The Wizards are at the crossroads of franchise-dom.
by Mike Prada on Dec 21, 2009 3:36 PM EST
in Free Agency
60 comments
There is no doubt in my mind that the Wizards have reached the preverbal fork in the road. We're 8-17. The season is close to a third over. We have not demonstrated any progress from the beginning of the season. Sure, we've played close games, but against teams like the Raptors, Bucks, Clippers, Warriors, Pistons, Pacers, 76ers and Kings. Teams that, if we really were making progress, we'd defeat more handily.
The "slow start" meme is also losing steam. It's been 25 games. We're nearly a third of the way into the season. We have a 25-game sample of Caron Butler struggling mightily to fit into the offense. We have a 25-game sample of Gilbert Arenas slowly getting his way back into the flow, a 25-game sample of him trading good performances with bad, a 25-game sample of him struggling to finish shots at the rim and convert free throws. We have a 25-game sample of Flip's offensive system not working so well. We have a 25-game sample of the inconsistencies our young players bring. These are no longer statistically insignificant.
The fork leans three ways. Here they are:
OPTION 1: Stay the course, wait for Mike Miller to come back, and hope things turn around. Positives: easier for Ernie Grunfeld to save face, easier to execute (you aren't relying on other teams to accept trades for you), easier to sell to most of your fans (see, we won't tank! We're "trying" to win). Negatives: you aren't building toward much in the future, even a best-case scenario for this year is low-40s wins and a first-round exit, you bring upon yourselves really tough decisions in the offseason with Haywood/Miller and your long-term cap flexibility, you force me to watch this team (slightly kidding).
OPTION 2: Make an in-season trade with the goal being to upgrade this year's team. This could come in the form of an addition-by-subtraction trade (Caron for pieces that help you win now), or by trading your expirings and propsects for a veteran and ballooning your payroll even more. Positives: you're still trying to win and you are actually proactive about it instead of waiting around. Negatives: you still create big long-term questions down the road.
OPTION 3: Rebuild completely and trade what you can for payroll flexibility.
Option three seems to be en vogue right now, but I don't think people realize quite what that means. Below the jump, let's explore it more.
First things first: rebuilding sucks. You do not rebuild and become a good team overnight. Just take a look at two of up-and-coming young teams in our league right now that we envy (Oklahoma City, Portland). Both those teams had several years where they just plain sucked. Oklahoma City was once Seattle, who has not made a playoff appearance since 2005. They were 20-62 two seasons ago and 23-59 last season. Portland, meanwhile, went six years between playoff appearances as they slowly deconstructed the JailBlazer teams. They had to get crappy and unload their terrible contracts before they got good again. Talk to any of their fans - trust me, those terrible years were painful for them.
There are others, too. What about a team like Atlanta, who didn't win more than 35 games from 2000 to 2008? They have an enviable situation now, but it took a lot of time to get there. Then, there are the teams that are only now sort of starting to turn things around -- teams like Sacramento and Memphis. Those teams haven't been relevant since 2006, when both made the playoffs. Memphis got ridiculed for their efforts to rebuild, while Sacramento had the worst record in basketball last year and is facing relocation issues. Both those teams needed to take their lumps, but now, they have young stars, a lot of cap space and some nice long-term prospects. I'd trade rosters with both of them in a heartbeat.
The point here is, if you're going to rebuild, then you need to rebuild for the long run. No going halfway and wondering whether you're really "winning" each individual trade. It's the long-term vision that matters. Seattle didn't "win" the Ray Allen trade. Portland didn't "win" the Zach Randolph trade. Memphis sure as hell didn't "win" the Pau Gasol trade. They made the trades with an eye on the future, an eye on getting long-term cap flexibility. Most of the time, they didn't even get great prospects back. They did, however, facilitate the ability to get prospects later, via the draft, and they also created the ability to choose a direction for the team, rather than being forced to "compete" because you have a bloated payroll.
To rebuild, you have to tear down the foundation. The foundation of this team is clear: Gilbert Arenas, Caron Butler and Antawn Jamison. Every other undesirable piece, save for DeShawn Stevenson, expires before 2010. We therefore need to move our Big 3 for cap flexibility and prospects to really rebuild.
