Wizards 2019 Draft thread. (Tank for Zion, or OTHER NAME HERE)

[Dat2U]

If you keep Beal and manage to squeeze out enough wins to make the playoffs, your young ballers like Brown and Bryant will be developing and learning how to win...and you’ll still likely end up with a top 20 draft pick next season and Wall returning full-time for the 2020-21.

If you keep Beal and don’t make the playoffs, you’re a lottery team with decent odds of coming away with a top 5 pick in the draft and Wall returning full-time for the 2020-21.

If a true godfather deal comes along for Beal, you take it and run. But that deal would have to include a young player with all-star potential and a few high draft picks.

Those are all win-win situations for the Zards, imo.

Doc really nailed it with this great post:

Basically our only hope of a championship is the same as almost every other team: that Zion-like transformative franchise player (ZLTFP). Your feeling is we can only land him by swapping Beal for at most one or two extra bites at that apple. Maybe then we get better luck with a few % points better odds. And if not then we add talented players. Ok.

My feeling is: if we get lucky we get lucky. But. Trading Beal subtracts one skilled player who helps any young talent we do land to actually reach that potential. He is a good mentor. Plays hard on defense. Is coachable. Improving. Has learned to kick his skittles habit and fix his nutrition and conditioning. He passes the ball and rewards you with assists when you pass to him.

Swapping that out for a few young players who may develop. Or a couple more chances at that ZLTFP. Doesn’t seem like the best road to contention. In an era where mediocre teams are just about as likely as the bottom feeders to get the top ZLTFP in any draft.

If we keep Beal, in three years or so, we will have Beal plus an (X)% chance and another superstar. If we trade Beal, we will have no Beal and an (X+Y)% chance at a superstar. If Y was a really big number, I'd consider it. But it isn't. With the new lottery odds, Y is a fairly small number. I'd rather keep Beal. And if that X percent chance pans out, we will have Beal AND a superstar, which is the foundation for a championship team.

These are fine points if time weren't a factor.

Even a good looking rookie doesn't necessarily change the fortunes of this franchise immediately. I keep saying it but I think people are underestimating the bareness of the cupboard surrounding Mr. Beal.

Outside of Beal were basically a newly born expansion franchise except we have no cap room, no expansion draft from which to add talent and incredibly expensive remnants of a buffoon who led a decade & half **** show.


The optimism here is encouraging yet laughable. I appreciate it and I'm disgusted by it at the same time.

[Shoe]

Luka Samanic vid. He will probably move up the mocks soon. Skinny but weighed 227 at the combine which isn't too bad. Good athletic testing and seems to have good skills.

Some more recent footage. He looks improved and you can see him flash that 38" vertical.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

In terms of mental makeup I think it bodes well that he came out, balled out, and wasn't afraid to show off his dribbling.

Read on Twitter

?s=19[/tweet]

[tweet]

Read on Twitter

?s=19[/tweet]

Read on Twitter

While Doncic was playing for Barcelona at 16 , Samanic was still a bean pole.

[Shoe]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[gambitx777]

...UNless it is #4 and kuzma flat out for beal. No thank you....

Kuzma is a potential journeyman at best. I wouldn't consider that trade.

I was just pointing to that is where the conversation has to start and that ingram and a pick start is an insult.

[doclinkin]

These are fine points if time weren't a factor.

Even a good looking rookie doesn't necessarily change the fortunes of this franchise immediately. I keep saying it but I think people are underestimating the bareness of the cupboard surrounding Mr. Beal.

Outside of Beal were basically a newly born expansion franchise except we have no cap room, no expansion draft from which to add talent and incredibly expensive remnants of a buffoon who led a decade & half **** show.


The optimism here is encouraging yet laughable. I appreciate it and I'm disgusted by it at the same time.

I’d say the only optimism comes from cutting out the festering lump of our former GM. Nobody is saying we are anything like contenders. We are just looking forward to our front office making smarter choices.

But what’s the panic over time? It’s not like there’s a window that’s closing where we have anything like a chance at a championship soon. New York has cap space for two max players. The Bucks will pay to keep their key free agents. Golden State will still be dominant even if they lose KD.

