2010 NBA Draft Wizards snap reaction
by Mike Prada on Jun 25, 2010 2:55 AM EDT
in Draft
Email
PrintReactions, one by one:
The John Wall pick was the John Wall pick. I am smitten by this kid and officially freaked out that we're going to waste two years without as much cap flexibility as necessary to build around him. I've hung around him a bit now for the past two days, and I am more sure he's going to be great than any other player I've seen. Maybe he won't be the best player on a title team, but he'll always be the straw that stirs the drink. You could put 14 Ron Artests around him and he would make them work. He has that kind of leadership and character.
My favorite part of today (besides Wall's group going into the wrong interview room on their way up the stairs after he was picked) was when Wall said he wasn't afraid to speak up to lead older people. It was one of the very first things he said, and I was happy to hear it. Good. I believe him, and that alone gives me hope.
No day that ends with us getting John Wall is a failure. That said ...
The Kirk Hinrich trade was really bad, and for that, I blame EG, not Ted. Why? Because in theory, the Kirk Hinrich trade accomplishes the bare bones of Ted's philosophy. Ted's not afraid to take on salary in order to get more picks, and he probably told Ernie so. But at that point, it's on the general manager to fulfill the owner's philosophy in such a way to maintain proper cap flexibility and team building. The Kirk Hinrich trade does not accomplish that. Hinrich is okay, but he's also 29, and has not had a good season since 2007. He's slipping on defense, which was once his calling card. More importantly, he's owed $9 million next season and $8 million in 2011/12, one year after a new collective bargaining agreement is put in place.
It's the price that's the real issue here. Hinrich isn't bad, but at best, he's worth half his contract for half as many years. If Hinrich had one year and, say, $5 million left on his contract, I would be ecstatic. But he doesn't. For a team that just blew up an overpaid, capped-out roster, I find it absolutely shocking that we would then take on this kind of commitment for a third guard and a "mentor" for John Wall. (Speaking of: isn't it Sam Cassell's job to mentor Wall?). Did Ernie not learn at all from his mistakes with the Big 3 teams?
Think of it this way: Oklahoma City (I know, we bring them up a lot, but Ted talks about how great they are, so it's a fair comparison) acquired the 18th pick for one year and $2.1 million of Daequan Cook and the 32nd pick. For the pick just one pick higher than that, the Wizards took on two years and $17 million, plus $3 million cash (UPDATE: my bad, we got $3 million in cash from the Bulls) and a future second-rounder. One organization is doing it right, and the other is doing it wrong.
Finally, the scariest part about this is that we could have given the Bulls the chance to get LeBron James and another max free agent. Normally, I don't really care about the kind of chances we give the other team with a trade, because we should only worry about us getting better. But in this case, it demonstrates yet again how management just fails at playing chicken. The Bulls should have to be the ones paying a premium to dump Hinrich and get this chance at two max free agents, plus Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah. That's potentially much more valuable to them than the 17th pick is to us. And yet, we're the ones paying a premium for a pick that wasn't worth it. If Houston can get a ton of high lottery picks for letting the Knicks have the chance at two max free agents, why can't we?
(Sorry, one more PS: the Hinrich trade makes a bit more sense if there's some sort of salary dump set up for Gilbert Arenas. But if that's the case (and I find it pretty flippin unlikely), why not just go to a full youth movement and let Nick Young or a draft pick start at shooting guard? What do we really have to lose? What purpose does Hinrich serve then?).
The Kevin Seraphin pick is a complete unknown. On the surface, he seems like a classic bad Ernie pick. He's raw (he said he's only been playing for five years and hasn't lifted many weights), European (meaning he wouldn't be here) and nursing a knee injury that prevented him from doing many workout. But I've also talked to several people who tell me he's the real deal. He also said the Wizards were his first choice, and he's ecstatic to be here, so he could come as soon as next season. So I'll reserve judgment on this.
The Trevor Booker pick is also good by itself. We've needed a physical bruiser like Booker for a while, and he'll probably come cheaper than James Singleton or Craig Smith. I always liked him at Clemson, where he played with bad teammates and still produced, and I think he fills an immediate role right away.
The trading of two picks to get Trevor Booker is ... eh, probably unnecessary. Not necessarily because there's a lot of value at 30 or 35 - there probably isn't - but mostly because we didn't have to do that. We also didn't come away with the one easiest need to fill with a late pick - a nice TAD small forward. Sure, the Hornets stole Quincy Pondexter, but there were other capable wings available that could have helped (Damion James at 17, Devin Ebanks, etc). I like Booker a lot, but I'm not sure he's worth that haul.
The Hamady Ndiaye pick is typical Ernie. Not that we're likely to get anyone good at 56, but it just showed that he's literally throwing darts at a board trying to hit on the next best project center. The Wizards have now drafted the following raw bigs since 2005: Andray Blatche, Peter John Ramos, Oleksiy Pecherov, JaVale McGee, Kevin Seraphin and Hamady Ndiaye. One of these times, you'll hit it big Ernie. Until then, stop gambling.
Overall, I'm not quite as angry as some of you. At the end of the day, we did get John Wall (say that 5,000 more times if you're really upset. You'll feel better), a European big man with loads of potential, and a good, solid guy in Booker ready to play right away. Most of my ire is at the Hinrich trade, not with what happened otherwise.
But I also can't help but think that, outside of Wall, Ernie just traded around a bunch of pieces without really making us as good as we could have been after today in either the short- or long-term. From all we heard from Ted and Ernie leading up to the draft, there was real hope that we would really shift philosophies and make a huge splash in getting a real critical mass of young, ready to play prospects. Maybe this disappointment is due to unrealistic expectations, I don't know. But at the end of the day, I can't help but think that we could have done better outside of the John Wall pick.
One more note: I haven't had a chance to look at the open threads, but I've heard some pushback to some of the negative comments in there. On the one hand, I completely understand that point of view, and we need to keep things civil. On the other hand, I think it's important to note that the whole purpose of open threads are for instant reaction, and if that reaction is negative, then it should be expressed. If reading all that bugs you, that's fine, but also be sympathetic to those that are venting.
170 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good take, but here's where I differ:
Hinrich trade: This is where we’ve sort of “over-educated” ourselves. This is a bad trade if you look at it through the lens of a BOYD trade but it was NOT a BOYD trade. Grunfeld has wanted Hinrich for years and got the player he was targeting (Seraphin) and $3M cash for taking him.
