Official Trade Thread -- Part XXXIX

[barelyawake]

I believe our trade assets are being undervalued. The goal of next year should be to show off the actual potential and value of our young players, and then trade them in a package for one of the five or so players who can actually win a championship (when paired with Beal/Westbrook). If that isn’t the goal for next season, then we are in for another three years of pain and nonsense.

Kawhi was traded for two ninth picks with potential and a future first. Funny, we have exactly that.

[payitforward]

I believe our trade assets are being undervalued. The goal of next year should be to show off the actual potential and value of our young players, and then trade them in a package for one of the five or so players who can actually win a championship (when paired with Beal/Westbrook). If that isn’t the goal for next season, then we are in for another three years of pain and nonsense.

Kawhi was traded for two ninth picks with potential and a future first. Funny, we have exactly that.

So... you think that if we take Rui & Avdija off the team & substitute Kawhi Leonard for them, we have a solid chance of winning a championship some time in the next 3 years -- is that it?

Who are the other handful of players that "can actually win a championship (when paired with Beal/Westbrook)" that we can acquire for Rui, Deni & a future R1 pick?

[tontoz]

If he doesnt stay with the Bucks, he's going to Toronto. Powell will opt out and they'll waive everyone else to get to 37M in capspace
FVV
OG
Siakim
Giannis
FA Center

They win the East and probably a chip or two with that squad, Masai, and Nurse. That team is better than the Kawhi team with how much better the other 3 guys are/will be than they were 1.5 years ago.

I think the best place for Giannis is Dallas. Luka, Giannis and Porzingis together would be insane. Just find 3&D guards and wings to play around them.

Agreed. I think Giannis has to play off the ball more in order to succeed in the playoffs. Trying to drive from outside the 3pt line to the rim doesn't work against good defenses. In Dallas he would be able to get touches closer to the rim. He would feast off Luka's ability to break down defenses.

His defense and rebounding would be a huge addition in Dallas. Also as the Lakers proved this past season size still matters. A big part of their defense was their size everywhere. Dallas could potentially put a huge lineup on the floor with those 3.

Title contenders immediately if they land him.

[nate33]

I believe our trade assets are being undervalued. The goal of next year should be to show off the actual potential and value of our young players, and then trade them in a package for one of the five or so players who can actually win a championship (when paired with Beal/Westbrook). If that isn’t the goal for next season, then we are in for another three years of pain and nonsense.

Kawhi was traded for two ninth picks with potential and a future first. Funny, we have exactly that.

So... you think that if we take Rui & Avdija off the team & substitute Kawhi Leonard for them, we have a solid chance of winning a championship some time in the next 3 years -- is that it?

Who are the other handful of players that "can actually win a championship (when paired with Beal/Westbrook)" that we can acquire for Rui, Deni & a future R1 pick?

Yeah, barelyawake conveniently overlooks the fact that the only reason Kawhi was so cheap was because he was a 1-year rental.

[WallToWall]

Given we are pretty solid at PG and SG starting positions, what other (one) starting position do you think we need to upgrade in order to be legit title contenders? The premise being that we need 3 stars in order to contend.
There is, of course, the very small possibility that one of Bryant, Hachimura, Brown, or Avdija could get to a star-type productivity rate, but that would be at least another year away, if it happens at all.

So... the position, IMO, where an upgrade would be most impactful would be at C. Not only do we need a C who shoots 3's well, we would want a C who plays defense well, covers up for mistakes, can run the floor, can pass the ball, and can grab rebounds...all at an above average clip, with the ability to do a couple of those things at a well above average clip.

What is your take on the one position where a 3rd star type/quality player is most beneficial to this team?

[barelyawake]

I believe our trade assets are being undervalued. The goal of next year should be to show off the actual potential and value of our young players, and then trade them in a package for one of the five or so players who can actually win a championship (when paired with Beal/Westbrook). If that isn’t the goal for next season, then we are in for another three years of pain and nonsense.

Kawhi was traded for two ninth picks with potential and a future first. Funny, we have exactly that.

So... you think that if we take Rui & Avdija off the team & substitute Kawhi Leonard for them, we have a solid chance of winning a championship some time in the next 3 years -- is that it?

Who are the other handful of players that "can actually win a championship (when paired with Beal/Westbrook)" that we can acquire for Rui, Deni & a future R1 pick?

