with Beal and Drew Hanlen getting his body together and improving his handle and 3pt shooting.

I’m not ignoring Parker’s defense, which does indeed suck. (You could say that about a lot of the players in the NBA, btw.) If Parker at least works hard on the defensive end and the Zards team him with a first-rate defender (like a DeAndre Hunter or someone who might be available in free agency), Jabari could work out as a backup PF/SF.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Considering the Fs currently on our roster, Dekker is the only one that probably should be back. I'm still not sold on him but were rebuilding anyway and he's the only F that could possibly amount to something in the future, especially if were looking at Troy Brown Jr as a guard going forward.

Right. Except that he's already amounted to *something.* No one would suggest that you build around him, but Dekker has shown at least that he's a good bench player at a good price -- something every team needs. & he's young enough that he may well have more development in him. Esp. given that his numbers have improved year by year.

A month ago, I was pretty ho-hum about resigning him. Sure, for the vet minimum, I'd love to have him back, but I questioned the wisdom of investing more.

Now, I think I'd pay a bit more. I'd definitely offer him something like 3 years at $3M per year and try to lock him up long term for cheap.

So, let go Portis, Green, Ariza...
You think a starting frontcourt of Bryant, Parker, Dekker is worthwhile ?

You like DeAndre Hunter in the draft ?

http://www.nbadraftroom.com/p/deandre-hunter.html

[doclinkin]

No, moving Wall is not possible.

Hayes is a fine prospect. But how many resources should we invest into the C positon?

I think our F situation is wretched. Are we really keeping both Ariza & Green and expecting them to start next year? If Brown is our 3rd guard were looking at a bare slate.

Parker & Portis are not playable together. Lots of evidence of this.

Wesley Johnson should not return.

Why can't they play together? Depending on matchups, Jaxson Hayes eventually would start at C, with Portis and Parker at the 4 and 3 respectively. Parker looks out of shape from all the injuries, I expect he can shed significant body fat this offseason. Hayes gives you a rim protector behind them, I'd also look at Fernando. ....

Because this isn't 2005. Nobody plays big anymore. Defenses essentially play zone now, which limits post up opportunities and reduces the ability of tall players to offensively exploit their size advantage over smaller players. The way to counter effective zone defenses is with outside shooting and having multiple ball-handlers who can attack close-outs and make good decisions. Skill is way more important than size today.
...

Another issue is that teams just don't need many true centers. At most, you need 48 minutes of center play a night, and it's usually a bit less because teams go small in certain situations. On a team financially saddled by Wall's contract, we can't afford to devote so many resources (picks, cap room) to a position where we only need a total of 36-48 minutes a game.

It's different for a position like small forward. These days, small forwards can spend some time at shooting guard or power forward and it doesn't make much difference. So a team can devote the resources to have two or three good small forwards on the roster because you can find them minutes. With that in mind, I think it's really bad resource management to be going after a center right now. We have a good young guy in Bryant, and we have $21M devoted to his backups: Howard and Mahinmi. Frankly, I don't think we should even resign Portis, much less also pursue Hayes in the draft. We need to spend what little money we have at other positions.

So here's the thing that is sneakily happening though. Aside from GSW and The Rockets, teams are playing big and finding success in it. The trick is finding versatile bigs. Look atop the leaderboard in the East: The Bucks play big. They have Lopez and Greek Freak on the court all the time. Giannis inverts the court by being able to play as a face-up 7 footer who has no outside shot. But the reason for the teams success lies in an area we are weakest in: defensive rebounding. And on D, that team definitely plays Big.

Indiana finds over 50 minutes a game for Myles Turner and Domantas Sabonis. They are 4th in the league in limiting opponent points in the paint. Toronto just traded for Marc Gasol. Philadelphia leans heavily on the Process and on a giant sized PG who can't shoot but plays well on the interior, rebounding like a PF. Out West squads like the Nuggets, Portland and Utah are in the playoffs playing with a heavy front line. OKC leans on Adams. The Spurs are playing three seven footers in the front court.