I think we can safely say Gilbert Arenas is untradeable. Nobody is touching that contract without sending equally crappy ones back. For example, Golden State might want Arenas, but would insist on us taking back Corey Maggette (three more years at $10 million per). Philadelphia could use Arenas, but only if we take back Elton Brand's massive contract for three more years. Since the goal is to avoid adding long-term salary, we might as well hold onto Arenas for now. Maybe he comes back and can be a foundational piece like he was before. Maybe he gets just good enough for someone to take him on down the road. Either way, he's unmovable now.
The same cannot be said for Antawn Jamison and Caron Butler. We know someone values Jamison around the league -- Cleveland tried to get him last year and is interested in him again this year. I assume Butler will also garner interest around the league, considering he's got the shortest and cheapest contract. But remember, if we're really blowing things up, we want cap space before prospects. You get the cap space to get payroll flexibility, then you draft the prospects with the inevitable lottery picks that result.
So that being said, here are two simultaneous realistic trades I think we need to make to rebuild properly.
TRADE 1: Caron Butler, DeShawn Stevenson and Javaris Crittenton to Minnesota for Ramon Sessions, Ryan Gomes and Brian Cardinal.
- Minnesota does this because they have awful wing production in the short- and long-term. Butler provides that for two years, and the Timberwolves aren't going to have to give up any of their building-block pieces (Flynn, Rubio, Love, Jefferson, even Brewer). He's just as good as anyone they'd likely get this offseason in the 2010 sweepstakes, and they still retain enough cap room to broker one of those uneven trades. For example, the Timberwolves now become one of the few teams able to sign-and-trade for Rudy Gay, who will inevitably become a base-year compensation player with his new deal. They only give up Gomes and Cardinal, while swapping a better player with a longer contract (Sessions) for a guy with a shorter contract (Stevenson)
- We do this because Gomes and Cardinal combine for $10.6 million in 2010 savings, assuming we cut Gomes before June 30 (the remaining years on his deal are non-guaranteed). We also bring in a nice piece in Sessions, who either becomes a cheap replacement for Arenas once we trade him or provides that necessary second ball-handler to play some time behind Arenas and some time with him.
- Cleveland does this for obvious reasons - they need a stretch four and Jamison's among the best in the game.
- We do this to clear Jamison's long-term salary off our cap. We can cut Ilgauskas and let him go back to Cleveland, or we can keep him. Either way, we save $11.5 million. We also get Hickson, a nice young prospect, and a #1 pick (though it'll probably be in the 20s).
We then enter the 2010 sweepstakes with this roster: Arenas, Sessions, Andray Blatche, JaVale McGee, Hickson, Nick Young, a 2010 lottery pick, a 2010 late first-rounder and a 2010 second-rounder. Combined payroll - around $33 million. Enough to lure a max free agent if we want the quick rebuild, and also enough cap flexibility to go the long route if we strike out.
That's how you rebuild. Okay, it's not exactly how you rebuild -- there are other possible trades out there -- but those follow the model. You trim payroll with uneven trades, even if it means not getting great young prospects. Then, you let your young guys play through their issues, filling in the gaps with cheap vets to maintain "culture." You lose, then draft more young guys and try to get foundational pieces. There's no guarantee it works, but it's how you have to do it in this league. To get to Oklahoma City circa 2009, you got to go through OKC circa 2007 and 2008.
I'm not sure we're quite at the rebuild stage yet, but we need to start thinking about it. Once we do, we got to do it right, meaning make unbalanced trades in the short term and take our lumps with a roster that won't win many games. Just a word of caution to those who want to pursue this route: it's going to be a long road back.
0 recs |
60 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
you forgot minnesota
as an example of the pain of rebuilding. (and i wonder if they’re eager to do yet another trade with us so soon?)
but you summed it up nicely.
i’ve given up on option 1 as a real option. i’m hoping for option 2, contingent on us seeing some rays of hope in the next three weeks. that’s just me.
most of all, i’m shocked to hear you talk about trading gil. i’m not even there and i’ve had issues with the guy.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Dec 21, 2009 4:07 PM EST reply actions
Minnesota is another good example, yes
Though they’ve arguably been through (and will go through) far more pain than necessary.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
Don't remind us
By comparison with last year after Al Jefferson went down, this season has been positively charmed from the POV of Minnesota fans.