BOYD assumes that you are adding any washed-up or extraneous player to your roster until his contract expires. Grunfeld acquired the backup PG he needed regardless AND set the tone for adding players known for TOUGHNESS and DEFENSE. Yes $9M per is too much for Hinrich but the Wiz can easily absorb the cap hit for 2 years. It’s not a long term contract.
Seraphin: Yes, an unknown, but an TOUGH, PHYSICAL athletic big man. If he turns into a poor man’s Nene, which is what he’s been described as, then great addition.
Booker: Known for being TOUGH. Ernie said in the post game that he had targeted Booker at 30 or 35 and he thought someone else was going to pick him.
Grunfeld had a very specific agenda in mind and very specific players in mind and he got them. Adding tough front court prospects and a mean, defensive atitude to the Wizards seems like a smart play to me.
1) “Grunfeld has wanted Hinrich for years…” – a lot has changed for the Wizards in the intervening years. Before December 2009, the Wizards were an organization convinced it was a piece or two away from being a contender. Now, we are in full rebuilding mode. So most of the players we wanted while we were in contender mode are inappropriate choices for a rebuilding team.
2) “Grunfeld acquired the backup PG he needed…” Livingston wouldn’t have cost half as much as Hinrich and would have been every bit as good, if not better. Plus, Livingston is five years younger. Regardless, 17 million over 2 years is not a backup PG salary.
3) “The Wiz can easily absorb the cap hit…” The issue isn’t the direct cost of the Hinrich contract, it is the opportunity cost. With Hinrich locking down 8 and 9 million of cap space respectively for the next two years, that’s less cap space for the Wizards to pursue the BOYD strategy with. Whereas if we had found a deal closer to the OKC-MIA deal, we would have had significantly more cap space leftover for future BOYD deals.
4) I will leave the talent evaluations to the better basketball analysts here at BF. My qualm with the Seraphin, Booker, and N’Diaye picks are the inefficient ways in which we used our picks and assets to obtain them not so much with the players themselves. It should be noted however that Booker will turn 23 in November and N’Diaye turns 24 next January. Well, I do have concerns about Booker’s size translating to the NBA power forward game. According to the analysis I have seen, he does not come close to having an SF skillset so if he struggles due to size in the NBA (40 pounds lighter and 4.5" shorter wingspan than Blair) then he will have nowhere to go.
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 3:49 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
So because Ernie wanted him, it makes it ok? Regardless of how you look at it, it’s a bad trade. This haul might have been great in comparison to the last few drafts but at best Grunfeld did a mediocre job considering the kind of leverage he had. Also why shouldn’t you look at it from a BOYD view? Ted wants it done that way and Ernie didn’t deliver. He could of gotten the similar or the same guys at a lower cost.
Hinrich is tradable
You could flip him without too much problem I think. Maybe to someone like Portland for a shorter contract(Joel Przybilla) and a younger player(Rudy Fernandez).
by danielfarrell on Jun 25, 2010 6:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Because....
We took him into raw cap space before the most ballyhooed free agent signing period just about ever. That’s completely different than another team taking him on with another player heading out. Something like Hinrich for Mike Dunleavy wouldn’t be shocking (The Pacers were rumored to be interested leading up to the draft), especially considering the lockout will only have someone paying about half of his 2012 salary.
Some rumors out of Orlando that they are interested in Hiney too…
http://twitter.com/alexkennedynba
(of course they don’t make much sense as yet)
There were also endless Vujacic/Ammo rumors at the deadline (now moot, but still)
Then of course there’s the Rich bucher Tweets about Gil being moved.
(that would completely alter our whole fiscal dynamic, rebooting our priorities)
We did the math over on Real GM; it’s still quite possible that this works out being cheaper than the “OKC get’s the 18th” deal. Hinrich isn’t a straight dud for $17 million as you have to offset some of that with his actual value as a player. I don’t think we’re ‘stuck with him’ by any means.
I think a lot of the commentary here is not very balanced considering how things can play out from here.
i think you are missing the point. hiney is the side show. he costs what he costs. brings some things to the table. was expensive but not a franchise killer.
when you have the 30th and 35th pick and an owner willing to spend a little to improve your position…..you have to come out of that draft knowing you got at least one solid starter.
we did not and ernie failed again. why? because there were solid starters left on the board and we know that he doesnt know what the hell we are getting with our 18th pick. it was a pure crap shoot which is just plain reckless with an 18th pick in a deep draft. i hope he is fired and we get pritchard
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions
The 30th & 35th are seperate.....
I was just suffering to the nuts and bolts of the Hiney trade.
I wouldn’t have been opposed to moving up with both those late picks, but I would have wanted to see us get someone who, you know, wasn’t actually going to be there at 30.
Fire away on that one, I won’t say anything. While I’m at it, though, here’s my take on Seraphin:
However, I believe that there’s a good chance that OKC was going to take Seraphin at 18; the first 16 picks were pretty well straight consensus guys who were almost guaranteed to be gone and then they moved the the 18th, which they had just acquired, right after we picked. Seraphin visited them; they did not need a wing; Serge Ibaka has worked out for them; stashing would have been great for them as their roster is about full with rookie contracts already. Everyone else on the board was predictable, so Seraphin was the obvious pick for them unless they had planned to move it all along.
Mike Lee reported that the Cav’s wanted to move to 20 to get him too.
So I don’t think Seraphin was a wild flier, no. I don’t see how anyone can say on June 25th that “there were solid starters left on the board” and that Seraphin is somehow different in kind from these “sure thing” picks. Seraphin could easily turn into a solid rotation big or better at this point. He’s a moose with hops.
Oh yeah....
And if we sign Josh Childress, I’ll lend you, Les Bomber, my Katana with which to go after the Grunner.
I’m not here to offer some blanket endorsement.
i am open he could turn out well. my point being we dont know crap about the guy and there are players who fit us that we have a lot more information on. it’s the recklessness of the act more than the pick. who knows where the guy would have been drafted. people say all kinds of things. and no one really knows him.
personally, i dont believe for one sec that any team posturing for lebron is going to trade assets for the guy. their sights are set on bigger fish.
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Hinrich's value
Hinrich isn’t a straight dud for $17 million as you have to offset some of that with his actual value as a player.
I don’t believe this is true. Let’s say Hinrich adds five wins compared to Livingston next year. I would say that equal’s adding zero value to the Wiz next year. The Wiz aren’t in position to compete next year or the year after, so the quality of play Hinrich gives us is, to me, irrelevant. 32-60 isn’t any better than 27-65.
by Palace of Good Play's Golden Toilet on Jun 25, 2010 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Well.....