I would argue that the problem with retaining Portis and/or Parker is simply that they DON'T play big. That on the Defensive end they don't deter shots or rebound well enough.

What's happening right now is with the uptick in 3FG shots taken (like 30 a game) there are 20 or so long bounces to be had. Our squad gives up 14 points a game on 2nd chance points. Teams atop the leaderboard are squads that prevent those points and deter interior scoring, not as a primary attack but on those extra chances. Teams that succeed on offense are squads that "pitch it and go git it": they shoot from the outside and they rebound their own misses when they get a chance. And they prevent other teams from doing the same.

So. Even Thomas Bryant, he's okay, but he's no deterrent in the middle. And can't be relied on in traffic to act as that primary rebounder to snatch the 50/50 balls, even if he's an alright second line offense rebounder on those missed shots. So. When a player like shotblocker Jaxson Hayes pops up, or a low post brute like Bruno, I prick up my ears and think, okay, I don't hate the idea. We need that as well as a mobile rangy all court defender who can rebound from the back line and guard the pick and roll. We need both.

EDIT-=- we need both in part because we are near the bottom of the league in defending the outside shot. And part of that is because we lean heavily on rebounding from our guards, so they cheat on outside defense in order to chase the ball so thay can go on attack in transition. But if we had an interior rebounder who had a wide radius of 'gimmedat' rebounding then our outside players could do their job and stick with their man.

[nate33]

Right. Except that he's already amounted to *something.* No one would suggest that you build around him, but Dekker has shown at least that he's a good bench player at a good price -- something every team needs. & he's young enough that he may well have more development in him. Esp. given that his numbers have improved year by year.

A month ago, I was pretty ho-hum about resigning him. Sure, for the vet minimum, I'd love to have him back, but I questioned the wisdom of investing more.

Now, I think I'd pay a bit more. I'd definitely offer him something like 3 years at $3M per year and try to lock him up long term for cheap.

So, let go Portis, Green, Ariza...
You think a starting frontcourt of Bryant, Parker, Dekker is worthwhile ?

You like DeAndre Hunter in the draft ?

http://www.nbadraftroom.com/p/deandre-hunter.html

Note that, in my scenario, I'm paying Dekker just $3M, which is about 2.5% of the cap. Paying 2.5% of the cap for a backup who can give you 20 good minutes is fine - particularly when he has further upside in his game.

I'd certainly bring back Ariza or Green for that kind of money as well. Indeed, I think there's a good chance we bring Green back for the vet minimum (which, from his perspective, earns him $2.4M, though he would only count $1.6M against our cap). Ariza will surely cost more. Probably a lot more. Like $10M, maybe. And given that he's 33 years old and our team has no hope for title contention during the remainder of his career, I'm not sure what the point would be. Veteran mentors are nice, but not for $10M.

If we didn't draft a SF, I might be willing to pay $5-7M to bring Ariza back on a 1-year deal just to fill the SF spot. He is a good guy who plays the right way, and can help set the tone for young players like Bryant, Brown, Dekker and our draft pick.

I do like DeAndre Hunter. I also like Brandon Clarke. Those two guys are my favorite picks if we end up drafting in the 8-10 range. I'd also take Darius Garland if he is still on the board. I think he has Damian Lillard upside. (We can slide Troy Brown to SF to make room at guard).

[nate33]

So here's the thing that is sneakily happening though. Aside from GSW and The Rockets, teams are playing big and finding success in it. The trick is finding versatile bigs. Look atop the leaderboard in the East: The Bucks play big. They have Lopez and Greek Freak on the court all the time. Giannis inverts the court by being able to play as a face-up 7 footer who has no outside shot. But the reason for the teams success lies in an area we are weakest in: defensive rebounding. And on D, that team definitely plays Big.