And while I’m here: For Flip to be suggesting that he’s “never yelled at a player for taking bad shots in a game-until this year,” that is ridiculous. Mr. Saunders is about par for the league in terms of riding his players. He used to pull Wally Szczerbiak’s chain as dramatically as I’ve seen, with maybe the exception of Chuck Daly throwing a blanket over the young Dennis Rodman’s offensive flights of fancy.
Flip’s also probably somewhat above average in terms of getting caught in this sort of half-here, half-there mode in which the franchise isn’t quite sure where it’s going. He walked into “rebuild immediately to a championship” for the Wiz here. In Minnesota and Detroit, both, Flip came into this sort of friction with his system and the roster he was presiding over. He’s okay at handling it, but I wouldn’t be exactly sanguine about the prospects of a decisive resolution. The plus side is, he’s not impatient enough to make a Nelly-level bad move….
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
If you are going to blow it up, then blow it up
That means trading Jamison, Butler, Haywood and Miller THIS season. In each trade, you need to try to get building block for the future, be it a draft pick or a promising young player. Trade those four guys and the Wizards should be able to get at least four building blocks for the future, plus cap room.
While I agree that rebuilding can take a long time, the main reason it usually takes a long time is that teams wait too long to start rebuilding. They have a couple of bad years, and wait until they hit rock bottom to admit that they have to blow it up. And when they do, they have bad players on bad contracts. So it takes a few years to clear out the trash, and then they start collecting the building blocks for the future. (Minnesota is a good example of this.)
With the Wizards, if they blow it up now, I think they can rebuild quickly (i.e., two years). In Jamison, you have a good player on a pretty o.k. contract. In Butler, you have a pretty good player on a good contract. It will take a lot of fortitude on Grunfeld’s part to blow it up, but if he wants to do it right, he needs to do it right now, collects some assets, and really accelerate the rebuilding process.
Not to nitpick your post, but if you trade Butler, who is only signed through the end of next season, you can’t just get expirings and bad players. You need to get someone who can be a building block of the next Wizards team. Heck, if you are going to trade Butler to Minnesota, get Rubio’s draft rights. You think David Kahn wouldn’t want to move Rubio for Butler?
No, he wouldn't
You think David Kahn wouldn’t want to move Rubio for Butler?
I’m sorry, you’re kidding yourself if you get a building block for Caron Butler. His value is somewhere around Mike Bibby’s or Ron Artest’s in 2007. Neither of those trades brought back much in terms of prospects.
By all means, try, but it’s probably not going to happen. And why would anyone give up anything of real value to rent Haywood or Miller for a year? I just think you’re setting your sights too high. That’s why it takes so long – GMs overvalue their guys and have to settle for worse packages when they invariably don’t get “full value.”
Besides, the lotto pick in 2010 is your building block.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
Sorry, that came across pretty harshly
Point still stands: you aren’t getting a foundational piece for Caron Butler. Best you can do is get a second-tier guy like Corey Brewer (who kind of sucks, which is why I’d take Gomes and the cap space). Maybe Golden State gets stupid and trades Anthony Randolph. That’s about as good a chance as you get.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
We should define "building block" or "foundational piece"
I don’t mean that the Wizards can trade Butler for a future franchise player. But they can get someone like Hickson, Brewer, Brandon Rush, etc., someone who would be a future starter or in the top 7 of a team. Maybe I’m still hurting from the draft when I suggest that the Wizards could get Rubio for Butler, but Kahn’s taken a big hit publicly for Rubio staying in Spain. Getting Butler for Rubio might get that monkey off his back. My point is that if the option is to trade Butler for trash, keep him, since he’s only on the hook for two more years. If his contract were longer, it would be a different story. (I could make the point that Grunfeld traded Rubio for Miller and Foye, and Butler is >>> Miller and Foye, but I don’t feel like crying today.)
I believe that a contending team would trade a first round pick (which would be a pick around 24-30) for Haywood, because they are going for a championship. A non-contending team would be stupid to make that sort of trade. Perhaps the market wouldn’t be so rich for Miller.
I see what you're saying
Fair enough. I think Brewer sucks and will be out of the league in three years, which is why I don’t have too much interest in him.
I wonder if anyone would be willing to give up a prospect and a pick for Haywood? Probably not. But maybe Dallas would do Gooden and Beaubois for Haywood? Would Atlanta trade Jeff Teague and a pick (probably not). Would Miami trade one of their mid first-rounders (theirs and Toronto’s)? I dunno. I’d rather not carry a zillion 20-30 first-round picks, to be honest.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
Sign me up for Roddy Buckets
But that trade is NOT happening (perhaps mostly because they like that Gooden gives them versatility and Haywood is just a better version of the same look that they get from Dampier).
