Ricky Rubio staying in Europe doesn't automatically vindicate the Wizards
So how do I feel about Ricky Rubio remaining in Europe instead of coming to the NBA? I don't know.
I'll be honest: I didn't know what the heck was going on for most of the time. Every time the situation seemed resolved, it wasn't. Every time Rubio seemed to lean one way, he didn't. While one can argue that the nature of the uncertainty is enough of an indictment on Rubio himself for the Wizards to stay away from having to deal with that drama, the unbelievably unreliable European media is to blame for a lot of this as well. Throw in Minnesota's unique situation -- they drafted a point guard right after Rubio, they stripped down their team, they're rebuilding, etc. -- the difficulty with the buyout and several other factors, and there's a lot more to this debacle that simply Rubio's own immaturity and indecision.
But enough about that, what about the Wizards? The obvious reaction to the news is that this vindicates Ernie Grunfeld's decision to pass on drafting him for the surer thing of Randy Foye and Mike Miller. Is there an element of truth to this? Certainly. If we assume that there would have been some sort of difficulty in bringing Rubio on board and/or trading his rights for something of value, then yes, with the roster currently in the state that it's in, it would have been a very risky move when risk may not be the best thing for the team's psyche.
However I'd say there's too much unknown and forgotten here that makes Grunfeld's vindication a little more complicated.
Point 1: Grunfeld didn't trade Rubio, he traded the fifth pickRecall that the Wizards made their trade with Minnesota two days before draft day, not on draft day when Rubio actually slipped. While Ernie is paid to have some foresight, there's no way he could have guessed with 100% certainty that Rubio would indeed be around by the fifth pick. (This applies to David Kahn too; he could have taken Rubio only because he felt like he had to, not because he had him highly ranked on Minnesota's draft board).
Therefore, to say Grunfeld decided between Rubio and the Miller/Foye package is misleading. In reality, Grunfeld decided to take the Miller/Foye package instead of having the chance to select Rubio or anyone else. You can't say honestly that Grunfeld was thinking to himself "you know, I'd rather have Randy Foye and Mike Miller than Ricky Rubio." In reality, he was saying "I'd rather have Randy Foye and Mike Miller than be in a position where I'm deciding between several prospects, which may include Rubio if teams get scared by him."
You could look at this one of two ways. You could say that Grunfeld knew Rubio was going to be a difficult sell and could very well stay in Europe, which means he ruled him out and figured he wouldn't draft him anyway if he kept the fifth pick. In this case, getting something for a pick he wasn't going to use anyway is a good thing. However, you could also say that, by making the trade two days in advance, Grunfeld took his myriad options away from himself. On draft day, he could have selected Rubio, traded the pick, selected someone else, etc, and those options may have potentially yielded a better return than Foye/Miller. We won't know the answer to that question definitively until we see how the season plays out.
Point 2: Ernie would have handled things differently than David Kahn if he drafted Rubio
I'm not going to sit here and say Kahn handled things the wrong way. He was put in an unbelievably difficult situation (though you could say he did it to himself), and I have no doubt he worked as hard as possible to get Rubio to come play in the NBA right away. But if Ernie Grunfeld was put in Kahn's situation, you can be sure that he wouldn't have done several things Kahn did, including:
- Draft another point guard right after Rubio. It's unclear how much drafting Jonny Flynn affected Rubio's decision, but it probably added an unnecessary layer to an already complicated situation. Now, the Wizards do already have Gilbert Arenas, and Rubio's agent has said he wouldn't have wanted to play alongside him. But it's far different to come from the US and play with an NBA all-star that could potentially move to SG more easily than to have to compete for minutes with a six-foot rookie point guard.
- Announce to the world that he definitively did not intend to trade Rubio. Kahn essentially told teams, "Don't bother with your trade proposals, I'm not trading him anyway." I'm sure Ernie would have left the situation much more open, which might have improved the offers.
- Done nothing else to try to improve his team. Even with Rubio in tow, Ernie would have certainly tried to make other moves to improve the ballclub for next year. He's sensitive to the wishes of his coach, owner and star player, and the Wizards had several tradeable assets to give to other teams to upgrade the roster.