Indiana finds over 50 minutes a game for Myles Turner and Domantas Sabonis. They are 4th in the league in limiting opponent points in the paint. Toronto just traded for Marc Gasol. Philadelphia leans heavily on the Process and on a giant sized PG who can't shoot but plays well on the interior, rebounding like a PF.

If you can find the right kind of unicorn, then, yes, you can play big. Giannis rebounds like an elite center but defends the perimeter like a rangy small forward. Give me him at PF and I'd gladly go big. It also helps that Brook Lopez is playing like a 7-foot shooting guard. He rebounds like one too, but, thanks to Giannis, it's not a problem.

Indiana struggles when Turner and Sabonis share the floor and they do their best to minimize that configuration for the reasons I outlined in my initial post. Sure, there are some matchups when it's okay, but it's not their preferred lineup. They've only played together for 313 minutes. They're probably going to have to trade Sabonis because they know it doesn't make financial sense to pay him and Turner.

Philadelphia is struggling mightily on offense because of their weird big lineup. They have 4 max players and are just 4th in the East. They went on their massive winning streak last season when Embiid got hurt.

Out West squads like the Nuggets, Portland and Utah are in the playoffs playing with a heavy front line. OKC leans on Adams. The Spurs are playing three seven footers in the front court.

Utah starts Favors and Gobert, but they get Crowder into the lineup as soon as possible to minimize the time Favors and Gobert play together. Gobert has played less than one third of his minutes alongside Favors. Denver has a unicorn at center. I'll grant you Portland. They're going big without much shooting at either the C or PF spots and still getting it done.

[payitforward]

Sam Dekker:

A month ago, I was pretty ho-hum about resigning him. Sure, for the vet minimum, I'd love to have him back, but I questioned the wisdom of investing more.

Now, I think I'd pay a bit more. I'd definitely offer him something like 3 years at $3M per year and try to lock him up long term for cheap.

Three years is definitely the right idea. At the end of the contract we'd have his Bird rights & an edge over another team that might want to sign him.

Of course, we want to sign Sam for as little as we can -- but at the general pay scale of this guy, the financial details of the contract are not as critical as making sure we've got him sewn up. IMO, your idea of $3m a year is fine as an entry point, but I would be perfectly happy with a rising contract that added up to $15m over 3 years -- if there was a team option for that most expensive final year. Now, that's a $6m difference over 3 years which, in the current NBA climate, doesn't amount to much.

Then again, given 7.5% yearly raises, that probably starts too high. IMO $4m > $4.3m > $4.6225 -- i.e. @ $13m total -- would be great.

[doclinkin]

So here's the thing that is sneakily happening though. Aside from GSW and The Rockets, teams are playing big and finding success in it. The trick is finding versatile bigs. Look atop the leaderboard in the East: The Bucks play big. They have Lopez and Greek Freak on the court all the time. Giannis inverts the court by being able to play as a face-up 7 footer who has no outside shot. But the reason for the teams success lies in an area we are weakest in: defensive rebounding. And on D, that team definitely plays Big.

Indiana finds over 50 minutes a game for Myles Turner and Domantas Sabonis. They are 4th in the league in limiting opponent points in the paint. Toronto just traded for Marc Gasol. Philadelphia leans heavily on the Process and on a giant sized PG who can't shoot but plays well on the interior, rebounding like a PF.

If you can find the right kind of unicorn, then, yes, you can play big. Giannis rebounds like an elite center but defends the perimeter like a rangy small forward. Give me him at PF and I'd gladly go big. It also helps that Brook Lopez is playing like a 7-foot shooting guard. He rebounds like one too, but, thanks to Giannis, it's not a problem.

Indiana struggles when Turner and Sabonis share the floor and they do their best to minimize that configuration for the reasons I outlined in my initial post. Sure, there are some matchups when it's okay, but it's not their preferred lineup. They've only played together for 313 minutes. They're probably going to have to trade Sabonis because they know it doesn't make financial sense to pay him and Turner.