There’s an awful lot of ways you could measure it. One of course it his trade value, then there’s the cultural value he brings to the team from a development standpoint in infusing professionalism and defense.
I absolutely agree that we don’t need to be making incremental moves jostling our way from the 6th worst record to the 8th worst record. So yes, keeping Gil and Hinrich in an attempt to catch the Pacers makes no sense. That said, a lot remains to be determined as far as where we’re going to be at next year based on moving either Gil or Hiney. Hard to make definite statements at this point.
I will say though that I don’t think teams like the Nets and the Wolves really had “developmental years” (even the Kings second half pretty well sucked). They improved their draft positioning thus acquired “another lottery guy”, but I don’t think their previous lottery picks were in a positive situation at all. It’s a fine line and i think it worked out as a positive for the Kings, so-so for the Nets and pretty darn bad for the Wolves. I’d also point out that next years draft is probably going to stink pretty bad with the lockout coming.
Let’s see where it goes though. If they move Gil later this summer then I do believe Hinrich has value to us as far as being that rock in the locker room who competes game in and game out. Alternatively, maybe they move Hinrich sometime later based on his value to other teams. Like I said, there’s a few ways we can measure his value, but he’s not a total paper weight.
Good thoughts
To me, Hinrich’s trade value only matters if we are actually able to trade him. I don’t see that happening any time before the 2012 trade deadline, and even then it seems unlikely. Compared to being able to take on a new contract next summer for an additional pick, his trade value doesn’t do it for me, but I see your point.
As for the poor teams, I think many people are impressed by the way OKC is run. 20-62 then 23-59 in Durant’s first two seasons didn’t seem to adversely effect him or the team. To me that was the ideal plan, and we’ve just scuppered our chances of following their lead unless we are indeed able to trade Hinrich or Arenas.
by Palace of Good Play's Golden Toilet on Jun 25, 2010 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Scuppered is a strong word
A good word, but a strong one.
Unfortunately I mixed up
effect and affect in the same post.
by Palace of Good Play's Golden Toilet on Jun 25, 2010 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Watch out for....
Indiana, Orlando and the Lakers as far as trade targets.
There were rumors of Hiney to Indy a day or two before the draft. It’s my opinion that they’d send us Mike Dunleavy Jr. straight up as it helps get them under the tax and they are way overloaded on the wing.
Keep in mind too that his second year at $8 million is much more likely to be $4 million for half a year with the lockout.
Count me as “bullish” on his potential value. Now, whether or not Ernie thinks we should move him is another question. Dunno.
Sounds like were bringing in that little point guard (Randle, was it?) from California for our Summer league squad. Take it for what it’s worth.
Oh yeah....
And as far as the OKC Thunder and 20-23 wins, I’d agree. That’s about the sweet spot for tanking. The Nets and Wolves with 12 & 15 wins respectively, not so much.
I have to admit, I’m hoping we move Gil, just due to a lot of issues, though nothing personal and with vehemence. he should be on a win-now club with that contract as far as I’m concerned.
Were that to happen, I think Hiney would be a nice team captain on a 20 win tank squad that fights hard each night.
A lot to be determined as yet. Sounds like Sheyer is coming into our summer league squad too; that’s five potential point guards. I’m sensing some kind of movement one way or another.
Moving Gil for a contract that expires earlier would be huge
But judging the Hinrich trade independently, I just can’t swallow it. Hopefully you are right that we will offers to trade him.
by Palace of Good Play's Golden Toilet on Jun 25, 2010 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Trades
I don’t really see what the Lakers would do. Make Odom plus a first for Hinrich? I can’t imagine they’d want to do that, but they don’t really have any other player’s whose salaries would work. Maybe Vujacic and Brown/Farmar straight up for Hinrich.
Indiana: Hinrich straight up for TJ Ford? Don’t really see Indiana doing that.
Orlando: The rumored Hinrich, Foye, Thornton – VC deal would be awesome.
by Palace of Good Play's Golden Toilet on Jun 25, 2010 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd say....
Maybe Vujacic and Brown/Farmar straight up for Hinrich.
That would be the deal now, yeah
As to Indiana, you don’t think Indy would be in for Ford? They’re supposedly trying very hard to dump Ford and there were rumors of Hinrich to Indy leading up to the draft.
Tweets from a few days ago…
@nbadraftnet
Trade Rumor: Kirk Hinrich to Indiana. 17th pick included – Indiana targeting Gordon Hayward at 17. Not sure what Ind gives in deal.
@nbadraftnet 10th pick included in that rumored deal. Not sure who Chicago targets at 10.
I’m sure the details are wrong there, but there were multiple sources suggesting talks.
This is from four days ago….
On Tuesday, Bird even defied conventional wisdom by announcing his draft-night strategy — adding a point guard, upgrading Indiana’s overall talent level and looking for a trade to make it all work.
“I want to win, our team wants to win and if the right deal comes up, we’ll look to move forward,” he said. “You never know what’s going to happen, but it is time to start winning.”
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2010/news/story?id=5315083
Uhh
Grunfeld has wanted Hinrich for years
That makes it worse. Got to know when circumstances with your roster chabge,
Sounds like Wizards were only team interested
From Chicago Tribune on midnight before the draft:
“They’ve tried to package the pick with Luol Deng or Kirk Hinrich with little serious interest yet”http://bit.ly/9MuSa4
If no teams were interested in Hinrich and the 17th, why would anybody be interested in Hinrich alone in the future? What about as an expiring next year? Indiana had to package the 11th to get rid of Mo Pete who makes $2.4 million less this year than Hinrich will next year when he is an expiring. Hinrich’s not tradeable.
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Was Ernie had?
If that deal falls apart, Bucher reports the Kings will be Plan B for the Bulls. Yet a league source with knowledge of the Kings’ thinking tells FanHouse that’s not the case and the Kings have no interest, meaning it’s likely a smokescreen by the Bulls to gain leverage should the Wizards consider backing out.
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
At this point
It makes little sense for the Kings. They have too many centers as it is.
I agree in principle
but Hinrich is nonetheless a fine fit here. As for his tradeability, the landscape will be dramatically different come February. As for his ability to serve as a mentor, people on this site tend to discount the human factor in sports. For instance, someone today listed all the great late draft picks the Spurs have made and attributed their success exclusively to their evaluation skills, totally ignoring the possibility that people like George Hill and Ian Mahinmi aren’t necessarily more talented than the stiffs that got drafted around them, but were simply trained to be serviceable backups by being in an excellently run system. Everyone who gets drafted has potential, but for the lower picks, it all comes down to a combination of organizational training and individual will. It’s valid to say that Kwame Brown was a good pick who was handled very poorly. Maybe it he’d had a veteran PF to mentor him instead of Doug Collins and Michael Jordan, things would have turned out differently. Not that Wall isn’t miles ahead of Kwame maturity-wise, but it cannot hurt to have Hinrich on the team.