- I'd guess with several other pressing matters affecting his ballclub, Ernie would not have directly negotiated with Rubio's Spanish teams as much as Kahn. I'm not sure what kind of affect this would have had.
Some of those factors would have made it easier to convince Rubio to come here. Some of them would have made it harder. Regardless, the larger point is that Ernie would not have handled the situation the same way as David Kahn, meaning we can't really say whether Rubio would have made the same decisions he made.
Point 3: Minnesota's rebuilding and is in a less visible place than Washington
Again, this isn't to definitively say that Rubio would have played in DC and not Minnesota, but the very fact that we have to ask ourselves this question means we can't just unilaterally pat Grunfeld on the back. Maybe Dan Fegan's comments about Rubio playing alongside Arenas were just hot air, and Rubio wouldn't have minded. Maybe Rubio was ready to play right away. The fact that Rubio won't play right away for Minnesota doesn't get us any closer to answering these questions than we were on draft day. We can have opinions, but we won't have any additional facts
It's also worth noting that Minnesota doesn't need Rubio as much as the Wizards needed him (or, more accurately, some value for the fifth pick). The Timberwolves are committed to a long-term plan, and having Rubio aboard doesn't change that. They aren't planning on being a winning team for a couple years, and even if they were, Miller and Foye were not in their long-term plans. The Wizards, however, were under pressure to get someone who could help them win next year. Perhaps if Rubio is the pick, the Wizards would have been more aggressive in getting him to come play right away.
Why am I spelling this all out?
My only point is this: Ernie should not be judged on his Minnesota trade based on Ricky Rubio. Rubio was arguably not an option for the Wizards, and even if he was somehow picked by them, we have no guarantee that this whole debacle would have played out the same way. Michael Lee hit it perfectly with this sentence.
The only question now -- which can be answered somewhat this season -- is, did Grunfeld get enough for No. 5? Either way, it's really not worth debating Foye and Miller vs. nothing this season.
I don't think Rubio going to Europe should have any affect on how we view the Foye/Miller trade. The way we evaluate the trade is to see whether Foye and Miller help the Wizards win a lot of games. If they do, the trade was good. If they don't, then it wasn't. Ricky Rubio has nothing to do with it.
19 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This is on point
My gripe with this trade was that I felt like the Wizards could have gotten more, not necessarily the loss of a shot at Rubio. Still, Grunfeld is looking like Jerry West right about now compared to David Kahn, who has already put out press releases blaming Rubio,
twitter.com/rashad20
i dispute that we could have gotten more
but we have no way of debating that.
still i’m surprised that’s your take on it. i hope you respect how much value EG got out of the #5 pick.
i think jonathanjoseph sums it up when he says that trading for randy foye is like picking up a #5 draft pick on top of everything else we got. i wasn’t that excited about the trade when i first heard about it, because i had kind of lazily written off foye, but even then i felt like EG couldn’t have gotten much more.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Sep 3, 2009 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with some of this, but not all
My viewpoint is this: I am going to be a Wizards fan this year, in five years, and in ten years. So, I wanted Rubio. I don’t judge the trade to be a winner if Miller and Foye are great for the Wizards this year. I want to see what this trade nets the Wizards over time. If, over time, Rubio proves to be a terrific, all star caliber point guard, the trade has to be viewed with that in mind.
Wilbon
So, basically, Michael Wilbon should stop writing columns like this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062504743.html
And then say things like this:
http://twitter.com/MikeWilbonSaid/status/3690138515
… Kinda. Sure, both came in different contexts … but Grunfeld made the right move regardless.
Representing DC with Wizards & Stuff - Truth About It.net and Bullets Forever.
I've been having a discussion about this all day on Twitter
But I have no problem with Wilbon. The two opinions are not mutually exclusive. He can easily craft an coherent argument that says the Wizards would have been in better position to get Rubio to come to the NBA this year, for many of the reasons stated in this post.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
Yea, but ...