Philadelphia is struggling mightily on offense because of their weird big lineup. They have 4 max players and are just 4th in the East. They went on their massive winning streak last season when Embiid got hurt.

Out West squads like the Nuggets, Portland and Utah are in the playoffs playing with a heavy front line. OKC leans on Adams. The Spurs are playing three seven footers in the front court.

Utah starts Favors and Gobert, but they get Crowder into the lineup as soon as possible to minimize the time Favors and Gobert play together. Gobert has played less than one third of his minutes alongside Favors. Denver has a unicorn at center. I'll grant you Portland. They're going big without much shooting at either the C or PF spots and still getting it done.

Which is my point in saying we need versatile bigs who rebound and play defense. Even if we only get one. We definitely need interior protection and rebounding. I think you will find more teams atop the leaderboard that rebound and defend the paint than you will find teams that excel at shooting from the outside or scoring in general. It is an easier route to solid success. A more high percentage play. The Wizards and Pelicans top the league in points per game. And wallow at the bottom of the standings.The Pistons Nets and Heat are all playoff bound teams despite middling offense, in large part because they do rebound and defend the interior.

We score well. We are good in transition. WE shoot fairly well from the outside, we can play small ball on offense. We can't play small ball on defense. We can't defend the interior. And because of that it flips us upside down on defense, since all players need to do is move the ball to get the right switch then drive to the middle. So our wing defenders are always looking to collapse and help, so we lack the ability to tighten up and play all court defense in the half court.

We lack two key players in defense. One is definitely the sort of versatile four position wing defender who can snuff the opponents hot player or lead scorer or pressure the point of attack. BUT. We also lack a versatile mobile interior strong defender who can act as last line defender if we get beat on the outside. Not every team has reliable 3pt killers. Many minutes a game can be spent in a zone with a long big playing the 3 second do-si-do into and out of the paint. I feel like the outside shooting fetish is a fad and the smartest teams are starting to realize that while small ball is a tactic there is a benefit to interior scoring as well. And interior defense especially. We need a keystone lynchpin defender.

I also think there is an opportunity in the metagame we have missed, that teams who go small have not yet been countered with. I feel like having a tall PG like John we have never had the strong mobile Big with good hands who can take advantage of passing lanes above the traffic and pound players under the cylinder. If Howard and Wall were both healthy then we might have seen it. I feel like there is a sneaky opportunity there. But I'm seeing other teams start to do it. The 14 second reset after an offensive rebound recognizes that with more 3 pt shots there are more long bounces, and it has sped up the game. BUT there is still an opportunity in loading up on at least one dominant interior player and making teams pay. If they can kill you from outside, okay, but there is about a 1 in 3 chance their shot goes in from outside, and a 60% chance your dunk does. Plus fouls. If you look at the top players in Free Throws shot per possession, aside from James Harden and Lou Williams the rest of the top 20 are Bigs. Only the 76ers have the smooth passing big PG paired with a dominant interior attacker. Blake Griffin to Drummond though has seen some success. I feel like there is a chance for a renaissance of Bigs who aren't simply pitching from outside. Since true bigs are undervalued, maybe while we rebuild we can get better value by exploiting that market. There's hidden upside in players that are being ironically overlooked for being Big.

IF I could trade down and get both Hunter and Bruno, I'd be super happy. Or Clarke and Kabengele. Or mix and match with a Hayes as a change of pace defensive Center. Though he doesn't rebound as well as I'd like. Anyway. If I'm not top 2 (Zion and Morant) then I want rebounders and defenders in this draft, and more picks. 2nd rounders and future firsts with limited lotto protection.