Yeah, barelyawake conveniently overlooks the fact that the only reason Kawhi was so cheap was because he was a 1-year rental.

Lol I didn’t conveniently anything. Ya’ll keep playing Moneyball pretending it isn’t the case that the NBA championship can only be won by (at most) five guys any particular moment in all of NBA history. We need to showcase our young talent and be a top team in the East, next year, to be considered a destination city (along with Beal and Westbrook). At that point, it’s luck that one of those five players ask for a trade. I’m merely saying I think we’ll be better, next year, than you think. And we will have the assets, when/if those players become available.

But, thanks you two, for reminding me why people stopped posting here. Don’t worry. I’m not lingering. I said my year’s worth of comments. I was out. Btw, one of my companies just inked a deal yesterday to partner with the Spirit, so I’m all about Kelly and Ashley Hatch, these days.

PS Internet smug is so 2000 and late.

[nate33]

So... you think that if we take Rui & Avdija off the team & substitute Kawhi Leonard for them, we have a solid chance of winning a championship some time in the next 3 years -- is that it?

Who are the other handful of players that "can actually win a championship (when paired with Beal/Westbrook)" that we can acquire for Rui, Deni & a future R1 pick?

Yeah, barelyawake conveniently overlooks the fact that the only reason Kawhi was so cheap was because he was a 1-year rental.

Lol I didn’t conveniently anything. Ya’ll keep playing Moneyball pretending it isn’t the case that the NBA championship can only be won by (at most) five guys any particular moment in all of NBA history. We need to showcase our young talent and be a top team in the East, next year, to be considered a destination city (along with Beal and Westbrook). At that point, it’s luck that one of those five players ask for a trade. I’m merely saying I think we’ll be better, next year, than you think. And we will have the assets, when/if those players become available.

But, thanks you two, for reminding me why people stopped posting here. Don’t worry. I’m not lingering. I said my year’s worth of comments. I was out. Btw, one of my companies just inked a deal yesterday to partner with the Spirit, so I’m all about Kelly and Ashley Hatch, these days.

PS Internet smug is so 2000 and late.

Dude, chill. I'm not trying to be smug. I'm rightfully pointing out that it's not that easy to just trade for an elite guy - a guy good enough to win us a title. Kawhi was purchased at a historically low price for a top 5 player in his prime, and even in that case, he was fortunate enough to join a team that was considerably better than our current team.

I disagree with the idea that we have sufficient assets on the team to acquire the talent to win now. You can't just will yourself into a championship, you have to have the asset base to make it happen. This team won 37% of their games last year. We don't have the assets. To get the assets, you need to acquire them while they're undervalued (typically by drafting them) and then develop them on your team. Any premature attempt to go all-in by trading your developing assets for win-now assets typically results in a futile and short run as a 48-50 win team before a collapse and rebuild.

Basically, you are suggesting to run the team like Ernie Grunfeld. Your strategy sounds a lot like trading the #5 pick for Jamison, or trading the #5 pick for Mike Miller. Those moves were made because EG didn't have the patience to develop talent, and they inevitably resulted in us being a treadmill team winning 45 games a year rather than a contender.

[doclinkin]

Danny Ainge managed to do it, but he did so by stockpiling assets and trading a haul for disgruntled star KG. The Lakers managed to do so, with about the level of talent we have here, but they were able to do so because LeBJ liked the market and history.

[Silvie Lysandra]

Basically, you are suggesting to run the team like Ernie Grunfeld. Your strategy sounds a lot like trading the #5 pick for Jamison, or trading the #5 pick for Mike Miller. Those moves were made because EG didn't have the patience to develop talent, and they inevitably resulted in us being a treadmill team winning 45 games a year rather than a contender.

I feel like this is based on a fundamentally flawed premise: that there is no significant improvement between Ish Smith/Isiah Thomas (strong argument that he was the worst player in the NBA last season) and Russell Westbrook. I think the upgrade at PG *alone* (going from one of the worst PG rotations in the NBA to a PG rotation featuring at worst an above average PG) is potentially enough to push us over the "50% of wins" mark, depending on how long RW continues to be an All-NBA player.

It also presumes that we do not have the assets, when the whole point of his idea is to determine if we *do* have the assets. Right now, that's an unknown, based on several variables.