As for his salary, you make the point that you’d have been thrilled if he were owed just $5M. It seems a little dramatic to me that you see an extra $6M per season as the difference between “really bad” and you feeling “ecstatic”. I am being nice by using the word “dramatic.”
I think people need to step back and look at the final outcome of last night and quit worrying about how the sausage was made. If everyone was as good as Sam Presti, then Sam Presti wouldn’t be special anymore. Not everyone can be number one. The Wizards had a great night.
And I'll say it again with the mentor stuff
1. We have Cassell – this is what he’s there to do.
2. You can find cheaper pros than Kirk Hinrich.
It seems to me the Wizards could’ve gone the free agent route to find a mentor for Wall, though that wouldn’t net them the 17th pick.
In any case, a case could be made for having a mentor that actually plays. As great as Cassell is, it’s probably useful to have another experienced point guard running through all the drills, participating in practice, playing in games, etc. There are things Hinrich will be able to provide for Wall that Cassell won’t be able to because one’s a player, the other’s a coach.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions
sorry
I meant to say the free agent route could’ve been a much cheaper option to find an adequate mentor.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
And I'll say it again
There’s a giant difference between a teammate and a coach. But, yes, Hinrich is overpaid. That’s why the Wizards were able to make this deal. Again, I hope he’s eventually moved for more forward-thinking parts, but at the same time, I am a strong believer in the value of veteran leadership (which for the record is, in and of itself, precisely as valuable as cap space). There are so many variables, though, regarding what may or may not happen to his contract as regards the team’s cap space, that it’s unfair to assume that it’s going to be a millstone. When it turns out to be a problem, then I think it will be reasonable to complain. At this point, all it is is speculative doom and gloom.
Flip wanted Hinrich?
I think he had a big say in adding Hinrich. He loves big guards and now he has three that are interchangeable. Flip’s the kind of guy who wants to compete every year. From his small snippet on draft night it sounded like he thinks this team can make the playoffs.
Grunfeld reportedly has wanted Hinrich for years
but he’s certainly a good fit in Flip Saunders offense as the 3rd guard.
I think there’s still some cap room to spend. Childress? Mike Miller? Josh Howard? Any of those 3 and I think this is a playoff team in the EC.
by JonathanJoseph on Jun 25, 2010 3:47 AM EDT up reply actions
coaches always want players. that’s why there is a salary cap!
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions
we are spending over 30million next year on point/combo guards
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
From his small snippet on draft night it sounded like he thinks this team can make the playoffs.
\
There’s a reasons most coaches aren’t GMs. It’s called “conflict of interest.” They are short term oriented while GMs need to be considered 2, 3, 5 years down the road.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 25, 2010 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Well, Mike, at least you are not as hostile as...
some of the other posters on this blog.
Let’s see how Seraphin, Booker and N’diaye look in Las Vegas. And let’s assume that Krik Hinrich has some gas left in the tank, especially on D.
There’s still the Childress deal to follow.
And there are probably a few other machinations left.
And as you so rightly sad up front.: First and foremost, JOHN WALL.
Isn’t the Childress deal off the table?
by Buddha Brown on Jun 25, 2010 3:23 AM EDT up reply actions
+1
I understand the negative reaction’s but after a while they really got mundane to read through. I enjoyed Mike’s summary not only because I agree with the Booker pick but it was a good perspective on the good and bad.
by purpleonblack86 on Jun 25, 2010 3:46 AM EDT up reply actions
The Kings did well tonight. Holy hell.
And in 5 years, NJ will regret taking Favors over Cousins. Cousins was so much better this year in every respect. People overvalue Favors’ fantasy “upside” quality, and people exaggerated Cousins’ immaturity.
My swag was phenomenal.
Favors fit in with New Jersey better.
I like Cousins better but I wont argue with the pick. Brook Lopez can play the high post. They NEED a big man to stay down low and do all the dirty work. Favors will be playing to his strengths in New Jersey. Its a great pick.
I love the next two years
compared to the past two, Jamison and Butler are fading memories
by Mikko Leinonen's opposite on Jun 25, 2010 4:01 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
damn, when did 29 become " old " , haha
peace
by Mikko Leinonen's opposite on Jun 25, 2010 4:05 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Seraphin...
I think this draft rests on how well Seraphin pans out. Did the Wizards do their homework on him? He’s real strong looking and athletic…if he can actually play, it
might turn out very well. Trovor Booker is ready! His athleticism is great! And I think he
can be a bit of a combo forward, playing a little at the the 3 like….Michael Beasley, a play-
er I like. Mike, as for your take on the young Wizard bigs, Blatche was a good gamble,
and I’ve a sneaky suspicion that Mcgee could be the one who flies over the center
coo-coo’s nest. Wonder if we’ll bring in a free agent??
blatche was a mid second round pick. he did not cost 17 million and a first round draft pick.
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 8:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Booker's Wingspan is 6'9.75"
FYI: Dejuan Blair has a 7’2" wingspan
In senior year, Booker shot 59% FT’s and 27% 3pt’s
PF’s/C’s drafted since 2000 with wingspans of less than 6’11":
Shane Battier 6’10.5" (9 seasons, 8.0 ppg 4.7 rpg, active) *plays small forward in NBA
Alton Ford (never played)
Corsley Edwards (3 year career)
Jason Smith (drafted in 2007, 2 seasons, 4.0 ppg 2.8 rpg, active)
Reyshawn Terry (never played)
Jared Dudley (3 seasons, 6.6 ppg 3.5 rpg, active)
Darrell Arthur (2 seasons, 5.2 ppg, 4.2 rpg, active)
Trent Plaisted (never played)
Donte Greene (2 seasons, 6.5 ppg 2.4 rpg, active)
Less than 6’10"
Chris Porter (never played)
Dan Langhi (133 games over 4 seasons, 3.0 ppg 1.5 rpg)
Brian Scalabrine (9 seasons, 3.3 ppg 2.1 rpg, active)
Sean Lampley (played 45 games in 2 seasons in the NBA)
Matt Bonner (6 seasons, 6.7 ppg 3.5 rpg, active)
Luke Walton (7 seasons, 5.4 ppg 3.1 rpg, active)
Dijon Thompson (16 games in 2 seasons in the NBA)
Lawrence Roberts (87 games in 2 seasons in the NBA)
Joey Graham (5 seasons, 6 ppg 2.5 rpg, active)
Craig Smith (4 seasons, 8.7 ppg 4.3 rpg, active)
Maarty Leunen (never played)
Luke Harangody (drafted 52nd in 2010 draft)
Demarre Carroll (rookie season, 2.9 ppg 2.1 rpg, active)
Note: Chuck Hayes (undrafted) has a 6’10" wingspan. He was the only undrafted player I found on draftexpress under 6’11" that had played in the NBA. (5 seasons, 3.6 ppg 5.3 rpg, active)
Source: http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/
Look at Booker's other measurements too
He has a max vertical of 36", therefore he can actually get up higher than a lot of the 2010 PF class. His max vertical reach is 11’10", which is very good.