[Ruzious]

The shot chart for the best teams are filled with dots at the 3 point line and right near the basket. So, I am more than hesitant to dump a center like Portis who provides those dots - and rebounds reasonably well on a team that doesn't rebound reasonably well. I think the rebounding problem goes to when the team goes smallball and uses non-rebounders like Green or Morris (previously) at C. And we have no PF that rebounds - that's gotta change at some point, lol. Parker's doing it ok now, but he's never been reliable at it and should not be counted on as an improtant part of the future. Again, I don't think the stausi of Manhinmi and Howard should have any effect on what we do with either Portis or Bryant. Mahinmi and Howard don't factor at all in the team's future. They are contracts; not players.

What we really need... is a star up front, and because we have 2 centers that can make 3's consistently, the star big we have doesn't have to have a 3 point shot. We also don't have a 3 at this point, but we can get by with young players like Brown and Dekker. Ideally, we acquire a 3 who can rain 3's.

In the backcourt, I want to keep Sato - like everyone else does - but there is a problem with him other than defending quick quards. Even though he's made a high % of his 3's, he's a very low volume 3 point shooter that defenders can lay off a little because he's so slow to shoot them. If we don't think he can speed up the catch and shoot, I would not pay a lot to keep him, and if someone offers him 10 mil a year, I don't keep him. Otoh, I don't think anyone offers that kind of money - for that reason - but all it takes is 1 team.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

So here's the thing that is sneakily happening though. Aside from GSW and The Rockets, teams are playing big and finding success in it. The trick is finding versatile bigs. Look atop the leaderboard in the East: The Bucks play big. They have Lopez and Greek Freak on the court all the time. Giannis inverts the court by being able to play as a face-up 7 footer who has no outside shot. But the reason for the teams success lies in an area we are weakest in: defensive rebounding. And on D, that team definitely plays Big.

Indiana finds over 50 minutes a game for Myles Turner and Domantas Sabonis. They are 4th in the league in limiting opponent points in the paint. Toronto just traded for Marc Gasol. Philadelphia leans heavily on the Process and on a giant sized PG who can't shoot but plays well on the interior, rebounding like a PF.

If you can find the right kind of unicorn, then, yes, you can play big. Giannis rebounds like an elite center but defends the perimeter like a rangy small forward. Give me him at PF and I'd gladly go big. It also helps that Brook Lopez is playing like a 7-foot shooting guard. He rebounds like one too, but, thanks to Giannis, it's not a problem.

Indiana struggles when Turner and Sabonis share the floor and they do their best to minimize that configuration for the reasons I outlined in my initial post. Sure, there are some matchups when it's okay, but it's not their preferred lineup. They've only played together for 313 minutes. They're probably going to have to trade Sabonis because they know it doesn't make financial sense to pay him and Turner.

Philadelphia is struggling mightily on offense because of their weird big lineup. They have 4 max players and are just 4th in the East. They went on their massive winning streak last season when Embiid got hurt.

Out West squads like the Nuggets, Portland and Utah are in the playoffs playing with a heavy front line. OKC leans on Adams. The Spurs are playing three seven footers in the front court.

Utah starts Favors and Gobert, but they get Crowder into the lineup as soon as possible to minimize the time Favors and Gobert play together. Gobert has played less than one third of his minutes alongside Favors. Denver has a unicorn at center. I'll grant you Portland. They're going big without much shooting at either the C or PF spots and still getting it done.

Which is my point in saying we need versatile bigs who rebound and play defense. Even if we only get one. We definitely need interior protection and rebounding. I think you will find more teams atop the leaderboard that rebound and defend the paint than you will find teams that excel at shooting from the outside or scoring in general. It is an easier route to solid success. A more high percentage play. The Wizards and Pelicans top the league in points per game. And wallow at the bottom of the standings.The Pistons Nets and Heat are all playoff bound teams despite middling offense, in large part because they do rebound and defend the interior.

We score well. We are good in transition. WE shoot fairly well from the outside, we can play small ball on offense. We can't play small ball on defense. We can't defend the interior. And because of that it flips us upside down on defense, since all players need to do is move the ball to get the right switch then drive to the middle. So our wing defenders are always looking to collapse and help, so we lack the ability to tighten up and play all court defense in the half court.