- Is Bryant ready to take the next step, especially as an interior defender?
- Is Bonga ready to be a starting-level 3 and D combo forward?
- Will Brown make enough incremental improvements to be an above average bench player/spot starter?
- Will Rui become a quality 3rd scoring option while improving his defense/rebounding?
- How much will Avidja show in his first year?

On top of that:

- Will Beal return to form defensively now that he presumably has more help?
- How much does Westbrook (good argument that he himself is an undervalued asset - as great as Wall was when healthy, we traded a guy coming off the worst injury in sports + a 2023 first that will likely be pretty late for an all-NBA PG, regardless of how overpaid he is) still have left in the tank?

There's a ton of ifs with our roster. But there's a real chance that they can be answered positively, or at least many of them (Beal becomes a solid defensive player, Westbrook is still an All-Star/All-NBA caliber guard, at least one or two of the young players turn into legitimate quality starters). If they are, then you can start thinking "hey, IF a trade for a reasonably costed star comes along, or at least a quality 3rd piece, then maybe we take it". If we're sitting at the end of the first part of the schedule at say, 22-14 (a 50 win pace in a normal season) then you at least have to ask.

Basically, what we need to find out is whether we *did* acquire the low cost assets needed to contend. If we did, then we're in a good spot to look for opportunities to take the next step. If we didn't, then we are stuck on the treadmill for the next 3 years. But it's already baked in.

[payitforward]

...But, thanks you two, for reminding me why people stopped posting here. Don’t worry. I’m not lingering. I said my year’s worth of comments. I was out. Btw, one of my companies just inked a deal yesterday to partner with the Spirit, so I’m all about Kelly and Ashley Hatch, these days.

PS Internet smug is so 2000 and late.

Congratulations on the business deal. Meanwhile, I was asking what I thought was a serious question -- wanting to know who you were seeing in that light.

So... to me... it kinda feels like "Internet smug" is more on you than on me or nate: reread your own words above....

Or... better yet, don't bother, forget about all that -- I actually want to know what these moves are that make you think will turn us into contenders!

Turn your attention to that instead, ok?

[payitforward]

Hey, no doubt that if Russ plays at an all-NBA level (i.e. like 2-3-4 years ago), that might well take us over 50% this year -- but, that's a long long way from saying that we are lined up to contend for a title this year!

I thought barelyawake was saying we had to trade some of those young assets for one of the only 5 players who can take you to a title.

OTOH, the way you are putting it... sure -- if those "is" questions & "will" questions are all answered in the positive, then we can go further than if some or all of them are answered in the negative.

Which, btw, is what nate has been saying -- he's said that we might be as good as or better than the team that won 49 games. So, I'm not sure where the problem is or what you are objecting to.

Moreover, if there were a trade for a star at a reasonable cost... who do you imagine would be saying no to that??

But, however good we are this year, or however far we fall short of optimal outcomes, I sure don't see anything baked in that puts on a treadmill for the next 3 years. Maybe I'm missing something...?

[Silvie Lysandra]

Hey, no doubt that if Russ plays at an all-NBA level (i.e. like 2-3-4 years ago), that might well take us over 50% this year -- but, that's a long long way from saying that we are lined up to contend for a title this year!

I thought barelyawake was saying we had to trade some of those young assets for one of the only 5 players who can take you to a title.

OTOH, the way you are putting it... sure -- if those "is" questions & "will" questions are all answered in the positive, then we can go further than if some or all of them are answered in the negative.

Which, btw, is what nate has been saying -- he's said that we might be as good as or better than the team that won 49 games. So, I'm not sure where the problem is or what you are objecting to.

Moreover, if there were a trade for a star at a reasonable cost... who do you imagine would be saying no to that??

But, however good we are this year, or however far we fall short of optimal outcomes, I sure don't see anything baked in that puts on a treadmill for the next 3 years. Maybe I'm missing something...?

It sounds like we're all misunderstanding each other and are more or less on the same page

What I mean by this is that our next 3 years are going to be determined by the outcome of the acquisitions of the last 2-3 years. good Hachimura, Bonga, Brown, Avidja and Bryant turn out to be over the next 3 seasons. If they're all, or at least some of them are, quality rotation players or better, with a few quality or even high quality starters in the mix, then we're in the mix for looking to become contenders. If they aren't - if they're barely starter quality or sub-starter quality, then we're stuck for the next 3 years. Beal and Westbrook are All-Star caliber, but they're not top 10 players. So either we build an incredibly deep team around them, or we package our assets for a star.