It’s like Grunfeld says, “I’m going to make a move to win now” … which he did, and Wilbon just ignores that principle and operates on predicting future regret. Yes, it’s in his right to do so, but it seems like a waste of time.
Representing DC with Wizards & Stuff - Truth About It.net and Bullets Forever.
Why must Wilbon opine based on Ernie's timeline?
Why can’t Wilbon think that Ernie’s timeline makes sense unless Ricky Rubio is available?
I don’t like how Wilbon argued his opinion (Arenas is a shooting guard anyway, the Wizards don’t have any big men), but I think the opinion is valid.
A waste of time would be if Wilbon said something factually incorrect, like the Wizards could have paid for more of the buyout than Minnesota, or if he said Rubio would prefer DC to Minnesota.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
I disagree with:
The way we evaluate the trade is to see whether Foye and Miller help the Wizards win a lot of games. If they do, the trade was good. If they don’t, then it wasn’t. Ricky Rubio has nothing to do with it.
Rubio is the person every critic of the trade threw out there. You can’t evaluate the trade in a vacuum — to fairly evaluate the trade you have to look at how things play out and try to figure out what else the Wiz could have realistically done. That’s probably picking Rubio, Curry or Hill, but most likely picking Rubio and then trading him. Would that really have gotten us much more than Foye and Miller (and dumping useless contracts)? I doubt it. If Rubio, Curry or Hill become stars and Foye/Miller doesn’t really work out well, then you can criticize the trade. If all three of those guys are worse than Foye+Miller, then you have to praise the trade. If Curry is the next Reggie Miller and Rubio never leaves Europe, you could criticize the pick, but you’d have to acknowledge that you’d have botched it too.
I still think they they are vindicated.
Grunfeld got a lot of heat when it was found we could have gotten Rubio. The bottom line is I still believe that the Wizards + Foye + Miller > Wizards + Rubio.
I don’t think the Wizards get the buzz for this year if they just have Rubio because he wouldn’t be an impact player this year if he even somehow signed.
by Kuruption on Sep 1, 2009 10:10 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Vindicated
We got Foye and Miller both as players and trade chips. We can offer both talent and expiring contracts along with a pick to acquire players. If this is our go for it year we have all the assets to make a big move.
Rubio was never going to come to dc and that would kill his trade value.. No reason to pine about what a guy could do in 5 years.
For the record, I liked and like the trade
But it’s probably more “fair” to assess it against how good Curry and Hill turn out to be (and how good Miller and Foye are) rather than the fact that the Rubio situation blew up.
Yes, Grunfeld either has or will be vindicated...there should be no question
Wilbon argued that Rubio, not the 5th pick, was the prize that Grunfeld passed on. And either way, it’s not a good argument.
NO rookie does this franchise any good given its window of opportunity, and even if Rubio had come over now…thinking that he would be any sort of difference maker before his 21st birthday is wishful thinking.
In the trade Grunfeld:
1) Got 2 starting caliber players that filled holes on the roster (3 pt shooting, backup PG, size in the backcourt)
2) Gets a guy in Foye who seems to still have upside, perhaps as much upside as any single rookie we could have drafted (will Stephen Curry end up better than Foye? Maybe…)
3) Saved $3M in cap room this season and $12M overall which would have gone to the rookie which turned into Oberto (and cap space going forward)
AND
4) Got rid of $18 Million in bad contracts ($30M total if you add the contract for the draft pick) that will allow the Wizards the flexibility to resign important players.
AND gave up nothing of consequence but the 5th pick.
Let’s say, for arguments sake, that Grunfeld kept the 5th pick, chose Stephen Curry, and Curry becomes an all-star by his 4th season, which would be as quickly as practically possible.
That means that the Wizards are:
1) Weaker in 09-10 because Miller/Foye >> rookie Curry
2) Likely to lose Haywood in 2010 with $8M less cap room because of the Songaila and draft choice contracts.
3) By the time Curry becomes an all-star in 2013, Jamison is retired and Butler is 33.
Let there be NO QUESTION that over the next 3-4 years, this trade has increased the talent, depth and roster/cap flexibility at the cost of picking up Stephen Curry/Jordan Hill who are far from sure things.