We lack two key players in defense. One is definitely the sort of versatile four position wing defender who can snuff the opponents hot player or lead scorer or pressure the point of attack. BUT. We also lack a versatile mobile interior strong defender who can act as last line defender if we get beat on the outside. Not every team has reliable 3pt killers. Many minutes a game can be spent in a zone with a long big playing the 3 second do-si-do into and out of the paint. I feel like the outside shooting fetish is a fad and the smartest teams are starting to realize that while small ball is a tactic there is a benefit to interior scoring as well. And interior defense especially. We need a keystone lynchpin defender.

I also think there is an opportunity in the metagame we have missed, that teams who go small have not yet been countered with. I feel like having a tall PG like John we have never had the strong mobile Big with good hands who can take advantage of passing lanes above the traffic and pound players under the cylinder. If Howard and Wall were both healthy then we might have seen it. I feel like there is a sneaky opportunity there. But I'm seeing other teams start to do it. The 14 second reset after an offensive rebound recognizes that with more 3 pt shots there are more long bounces, and it has sped up the game. BUT there is still an opportunity in loading up on at least one dominant interior player and making teams pay. If they can kill you from outside, okay, but there is about a 1 in 3 chance their shot goes in from outside, and a 60% chance your dunk does. Plus fouls. If you look at the top players in Free Throws shot per possession, aside from James Harden and Lou Williams the rest of the top 20 are Bigs. Only the 76ers have the smooth passing big PG paired with a dominant interior attacker. Blake Griffin to Drummond though has seen some success. I feel like there is a chance for a renaissance of Bigs who aren't simply pitching from outside. Since true bigs are undervalued, maybe while we rebuild we can get better value by exploiting that market. There's hidden upside in players that are being ironically overlooked for being Big.

IF I could trade down and get both Hunter and Bruno, I'd be super happy. Or Clarke and Kabengele. Or mix and match with a Hayes as a change of pace defensive Center. Though he doesn't rebound as well as I'd like. Anyway. If I'm not top 2 (Zion and Morant) then I want rebounders and defenders in this draft, and more picks. 2nd rounders and future firsts with limited lotto protection.

What I notice repeatedly watching Jaxson Hayes, is guard penetratration, then they see him in the interior, stop in their tracks, and bring it back out. His length and hustle are elite level. His hands and timing are top shelf , and if you try to match him with an undersized defender he will make you pay.

At the same time, watching Fernando throughout the year, he is a beast on the boards, which we so desperately need. I think he actually gives you similar game as Howard, but he's entering the league opposed to ending his career. Plus I've heard from numerous sources he's actually very skilled offensively and can shoot out to the 3, but doesn't get the opportunity to showcase those skills in Maryland's system which basically relegates him to the lowpost. But even in that role he displays above average passing skills. But beyond that, I love how he plays, enthusiasm, hustle, and physicality.

I don't see Howard or Mahinmi as having any future with this team, so unless you are happy with Bryant as a starter, I like the idea of going big with our pick and solidifying that spot. Bryant to me is an ideal guy off the bench to bring a spark with his hustle, and depth is always valuable because interior players are susceptible to foul trouble.

I mean it's also about creating matchup problems, and unless you are going to out small everyone, going big at times can create a mismatch teams aren't built to deal with or can be an advantage in your favor.

[trast66]

We desperately need rim protection but then again we desperately need everything except a staring shooting guard. I don’t think we should take a 5 that high in the draft at this point.

I have no idea why anybody wants Parker or Porter. Not unless they play for free.

We have Brad, Troy and a first round pick. Keep Bryant but for no more than $5M a year. Sad as it is, best for us and him if Sato moves on. There is no top 70 free agent that would come here and the rest we don’t want unless they sign short term low cost. Stay under cap so we can absorb some young, high potential guy who wears out his welcome.

