Offseason Plan

[doclinkin]

I think this is my favorite, plausible plan at the moment:

1. Tell Beal he is not getting the full 35% max extension starting at $41.5M. Instead offer him a 5-year extension starting at his the same salary he is scheduled to get if he opts in on his player option: $36.4M. Over 5 years, that would be a 5-year $211M contract - which is no insult to Beal. If he doesn't like it, he can try his luck in free agency this year, or opt in on his player option (at $36.4M) and see if he can make more in free agency next summer. Either way, his cap figure would be $36.4M (or zero).

2. Renounce KCP and Ish Smith

3. With Beal at a cap cost of $36.4M, and KCP and Ish off the books, the Wizards would have $13.4M in cap room. I'd offer to trade Rui Hachimura (at a salary of $6.2M) to Dallas for a resigned Brunson. By unloading Rui, we'd have the cap room to pay Brunson a salary starting at $19.7M with 5% raises. That's 4 years $84.7M. Dallas gets a needed forward who can shoot corner 3's and guard 3 through 5. Rui only costs $6.2M next season, which will keep their luxtax costs in check. Basically, they get a very useful, cheap rotation player at a position of need as consolation for agreeing to a S&T deal. I think it makes good sense for them under the assumption that they can't afford to resign Brunson due to the prohibitive luxtax costs. It's better than letting Brunson walk for nothing. They'd also get a $12M TPE.

4. Draft BPA at #10, whether it's Sharpe, Mathurin, Davis, Eason or Daniels. Our team would be in need of SG for the future and a PF for the future, so any of those guys would be a good fit. Maybe we get lucky and move up to #4 or #5 and land Keegan Murray.

5. Resign Sato for the Room Minimum (up to $4.7M). Resign Gill for the Vet Minimum.

6. Going forward, if Beal is cool with his new contract, that's great. If he sulks about it, then we can always get a mulligan by trading him to LA on December 15th for Westbrook and as many unprotected future picks as we can extract.

Lineup:
Guards: Beal, Brunson, Draft Pick, Sato
Forwards: Kispert, Kuzma, Avdija, Gill, Todd
Centers: Porzingis, Gafford, Carey Jr.

I'm with every part of this plan except we cannot move up to #5. But I'd take Keegan at #3 even.

Also I am not all that interested in bringing back Westbrook who is in the steep decline at the end of his career but still has the emotional memory of being a star. I don't see that as positive for the development of our young players. But I'd put Beal up for auction and let the teams that want him make an offer. If the Lakers want to jump in on that and ship back Westbrook I would want picks all the way out to their grandchildren's children's picks. Lottery unprotected.

[NatP4]

I like it nate, but let’s still move Kuzma on draft night for a late 1st and go get David Roddy. I think he’s going to be a quality NBA player capable of handling the 4 position full time in today’s league. We can lean on Gill to play actual rotation minutes next year while Roddy develops.

Let’s get Daniels at 10. He fits everything that Doc just posted in the Avdija thread. Great cutter, ball doesn’t stick, think he will eventually be a good off ball catch and shoot guy. It’s kinda sad that Beal used to be a perfect fit in that kind of offense. Now, he has too much superstar ego to play that way. Brunson would be a superstar in that offense. Roddy also played that way with CSU. Just a high level feel for the game big that can play out of the post and make reads. Also, Trevion williams plays that way and is ELITE. Give me him with our late 2nd.

Doc threw out some examples of offenses play that way, and Villanova is another good one. Brunson is a classic play on two feet/make one quick read and move the ball triangle offense guard. Dyson Daniels is EXACTLY that. Ayayi also plays that game, let’s give him a shot.

Brunson Daniels
Beal Sato Ayayi
Kispert Avdija/Roddy
Avdija Gill Roddy
Porzingis Gafford Williams

We can play a ton of effective 3 guard lineups. Daniels can guard 1-3, Sato and Beal can play the wing. Kispert is a really good young player that should play 30+ a night IMO. Avdija is the swing factor. I still think he’s going to be a top 50 player in the league sooner than later.

[nate33]

I'm with every part of this plan except we cannot move up to #5.

You are right. I don't know what I was thinking.