Miller and Foye could have the worst years of their careers and it would still be a good trade. This trade is up there with Grunfeld’s greatest heists and Minnesota GM David Kahn has a ton of egg on his face right now.
(Oh, and the Rubio hype has gotten beyond ridiculous. 4 teams passed the opportunity to draft him, he’s 18 years old and would get physically manhandled in the NBA for years, doesn’t have a jumpshot yet and doesn’t fit with a ball-dominant Arenas.)
4 teams passed on him?
What is that supposed to mean? 30 teams passed on Arenas. I’ve actually never heard a professional sports journalist say that he doesn’t believe Rubio will be good. I hear it from fans, but never from anyone in sports journalism or the league. The opinions those people have of him range between career starter and Hall-of-Famer.
"One-on-one? You can't." -Gilbert Arenas
JC Bandwagon all day!
what does 30 teams passing on arenas have to do with anything?
if randy foye and mike miller both die tragically in a drag racing incident on GW parkway then based on much of the logic i’m seeing thrown out here, we would have to say EG made a bad trade.
right now, in the here and now, this trade looks great.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Sep 3, 2009 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions
One point that hasn't been mentioned
Is that Rubio staying over in Europe for two more years could make the trade worse for the Wizards, for two reasons.
First, would a team rather have Rubio on a rookie contract when he is 18 through 22 years old, or 20 through 24 years old? Obviously the latter. Second, by staying over in Europe and improving, with the Wizards retaining his rights, Rubio becomes a trading chip with increasing value. If you believe, as I do, that the Wizards need to make a big move for Bosh or someone of that caliber to make a jump to championship contender status, the Wizards need assets like the draft rights to Ricky Rubio in order to facilitate a trade. Trading Randy Roye instead of Rubio won’t be as enticing to teams.
Interesting perspective
That’s sacrificing the present for the future, but has some merit. Of course, it assumes Rubio fill fulfill his potential, which is rarely the case.
It's simpler than that
Rubio’s own immaturity and indecision.
an indictment on Rubio
Mike – You’re reading too many complicated ideas into this situation.
1. Ernie saw who was projected to be available at the 5th pick and decided that Foye and Miller were better than (take your pick): Hasheem Thabeet, Tyreke Evans, Jonny Flynn, Stephen Curry or Jordan Hill. Ricky Rubio was, by all accounts the second or third best player available, and should not have been available at number 5
2. Had the Wizards drafted Rubio, they would be in the same position that Minnesota is in now. The basic fact is that had Rubio been drafted 2 or 3, he would be playing in the NBA this year. His salary would have been sufficient for him to pay off his exorbitant buy out with the Spanish club within the two-year timeframe they required – and he still would have had money left to put food on the table. Being drafted 5th (whether it was by Minnesota or by Washington, or by ANY other team) means that his salary slot, alone was not enough to pay off DKV Joventut.
You may argue that Washington is a bigger market, and that perhaps Rubio could have received more endorsement deals here – or that Ernie Grunfeld is a better negotiator than David Kahn and may have been able to garner a lower buy out from DKV Joventut – but all that is speculation….. and the fact remains that Ernie had to make a decision based on what he knew at the time.
AND Ricky Rubio had to make a tough decision as well. Pay out of his own pocket for the “privilege”of playing in the NBA, or go back to Spain and wait another two years. How many of us could afford to pay, so that we could work?
Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......
I'm still not convinced this is simply a math problem
Because then why would Rubio come out and say negative stuff about Minnesota, or Memphis, like he did? Why would it matter if he went to Memphis when he’d earn more money anyway? Why would he prop Sacramento, who had the fourth pick, more than any other team?
I’m sure it was a factor, but it wasn’t the only factor. There’s a human element here, as well as the “I want to play for the right team” element. If New York has the fifth pick, I’m convinced Rubio comes here because he’d find the team more desirable. I also think DC is more desirable a situation than Minnesota, and he waited until the last minute to change his mind about Minnesota.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by 

