Also, he led his class in the bench press category with 22 reps of 175 pounds.
So overall, Booker measures out well.
Whether the Wizards needed to move up to draft him is another question. But we’ll better know the answer to that later this year.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 7:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Not to mention his blazing time in the Sprint
At 3.10 seconds, which as far as I know was the fastest of any player, even John Wall (3.14).
I agree
His leaping ability will be a help, but if someone’s posting you up, a long wingspan may be of greater use.
Still, he measures up to be one of the best athletes of the draft, so we’ll see where that gets him.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I'd agree with the Original Post
I don’t hate the players, but I don’t like the moves that got them. And although I’m arm chair criticizing, there are other players I would have taken at # 17 and # 23. I’m sure people say that every year, and most years the random Internet posters turn out wrong. But after so many wanted DeJuan Blair last year and were right, one can understand the lack of excitement.
Please send Hinrich to the Pacers, I hear they want a point guard! And they love white guys :)
unrelated but...
has anyone seen this picture on nba.com? looks like john wall has picked his new number…
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/2010/images/06/25/wall526-3-062410.jpg
but whyyyyy #63
63 is the first number you come to that has never been worn by any player in the history of the NBA going all the way back to it’s inception as the BAA in 1946.
Every number from 00 to 62 has been worn. 63 is the first number never to have been worn. EVER.
I think this might John Wall’s testament to wanting to be the first and not wanting to be compared to any other player in the NBA.
Be neat if someone took #78
in honor of the championship year
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 8:11 AM EDT up reply actions
I think that's just a generic number
The NBA balls they hand to draft picks each year have some really odd numbers to avoid any confusion. Take a look at some of the photos from last year.
by Jake Whitacre on Jun 25, 2010 8:23 AM EDT up reply actions
From Wizards Insider
Hinrich and Seriphan were acquired in a pre-draft deal with the Chicago Bulls in which the Wizards also received $3 million, according to a source with knowledge of the trade talks, and only had to sacrifice a future first-round pick.
That is the first I have heard about us giving up a future first-round pick in the Hinrich trade. WOW fingers crossed that Lee made a typo and meant second-round, which is what had been reported previously.
we gave up a first round pick…r u kidding me??? add in a lost first round pick for not being able to BOYD next year and what an incometent idiot
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 8:32 AM EDT up reply actions
It was a typo. Michael Lee corrected the article...phew
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/wizardsinsider/2010/06/wild-night-for-wall-wizards.html#more
Now reads
and only had to sacrifice a future second-round pick.
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions
that makes more sense. i dont think ernie is good. and he drafts too much for potential which tells me he does not believe in coaching up a player or general improvement. but i didnt think he was insane. the trade still cost us a BOYD first rounder next year.
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Nice level-headed description
I initially liked the Hinrich trade, but that was because I thought he only had one year left on his deal. That makes for a crowded backcourt if the Wizards decide to bring Livingston back — and that’s not even considering some minutes for Nick Young.
Also, I agree with Mike, the deal would look much better if Arenas is on his way out. But that would be extremely difficult to do, and it’s not like the Wizards can just dump all of that salary anyway — they’d have to be taking a significant chunk back regardless.
As for the Booker pick, I’m a little confused at EG’s strong desire to get him. He’s a nice player and isn’t afraid to mix it up inside, but I didn’t see the point of trading two picks to get him. Not that he’s as good as DeJuan Blair, but this seemed like EG trying to make up for last year’s inability to take someone like Blair.
Anyway, at least the Wiz took the right player at No. 1, and if any of the other players turn out to be decent it’ll make the draft even better.
Spot on
The Bulls should have to be the ones paying a premium to dump Hinrich and get this chance at two max free agents
This is exactly what is so wrong with the Hinrich trade. Bulls just made perhaps a franchise altering trade that gives them a chance at multiple championships. You’re telling me we couldn’t have at least finagled a future 1st rounder also? Ernie got hosed in this trade. It’s such a crazy trade that some are speculating he did this trade just to screw over the Knicks. Crazy talk, but the kind of talk that happens when you make ridiculous trades like this.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 25, 2010 7:48 AM EDT reply actions
And its always bad when an article mentions your trade
in the same breath as the Pau Gasol trade. If the Wizards truly did give away a future first-round pick, then this trade comes a little closer (although still farrrrr away) from approaching Gasol-trade magnitude.
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 7:57 AM EDT up reply actions
they started with an A+ and regressed even though we had the 17th, 30th and 35th pick (last two originally)
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 8:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Seems like the national outlets are giving the Wizards the grade based on Wall alone
and have not evaluated the Seraphim/Booker/N’Diaye picks. Chad Ford, for instance, does not make a positive or negative assessment of any of the picks, rather he simply describes Seraphin as a “big, physical forward who is still learning to play offense” and Booker as “another tough guy who likes to bang in the paint” and does not mention N’Diaye. I’m wondering if a lot of this has to do with Seraphin and Booker being first-round surprises, and the media playing catch-up to find out who these guys are and what to think about the pick. Two lines above Ford offers actual assessments of Toronto’s picks: Davis as a “solid replacement” for Bosh and Alabi as a “steal.”
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions
they also never look at the cost of it all.
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions
yes- if u r considered too short to play your position, you go 2nd round. if blair goes second round last year, booker is def 2nd round this yr with a deeper draft- esp at that position
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions
ernie panicked. that is all there is to it.