Is the fear Bradley’s extension? I’d say he becomes a better asset if we sign him long term. Betting on him to continue to improve, as he has been with increased usage. His value is low enough right now that the inept Lakers are openly talking about poaching him apparently. Now is not the time to shop him. Better to show he can earn that contract and see who comes sniffing. And if not then he’s young enough it’s likely he’s going to be very solid for a long time. Let’s see what we can build around him.

Teams like LA seem to think we need to give him away for free. We don’t. I’ve given plausible reasons why. And if teams understood that the FANBASE wants to keep a high character guy, it gives cover to the home team who understands fan loyalty has been strained. They can make clear they’re not listening to stupid deals. We don’t want panic moves. We’re life long fans. We want a long ranged mindset.

Yes. It will take some time to dig out from Ernies moves. Yes we are an expansion team if we let Walls contract hamstring us. But. We’re an expansion team with mitigating factors. Insurance. Revenue streams others don’t have. New GM. Even if we suck it’s with a bit of hope.

Honestly Dat you’ve got time. Even as a fan there’s no reason to panic. Sure we’re gonna build from the bare floor. But you’ll stick around and stay a fan even if it takes a minute. Where are you gonna go. You stayed a fan thru a decade and a half of Ernie Grunfeld. You’ve got time to see what the new GM can do with this team.

Even one or two extra young draft picks aren’t going to change the equation. Nobody is giving away a #1 overall for Brad Beal. When you have no chance at a championship you are free to appreciate what you do have for a minute. Take a breath. Start over. Cheer for the players you’ve got who reward your fandom. Collect picks. Draft smart. Listen for trades but don’t listen to the doom prophets who say you HAVE TO do whatever they think you do. Just where I’m at right now.

[Shoe]

Read on Twitter

[Illmatic12]

Read on Twitter

This idea of him being “raw” is really overstated. Those are legit pro level plays he’s making against grown men.

If he played in NCAA (for the right program) he would be destroying. And he was born in Dec 2000 so more than a year younger than a guy like Cam Reddish, 2 years younger than Culver, 3 years younger than Hunter.

Just imagine that player in 2 years , and where they would be drafted if you put them in NCAA for a full season.

[payitforward]

The Zards are possibly a 40 plus win team last season with a healthy Wall and Howard. ...

I think people underestimate the loss of Dwight and his rebounding and rim protection. ...a huge loss for a squad that was one of the worst rebounding teams in the NBA last season.

In the below, I explode this notion. Not b/c I want a dispute w/ you Zards, but because I think it's really important to take absolutely seriously how bad the Wizards have become. Look straight at it & accept it.

First off, John Wall came into the season & played quite well for the first 20 games. We went 8-12 (i.e. a 32-33 win season).

But, what about Howard? Well, if what you are saying is that it would have been a better idea to sign a younger player than Howard, a healthy player, then no one could deny that.

Fortunately, however, it turned out that Ernie had done just that. Once Thomas Bryant started to get minutes, he provided better production than Howard had in his few games. Overall, in fact, Bryant was better than Howard had been the previous year with Charlotte.

Obviously, we can't add production based on Howard being available, while we also count Bryant's production. If we'd gotten to put 6 guys on the floor, or somehow managed otherwise to have our team play an extra say 1800 minutes, yeah we'd have won more games!

But... is there another way to project a better result than we had? Let me try.

The best stretch of the Wizards' season (before the trade) comprised the last 18 games of Otto Porter's career as a Wizard: we went 9-9. That does project to "a 40 plus win" season. Unfortunately, 11 of those games were at home, with only 7 on the road. Project our 2-5 road record in that stretch out to 11 games (to equal the # of home games) & it looks like 10-12 overall (i.e. a 37-45 season).

Lets try again, this time cherry-picking to make things look as good as possible.

After the trade, we went 2-1 our first 3 games, & one was on the road. With the preceding 18, that's 11-10 over 21 games. 8-4 at home; 3-6 on the road. Projecting to equalize, that's 12-12. So... there's your "40 plus win team."