Also I am not all that interested in bringing back Westbrook who is in the steep decline at the end of his career but still has the emotional memory of being a star. I don't see that as positive for the development of our young players. But I'd put Beal up for auction and let the teams that want him make an offer. If the Lakers want to jump in on that and ship back Westbrook I would want picks all the way out to their grandchildren's children's picks. Lottery unprotected.

Oh, I definitely don't WANT Westbrook. The idea here is that if Beal makes noises about wanting to move on, we trade him for Westbrook's expiring contract and as many picks as we can extract from the Lakers. I'd definitely waive Westbrook immediately.

I only mentioned Westbrook because I think the Lakers are likely to be the team in most desperate need for Beal and would probably pay the most.

[nate33]

I like it nate, but let’s still move Kuzma on draft night for a late 1st and go get David Roddy. I think he’s going to be a quality NBA player capable of handling the 4 position full time in today’s league. We can lean on Gill to play actual rotation minutes next year while Roddy develops.

Let’s get Daniels at 10. He fits everything that Doc just posted in the Avdija thread. Great cutter, ball doesn’t stick, think he will eventually be a good off ball catch and shoot guy. It’s kinda sad that Beal used to be a perfect fit in that kind of offense. Now, he has too much superstar ego to play that way. Brunson would be a superstar in that offense. Roddy also played that way with CSU. Just a high level feel for the game big that can play out of the post and make reads. Also, Trevion williams plays that way and is ELITE. Give me him with our late 2nd.

Doc threw out some examples of offenses play that way, and Villanova is another good one. Brunson is a classic play on two feet/make one quick read and move the ball triangle offense guard. Dyson Daniels is EXACTLY that. Ayayi also plays that game, let’s give him a shot.

Brunson Daniels
Beal Sato Ayayi
Kispert Avdija/Roddy
Avdija Gill Roddy
Porzingis Gafford Williams

We can play a ton of effective 3 guard lineups. Daniels can guard 1-3, Sato and Beal can play the wing. Kispert is a really good young player that should play 30+ a night IMO. Avdija is the swing factor. I still think he’s going to be a top 50 player in the league sooner than later.

While I don't think Kuzma is untouchable or anything, I also don't share your passion for removing him from the roster. I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to dump him - particularly if we don't have a talented enough young prospect to replace him. I don't know anything about Roddy, but I think it's pretty risky to simply assume a 2nd round pick can replace an established NBA player as a rookie. Let's not put the cart before the horse. Draft Roddy if you like him. And if he looks promising after a few months of play, THEN start shopping Kuzma.

For the time being, there are enough forward minutes available to ensure that Avdija and Kispert get plenty of burn. I'd lean toward keeping Kuzma unless someone came along with a pretty intriguing trade offer.

I haven't written Kuzma off as a negative player. I think he was thrust into a role where he was asked to do a bit more than he is capable. I'm curious to see how he will play after a full offseason working in an offensive system structured around Porzingis, Brunson and Beal, where Kuzma has the luxury of being a 4th option and can focus more on defense and finishing efficiently rather than on shot creation. Kuzma might also fare really well as a 2nd option on the bench unit.

[NatP4]

Again, Kuzma has 5 full seasons of being absolutely terrible and completely tanking his teams on/off numbers. He is not a good player. If we can get a 1st round pick for him, it would be idiotic not to do so.

You could literally plug in any 2nd round pick and they could be just as good. Actually, I take that back, Isaiah Todd would somehow be worse.

Also, you can’t pick Roddy unless you acquire that pick in a Kuzma trade. He’s gonna go 20-40ish, and I never said he would replace Kuzma in his rookie year. I clearly stated that Gill could step in while Roddy develops.

Kuzma is not a part of our future and he doesn’t help us win. If anyone offers any kind of draft pick for him, we should make that move.

[payitforward]

I really like the looks of things in the plan above if we somehow land Sharpe in the draft, and then end up trading Beal for Westbrook and the Lakers 2027 and 2029 unprotected picks. Give the Lakers Kuzma too. I'd like to see us develop a young lineup of:

PG Brunson
SG Sharpe
SF Kispert
PF Avdija
C Porzingis/Gafford

Let them tank for this season (we'd cut Westbrook) and we'd add one more high lotto pick next year plus have enough cap room for a max salary. And when the team starts turning the corner and winning a year or two down the road, we'd get to add even more talent with those Lakers picks.