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Blair and Booker
Its not apples to apples. Blair is way more of a post guy (without any ACL’s) versus the ultra athletic Booker. I’m not saying that Booker is a better prospect then Blair, I don’t know, but I don’t think this is a fair assumption.
if blair goes second round last year, booker is def 2nd round this yr
in short, we had three top 35 picks including #1 in the deepest draft i can remember and walked away with the best player in the draft, two prospects who might have potential, lose a future first round pick and get a back up point guard that costs 8-9 million per year
…why he is drafting for potential when legit prospects are on the board is beyond me. all i can say is uggggh.
at least go out and sign zoubek. he has good size and will hold down the block better than our 230lb “prospects”
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 8:42 AM EDT reply actions
fuck zoubek
talk about bad knees…also just say no to duke
by tmoneyttime1 on Jun 25, 2010 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Piling on
Also softening the blow was the cash coming from Chicago, but this is the part of the deal that I really dislike from the Wizards’ perspective. Washington didn’t get nearly as much as it could have. The Wizards could have set the deal up as two trades, since they got two pieces from Chicago (Hinrich and the draft pick) and received as much as $6 million — the league maximum is $3 million for any given trade. Instead, it’s been reported that Washington only received $3 million.
Hollinger rips the trade. (Later on he criticizes EG for paying $17M for the 17th when OKC and Dallas paid much less for 18 and 25, respectively.
Again, it’s a bad sign when everyone is positively raving about what the other side gets from the deal (here its cap room and chance to lure LeBron). No reason why EG couldn’t have got twice what he did. Cap room was the most valuable asset in the whole damn draft, but EG is so lost in his own tunnel vision that I don’t think he even realized it.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 25, 2010 9:04 AM EDT reply actions
That extra 3 million would have bought us the 25th pick in the draft
which might have allowed us to take Booker @ 25 and keep our 30th and 35th, while still holding on to 3 million overall. Clearing this cap space is worth so much more to the Bulls than an extra 3 million. Its hard to imagine how many tens (hundreds?) of millions in increased revenue and franchise value the Bulls get by landing Lebron and another star FA. And the Wizards held the keys to that palace.
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions
The draft wasn't that bad...
Wall is espected to pan out, but if only 1 player from the rest of our picks become a solid role player/contributor then we simply win. These drafts are always a crapshot so you can’t expect much from outside the top 5 picks. The Rutgers guy should be a good defensive presence. Booker is expected to be a hustler and “fight for the ball” guy regardless of his height (like a Glen Davis) and this France guy is another big body that we hope can do some things.
At least Grunfield has the right idea in trying to get multiple good bigs since that is another key to winning in this league. It kinda look like he is trying to build this team up like Billups Pistons which is not a bad idea.
by ATLredskin on Jun 25, 2010 9:06 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
nah! old desensitized bullets fans suffering decades of poor management
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 9:30 AM EDT reply actions
DESENSITIZED?
You people are the touchiest, whiniest, most high-strung, negative, hyper-sensitive babies around. Everything is a disaster to you. The only word I can think of to describe you that’s less accurate that “desensitized” would be “calm.”
Is it at all possible the Pacers are still in play?
They took Paul George. Their best player is a SF. Now maybe George plays the 2, but his height – to me – makes him a SF. I would be ecstatic if we flipped Heinrich, Seraphin, future pick, and cash for George and Dunleavy. Hell add in Foster. That cuts salary for the Pacers, gives them a Euro to stash, thus less salary this year, and provides them their PG they desperately need. We basically turn a future pick, Dunleavy and Foster’s expiring (which will be valuable) into Paul George. I like.
why a future pick? Indiana’s the one that is desperate, not the Wizards.
Just answered my own question — Ernie will overpay.
I'd rather us give away a future first and second instead on seraphin
Next year’s draft looks pretty weak
Not what I would have done, but not terrible
I’m disappointed the team didn’t do better, but really this is a mediocre performance, as far as I can tell. The Hinrich deal is about what I would have expected — $9M this year and $8M next isn’t that bad for a team that needs to fill roster spots anyway.
I didn’t care for the picks. I would have taken Anderson instead of Seraphin, Orton or Jones instead of Booker, and Robinson (or even Zoubek) instead of N’Daiye, but that’s all guesswork. If these guys pan out, then they’re good picks. We’ve still got some cap room to work with ($9M this year?, I haven’t done the math), so hopefully we’ll put that to good use.
the BOYD strategy
the talk had been around taking on Troy Murphy or Peja’s contract to move up and get a Cole Aldrich or Patrick Patterson, but I really like Kevin Seraphin at 17. Taking back Kirk Hinrich just means Arenas doesn’t play the PG at all. Grunfeld talks about adding toughness and changing the mindset of the franchise and I like what he did in the draft. I wanted Whiteside, BUT Booker is legit.
Booker is a PF with SF height and reach
Don’t get me wrong, he might be a useful role player, but I wouldn’t predict him to ever be more than a 15-18 mpg guy, nor would I call him “legit.” I don’t hate the pick, but trading two picks to get him was a bit silly. Also, from what I understand Seraphin is a project who is basically two years away. How does that give us toughness now?
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 25, 2010 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
i dont mind the second part as much as reaching for a first round back up that i would just as soon invite to camp as an undrafted player
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Thinking about it more.
And this trade gets worse. For the 11th pick, the Hornets traded to OKC Mo Pete (BOYD), for the cap space plus what, the 21st and 28th? Are you telling me they wouldn’t have done Peja for our late first rounder? We could’ve added Xavier Henry. And had a valuable chip come trade deadline.
Would Leonsis agreed to take on $15 million in salary over one year just to move up to the 11th?
The deal Grunfeld did was better. And Hinrich will be a much better trade chip in the future.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Rather than 17 over 2? Same difference
Hinrich a better trade chip? The Hornets had to give up their 11th pick to move Mo Pete. No team other than the Wizards expressed serious interest in the Hinrich + 17 package, according to the Chicago Tribune, so why would teams all of a sudden jump in line for Hinrich alone.
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Yes, Hinrich in the future will be a better trade chip
Because he’s actually a decent player that can make a team better. These big expiring contracts for players that aren’t very good aren’t as valuable as they’re often made out to be.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Trade chip for what?
Don’t you realize that in order for Hinrich to be a “trade chip” we will first need to be in position to contend and to take on a big contract? We have to not only be “contending,” but Hinrich can’t be part of the reason for the success or there will be no reason to dump him.
The only other option is that some other contender needs a PG and feels that Hinrich will boost them to the championship (and thus flips us expiring contracts and a 1st round pick for a one year rental) — but that’s a pipe dream because no contender would ever see a 31 yr old declining Hinrich as the answer to their problems.