[payitforward]

Hey, no doubt that if Russ plays at an all-NBA level (i.e. like 2-3-4 years ago), that might well take us over 50% this year -- but, that's a long long way from saying that we are lined up to contend for a title this year!

I thought barelyawake was saying we had to trade some of those young assets for one of the only 5 players who can take you to a title.

OTOH, the way you are putting it... sure -- if those "is" questions & "will" questions are all answered in the positive, then we can go further than if some or all of them are answered in the negative.

Which, btw, is what nate has been saying -- he's said that we might be as good as or better than the team that won 49 games. So, I'm not sure where the problem is or what you are objecting to.

Moreover, if there were a trade for a star at a reasonable cost... who do you imagine would be saying no to that??

But, however good we are this year, or however far we fall short of optimal outcomes, I sure don't see anything baked in that puts on a treadmill for the next 3 years. Maybe I'm missing something...?

It sounds like we're all misunderstanding each other and are more or less on the same page

What I mean by this is that our next 3 years are going to be determined by the outcome of the acquisitions of the last 2-3 years. good Hachimura, Bonga, Brown, Avidja and Bryant turn out to be over the next 3 seasons. If they're all, or at least some of them are, quality rotation players or better, with a few quality or even high quality starters in the mix, then we're in the mix for looking to become contenders. If they aren't - if they're barely starter quality or sub-starter quality, then we're stuck for the next 3 years. Beal and Westbrook are All-Star caliber, but they're not top 10 players. So either we build an incredibly deep team around them, or we package our assets for a star.

Misunderstand each other? No way!! Though, to tell the truth, sometimes when I reread my posts I misunderstand myself. (Also sometimes right when I'm writing them for the first time!)

You are so right: Rui, Bonga, Brown, Avdija & Bryant are essential to our future. & I'll add that if two (or more!) of Mathews, Wagner, Robinson & Winston become solid NBA rotation players, that too would be really big -- & I don't think it's at all impossible btw (my highest hopes are on Mathews & Winston).

I have the feeling that it's going to be a lot of fun to have Russell Westbrook as a Wizard for a while -- but, after all, we can't be building around him for 3-4 years from now. In fact, though I don't think it's been explicitly mentioned, trading John for him made for a significant change in strategy going forward. Just Russ being a couple of years older than John changes things for the team I'd say.

Of course, the above is also why I wish we had just one more young guy out of this draft: Killian Tillie went undrafted. So did Devon Dotson. Ditto Mason Jones & Ty-Shon Alexander. They're all on 2-way contracts around the league. Not to mention (for the umpteenth time) Nate Hinton.

Guys like Lopez, Neto & Gill seem altogether unlikely to contribute to that 3-year development picture barelyawake & you are talking about. & if we're talking about assets to trade, none of them is likely to give us that!

[Silvie Lysandra]

When talking about guys like Lopez, Neto and Gill, it depends on whether you subscribe to the idea that you need a balance of locker room vets with your young players to maximizing the chances of them developing. If you *don't* think that's a factor, then signing guys like Lopez and Gill is pretty silly. They're not a part of the team's future. However, if you do - if you think Robin Lopez will make Thomas Bryant better defensively, or if you think playing against Gill will make Rui and Avija better because of vet savvy, then they do make sense. I feel that's almost a subjective viewpoint, that can't be falsified either way, but it FEELS correct.

[penbeast0]

Given we are pretty solid at PG and SG starting positions, what other (one) starting position do you think we need to upgrade in order to be legit title contenders? The premise being that we need 3 stars in order to contend.
There is, of course, the very small possibility that one of Bryant, Hachimura, Brown, or Avdija could get to a star-type productivity rate, but that would be at least another year away, if it happens at all.

So... the position, IMO, where an upgrade would be most impactful would be at C. Not only do we need a C who shoots 3's well, we would want a C who plays defense well, covers up for mistakes, can run the floor, can pass the ball, and can grab rebounds...all at an above average clip, with the ability to do a couple of those things at a well above average clip.

What is your take on the one position where a 3rd star type/quality player is most beneficial to this team?