Except that it's actually 2 different teams, the 2d of which (featuring Bryant, Parker & Porter) proceeded to go 6-12 in the 18 games that followed while trying as hard as possible to sneak into the playoffs. 6-12 projects to a 27 win season.

If, however, we include those first 3 games by the new team, it becomes 8-13 -- which projects to 31 wins. Include the previous 9-9 stretch, & it's 17-22 -- a 36-win season.

(& then the new team then closed the season by going 1-5. Overall, the post-Porter team went 9-18 -- a 27 win season.)

Ok... one more time: how can one make the mess last year look the absolute best over a long stretch of the season? We started 1-7. We closed 1-5. Lets take all 14 of those games off our record & see the result.

In the 68 games between that awful start & our tankathon close, we went 30-38 -- which projects to a record of 36-46.

That's the most optimistic possible look at the season. In short, no, there was no "40 plus win team" wearing Wizards jerseys last year.

Common sense says that if we bring back the exact team that ended the season, the one that went 8-13 prior to the tankathon, we would be likely to win 36 games. Drop someone & add a rookie, drop 2 guys & add 2 rookies -- we'd have to have a great draft for that to help.

This is consistent with nate's prediction:

...I think 35 wins is easily possible.

[payitforward]

A healthy Dwight would help us, but I'm fully expecting Dwight to miss 60+ games this year.

A Healthy Dwight wall Beal were at minimum a 50 win team...

C'mon now. Dwight isn't that good. There's a reason why he was available for the MLE. He hasn't had a substantially positive impact in 4 years.

Got to take away Bryant's minutes if you want to add minutes for Howard....

[doclinkin]

In prior years I’ve been more in tune with international players. Good to see young cats Luka and Sekou balling out. It does make me wish we had a couple picks in the teens to snatch and stockpile players.

[payitforward]

Samanic reminds me a lot of the Brooklyn Nets rookie - Rodions Kuruc. He was the 40th pick and played really well for them, he was selected to the rookie-soph game iirc. ...

Kurucs was expected to be a typical floor spacing big, but the aspect of his game that got overlooked was his underrated athleticism and quickness. He’s able to take other bigs off the dribble when they run him off the 3pt line. And on defense , it turns out that he can actually switch and slide his feet with guards so he makes for a useful small ball C.

Kurucs was a terrific pick at #40, no doubt. & he has potential. But, tho he started the season well, I'd say "played really well" is an overstatement.

I'm not dinging the guy! For example, he had one outstanding game vs. the Sixers in R1 of the playoffs. Plus he played 1300 minutes for the Nets as a 20-21 year old rookie. A bargain pick w/o a doubt.

I also think he's got to wind up more of a wing than a big. If you get 7.5 boards per 40 minutes, it might be hard projecting you at Center.... But, he shot 31.5% on 3-pointers. That made for a TS% well below average.

I mention this only b/c of your comparison to Samanic -- whom, like you, I really like. But Samanic is a good bit bigger than Kuriucs, he's 6'11" & already at 220 lbs -- Samanic is a 2 full years younger than Kuriucs -- just turned 19 in January -- so he might well grow a bit more.

I have to think Samanic is even earlier in his development than Kuriucs. Watching him, it's hard for me to imagine he's ready to play big minutes in the NBA.

[DCZards]

These are fine points if time weren't a factor.

Even a good looking rookie doesn't necessarily change the fortunes of this franchise immediately. I keep saying it but I think people are underestimating the bareness of the cupboard surrounding Mr. Beal.

Outside of Beal were basically a newly born expansion franchise except we have no cap room, no expansion draft from which to add talent and incredibly expensive remnants of a buffoon who led a decade & half **** show.


The optimism here is encouraging yet laughable. I appreciate it and I'm disgusted by it at the same time.

Dat, you’re quick to diss those of us with a different vision for rebuilding the team than the one you have. But I think it’s your view of prioritizing the accumulation of draft picks over an all-NBA caliber player with excellent intangibles is the one that’s badly misguided.