Please explain.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 25, 2010 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions
well he’s 29 now, but will be 31 around the trade deadline in 2011 when he might be traded.
In any case, apparently both Boston and LA were interested in trading for him this past season, but if Chicago has had difficulty trading him it’s because of the contract.
I could easily see in a couple years the Wizards trading Hinrich to a playoff team desiring an extra piece for another expiring contract and a draft pick for example.
Players with expiring contracts who can also contribute on the court tend to be much better trade bait than those who struggle on the court.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
I disagree
I doubt that anyone will see a 31 yr old Hinrich as the key ingredient to a championship team. But if you’re convinced otherwise, then we can agree to disagree.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 25, 2010 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions
You might be right, but I’m not saying he would be a “key” ingredient, but a useful addition to some teams looking to be more competitive.
Also, I don’t want to play up the trade chip things too much because I believe Grunfeld made the trade because he wants Hinrich to play for the Wizards.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't like that angle either
Hinrich might have 2 more decent years left in him, but I thought the plan was to rebuild, not to muddle along around .500, which is what it looks like EG is doing.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 25, 2010 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
No the plan is to rebuild with a solid core of veterans around. This isn’t a “win now” approach that they’re taking.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
So we pay $17M for a mentor/solid core vet
Again, sorry. That’s what coaches are for. You don’t pay a mentor type guy 17 million and blow up your cap space just so you have someone to teach the kiddies.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 26, 2010 1:39 AM EDT up reply actions
Hinrich's 2009-10 PER- 11.61 (253rd out of 351 players); Mo Pete's- 9.39 (307th)
253rd shouldn’t be worth 8 million to many teams (after the new CBA) and 253rd should be worth 1.4 million more to teams than 307th
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions
Actually
Peja’s contract is probably more valuable than Hinrich’s. The 11th pick is more valuable than the 17th. And Peja’s contract is around 13 million. I don’t understand how anyone could see the Hinrich deal as better. The deal I proposed would cost less over the term of the deal, provide the wizards with better talent, and more flexibility.
Peja’s contract according to Hoopshype is for 15.3 million next season. Hinrich’s contract is for 17 million over two seasons, and by all means is much better. No way Leonsis or Grunfeld prefers trading for Peja plus the 11 over Hinrich plus the 17.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Completely disagree
Yes, Hinrich is the better player than Peja. But you are talking about a back-up guard. Someone who is going to get 15-20 minutes a game. The difference between Hinrich and average vet minimum over that amount of minutes is small. Now, add in the difference between 17th and the 11th pick and I think already Peja is the better deal.
Now, we haven’t even consider that their is a limited amount to spend per year. We obviously don’t get to roll unused cap space into next year. It is a perishable good. We aren’t going to sign anyone of consequence this season. Therefore, it makes more sense to take all the cap hit in one season then over two. If the Wizards had their way, they would count all of Hinrich’s 17 million against the cap this season.
no they wouldn't
Right now they have about $10 million more to spend on free agency or other trades. Make the trade for Peja and they have only about $4 million.
While the Wizards aren’t going to be big players with this free agent class, we all know they’re not finished with adding players to this team this summer.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions
If they aren't going to be big players
Then who would we sign for over 4 million a year? I would prefer greater flexibility, specifically in the long-term. I would also prefer getting the better asset (the 11th pick). I still don’t think Peja’s contract is that large. Regardless, we could’ve taken on D-Song and Mo-Pete for 13 million. So that is 6 million to spend, with the better asset and more long-term flexibility.
Two scenarios
1) Trade for Peja’s one-year 15 mil contract for the #11. Next year trade for another one year $15mil contract for the #11 in 2011.
2) Trade for Hinrich’s 2 year $17 mil contract for the #17. This year trade for another 2 year $17 mil contract for the #16 pick in the 2010 draft.
In total, option 1 costs us $30 mil over two years and nets us two #11 picks. In total, option 2 costs us $34 mil over two years and nets us the #16 and #17 pick.
Option 1 is clearly better than option 2. Therefore, each half of option one is better than each half of option 2. Therefore the Peja trade would have been much better than the Hinrich trade.
by Palace of Good Play's Golden Toilet on Jun 25, 2010 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Would you be upset
If Ernie signed Hinrich, as a free agent, to a two year year 12 million dollar deal? Because the going price for the 18th pick was roughly five million in value based on OKC.
So take five million out of 17 million and you are left with 12 million over two years. Would you be happy? I know I would hate it.
All BOYD trades involve bringing in players who are overpaid in order to get prospects. The only way to get that 17th pick was to take on a bad contract. The same could be said for the 11th. OKC gave up two 1st round picks and agreed to take on a bad contract.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
But I would argue we took on a worse contract
For a significantly worse pick.
yeah
But again, I’d rather Hinrich & the 17th than the alternatives thrown out for the 11th.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions
Which brings up an interesting point
I’m confused that more teams weren’t throwing around cash for picks. Normally, that’s a hallmark of the draft. I find it hard to believe that we couldn’t have gotten in there at least once to buy a pick off someone, or offer only “future considerations.”
The artist formerly known as ledellforlife.
I wondered that too
I kept on hoping the Wizards would flat out buy a pick.
by Johnnie Futbol on Jun 25, 2010 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions
I would totally agree with you
If we had gotten the third pick and Favors. Then Hinrich would have gotten major minutes. I just don’t see Hinrich having the minutes to justify this trade.
yep- but i do think they were desperate for someone to mentor JW and fit in the system. and it shows with the terms they agreed upon.
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 10:27 AM EDT reply actions
Grunfeld is finally on record
He owned this draft—and the responsibility for assembling this team. IMHO it was a terrible draft night for the Wizards, but that’s just my opinion. I think it will be several years before Wall fulfills the considerable expectations of him, and the other three choices were in a word, horrendous. But my opinion doesn’t matter. What matters is that this was all Grunfeld; there’s no Abe Pollin to blame any more. Grunfeld will finally be judged on results—starting last night.
Which means that Ted will be negotiating with Pritchard next April. Too bad. I was always a big fan of Ernie G. But as of this morning, it looks like the man absolutely cannot draft. And now it’s starting to look like he can’t trade, either. His mandate was simple; emulate Oklahoma City. Would OKC have traded for Hinrich?
The reasons I got nervous when Seraphin's name was called
were Weiss, Navarro, Ramos, Pecherov, Veremeenko. Ernie is 0 for 5 in scouting European talent. That said, I am looking forward to seeing the Wizards in summer league, cheering for the new additions, and wanting to be proven wrong. Seraphin seems like a humble, grateful, dedicated player. Even if he does not live up to the pick, he is going to be fun to watch and root for.