I like the whole sequence of moves, nate -- well done!

I'd be holding my breath on the Rui-Brunson deal -- it's such a win for us & so speculative for them. But, weirdly, somehow it does seem possible.

Still... let me ask you this: why not Rui to SA for Tre Jones instead? Brunson is further along, to be sure, but in this scenario the fact that Jones is younger is a significant advantage.

SA has expressed a lot of interest in Rui. For that matter, weren't they rumored as a landing spot for Kuzma at one point? It could be him instead for Jones (I haven't thought about how that would be structured given the salary difference).

Now that I think of it, I think one of the two for Tre Jones would be the single most intelligent trade we could make.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

I really like the looks of things in the plan above if we somehow land Sharpe in the draft, and then end up trading Beal for Westbrook and the Lakers 2027 and 2029 unprotected picks. Give the Lakers Kuzma too. I'd like to see us develop a young lineup of:

PG Brunson
SG Sharpe
SF Kispert
PF Avdija
C Porzingis/Gafford

Let them tank for this season (we'd cut Westbrook) and we'd add one more high lotto pick next year plus have enough cap room for a max salary. And when the team starts turning the corner and winning a year or two down the road, we'd get to add even more talent with those Lakers picks.

I like the whole sequence of moves, nate -- well done!

I'd be holding my breath on the Rui-Brunson deal -- it's such a win for us & so speculative for them. But, weirdly, somehow it does seem possible.

Still... let me ask you this: why not Rui to SA for Tre Jones instead? Brunson is further along, to be sure, but in this scenario the fact that Jones is younger is a significant advantage.

SA has expressed a lot of interest in Rui. For that matter, weren't they rumored as a landing spot for Kuzma at one point? It could be him instead for Jones (I haven't thought about how that would be structured given the salary difference).

Now that I think of it, I think one of the two for Tre Jones would be the single most intelligent trade we could make.

I'm just a little lost on the seemingly unanimous consensus that we're going to get Brunson. Did I miss something?

He's a UFA. I guess he's a good player to go after, but at 6-1 he doesn't seem to fit the profile of a tall PG that both Beal & WUJ has mentioned they think we need. And the big salary increase everyone is talking about for him based on good production in a fairly limited sample size, seems we've gotten burned with that before.

I mean if that's what everyone is thinking I'm ok with it, we do need a PG. It just is surprising how everyone is talking like it's a done deal, not sure why he'd want to come here. Is he tight with KP?

[doclinkin]

SA has expressed a lot of interest in Rui. For that matter, weren't they rumored as a landing spot for Kuzma at one point?

The Kuzma rumor was coming out of the Lakers FO as a rumored Kuz+2nd for DerMarr sign and trade. Scuttlebutt is it was intended to pressure the Kings to give a better deal on Buddy Hield.

The Rui interest is real though. Pop likes the kid.

[doclinkin]

Again, Kuzma has 5 full seasons of being absolutely terrible

No he has 5 full seasons of not living up to expectations. Statistically his aggregate mediocrity comes from an oxymoronically consistent streakiness, particularly from the 3pt line. He will gun you out of games, and will scorch the opponents in others. Sometimes he will do both in the same game. Jack shots early then save you in the 4th quarter when he catches heat. The thing is he always thinks he is the player that can score an efficient 30 points. Because he has. He has 17 career efficient 30+ games. Seven 35pt+. He has a 40-piece in his career bucket.

But 'absolutely terrible' is a stretch. He rebounds. Passes. Gives effort on defense. He understands basketball, makes good cuts, attacks closeouts on mismatches. He is not lost out there wondering where to be, is not ball watching. On games when his shot is falling that +/- is impressive. When it is not, the team drowns. Mostly he is a lightning rod for people who don't like his prettyboy affect and that he comes across as a guy who thinks he is a star. He has not earned the casual swagger that he portrays. The spotlight of LA did not do him a favor.

But 'absolutely terrible' does not lead a team in double doubles, post triple doubles, have 7 career games of 35+ points. Scroll through his game log. His +/- numbers are off their medication. Some nights he is +18 then 2 games later he is -23. It almost always tracks with his 3pt shooting. Simply he is not as good an outside shooter as he thinks he is. Not consistently anyway. Some nights he is *exactly* as good at his self confidence suggests. An absolutely terrible player does not post those positive double digit +/- games, they consistently post the negatives.