BB has ALL the tools—both on and off the court—to be the “cornerstone” of a rebuilding franchise. You take advantage of that and don’t trade it away for one or two more high draft picks.

Yes, you need a great player or very good players to team with Beal, but he’s cornerstone material.

[The Consiglieri]

The Zards are possibly a 40 plus win team last season with a healthy Wall and Howard. ...

I think people underestimate the loss of Dwight and his rebounding and rim protection. ...a huge loss for a squad that was one of the worst rebounding teams in the NBA last season.

In the below, I explode this notion. Not b/c I want a dispute w/ you Zards, but because I think it's really important to take absolutely seriously how bad the Wizards have become. Look straight at it & accept it.

First off, John Wall came into the season & played quite well for the first 20 games. We went 8-12 (i.e. a 32-33 win season).

But, what about Howard? Well, if what you are saying is that it would have been a better idea to sign a younger player than Howard, a healthy player, then no one could deny that.

Fortunately, however, it turned out that Ernie had done just that. Once Thomas Bryant started to get minutes, he provided better production than Howard had in his few games. Overall, in fact, Bryant was better than Howard had been the previous year with Charlotte.

Obviously, we can't add production based on Howard being available, while we also count Bryant's production. If we'd gotten to put 6 guys on the floor, or somehow managed otherwise to have our team play an extra say 1800 minutes, yeah we'd have won more games!

But... is there another way to project a better result than we had? Let me try.

The best stretch of the Wizards' season (before the trade) comprised the last 18 games of Otto Porter's career as a Wizard: we went 9-9. That does project to "a 40 plus win" season. Unfortunately, 11 of those games were at home, with only 7 on the road. Project our 2-5 road record in that stretch out to 11 games (to equal the # of home games) & it looks like 10-12 overall (i.e. a 37-45 season).

Lets try again, this time cherry-picking to make things look as good as possible.

After the trade, we went 2-1 our first 3 games, & one was on the road. With the preceding 18, that's 11-10 over 21 games. 8-4 at home; 3-6 on the road. Projecting to equalize, that's 12-12. So... there's your "40 plus win team."

Except that it's actually 2 different teams, the 2d of which (featuring Bryant, Parker & Porter) proceeded to go 6-12 in the 18 games that followed while trying as hard as possible to sneak into the playoffs. 6-12 projects to a 27 win season.

If, however, we include those first 3 games by the new team, it becomes 8-13 -- which projects to 31 wins. Include the previous 9-9 stretch, & it's 17-22 -- a 36-win season.

(& then the new team then closed the season by going 1-5. Overall, the post-Porter team went 9-18 -- a 27 win season.)

Ok... one more time: how can one make the mess last year look the absolute best over a long stretch of the season? We started 1-7. We closed 1-5. Lets take all 14 of those games off our record & see the result.

In the 68 games between that awful start & our tankathon close, we went 30-38 -- which projects to a record of 36-46.

That's the most optimistic possible look at the season. In short, no, there was no "40 plus win team" wearing Wizards jerseys last year.

Common sense says that if we bring back the exact team that ended the season, the one that went 8-13 prior to the tankathon, we would be likely to win 36 games. Drop someone & add a rookie, drop 2 guys & add 2 rookies -- we'd have to have a great draft for that to help.

This is consistent with nate's prediction:

...I think 35 wins is easily possible.

Don't forget to add the note that people always seem to forget in other sports (maybe because of the NYG):

*Other teams are trying to improve too.

With that knowledge in tow, and knowing how very little flexibility we have beyond trading Beal. Which teams have a better chance of improving faster? Teams like the Knicks, the Cavs and the Bulls will be trying to improve despite being hosed by the lottery, ditto the Suns, while the Mavs, Pelicans and Memphis will just get better. Who has more flexibility? Us or virtually any of those teams? People always forget other teams are trying too.

[The Consiglieri]

These are fine points if time weren't a factor.

Even a good looking rookie doesn't necessarily change the fortunes of this franchise immediately. I keep saying it but I think people are underestimating the bareness of the cupboard surrounding Mr. Beal.