Dan Steinberg’s funny article about Seraphin’s day at the draft
http://bit.ly/bpCKBz
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 10:49 AM EDT reply actions
European international talent (Ramos was Puerto Rican)
by morethesamewiz on Jun 25, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Try again
Puerto Rico does not play internationally for the US. They have their own team.
MR
I don’t think that is zeke’s point. Puerto Rico does field its own team, so he could be considered “international” under the the strictest sense of the term.
But you are right as to residential status, PR is considering statehood even as we speak!
The artist formerly known as ledellforlife.
However
They do play under a different banner in international play. They have their own olympic team. Their own International Basketball team. Sure, they are US citizens, but for the purposes of the basketball world, they are international.
lol- pritchard will be scooped up before next spring.
this observation is amazing….no one from duke was drafted. forget about it being duke, i am shocked shocked shocked that not one player who played for the defending ncaa national champions was drafted. someone from that team is going to have a long nba career.
its good for us md fans. but i think a lot of these GMs are just starry eyed…probably why the lakers and celtics have combined to win over half the championships … and us… :-(
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 10:49 AM EDT reply actions
and ted said his european scouting dept was substandard and he planned to beef that up!
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 10:50 AM EDT reply actions
ernie grunfeld is a YES man…that is all there is to it
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 10:50 AM EDT reply actions
People are overreacting
I’m a litle confused about all of the anger. I think Prada’s take was pretty much spot on. We got Wall, a couple of raw but talented bruisers, a ready to go bruiser, and a back up combo guard that we probably overpaid for. I think that they did everything they set out to do. And again, we may have overpaid for Heinrich, but by the time we know what time of team we have in two-three years he will be gone. He is a little expensive but it’s not as if we broke the bank for this guy. The team is going to be extremely young and extremely athletic next year, and I don’t think that is such a bad thing. We aren’t getting anyone from this free agent class and we aren’t getting anyone next year either, so using some space on Heinrich, especially if we can somehow dump Arenas, isn’t such a bad move, especially if the Frenchman pans out. He’s got a lot of hype behind him.
I'm still not sure
why Wall needs such an expensive caddy for his first two years? Couldn’t we have resigned Livingston to serve as the backup? Or at least extracted a future first round draft pick from the Bulls?
My problem with Grunfeld’s management of this is that I don’t think he valued his assets properly. There was/is an obvious arms race happening between Miami and Chicago in terms of this summer in FA. Why not extract max worth from the Bull?
The artist formerly known as ledellforlife.
Who was Rondo's back-up, mentor?
This whole idea of needing a mentor is stupid. It is more stupid when it costs you 17 million over two years.
by zeke5123 on Jun 25, 2010 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
the coaching staff played point…just like ours!
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
I agree with you
Grunfeld seems slightly fixated on acquiring players he missed out on. See Crittendon, Javaris.
The artist formerly known as ledellforlife.
Truly is unfortunate
But you appear to be correct.
can you give one more example?
I’m not sure twice counts as a fixation.
agreed sean
and getting three backups is not as good as pairing the two latter picks for one decent starter. and the backups arent much if at all better than some of the guys who went undrafted
we should have come out of this draft with john wall and one legitimate starter caliber player. and invite some of the undrafted guys into camp to find some undiscovered backup gems.
so john wall and three backups is not good at all. i hardly think we are over-reacting.
by les boulez bomber on Jun 25, 2010 11:02 AM EDT reply actions
We don't know that all three will eventually be backups...
That’s why it’s premature to say anything about this draft. Wall could blow out his ACL, or be Isiah Thomas. Booker could be DeJuan Blair, or a bust. You’re making unwarranted assumptions. We simply don’t know the day after a draft how good the draft was.
What you are advocating is results based analysis.
We must evaluate moves based on current information. Basing moves on current information creates a process which will lead to successful franchise in the long-term. Just because a pick worked out does not mean the process was right (and by extension the pick). If I had a coin that when flipped landed heads 2/3 times, and you called tails and it landed tails you were right but your process was wrong and is not sustainable. The right call, even if it does not work out, is calling heads.
Frankly, based on the current information at hand, we had as bad as a draft as one could have while drafting John Wall… So all-in-all, great draft. But shitty last few picks (still think the frenchie could be good, terrible trade to attain him though).
Just a note
I don’t think either side is “overreacting.” I think Mike wants the tone to remain civil around here, which is always difficult on big days such as Draft Day, the Trade Deadline ect. Everyone take a breath and reread their comments before posting, I too have been guilty in being overly harsh in responding to people who haven’t agreed with me over the last couple of days.
I know some people are sick of reading “F-Grunfeld” comments as much as others are sick of the “Leave Ernie Alone!” Britney defense line of commentary.
Remember we are all fans of the Wizards, which is what brings us to this site and we all have the right to our opinions.
The artist formerly known as ledellforlife.
Good point - hopefully a day of reflection brings out more substantive comments.
Getting buckets since 2003.
by Icantfeelmyface on Jun 25, 2010 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Question for the group
Who would you like to see the Wizards look at during Free Agency as a low level acquisition? I myself would like to retain Singleton, but I know that there are other players out there who have generated interest here like Tony Allen.
Following the draft, which FA pickup would best fill out the Wizards’ roster?
The artist formerly known as ledellforlife.
I would think
that we might be looking at Josh Howard again.
The artist formerly known as ledellforlife.
Probably we still need an SF...
And although there are haters around here, I think at the right price Josh Howard makes sense… But couldn’t we also go Blatche, McGee, Booker across the front line under many circumstances?
Just say No to JHO
won’t be avail at the right price anyway
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
Why retain Singleton...
When Booker has the same qualities he has…and Ndaiye could play PF some if needed.
because Singleton is a known commodity maybe?
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
I hope the reports are correct and
We acquire Childress…I think he’s the best option…Not as injury prone as JHo…Better than Thornton…and his half court game(the weak part of his game) has reportedly gotten better in Europe.
Mike Miller.
Wasn’t the guy 2nd in the league in 3 point % and our 3rd leading rebounder?
I dont think we need a player like him though
Rebounding, yes…but we dont need a shooter at the 3 as much…I’d rather have a lengthy guy that can defend the other team’s star player…an Ariza type.
Exactly why we should have traded him at the deadline
He was valuable as a player and as an expiring contract. Another missed opportunity by Grunfeld.
by Palace of Good Play's Golden Toilet on Jun 25, 2010 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