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 5:54 PM EST up reply actions
But they can re-sign Haywood after the season
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
They could just sign him as an FA too
and give up nothing to do it.
Or do they have to get his bird rights for that to be realistic?
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 6:00 PM EST up reply actions
They can only spend the MLE on him unless they have his Bird Rights
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
Aren't they more likely to trade for Gortat then?
Given that he is already locked up for MLE money?
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 6:03 PM EST up reply actions
Dallas can't acquire Gortat because they tried getting him last year
You can’t trade for an RFA you try to sign for a year. Plus, Gortat is BYC and therefore practially untradeable.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
Gotcha
They’d have to wait until July to get him then – which does seem plausible.
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 6:50 PM EST up reply actions
It's hard to find pieces that fit
One option would be Haywood to Utah for Harpring or Korver and and a first round pick. Something like that, where the Wizards get a seldom-used player on a one year deal, plus a pick.
(David Thorpe actually likes Brewer. At least he is defense-first.)
Sometime go look at what Kahn's said about Rubio
There’s public perception from Washington, DC, and then there’s what the Wolves assess the value of their various prospects to be. Don’t assume that because ESPN ran critical coverage, the Wolves are somehow moping around looking to sell low. Kahn’s not an idiot.
Miller’s value might still be there for a contender, especially given that he’s an expiring. Then again, that combination’s why Washington picked up Mike, right? ;-)
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Absolutely agreed
Minnesota fan. There is no possible way David Kahn would trade Rubio for Butler given the team’s situation and Butler’s age and injury history. Not that Minny doesn’t lack wing talent badly. So badly. Butler does have some value, he’s not garbage, but he’s not going to be the centerpiece of a trade like that.
(The consensus is that Rubio is 2 or 3 years out right now. At which time he’ll be the age of Jonny Flynn right now, only with loads of professional experience playing at a much higher level than U.S. NCAA ball. None of that means the Wolves are in any sort of panic mode about the kid. Not so at all.)
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
You're probably right
Which just goes to show how terrible the Wizards-Wolves trade was for Washington.
The peculiar-est thing about that trade
Is how badly it threw the two rosters out of whack. The Wolves sent Foye and Miller, essentially their two best wings (such as they were), and got back nothing but frontcourt for the time being.
Right now on the Timberwolves roster, Nick Young would probably be getting 33 minutes a night as the clear starter.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
I doubt Rubio ever suits up for Minnesota
and I wonder if they ever get much for him in a trade.
Remember that once he is 3 years out from the draft he is no longer constrained by the Rookie scale and so he can demand a ton more than the Wolves would be willing to pay. He will get traded then to a contender (probably for draft picks) and the result will be the Wolves just getting another young player.
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 5:58 PM EST up reply actions
Wrong about the money
The Wolves already have demonstrated the willingness to line up sponsors in order to address the buyout thing last summer, and nearly signed Rubio against all odds. They’re not at all unwilling to pay him MLE-type money at least.
They may trade the guy, but it won’t be because of his contract demands.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
He will demand a starting salary of around $10mil per
I sincerely doubt he ever wears a Wolves jersey, even if you are right that its not because of salary demands but rather because he will have a lot more freedom to exert leverage by having waited it out.
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 6:03 PM EST up reply actions
Funny,
He was very nearly willing to take rookie scale and a couple of endorsements to make up for his buyout number back in July.
I don’t think you’re following this story at all closely….
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
I have been actually
and I don’t actually buy that that was as close to happening as you think it was.
His option were: 1) play nearly for free in the NBA in order to pay his buyout, 2) stay in Europe for 3 years thereby earning more money because of his buyout and then sign with an NBA team outside of the rookie pay scale.
Its fairly clear that option #2 was the prohibitive choice from the start. Why would Rubio play for a lottery team in a cold weather small market for free when he could net somewhere between $10-15m more by staying at home and playing in Europe and then signing a more lucrative NBA contract later?
Not sure that I can track it down, but, in one of his rare moments of lucidity, Chad Ford had a nice article on this sometime during the off season just before Rubio had his rights traded to Barcelona and signed a contract extension. I’d take the line of crap that Kahn was trying to feed the local media on this with a heavy dash of salt.
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 6:27 PM EST up reply actions
That particular Chad Ford article didn't impress us much here
And we do remember it and the various other opinions written over the summer. The big media sources seemed particularly apt to fall over themselves reporting every translated-from-the-Castilian-press rumor, and their reporting amounted to regurgitating the same few items of conventional wisdom once a week.
I don’t want to get into a stink-out about this, but what you’re saying is basically the “National media from 10,000-feet” version of events. Think of analogous situations with the Wizards and how they get covered by ESPN. The cold weather angle, for example, was marginalia; it was always the case that the buyout number was Rubio’s big obstacle. The small market thing, well…. sometime look up the relative sizes of NBA television markets. (Washington DC: 8th; MSP: 15th, Denver: 18th, Orlando: 19th, Sacramento: 20th.)
This line of argument from you is roughly equivalent to a great many ideas fans have about other teams from a distance. I might think to myself that Kelenna Azubuike, say, would be a good fit for the Wolves (if he wasn’t hurt), and that Golden State doesn’t value the guy too highly on their roster full of oddball wing talent…. It sounds plausible, and maybe in a blurb somewhere Chad Ford or Hollinger or someone will have suggested the guy as a potential trade target. Go to the Warriors’ board, though, and that plausible idea might prove to be thin as air. What would happen if I assumed something like that about Nick Young? Same deal.
Just this last week Hollinger suggested Ramon Sessions, our backup PG who’s signed to a very acceptable deal, would be the first guy dealt in mid-season. Maybe, there are reasons to consider the idea, but that would leave the Minnesota roster with a single legitimate PG option who’s a raw-as-heck rookie. Sounded okay, though…. at first.
All I’m saying is, it’s extremely unlikely that the Wolves would fail to sign Rubio because of huge contract demands. Unless the kid’s value appreciates considerably, he’s not going to pull $10 million his first year over. There may be a collection of other reasons it doesn’t happen, but that won’t be the lever that makes any trade go down. And, more to the Wizards’ point, there is absolutely no way Kahn is in anything remotely like a “sell-low” moment of panic over Ricky R. He shows no signs of it whatsoever. The whole “he’s taking a beating over drafting the kid” thing is, again, a total national media meme that isn’t real on the ground at all.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Right, I agree he won't sell low
Kahn doesn’t have much incentive to sell low here – Butler isn’t going to power the Wolves into the playoffs this year or next probably.
I think we just disagree as to whether he will ever be in a Wolves uniform. If he would prefer to play elsewhere, then I think he will have the leverage to do that. When the wolves trade him they may or may not get fair value, but I do think they will eventually trade him when he is ready to come over.
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 7:48 PM EST up reply actions
meant to include this in the last post
As much as I dislike Chad Ford and think that he often is wildly inaccurate in his speculation on team’s roster motivations and how a situation will play out, I really am a bit stunned that you seriously think Rubio was on the verge of coming to play for the Wolves for free.
What motivation could Rubio have possibly had to accept a rookie scale deal from the wolves that would barely cover his buyout rather than having a European team pay his buyout and then stay abroad long enough to get a richer deal? Why would Rubio walk away from that much money?
Certainly the cold weather, small market does contribute – mostly in that the “cold weather” factor really happens to translate into MSP having a smaller latino population (which is relevant both to Rubio’s comfort and, more importantly, to his value as a marketing person for local business) and because a small market makes it harder for him tor recoup the difference in endorsements alone.
Also, consider that it is in Rubio’s interests to develop and continue to grow overseas rather than doing it in the NBA. If Rubio comes in as an 18 year old kid and falls flat, then his star could be tarnished. But, if Rubio matures into an all star caliber point guard in 3 years, then he could enter the NBA as an actual, rather than potential, super star and thereby immediately have more cache and marketing value.
No matter how “closely” you are following the situation, no one could have had enough evidence to conclude that the mere dream of playing in the NBA could have outweighed the enormous economic benefits of staying in Europe for 3 years and the psychological (and potential economic benefits) of maturing outside of the spotlight and entering the NBA as a more established commodity.
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 7:58 PM EST up reply actions
What motivation could Rubio have possibly had to accept a rookie scale deal from the wolves that would barely cover his buyout rather than having a European team pay his buyout and then stay abroad long enough to get a richer deal? Why would Rubio walk away from that much money?
Dude wants to play in the NBA, against the best players in the world. The kid believes he can be one of the best ever and wants to prove it. Plus he wants control over his career in ways that the European system simply won’t allow. That’s why he very nearly decided to come over. Ultimately immediate finances won, which is perfectly reasonable.
As far as endorsement opportunities and latino populations here, I’m not really sure where you’re coming from. Minnesota has a quite large resident Spanish speaking population, granted not as large as some places but it’s not like everyone is from German or Scandinavian descent. Far from it, actually. And location and market size doesn’t matter for endorsements anymore. Do you think Tiger Woods made so much money from endorsements because he lives in Florida? Or Lebron because he’s in Cleveland? Do you really believe that Kobe Bryant’s endorsements are due to the fact that he lives in LA? Rubio is attractive as an endorsee because he’s young and cross-culturally (meaning cross-market) attractive. The guy is not going to have a problem with endorsements.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Note, however, that I don't think Kanh made a mistake by picking Rubio
(though I do think he probably should have taken Curry at #6 instead both because I think he is more talented than Flynn and so that he wouldn’t take such a beating for drafting two PGs).
He didn’t give up much for that pick in the long run and Rubio is a potentially valuable future trade chip who was a steal at #5.
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 6:33 PM EST up reply actions
The technicnals of the NBA
Go over my head, I probably understand the NFL salary system better,
But on the above ideas I am more swung by option 3,
Without a top 3 player like a Kobe, LeBron or Wade to build around (Gil
is not going to get to those levels) then I cant see how we can get to the
end goal from where we are, If we enter the top end of the draft for a couple
of years then at least we have a chance of striking gold.
Yes, it can be painful
but sometimes it is the only way to move forward
I’ll throw in the Celtics as an example too. People think they got better all of a sudden with the 07 trades. Of course that’s not the whole story. There were years of bad teams and bad contracts that had to be endured before Danny got the trade chips to make a play for Ray Allen and KG.
Without trading Antoine for Raef and Raef for Theo Ratliff, there would be no KG in Boston. A painful road.
p.s. please cut Gomes in the above scenario. We’d love to have him back in Boston.
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
You may well have an easy-ish crack at Gomes
Ryan’s a mensch and a great guy. His contract also gives the Wolves an out this coming summer, and because the team (foolishly) picked up Corey Brewer’s option for next year it seems pretty likely Gomes will be set loose in one way or another.
He’s basically what he’s going to be right now, as in “bad tweener” caught defensive between positions, but Gomes should be a solid veteran bench guy on someone’s deep playoff team. I’d place a bit of money on his coaching at some point.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
trading partners is key
Cleveland is a great team to trade with because they would eat salary to give them a boost this year.
Not sure how willing Minny would be to take on salary, but who knows what Kahn is thinking.
Someone will be desperate in Feb. Pull the trigger then.
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
Short version on Kahn
He’d consider anything, but every move he’s made to take on salary has been matched scrupulously by a balancing one to leave the space for next offseason. Unless he’s got a deadline deal to acquire the equivalent of a FA signing, I don’t see him frittering away salary room without getting a starting-caliber wing at this point, period.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Is this seasons situation
Not simply because we dont have a true PG.
One step at a time...
Let’s see what happens over the next 3-4 weeks. But Flip MUST commit to a three-guard rotation of Gilbert, Foye and Young over that period… Any other backcourt player has to be used situationally…. If the Wizards can win with this rotation, fine… EG is vinidcated for the time being.
If the WIzzies cannot win with this guard rotation, then a deal like the Butler for Sessions package has to be given a shot. Implicit in this is that either Young or Foye will have proven himself expendable.
Whether or not the above guard rotation works, EG has to have a “come to Jesus” meeting with Caron. Either the GSW game is proof that the 2009-10 versions of Caron and Gilbert can live long and prosper together, or it is the outlier and these guys in their present shape are basically doomed to invade each other’s time and space to the benefit of neither or the team as a whole. If so, it’s time to pull the trigger on Caron to Portland but only if something very good comes back in returm… for example, OK, maybe we can take Andre Miller’s contract (there’s your point guard, Wuds) but we have to get Rudy Fernandez too. Dealing Caron to the Suns for Barbosa, Amundsen and a draft pick might be interesting too.
Cleveland really does seem to have a substantial case of the hots for Antawn Jamison, but dealing him for Hickson, Z and a late first round pick is really a concession on the Wizzies part that for the time being all is pretty much lost. I’m not yet convinced that this is the case, particularly if the above scenarios work out. For sure, a team that really wants AJ come February may take more off of our hands and give more in return as well.
WIzzies
my wife calls ’em that. cracks me up.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Dec 21, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions
I just think its all a cycle....
Without a transcendant superstar. You look at the teams who went through the “rebuilding process” and yes they are exciting, but do you really think they are gonna one day compete for a championship if that is the overall goal. Atlanta, I think we can say has reached its peak this season, and probably wont make it out of the second round. Portland will be good for a while, but really won’t get past the Lakers for atleast two years and then who knows what happens. They probably lose in the first or second round. OKC is the only one, in my opinion, who has a legit chance at a championship. They have potentially a transcendant superstar.
In this league, you do not win championships without a transcendant superstar unless you’re the 2004 Pistons, who didnt undergo a big rebuilding project. You need a Kobe, Wade, Duncan, Shaq, Jordan, Hakeem, Isiah, Magic, Bird, Kareem. And the list goes on. If the point of the big “rebuilding project” is to win a championship, you have to get SUPER lucky. In this town we use the Caps as an example, but you have to get SUPER lucky to land a superstar in Ovechkin.
The point is, is that the rebuilding project does not always guarantee success. And even if it does bring a young exciting team to the table in six years, their is no guarantee that they will be any better off than what the Wizards are right now(a first round playoff exit, hopefully crosses fingers) Rebuilding projects only work unless a superstar comes walking through the door. I do not believe the Wizards need to go through this long, excruciating process. That’s not saying that changes don’t need to be made, but not yet, lets atleast give it this year.
Ugh
I don’t think I could stomach giving LeBron’s Cavs the last possible piece to a championship puzzle.
But if we do make a trade, it has to be for someone who can give us some consistent post-play.
call me optimistic
I still think we’re one decent big man away. You need to draw attention to the paint so the perimeter guys can get more space. Even Kobe figured this out; while Odom, Gasol and Bynum are OK individually, collectively they take away enough pressure from Bryant to allow him to he “heroic.”
wow
Odom, Gasol and Bynum are OK? Any one of those guys would likely be the best player on our team. I hate Gasol, but he’s probably the second-best PF in the game right now. And Odom is an all-star coming off the friggin bench. Bynum is a monster. Trade Haywood, Jamison and Blatche for those three and we beat the Lakers in a 7-game series, easy.
How would you feel about Euro talent?
The T’Wolves drafted and stashed Nikola Pekovic at the top of the 2nd round last year. His deal’s up in Europe this coming summer.
The basic picture is a dominant post-scoring European big; stand everything about the classic finesse euro on its head and you have Pekovic. Bull-strong post game. In the context of European ball he’s the star player on a championship-tier team, mostly from scoring on the block. He’s also basically redundant to Al Jefferson, with the possible question about whether he’s a 4 or a 5 right along with the rest of it.
If it’s true rebuilding, then waiting for the contract next summer wouldn’t be an issue. I’m also not sure how David Kahn would feel about Pekovic, who was a McHale draft pick (but who was a dead lock at the top of the 2nd in that class, due to the rookie salary scale problem that’s kept Tiago Splitter out of the NBA to date).
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
My reaction
I choose option 3 because we have all endured so much pain that we should try to make it worth something. Anyone who has been a fan of this team beyond the recent stretch of competitive play (the 4 consecutive playoff seasons) knows how hard it is to be a fan of a bad team. Having gone through that, I’d rather commit to doing that for another 2-3 years for a chance at greatness rather than being in the kind of pain we are in now for limited future gain.
That said, I’m not really so sure about your trade proposals.
On the one hand, I think that your proposed Caron trade is pretty terrible and amounts to selling him for 50 cents on the dollar. First, Caron is a 2 time all star at a position of need for Minnesota (wing scoring) and you are telling me that all he is worth is the expiring money and the right to get rid of Deshawn? I think that that would be giving him away and losing our most valuable trade piece in the process. Second, why would we take on Ramon Sessions in this? I think his contract is an OK value – but if our goal is to reduce future payroll, then why should we take back a long term contract in this deal? If you want to cut salary, then do that and don’t go half way. If you want to give us flexibility to construct our team by picking and choosing our spots in the future, then don’t trade for a guy with a 4 year contract.