It has got to be maddening to coach though. You don't know which Kuz you will get. You cannot rely on him. In 29 wins Kuz was +7, in 37 losses he was -17. The gamble that a team takes with Kuz is that maybe-couldbe some day he will put it all together and figure out how to string those positive games together. Sure maybe. If he had the competitive frenzy to improve, instead of seeming copacetic with whatever happens, win or lose.

Can a young player suddenly click and put together a career out of former streakiness? Nick Young, Kelly Oubre, suggest nah. Not if you are already a Swaggy P Wave Papi in a pink sweater. But I dunno Rudy Gay? Some people do become a solid positive later in their careers. It's rare though. Does the Wiz' squad of film stat nerd gurus have optical tracking data they can show Kuz to say "hey, these are the shots you are missing, and these are the ones that go in". Because his heat chart is a mess:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/k/kuzmaky01/shooting/2022

He will literally take a shot from anywhere on the floor. That is the shot chart of an undisciplined player who does not know his strengths and weaknesses. It is the shot chart of a guy like Stef Curry who actually can hit a shot from anywhere. A star. A guy who will jack a shot with confidence thinking every time it is going in. This chart is the antithesis of the Bruce Lee quote: Fear not the man who practices 10,000 kicks. Fear the man who practices one kick 10,000 times. Kuzma is just out there kickin and kickin, and okay some nights those kicks do hit.

That said, here is who Kuz thinks he is. Take a look at the splits on that shot chart. Specifically his 3pt shooting percentage with 3 minutes or less in the quarter. He's shooting 40% from 3 in clutch situations. And his 3fg% goes up in OT. Likewise his shooting seemed to improve in the post season during the Bubble championship. Maybe Kuz needs to feel pressure in order to focus. Needs to care. Dude probably just needs a sports therapist. A hypnotist. Then we would see him become a super star.

[payitforward]

Hell, there aren't any "absolutely terrible" basketball players in the NBA!

Overall, Kuz isn't very good -- for an NBA player at his position, I mean. His overall production is significantly below average for a 4. & that is the position he plays.

Compare his numbers up and down the line this year to those of Deni Avdija. Overall, they're slightly better. But, Deni is a SF -- & he's a better SF than Kuz is a PF.

That's just the way it is. If you average out what guys called PF do, their overall numbers are somewhat better than the average of what guys called SFs do.

Take that into account, & Deni is "better" than Kuzma (not to mention that he's 21. & he's a better defender. The comparison isn't the point -- the point is that if you assess what a does playing the 4 you have to compare him to other guys playing the 4 in order to know what his numbers mean.)

Now, Kuz is above average on a number of things as compared to other NBA PFs. He scores a few more points, gets more defensive boards, more assists, & fouls less.

Sounds good, right? Only, his scoring %s are below average, his offensive rebounding is below average, he turns the ball over a lot, & his steals are below average.

&, since he can't sequence his good nights for those when they'd make the greatest difference (no one has that ability!), what you get over time is the effect of his numbers overall, period.

[DCZards]

I think it’s extremely difficult (and somewhat misleading) to use stats to evaluate players like Deni or Kuz based on the “position” they’re playing.

Is Kuz or Deni playing the 4 when they share the court? Is Rui or Kuz the 3 when they play together? How is that determination even made?

Positionless basketball is a real thing in the modern NBA.

[doclinkin]

Now, Kuz is above average on a number of things as compared to other NBA PFs. He scores a few more points, gets more defensive boards, more assists, & fouls less.

Sounds good, right? Only, his scoring %s are below average, his offensive rebounding is below average, he turns the ball over a lot, & his steals are below average.

&, since he can't sequence his good nights for those when they'd make the greatest difference (no one has that ability!), what you get over time is the effect of his numbers overall, period.

There's a nuance to this part though. Most players can't, but yes the best players can sequence their good nights for when they'd make the greatest difference. MJ's shooting %'s often improved in the postseason, even while his usage increased.

Human beings are not averages. They are sine waves. Peaks and valleys. There are those who may average out to a mediocre player but they show the talent to be a better player than others, whether or not they have the focus to live up to that talent. What separates the Kobes from the James "Flight" Whites is not the athleticism (most jaw dropping dunks I have ever seen) but that focus. Anthony Gill is a solid reliable player who knows his role at the back of the bench. He posts a good +/- by doing the things that his role allows. I would put money on the fact that he will never have a 40 point night in his career, will never have a triple double, but by the account of Corey Kispert he is the hardest working guy on the team. Best conditioned, most focused on his physical training, most determined in the weight room, during and after practice.

Players like Kobe and Jordan have discussed that the hardest part of doing what they did was consistency. First proving you could do it, then stringing together those good nights and never taking a night off. This is what every rookie needs to learn: what do they do well, and how to they continue to do that. The best players string those nights together then add to the list of what they do well. In the case of Kuzma this is the part most lacking. Though he has shown an ability to improve in key areas. Kuzma has discussed that he had to learn to put in the effort on rebounding. When he did show consistency in that area, his numbers climbed. He strung those nights together. Could he improve in other areas? And if so how. I say yes, in one key way. Learn to take better shots.

Kuz shows an aptitude for clutch shooting. There are papers arguing both directions of whether clutch scoring is a thing, but we do know there are players who refuse to take the big shot. Hell we have Deni who refuses to take any shot. We had Otto, who was an efficiency god in part because he only took good shots, wide open shots, but on lower usage than the team and coaches asked of him. I recall John Wall calling him out on it. Asking him to be aggressive. Kuzma does not have that problem. He is not gunshy at taking the bail-out shot, and so far stats suggest it is in his skill set to make those.

Some part of coaching and especially player development is helping that player know what to focus on. Here you state Kuzma shoots below average efficiency and racks fewer offensive rebounds than most power forwards. Okay. We are back to the conversation about role then. So as not to split hairs we will accept the premise that he is below average for a PF. (Last year he was listed as a SF on the Lakers, but was taking the same shots). This season PFs attempted on average 2.5 three-point attempts per game. Kuzma jacked close to 6 per game. Given that he missed more than average, and was our best rebounder, and that we kinda suck at rebounding, this put him out of position for those offensive boards. And given that he shot from basically anywhere, there was no anticipating that rebound. So two of his 'Power forward' numbers were going to be lower: Overall FG% and Offensive boards. That's not helping the team.

If the team ran plays for Kuzma. If they analyzed his technique and heat chart. If stat guru Dean Oliver pulled him aside at halftime the way to does Brad Beal, and showed Kuz what it is he does on nights when the shots fall, or determines if there is a reason he shoots better late in the clock (or hey, is it a statistical fluke) then his percentages might improve. Hell if coaches simply stopped him from jacking shots randomly and gave a set of rules of when and where he was supposed to shoot an outside shot -- then those bad possessions could evaporate.

But still. You have to show the potential to do the thing, you have to be able to do it at least once, a few times, before you can string together a consistent series. Kuzma's streakiness can be seen as a positive sign, despite being a frustration. There are players who cannot do what he has done. Players do improve, in part when they are put in position to succeed. Coaching matters. Jokic blossomed under Wes' tutelage. We saw breakout numbers for Porzingis when put in a similar role that magnified his best skill set. I'm saying it is not beyond Kuzma to 'sequence' his good *possessions*. And that will lead to sequencing more consistently good nights. But that is just role and coaching.

[SUPERBALLMAN]

Hell, there aren't any "absolutely terrible" basketball players in the NBA!

Overall, Kuz isn't very good -- for an NBA player at his position, I mean. His overall production is significantly below average for a 4. & that is the position he plays.

Compare his numbers up and down the line this year to those of Deni Avdija. Overall, they're slightly better. But, Deni is a SF -- & he's a better SF than Kuz is a PF.

That's just the way it is. If you average out what guys called PF do, their overall numbers are somewhat better than the average of what guys called SFs do.

Take that into account, & Deni is "better" than Kuzma (not to mention that he's 21. & he's a better defender. The comparison isn't the point -- the point is that if you assess what a does playing the 4 you have to compare him to other guys playing the 4 in order to know what his numbers mean.)

Now, Kuz is above average on a number of things as compared to other NBA PFs. He scores a few more points, gets more defensive boards, more assists, & fouls less.

Sounds good, right? Only, his scoring %s are below average, his offensive rebounding is below average, he turns the ball over a lot, & his steals are below average.

&, since he can't sequence his good nights for those when they'd make the greatest difference (no one has that ability!), what you get over time is the effect of his numbers overall, period.

So your point is they should move Kuzma to SF?

I'd be surprised if Kuzma is dealt. Management seems to think he is a promotable player, featuring him prominently in their advertisings. They seem determined to push a new Big 3 of Beal (Gilbert), Porzingis (Antawn), Kuzma (Caron).

As a player, I don't really get the hate. I was pleasantly surprised by him this year. Early on when we got off to the hot start and it looked liked we had a deep team, he seemed to buy in to the team 1st role player mindset really focusing on rebounding, and I thought he defended well with effort, and was scoring in the flow of the offense. As the season wore on and guys disappeared he stepped up to the lead role and asserted himself on the offensive end when somebody had to.

Also I never got the impression with all the upheaval, dissent and losing during the course of the season that he complained or was a malcontent, & seemed willing to help younger players especially Deni. And in a limited sample appeared to mesh well with Porzingis.

[FAH1223]

Kuzma is a 6th man.

I do not think anyone is giving you a 1st rounder especially since he can opt out in 2023.

[payitforward]

I think it’s extremely difficult (and somewhat misleading) to use stats to evaluate players like Deni or Kuz based on the “position” they’re playing.

Is Kuz or Deni playing the 4 when they share the court? Is Rui or Kuz the 3 when they play together? How is that determination even made?

Positionless basketball is a real thing in the modern NBA.

This is certainly a valid point. But, in a sense, it misses my point. "Positionless" basketball has made basketball less "positioned." It hasn't eliminated "positions."

To put it more dramatically -- & I'm not saying this is a profound point -- if you start the 5 best point guards in the league, you won't win many games.

You still win or lose a game based on the numbers/percentages of all the guys you have on the floor. & despite "positionlessness," the average output of a 4 exceeds that of a 3. Kyle Kuzma gives you what Kyle Kuzma gives you. It doesn't get better, b/c you reference positionless basketball. Kuz's output is below average for a 4: if you start him there you handicap yourself in just the same sense.

& of course you have to "use stats to evaluate players like... Kuz." Wins & losses are 100% determined -- every single one of them -- by the stats of all the players on the floor in the minutes they played. Every game. Period. With no exceptions.

To be sure, if you played Kuz with another forward whose output exceeded that of an average 4, then you could say that was making Kuzma more effective; you could compare his output w/ the other team's 3. But, in the end, all that amounts to is the fact that if you put a better player on the floor you do better. Duh!

I'm not damning Kyle Kuzma. But we need to figure out how to become a good team instead of a bad team, which is what we are. & have been for a long time. Trading Kuz for a pick might help in that direction. For sure it couldn't hurt us, b/c it would not be difficult to replace his production. I would hope for enough improvement from Rui next year that he'd be as good as Kuz, maybe better.

[payitforward]

Now, Kuz is above average on a number of things as compared to other NBA PFs. He scores a few more points, gets more defensive boards, more assists, & fouls less.

Sounds good, right? Only, his scoring %s are below average, his offensive rebounding is below average, he turns the ball over a lot, & his steals are below average.

&, since he can't sequence his good nights for those when they'd make the greatest difference (no one has that ability!), what you get over time is the effect of his numbers overall, period.

There's a nuance to this part though. Most players can't, but yes the best players can sequence their good nights for when they'd make the greatest difference. MJ's shooting %'s often improved in the postseason, even while his usage increased.

Human beings are not averages. They are sine waves. Peaks and valleys. There are those who may average out to a mediocre player but they show the talent to be a better player than others, whether or not they have the focus to live up to that talent. What separates the Kobes from the James "Flight" Whites is not the athleticism (most jaw dropping dunks I have ever seen) but that focus. Anthony Gill is a solid reliable player who knows his role at the back of the bench. He posts a good +/- by doing the things that his role allows. I would put money on the fact that he will never have a 40 point night in his career, will never have a triple double, but by the account of Corey Kispert he is the hardest working guy on the team. Best conditioned, most focused on his physical training, most determined in the weight room, during and after practice.

Players like Kobe and Jordan have discussed that the hardest part of doing what they did was consistency. First proving you could do it, then stringing together those good nights and never taking a night off. This is what every rookie needs to learn: what do they do well, and how to they continue to do that. The best players string those nights together then add to the list of what they do well. In the case of Kuzma this is the part most lacking. Though he has shown an ability to improve in key areas. Kuzma has discussed that he had to learn to put in the effort on rebounding. When he did show consistency in that area, his numbers climbed. He strung those nights together. Could he improve in other areas? And if so how. I say yes, in one key way. Learn to take better shots.

Kuz shows an aptitude for clutch shooting. There are papers arguing both directions of whether clutch scoring is a thing, but we do know there are players who refuse to take the big shot. Hell we have Deni who refuses to take any shot. We had Otto, who was an efficiency god in part because he only took good shots, wide open shots, but on lower usage than the team and coaches asked of him. I recall John Wall calling him out on it. Asking him to be aggressive. Kuzma does not have that problem. He is not gunshy at taking the bail-out shot, and so far stats suggest it is in his skill set to make those.

Some part of coaching and especially player development is helping that player know what to focus on. Here you state Kuzma shoots below average efficiency and racks fewer offensive rebounds than most power forwards. Okay. We are back to the conversation about role then. So as not to split hairs we will accept the premise that he is below average for a PF. (Last year he was listed as a SF on the Lakers, but was taking the same shots). This season PFs attempted on average 2.5 three-point attempts per game. Kuzma jacked close to 6 per game. Given that he missed more than average, and was our best rebounder, and that we kinda suck at rebounding, this put him out of position for those offensive boards. And given that he shot from basically anywhere, there was no anticipating that rebound. So two of his 'Power forward' numbers were going to be lower: Overall FG% and Offensive boards. That's not helping the team.

If the team ran plays for Kuzma. If they analyzed his technique and heat chart. If stat guru Dean Oliver pulled him aside at halftime the way to does Brad Beal, and showed Kuz what it is he does on nights when the shots fall, or determines if there is a reason he shoots better late in the clock (or hey, is it a statistical fluke) then his percentages might improve. Hell if coaches simply stopped him from jacking shots randomly and gave a set of rules of when and where he was supposed to shoot an outside shot -- then those bad possessions could evaporate.

But still. You have to show the potential to do the thing, you have to be able to do it at least once, a few times, before you can string together a consistent series. Kuzma's streakiness can be seen as a positive sign, despite being a frustration. There are players who cannot do what he has done. Players do improve, in part when they are put in position to succeed. Coaching matters. Jokic blossomed under Wes' tutelage. We saw breakout numbers for Porzingis when put in a similar role that magnified his best skill set. I'm saying it is not beyond Kuzma to 'sequence' his good *possessions*. And that will lead to sequencing more consistently good nights. But that is just role and coaching.

It's impossible to disagree with this -- at least with some of it. But I have a less speculative, less subtle idea which I'd say is significantly better.

Trade him.

If we got a R2 pick in the 30s (no doubt along w/ a bad contract -- it'd have to be short, however), that would be better than the above. &, if he has the promise you describe... why would we not get that in return?

We're not stuck with Kyle Kuzma, so that somehow we have to reinterpret the facts to make him look better, or else find a "guru" who can get us more out of his talent. We can trade him. We can move on.

It's a key point. In reference to the whole franchise. We don't have to bend the truth to make it look like we have more potential than we do. We can actually change who that "we" is.

[DCZards]

When Kuz is the first or second offensive option (as he was asked to be a good deal of last season) he takes too many bad shots and tries to do stuff with the ball in his hands that he’s simply not capable of…which often leads to turnovers.

On the other hand, Kuz averaged career highs in rebounds and assists last season and is surprisingly good at using his size and quickness to get to the rim for easy baskets. He’s also clutch as hell…and a team leader.

If Kuz can accept being a third or fourth option—and play like one—he’s an on and off court asset to the Zards.

This is not an argument not to trade Kuz if the right deal comes along. But it is to suggest that his shortcomings are typically highlighted on this board while his strengths and contributions to winning are often ignored or played down.

[nate33]

I really like the looks of things in the plan above if we somehow land Sharpe in the draft, and then end up trading Beal for Westbrook and the Lakers 2027 and 2029 unprotected picks. Give the Lakers Kuzma too. I'd like to see us develop a young lineup of:

PG Brunson
SG Sharpe
SF Kispert
PF Avdija
C Porzingis/Gafford

Let them tank for this season (we'd cut Westbrook) and we'd add one more high lotto pick next year plus have enough cap room for a max salary. And when the team starts turning the corner and winning a year or two down the road, we'd get to add even more talent with those Lakers picks.

I like the whole sequence of moves, nate -- well done!

I'd be holding my breath on the Rui-Brunson deal -- it's such a win for us & so speculative for them. But, weirdly, somehow it does seem possible.

Still... let me ask you this: why not Rui to SA for Tre Jones instead? Brunson is further along, to be sure, but in this scenario the fact that Jones is younger is a significant advantage.

SA has expressed a lot of interest in Rui. For that matter, weren't they rumored as a landing spot for Kuzma at one point? It could be him instead for Jones (I haven't thought about how that would be structured given the salary difference).

Now that I think of it, I think one of the two for Tre Jones would be the single most intelligent trade we could make.

My goal was to create a plan that is at least plausibly in line with the goals and tendencies of management. They're just not going to see enough value in a backup PG who was drafted in the 2nd round to sacrifice one of Rui or Kuzma to get him. It has the appearance of trading win-now players for a speculative future based on the potential of some prospect. Ted simply hasn't allowed Sheppard to do that. (I understand you don't consider Rui or Kuzma to actually BE "win now" players, and you may be right. But perception matters to this ownership.)

Trading Rui for a guy like Brunson who is clearly a win-now player is much more in line with Ted's style. Also, Tommy's modus operandi is to maximize opportunities to poach value from teams who are being forced to make undesirable trades due to unusual circumstances. In this case, Dallas has little choice but to dump Brunson, so they're going to end up with less than fair return. I could definitely seem Tommy being at the other end of such a trade.

Let's not forget that Tommy was the guy who bought Wagner and a 2nd round pick for virtually nothing because the Lakers were desperate to execute the Davis trade. He acquired Bertans for nothing (back when Bertans was good) because the Spurs bizarrely wanted Marcus Morris. And Tommy unloaded Westbrook for real value because Lebron foolishly thought he could play GM. And he turned the awful Bertans contract and the underperforming Dinwiddie into Porzingis, who so far looks like he is actually a damn good player who was being misused in Dallas.

[doclinkin]

TL:DR: Kuzma takes bad shots, also makes clutch shots

It's impossible to disagree with this -- at least with some of it. But I have a less speculative, less subtle idea which I'd say is significantly better.

Trade him.

Or, you know, coach him.

Since Tommy is not going to trade him for a round 2 pick. Or wait, a round 2 pick plus a bad contract.

Considering 80% of round 2 picks don't play 3 years.

Much less post 17/8.5/3.5 with a triple double this year.

Or a 27 pts 22! rb game.

Or 12 games this year of 25 or more points.

Or 24 double doubles.

I'd love to see stats on how many round 2 picks, even in the 30's, post anything close to those numbers in their career.

If we are talking trade, sure, trade for chemistry and fit and future picks, but the narrative that Kyle Kuzma is totally a trash player with easily replaced numbers that any 2nd rounder can earn is simply not grounded in reality. He has better value in front offices around the league than some of these trade suggestions imply. Get equivalent value on a trade for a player you like, but no point deriding a guy who actually does show flashes of star ability. Efficient high number games. That other players simply don't have the talent level to reach, ever. Even if he is admittedly sometimey in his output.

[Shoe]

It's time for Durant to become the wizards' Delle Donne

KCP, Kuz, #10 package for KD

Wall
Beal
Kispert
Durant
Porzingis

Sato
Deni
Rui
Gafford

Kevin Durant calls Kristaps Porzingis a basketball ‘unicorn’

“He can shoot, he can make the right plays, he can defend, he’s a 7-footer that can shoot all the way out to the 3-point line,” Durant said, according to ESPN. “That’s rare. And block shots—that’s like a unicorn in this league.

“When they made the pick, I texted [Knicks head coach Derek Fisher] immediately and said ‘I like this kid, he can play.’ A lot of people were down on him, but he can play. He’s a skilled guy and I think we’ve gotten away from enjoying skilled players in this league. We get so many players that are athletic and big and strong, but he’s a skilled player.”