I would say Bryant/Bertrans are the closest thing we have to third strong weapons with very good offense in the frontcourt. What we need is a defensive presence that can play with them and I don't see any of our players being that guy. IF we can get an NBA quality defender on the cheap that's what we need (which is why I was looking into the possibility of a guy like 34 year old PJ Tucker), not another offensive star who needs touches and opportunities.

[nate33]

Given we are pretty solid at PG and SG starting positions, what other (one) starting position do you think we need to upgrade in order to be legit title contenders? The premise being that we need 3 stars in order to contend.
There is, of course, the very small possibility that one of Bryant, Hachimura, Brown, or Avdija could get to a star-type productivity rate, but that would be at least another year away, if it happens at all.

So... the position, IMO, where an upgrade would be most impactful would be at C. Not only do we need a C who shoots 3's well, we would want a C who plays defense well, covers up for mistakes, can run the floor, can pass the ball, and can grab rebounds...all at an above average clip, with the ability to do a couple of those things at a well above average clip.

What is your take on the one position where a 3rd star type/quality player is most beneficial to this team?

I would say Bryant/Bertrans are the closest thing we have to third strong weapons with very good offense in the frontcourt. What we need is a defensive presence that can play with them and I don't see any of our players being that guy. IF we can get an NBA quality defender on the cheap that's what we need (which is why I was looking into the possibility of a guy like 34 year old PJ Tucker), not another offensive star who needs touches and opportunities.

I think the odds of developing Bonga to be that player are higher than the odds of us acquiring one on the cheap.

[penbeast0]

Bonga might make a wing cover man, I don't think he'll be much of an inside presence.

[payitforward]

When talking about guys like Lopez, Neto and Gill, it depends on whether you subscribe to the idea that you need a balance of locker room vets with your young players to maximizing the chances of them developing. If you *don't* think that's a factor, then signing guys like Lopez and Gill is pretty silly. They're not a part of the team's future. However, if you do - if you think Robin Lopez will make Thomas Bryant better defensively, or if you think playing against Gill will make Rui and Avija better because of vet savvy, then they do make sense. I feel that's almost a subjective viewpoint, that can't be falsified either way, but it FEELS correct.

Well, as the saying goes, "it is what it is," & anyway one thing is sure -- the Wizards have never yet done exactly what I want them to do! Anyone surprised???

Can't really complain about the pace of change -- we have exactly 2 players on our roster who were Wizards 2 years ago today: Beal & Brown. That's it!

[Dat2U]

Given we are pretty solid at PG and SG starting positions, what other (one) starting position do you think we need to upgrade in order to be legit title contenders? The premise being that we need 3 stars in order to contend.
There is, of course, the very small possibility that one of Bryant, Hachimura, Brown, or Avdija could get to a star-type productivity rate, but that would be at least another year away, if it happens at all.

So... the position, IMO, where an upgrade would be most impactful would be at C. Not only do we need a C who shoots 3's well, we would want a C who plays defense well, covers up for mistakes, can run the floor, can pass the ball, and can grab rebounds...all at an above average clip, with the ability to do a couple of those things at a well above average clip.

What is your take on the one position where a 3rd star type/quality player is most beneficial to this team?

I would say Bryant/Bertrans are the closest thing we have to third strong weapons with very good offense in the frontcourt. What we need is a defensive presence that can play with them and I don't see any of our players being that guy. IF we can get an NBA quality defender on the cheap that's what we need (which is why I was looking into the possibility of a guy like 34 year old PJ Tucker), not another offensive star who needs touches and opportunities.

I think the odds of developing Bonga to be that player are higher than the odds of us acquiring one on the cheap.

Robert Covington. Bonga is a reliable jumper away from getting there. Defensively he's far and away the best wing option we have. Might be the same case at the 4 too. He just needs to start hitting the open shots he's inevitably going to get.

[payitforward]

Being able to view the situation in the form of PJ Tucker vs. Isaac Bonga, as penbeast sort of allows us to do, should make it easy to understand better v. worse ways of thinking about solving the "problem" of defense.

Tucker came into the league in 2006; he's in his last year or so as a player. It could never ever be a smart move to give up a young asset -- no matter how raw -- for him, because you simply can't get enough overall value out of the guy you're getting in return.

It would always be more intelligent to invest development effort, etc. in someone like Bonga instead of acquiring Tucker. Unless of course you have reason to believe that adding Tucker right now will make the difference between not winning a title & having an excellent to win one -- right now, this year.