Outside of Beal were basically a newly born expansion franchise except we have no cap room, no expansion draft from which to add talent and incredibly expensive remnants of a buffoon who led a decade & half **** show.


The optimism here is encouraging yet laughable. I appreciate it and I'm disgusted by it at the same time.

Dat, you’re quick to diss those of us with a different vision for rebuilding the team than the one you have. But I think it’s your view of prioritizing the accumulation of draft picks over an all-NBA caliber player with excellent intangibles is the one that’s badly misguided.

BB has ALL the tools—both on and off the court—to be the “cornerstone” of a rebuilding franchise. You take advantage of that and don’t trade it away for one or two more high draft picks.

Yes, you need a great player or very good players to team with Beal, but he’s cornerstone material.

IF you have other pieces to build with. We do not. The only kind of accelerator/deadline deal piece we have that would provide a good or great return is Beal. You can have Beal, or you can have a rebuild. You can't really have both (barring the Pelicans luck last Tuesday in a once in a decade draft, which is a lot to pin your hopes on).

[Shoe]

This idea of him being “raw” is really overstated. Those are legit pro level plays he’s making against grown men.

If he played in NCAA (for the right program) he would be destroying. And he was born in Dec 2000 so more than a year younger than a guy like Cam Reddish, 2 years younger than Culver, 3 years younger than Hunter.

Just imagine that player in 2 years , and where they would be drafted if you put them in NCAA for a full season.

The biggest thing I see from Doumbouya is he's not just shooting spot up corner 3's. He's pulling up off the dribble from the the top of the arc and the wing. Siakam rarely shoots those. If he turns into the kind of shooter that takes and knocks down those contested pull up jumpers at a high clip, his ceiling goes from nice 3&D to potential all-star. He's still only 18 and needs to raise his BBIQ though.

With Samanic, he's shown the agility to punish close outs. He had a faster shuttle run (3.03) and three quarter sprint (3.23) than most guards. I think his stock is rising big time, especially considering this Bucks series. Near 7 footers who jack up 3's are in vogue. He was also 2nd in top of the key shooting % at the combine.

[pancakes3]

...UNless it is #4 and kuzma flat out for beal. No thank you....

Kuzma is a potential journeyman at best. I wouldn't consider that trade.

I was just pointing to that is where the conversation has to start and that ingram and a pick start is an insult.

sounds like you're saying that Beal commands the same package that AD does

[rl25g]

This idea of him being “raw” is really overstated. Those are legit pro level plays he’s making against grown men.

If he played in NCAA (for the right program) he would be destroying. And he was born in Dec 2000 so more than a year younger than a guy like Cam Reddish, 2 years younger than Culver, 3 years younger than Hunter.

Just imagine that player in 2 years , and where they would be drafted if you put them in NCAA for a full season.

The biggest thing I see from Doumbouya is he's not just shooting spot up corner 3's. He's pulling up off the dribble from the the top of the arc and the wing. Siakam rarely shoots those. If he turns into the kind of shooter that takes and knocks down those contested pull up jumpers at a high clip, his ceiling goes from nice 3&D to potential all-star. He's still only 18 and needs to raise his BBIQ though.

With Samanic, he's shown the agility to punish close outs. He had a faster shuttle run (3.03) and three quarter sprint (3.23) than most guards. I think his stock is rising big time, especially considering this Bucks series. Near 7 footers who jack up 3's are in vogue. He was also 2nd in top of the key shooting % at the combine.

Doumbouya is my draft crush. Haven't had a crush this big since Leonard in 2011. I'm getting scared he won't he there at #9

[pancakes3]

I guess it's not so surprising bc outside of Yao, no Chinese/Asian int'l prospects have panned out but I'm still a little surprised at the lack of Chinese prospects in recent years.

[Dark Faze]

Sekou has some strong tools for his age. And he's likely to get up to 6'11 or so with time. With time to develop and time in the weight room he could be very good eventually.

Would have been nice to trade say, Porter for Haywards contract and 20 and 22 to grab Goga/Clarke/Herro

[Shoe]

Spoiler:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter