Rating Ernie's moves
Ernie Grunfeld just celebrated his 6th anniversary as the GM of the Wizards, so I thought it might be a good time to rate his (major) moves to date. I think most of us agree he's a better than average GM, and he's taken us from perennial also-rans to (more-or-less) perennial mid-packers.
In the case of signings, I've used the guideline of whether the signing makes the franchise meaningfully better, adjusted for cost ("C" is neutral). In the case of trades I've focused on "who won" ("C" is a tie.) I have also applied 20/20 hindsight where applicable. Finally, I've ignored minor transactions, including 10-day contracts, low minute/minimum contracts, and the like. Let's look...
2003:
Signed Gilbert Arenas - A
Signed Chris Whitney - C
Exercised option on Kwame Brown - B+
Exercised option on Brendan Haywood - B+
2004:
Traded Stackhouse, Laettner, Harris for Jamison - A-
Signed Peter John Ramos - D
Matched to retain Etan Thomas - D+
Signed Anthony Peeler - C+
Signed Michael Ruffin - B-
Signed Samaki Walker - C
2005:
Signed Antonio Daniels - B-
Traded Kwame and Profit for Atkins and Butler - A+
Drafted Andray Blatche - B
Signed Calvin Booth - C
Declined to Match for Blake - C
Exercised option for Hayes - C
Extended Butler - A
2006:
Bought out Atkins - C
Signed Songaila - C+
Signed Stevenson- B+
Declined to match for Jeffries - B
2007:
Drafted Nick Young - B-
Signed Pecherov - D+
Drafted McGuire - A-
Extended Blatche - B+
Signed Roger Mason Jr. - A-
2008:
Drafted McGee - A-
Extended Jamison - B-
Re-signed Arenas - B-
Signed Dixon - D
Extended Young - B+
Extended Pecherov - C
Traded Daniels for James and Crittenton - C+
2009:
Traded Rubio, Pecherov, Songaila, Thomas for Miller and Foye - A-
Signed Oberto - C+
Overall there have been four outright mistakes - Ramos, Pecherov, and Dixon take 2 (all minor), and the match for Thomas. On balance I think he's proven to be very good at trades, and probably about average at drafting based on his record here. I think the area that's both toughest to judge and perhaps his weakest spot is his record in resigning our own free agents. I don't think there's been anything stunningly great there, but to be fair that grade is "incomplete" and will be determined based on how we do this year.
Just one man's opinion...
This represents the view of the user who wrote the FanPost, and not the entire Bullets Forever community. We're a place of many opinions, not just one.
0 recs |
37 comments
Comments
I think the Blatche pick deserves a higher grade
We managed to get a decent big man with a pick that was something like 47 or 52 in the draft; I know the guy has problems, but that’s pretty good value for such a late second round pick. Also, I would give the Foye and Miller trade an I, since neither could be with the team next year while Rubio could turn into the next Jason Kidd. I don’t think retaining Etan Thomas was really that horrible, either, since he was paid about what most quality backup bigs make and we didn’t really have another reliable center on the roster at the time.
by pantslessyoda1 on Aug 18, 2009 10:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is a good idea for a topic
Obviously, it’s too early on the moves this offseason, but I think the trade and the Oberto signing should both be Bs.
The other thing I noticed right off the bat is that you don’t have the Haywood extension in 05. That’s easily an A+ in my book.
Also, how would you rate the moves he hasn’t made? Like letting Roger walk?
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Aug 18, 2009 10:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
b's?
I think he had it right with the trade being an A-. I was waiting for us to clear out some of our bench for something. With Miller and Foye, we got an experienced shooter and a solid athlete who has put up decent career numbers (Foye has a 13.0 ppg avg). Could we have gotten that with Songaila or Pecherov? Probably not.
I am glad the only A+ was getting rid of Kwame and getting Caron. I think that was Ernie’s move that had the most pay-off.
by csesno on Aug 19, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've explained my misgivings to the trade too many times to count
But I still contend we could have gotten more for the fifth pick and our expirings. E.g. Vince Carter. Plus, if Rubio blows up, then it looks bad.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Aug 19, 2009 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
true, I would agree with that in parts, but Vince is getting up there in years. He is still good, and I would have been pumped to see him on our squad. More importantly, we are still unsure when Rubio will be able to play in the NBA. The Wolves are having a hard time buying-out his Spanish team’s contract and it may cost them up to $7million to do so. We don’t have that kind of cash, and with Arenas coming back (hopefully) for a full season (knock on wood), we didn’t need another point guard.
This is all aside from my personal opinion, which is that Rubio won’t live up to his hype as an NBA point guard. I think he gets too much attention because he played well in the Olympics, but I am just not sure if he has the skill-set to transfer that success to the NBA game.
Just my thoughts, feel free to disagree.
by csesno on Aug 19, 2009 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wish you were here two months ago when discussion about the trade was at its highest
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Aug 19, 2009 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And to clarify
The Wolves are having a hard time buying-out his Spanish team’s contract and it may cost them up to $7million to do so. We don’t have that kind of cash
An NBA team can only pay up to $500,000 of the buyout. The issue with Rubio’s buyout is Rubio himself paying it, not the Timberwolves.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Aug 19, 2009 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And there's the rub
All year, mock drafts had him ranked 2nd or 3rd ……. Most of the reliable mocks (DraftExpress, etc..) had Rubio a solid 2nd pick.
So he declared for the draft…. and ended up being drafted 5th.
Had he gone 2nd, his salary would start at $3.7 Million, escalate to $4 Million the second year. Rubio would have to pay his own buy-out (estimated to be at least $6.6 Million); but his first two year’s salaries would have been more than enough to cover the buy-out, and allow him some money to live.
Since he was drafted 5th, his salary starts at $2.7 Million, and escalates to $2.9 Million in the second year… That’s not enough to even pay his buy-out…. even if Minnesota pays $500K it’s not enough. The kid would be playing in the NBA and PAYING more than $400K out of his own pocket to do so…. Not that I think he even HAS $400K to pay; since he was making less than $100K playing for DKV Joventut last year.
If he were drafted by NY, or Chicago or Los Angeles, he could probably get enough endorsement deals to help offset what he has to pay his old Spanish team (DKV Joventut); with perhaps enough left over to live on for 2 years….. but in Minnesota, there’s no way.
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
by Rook6980 on Aug 19, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He went second because his agent was an idiot
And the Kings and Grizzlies are dumb. It is my contention (and purely conjecture of course) that if the Wizards had drafted him this would already be settled.
"Would you like to shoot me now or wait till you get home." --- Daffy Duck
by George Templeton on Aug 23, 2009 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
If the Wizards had drafted him, he would be in the exact same predicament. Any NBA team (Minnesota and Washington included) can only pay $500K towards a player’s contract buy-out. The remaining must be paid by the player.
If Washington had drafted Rubio, we would be in the same position that Minnesota is in right now. Rubio cannot afford to pay the $6.6Million buy out… The Wizards wouldn’t be able to help. And the only thing they could do is negotiate a lower buy out from DKV Joventut – which is EXACTLY what Minnesota is trying to do….
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
by Rook6980 on Aug 23, 2009 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But Rubio . . .
could’ve been convinced that this was a great situation here and as such a deal might’ve gotten done quicker.
"Would you like to shoot me now or wait till you get home." --- Daffy Duck
by George Templeton on Aug 23, 2009 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not up to Rubio
The problem is NOT that Rubio wants to play somewhere other than Minnesota… He’s already said he’s happy to play there. The team “situation” is not the problem.
The problem is DKV Joventut refuses to lower their $6.6 Million buy out.
I fail to see how Washington could have done a better job of convincing DKV Joventut to lower their buy out than Minnesota….
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
by Rook6980 on Aug 24, 2009 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good list
I don’t think that Ramos really belongs on the list since he was a second round project and no one had any expectations that he would turn into a player. I love Gil but his re-signing has to be an “incomplete” at best so far. Similarly, I like Pech, but I don’t see any way not to score his drafting as an “F”.
Ernie seems like a very careful guy who is slow to pull the trigger on a deal. I think that if we could magically know all of the actual proposed deals over the years there might be some legitimate criticism for moves that he didn’t make. My one lingering question is “Would Antawn’s expiring contract have gotten us Pau Gasol from Memphis?” Other than that, I haven’t seen or heard of any proposed deal that would have propelled us to the elite.
by hotplate on Aug 19, 2009 10:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
My thinking on Pech...
Having him helped us make the MIller/Foye deal work.
I used a similar logic to assess that the Kwame extension was a good idea.
by RamVA on Aug 19, 2009 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My thoughts
Like Mike Prada, I think Haywood’s resigning was a real coup…. an ‘A’ , considering the salary….. A starting quality 7-ft Center for around $5 Million per year….
Same with re-signing Blatche. You just cannot find a good big man (even a bench player) for $3 Million a year, unless they’re still on their rookie contract. Although Ernie may have been aided by Batche’s own stupidity; there’s nothing in the ‘rules’ that say you can’t take advantage of someone if they make a mistake. Ernie’s grade = ‘A’ (Blatche’s grade = ‘F’)
Considering the fact that they never played him, nor did they send him to Dakota, extending Pecherov should have been a ‘D’…. They paid $1.8 Million but got absolutely nothing out of him last year. The only reason for not giving an F , is that he was part of the trade that brought Miller and Foye.
The Stevenson signing should be split… In 2006, when he decided not to match the ridiculous offer New York gave to Jeffries, Ernie signed DeShawn Stevenson to league minimum contract for $932,000 for the first year. He had a player option for the second year. THAT was a very good deal for the Wizards – and, for the price, and the fact that Stevenson started all 82 games, and easily had his best year in Washington (shooting 46% from the field, and 40% from beyond the 3-point arc) …. I’d give that signing an ‘A’.
Then, in 2007, with Juan Carlos Navarro already stating his intentions to play in the NBA, and with NO ONE knocking down Stevenson’s door after he opted out of the second year of his contract, Ernie signed Stevenson to a 4-year, $15 Million extension. Of course, the deal had probably already been discussed, and possibly even a verbal agreement in place (maybe even back in 2006) before Navarro negotiated his buy-out from his Spanish club…. Even so, the deal should have been for a shorter time… and considering how little we got out of Stevenson last year (invoking 20/20 hindsight here) , and the fact that the Wizards will be paying about $4 Million this year and next for a possible back-up, I’d give the second contract signing for Stevenson a ‘C’.
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
by Rook6980 on Aug 19, 2009 10:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I like Rook's comments
Extending Haywood was an A+
Extending Blatche for so cheap and so long was an A
The original signing of Deshawn was an B+
The extension of Deshawn was a D-. It was too expensive and too long while nobody was giving a competing offer. The only justification was to show the league that we took care of him after he signed with us for the vet minimum the prior year. But even under that pretense, it was clear to me that we should have signed him to a contract that expired in 2010, not 2011.
The Etan extension was a D- at the time. In hindsight (after seeing all the injuries) it was an E. His presence was a cap killer and a detriment to team chemistry. And he somehow convinced EJ to play him over Haywood far too often which made us worse. It was easily EG’s worst move of his tenure here.
The Daniels for James + Crittenton trade was a D in my book. Crittenton looks to be a dime-a-dozen 3rd string PG. If EG had done nothing, we’d still have that future first from Memphis and Abe would be saving $2.9M on Crittenton’s salary and luxtax fee.
I’d give EG a solid B for declining Jeffries’ extension, maybe even an A-.
The second Dixon signing was no worse than a C-. We only paid him the vet minimum. Who else was available that cheaply?
by nate33 on Aug 20, 2009 2:26 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Two thoughts
I gave Dixon a D because signing him made us worse. I expected it to be neutral at the time, but it wasn’t. Tons of people are available for the vet minimum, and even more are available for the rookie minimum. Would Donnell Taylor (in his first year) have been any worse?
Similarly I gave the James/Critt for AD trade a C+ because it made us better, though only marginally.
by RamV on Aug 20, 2009 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dixon didn't make the team worse
Dixon wasn’t any worse than the other garbage we trotted out at the guard positions last year. At times he was our best uninjured guard (when Young was slumping). The only reason he didn’t get to play more was because the Wiz weren’t trying to win (and Williams, Stevenson and James did so much more to help the team lose!)
My memory isn’t very good, but wasn’t this more or less publicly acknowledged during the season? Maybe when he started to get it going in December and was promptly benched?
by steadyhand on Aug 24, 2009 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think so
Stevenson was easily our worst player (who got minutes) last year, but Dixon was second. James and Critt weren’t far behind, but James was more effective offensively and Critt defensively.
D might be harsh, but he was basically worth nothing, and cost more than that. For the record, I am a fan.
by RamV on Aug 24, 2009 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the D was fair
It seems to me that grades should be awarded by scale. Dixon wasn’t supposed to be much last year, but he failed at what he was supposed to bring. For that, his signing gets a bad grade even if it didn’t make a difference or if he was just another bad guard in a group of bad guards.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Aug 24, 2009 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dixon was signed to be the last player on the bench
and he achieved that.
by MR on Aug 25, 2009 8:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't even think he achieved that
He was barely a replacement-level player last year.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Aug 25, 2009 9:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah hindsight
Makes us all look like geniuses.
by MR on Aug 20, 2009 4:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Except GMs are paid in part to have foresight
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Aug 20, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Six years in...
…he’s got enough history that we can judge him by his results. Sometimes that’s unkind, but that’s why he gets the big bucks.
by RamV on Aug 20, 2009 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, but if you guys can’t see the hilarity in grading a guy for “signing Chris Whitney” or “Signing Samaki Walker” six or so years later…then you need to go for a walk around the block once in a while.
by MR on Aug 20, 2009 9:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough
I maybe wasn’t great at drawing the line between “minor” and “major”.
by RamV on Aug 20, 2009 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
letting hughes walk
deserves an A. i don’t think it’s on there.
i think all the blatche moves deserve a grade of incomplete at this point. i also think it’s too early to give the mcguire pick an A-.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Aug 20, 2009 6:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I didn't put non-signings on the list
And perhaps I should have. It’s an important part of being a GM.
With that said, Grunfeld didn’t let him walk – he just failed to sign him. He made an offer and got outbid, and arguably he never had a chance to react to the Cavs offer. It turns out that a) that was a blessing in disguise, and b) even the offer EG made may well have been too high. How do you grade that?
by RamV on Aug 20, 2009 6:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think ernie knew that cleveland was going to offer more.
so not only does he save face with the league by offering hughes a reasonable deal, he also lets him walk and doesn’t take on that contract. win-win. gets an A from me.
note that you put the jared jeffries non-signing on the list.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Aug 21, 2009 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A decline-to-match is a little different
by RamV on Aug 21, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
who else during eg's tenure left here for more money elsewhere?
other than hughes and jeffries? that’s the key point. no need to mention every ruffin and jarvis hayes who left the team.
i haven’t actually thought hard about this so maybe i’m shooting myself in the foot here. or maybe not.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Aug 21, 2009 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I get your point
I still think it’s hard to judge in the case of Hughes. Getting outbid, then having that team (the Cavs) end up with a winner’s curse is a good place to be, but who knows if it’s good GM-ing? A decline-to-match can be judged pretty cleanly based on the facts.
Specific to this case, EG offered him $72MM for 6 years, and he instead took $70MM for 5 years from the Cavs. I think that if he had taken our offer it might have been a C for us, though probably would have precluded Butler’s extension. In any case, it’s hard to argue that he knew Larry wouldn’t take it, and the offer that he ultimately did accept from the Cavs wasn’t that much better. If his intent was to make an offer that would get turned down, there was no need for it to be more than $45MM for 6 – in other words, an offer we could have lived with. I think he got saved from his bad decision by an even worse one from the Cavs. Hard to give him an A for that.
I’ll add that it points to a possible pattern of over-valuing his own free agents. We’ll see how that works out with BTH.
Also, why does the league care if he made Larry an offer, and for how much that offer was? And why go so far beyond “reasonable” to do it?
by RamV on Aug 21, 2009 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
reasonable...
you have to at least give the impression of treating your key players well such that you can hope to lure other players to your organization, and also not to alienate the other players in the organization who felt close to larry. they didn’t want the org to treat larry badly after the success he had here. EG had to play both angles.
the market for larry at that time was WAY above $45 over 6. (20 point scorer, all-defensive team.) once michael redd (and i believe there was one other guy other than redd who got signed before hughes) was off the market hughes was pretty much the only free agent left for cleveland to target. it wouldn’t have been hard for EG to get a rough idea of what cleveland was going to throw at hughes and save face and let larry get overpaid elsewhere. ernie knew what the asking price would be.
and don’t forget all the fans who wanted hughes re-signed at that time. you have to save face with them too.
the other take is that EG overvalues his FA’s and offered larry too much and got saved by cleveland. he does have a track record of overpaying. however, i don’t think that’s what happened. he basically declined to match market value for jeffries and hughes.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Aug 24, 2009 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We'll have to agree to disagree
For the record though, EG’s initial offer was $54/6, which escalated to $72/6 over the course of the negotiations. Larry reportedly found that last figure insulting, though it would have made him the highest paid Wizard at the time. I think $54/6 would have been a contract we would live with.
by RamVA on Aug 24, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
fine, but that initial figure actually helps my argument i think
EG has a history of “overpaying” guys he wants to sign. i read the SI article with the figures you mention. considering market value for hughes at that time, it looks plain to me like he didn’t really want to keep hughes around that badly. (hughes’s injury history didn’t help.) after larry left for cleveland, EG immediately moved for caron and then re-upped caron for around what he was offering to larry. EG chose to go another direction (and he chose well).
after the caron move, mike wise argued we could have had both caron and larry, but i don’t think we could have afforded both.
of course there’s no way i can prove any of this to be the case, but that’s still my take on it. EG declined to match market value for hughes until it was too late. that’s very un-EG like for a guy he wants to keep.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Aug 24, 2009 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the Pecherov draft choice should get an F
I wanted the Wizards to get another guard. I wanted Rondo or Marcus Williams (I preferred Williams at the time) and I wanted to pull a Carville and put a trash can on my head when they took Pecherov.
"Would you like to shoot me now or wait till you get home." --- Daffy Duck
by George Templeton on Aug 23, 2009 11:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 