Ted is not deserving of Brad Beal. I hope Brad would buy in to a plan like this. He is certainly a candidate to ask for a trade next February.

[nate33]

Another scenario. This one focuses on revamping our defense.

1. Buy out Howard for $2M. I figure he can find a contender that will pay him the Room Exception or the Taxpayer Exception as depth. Those pay up to $5.3 or $4.4M respectively. So if we pay him $2M to go away, he could come out financially ahead and be on a contender.

2. Draft Brandon Clarke

2. Sign Bryant for $5M (hopefully 3 year deal or longer)

3. Sign Sato for $8M (hopefully 3 a year deal)

4. Resign Parker for a 2-year $20M deal with the second year a team option

5. Sign Dekker for the vet minimum (hopefully for at least 2 years)

6. Sign Nerlens Noel for $6M using a portion of the MLE. (He only managed to play 800 minutes this year in OKC, so I don't think he'll cost all that much more.)

7. Resign Ariza for 1-year at $6M.



That leaves a comfortable $4.3M cushion in the luxtax (enough to absorb a salary for a 2nd round pick) while fielding the following team:

PG Wall/Sato
SG Beal/Brown
SF Ariza/Dekker
PF Clarke/Parker
C Bryant/Noel/Mahinmi

Our starting lineup is unchanged except we trade Green's outside shooting for Clarke's rebounding and defense. Our bench is a scrappy bunch of hustlers and cutters with Parker as the primary offensive threat. Everyone on the team with the exception of Bryant and Parker should be above average defenders and rebounders at their position.

Ariza is a stopgap short-term solution at SF and veteran mentor. Hopefully, when Wall gets back, Brown will be able to get more SF minutes and eventually replace Ariza as our starting SF. Green can also be retained if he'll play for the vet minimum.

[payitforward]

Terrific thinking about players in all the above, but to me it's all about picking the best player available. I am not thinking about "what we need," because -- as trast says above, "we desperately need everything" except a replacement for Beal.

Our real problem is that we will be unable to get enough good players w/ what we can pay & stay under the lux tax.

We've got 3 guys under contract who will be able to play next year -- Beal, Brown & Mahinmi -- but along with Wall they are going to cost us $84m. Add a R1 pick @$4m, & that leaves us needing to add 9 players for @ $45m. The first 3 will (or at least should) be Satoransky, Dekker & Bryant, & those 3 will cost at least $16m. Wow...

[Dat2U]

Terrific thinking about players in all the above, but to me it's all about picking the best player available. I am not thinking about "what we need," because -- as trast says above, "we desperately need everything" except a replacement for Beal.

Our real problem is that we will be unable to get enough good players w/ what we can pay & stay under the lux tax.

We've got 3 guys under contract who will be able to play next year -- Beal, Brown & Mahinmi -- but along with Wall they are going to cost us $84m. Add a R1 pick @$4m, & that leaves us needing to add 9 players for @ $45m. The first 3 will (or at least should) be Satoransky, Dekker & Bryant, & those 3 will cost at least $16m. Wow...

So here's a quick analysis of how we can add talent beyond our draft pick.

Via Free agency
$9,073,050 Mid-Level Exception
$3,551,100 Bi-Annual Exception

Via Trade
$5,450,000 Trade Exception (Jason Smith, expiring 12/7/19)
$3,208,630 Trade Exception (Kelly Oubre, expiring 12/17/19)
$6,011,913 Trade Exception (Otto Porter, expiring 2/6/20)
$8,600,000 Trade Exception (Markieff Morris, expiring 2/7/20)

So at least there are a few options to add players beyond the veteran minimum. We should definitely be talking with teams wanting to create additional cap room.

[doclinkin]

Likely a moot point based on lotto odds, but somebody sell me on RJ Barrett. I'm not saying 'No', I'm just curious why he's a consensus top 3 pick in this draft.

He rebounds big for a SF. He's a willing passer (but he better be with that talent around him). He's young. Good size, athleticism.
Weighed against: He's a streaky shooter. Not a great 3fg shooter. Subpar FT shooter from the wing spot. Decent defender but not lockdown. His dribble drive is predictable, a lot of speed and power but not a lot of shifty in his game. And that is not the skill teams need most in a wing nowadays.

To me I wonder if we do get better value out of a trade out of that spot. You take Zion no question. Ja Morant has shown me what he can do in the bigs. He has an immediate role as a Wallstar understudy. His passing is better and his assist numbers will improve even, given better finishers around him. He doesn't have the accelration of a Fox/Wall, but he has the thing that is better: he sees the gamebetter. He has touch on his passes and change of speed that Walll didnt learn until 4 years in. We will see how he does in conference competition of the NCAAs if they make it. But his situational smarts are evident.

But outside of those two, the players I am greedy for should be available later on. I don't quite see Barrett as the no-question top 3 best value prospect in this year. I feel like, even squinting into the future, there will be a player later on who will be better quicker. So why not try to get a few chances, this year if there's a deal, or future picks if not. We have so many needs, and with such a broad field of talent maybe it makes sense to trade the slot to a team that will covet that potential, since everyone else projects him as top 3 value. I'd love to get multiple players on cheap contracts. Get a utility guy who fills a role for us as well as an upside pick later on.

I want Hunter. He fills a need. Fits well with who we have. Not an upside player, and his version of 'best player available' means: instant utility. He makes this team better.

I want Bruno Fernando. He fills a role as a defensive big, a highly proficient rebounder, and also has intriguingly developing skill that is catching up to his talent. He has one-hand-catch ability. Big soft hands. Like other former soccer playing bigs he has good footwork for his size, understands angles on defense, and unselfish play on offense. He will make the touch pass out of traffic. And has savage reaction speed on putbacks and dunks rolling down the lane. His athleticism and motor suggests he will adjust to NBA pick and roll defense even if right now he plays upright, and I can see him setting hellacious picks if he gets a big man tutor. There's something nastygood here with the right team and environment, I got a feeling. I've got the sense that he will become that keystone interior defender on a winning team. The guy who can call out reads and switches and make his team better, the way bigs are supposed to since they're the ones who can see the whole floor from underneath.

I like Clarke. He lets us play our under-rebounding bigs like Bryant or Portis (if we keep him cheap), and his lack of a developed outside shot will be less critical when they float out to play as en vogue face-up Bigs. His motor will make even boring nights interesting and will fire up both his teammates and the crowd. I like seeing his development in school, it bodes well for his future in the league.

A guy like Bol Bol intrigues me. Aside from foot injury fears he is the player with the 2nd most mindblowing physical talent in this draft. An anomaly, that level of developed skill fused with that length. If he can stay healthy he will be a puzzle for teams to solve. A lifer in this game, he plays like it is his birthright.

If we were lucky enough to bounce into the top 4 and Barrett was sitting there (I suspect the combine may displace him at that #2 consensus, if his tourney is decent but not world shaking) then to me I'd rather catch two of the above. Or one and a fistful of future picks from the right team.

I dunno. But if I could get Bruno and Hunter I'd feel good about the future with this squad.

[Ruzious]

I'm at 3 players that I really want, but see that we can only get 1; 2 if we get luck with a top 3 pick. Like Doc, I'm thinking trade down - if we get the 2nd or 3rd pick. And Atlanta - with currently the 5th and 8th pick being the logical target. The 3 players I target are Hunter, Clarke and Garland. But there are other players that really intrigue me - like Jontay Porter, Mfiondu Kabengele, and some 2nd round types - Shamorie Ponds, Ty Jerome (even with his lack of athleticism and length - he's got some wiggle that a lot more athletic players don't have). I was hoping there'd be an opportunity to trade Beal and get all the players I wanted, but that's not going to happen - and that might be a good thing - as Beal is becoming a legit star.