I think we can get salary cap relief, a prospect AND a pick for Butler. He has a good short contract and he is a former All Star and high character guy. I don’t see us giving him away for minimal salary relief and scraps.
On the other hand, I think that the Jamison trade is highly optimistic. Antawn is much older than Caron (4 years) and has a longer term contract. I don’t think we can get salary relief, a prospect and a pick for him. I think we probably have to choose 2 of the three (i.e. salary cap relief, & a pick or salary cap relief & a prospect). I’d take that Ilgauskas trade in a second even though it helps LeCrabDribble and would hurt my soul to watch him play for Cleveland (and to be rooting for Cleveland to win so Antawn could get a ring).
Re: Cleveland
I’m not sure they have a first-round pick anyway, so forget the pick.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
I'd take that trade with a second round pick in it
… if Cleveland magically had a high second rounder that is :<
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 6:01 PM EST up reply actions
They do
But you’re better off getting a future Cavaliers pick, like 2011 or 2012 — after LeBron leaves. Haha.
by disgrunted on Dec 21, 2009 6:15 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Not that Cleveland has one
But, we’d be better off with an early second round pick than a late first round pick (due to salary cap flexibility)
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 6:48 PM EST up reply actions
Yes AJ is older and his contract is longer... BUT...
… if a contending team like the Cavs thinks Antawn will be for them what Bobby Dandridge was for the Bullets back in the day, they may well overpay.
Now you could also possibly say the same for a team like the Suns with regard to Butler. If they are going to challenge the Lakers in the West they cannot really put all their small forward eggs in Grant Hill’s basket. Barbosa, who is nice but not essential for the Suns now that the Nash-Richardson backcourt seems to be really clicking, might well be expendable in that context. Barbosa running alongside Gil. Hmm. that could work!
You may be right about Antawn's value
but, as you say, that means that Caron also has the potential to be alot more valuable.
by Manimal Smith on Dec 21, 2009 6:41 PM EST up reply actions
when miller gets back
and the wiz make the playoffs we can all look back and laugh at how we wanted to blow the team up
Is it really worth it
just to make the playoffs as a 7 or 8 seed and get blown out in the first round? That’s not exactly the goal.
And to think...
that my British colleagues are convinced that Americans lack a sense of irony.
Actually, Miller could really help quite a bit. And I don’t think the majority of people on this site are arguing for a complete blow-up ot the team, even if only because Gilbert’s contract is immovable. What I sense is the direction of the comments is this: How do we reconfigure to stay relevant with the current version of Gilbert Arenas as a given?
it would be different
if they had bad players who played like this then it would be obvious to blow the team up but we have good players who just aren’t playing up to their potential and i think if most of the players played their best that this is a championchip caliber team. i think its just chemistry issues and thats where mike comes in somehow
i mean flip traded for mike for a reason right?
by Freedom Hurley on Dec 22, 2009 9:48 AM EST up reply actions
miller will solve all of our problems
he’ll teach deshawn how to shoot a jumpshot with the intention of scoring points/ he’ll force a defender to guard him close, giving CB more real estate to perform his iso magic/ he’ll doctor the results of every wayward paternity test for the team/ his presence on the floor will reignite the wiz’s white fanbase, helping luxury box sales…
i dont know about the paternity tests but
everything else….yea
by Freedom Hurley on Dec 22, 2009 9:25 AM EST up reply actions
I can't deal with another rebuilding project...
I’m in my mid-thirties – I watched this team suck for literally twenty years of so-called “rebuilding.” I am terrified of spending another 20 years watching it again. I know its probably an irrational fear… after all, the other teams mentioned in this post went only 3-4 years of suck-age. But… and I know I’m in the minority here… I’d rather watch this team get an 8 seed, and in the process allow me to dream of bigger things (even though its a false dream!), before the inevitable cold reality of immediate playoff ouster. Just let me believe! Please! Don’t pour cold water on my Bullets hopes and dreams a mere 2 months into the season! I’m beggin’ ya!
And, yes, I realize that at an 8-17 record, even an 8 seed might be stretching things… but allow me this delusion for at least another month :-)
I definitely agree with you
Even if we do “rebuild”, it doesnt guarantee any success. I’m happy with hope too lol
by SkinsWizStangs on Dec 22, 2009 12:51 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Bullets Forever
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
