How Building A Contender Around John Wall Starts With Nick Young's Signing
by Bullet Nation in Exile on Nov 29, 2011 7:02 AM EST
in Team Analysis
Email
PrintBad mid-level signings can cripple franchises. Chucking MLE and higher contracts at the likes of Drew Gooden and John Salmons can ruin years of carefully planned cap flexibility. With John Wall in place, the last thing we want to see is the front office over (or under) commit to anyone. Easy job, yeah? In his current form, Nick Young's unconscious shooting and respectable man defense makes him sound a lot like a sixth man on a contender.
Establishing the market for that kind of player on a non-contending team is difficult. This is usually because a dearth of contender-level talent means that player is starting, and starters command a different level of contract (unless it's Jason Terry). Of course, if you can get such a player for less than they're worth, that's a huge bonus. But there's often far more risk involved in letting the market establish itself than the gambit is worth. That's how the Redskins ended up snaking Stephen Bowen from the Cowboys, but the example we're going to look at is Wesley Matthews. The gambit the Trail Blazers used to sneak him away from the Jazz works for the home team this time and it's the kind of smart cap move that adds up to flexibility next summer.
Wesley Matthews was an undrafted swingman who signed on to the Jazz and enjoyed a very respectable season. The Jazz decided not to make an offer to their rookie gem and waited for the market to establish itself. Matthews later stated he likely would have signed a reasonable offer straight out, but he never received an opening bid from the home team and the Trail Blazers were waiting. Portland frontloaded a 5 year, $34 million offer sheet and with the Jazz close to and conscious of the salary cap line, they were instantly checkmated. What does this mean for the Wizards?
Reflexively, it means there's little chance we'll lose Nick Young unless someone overbids recklessly. We should be able to outbid any offer from an opposing team by frontloading the deal a la the Trail Blazers. But the model I'm really lookinig to copy is Nick Collison's deal with the Thunder, authored by Sam Presti.
Speculation has begun on the Wizards cap space, and just what they plan to do with it. The BOYD gambit beloved of the Bullets Forever community is out following the likely terms of the new CBA. We see plenty of cap space, but with the FA class of 2011 being underwhelming especially with the looming 2012 offseason featuring a higher caliber of player, there aren't any targets out there for the kind of cash the Wizards have to burn.
Presti signed Collison to a 4 year, $11 million dollar extension with a $6.5 million signing bonus. The way it's structured, Collison's salary declines over the life of his contract. The Thunder's cap space took a large hit upfront (otherwise sitting and becoming dead cap space), but left plenty of extra flexibility through the 2014/15 season while retaining a key reserve. Sign Nick to a similarly structured deal (it will certainly take more cash) with a big signing bonus and we've retained a key player, utilized cap space to the fullest possible extent, and guaranteed maximum cap flexibility going forward.
Not everyone is in love with Nick's game, preferring a SG who is a stronger team defender/rebounder/playmaker. To play devil's advocate opposite myself, should the team decide to trade him in the future, a cap friendly contract for a scoring off guard coming into the prime of his career is a big trade inducement. I believe Nick is a part of the contender the Wizards are building, but whether you agree or not, his signing and the terms of it are crucial to the future of the franchise.
108 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’m still unclear on a few points of the CBA rules on contracts, but isn’t there a limitation on year over year reductions in overall salary? Also, would the signing bonus count against the contracts overall value? eg. If we sign him to an 18 million / 3 year contract with a 6 million dollar signing bonus, does the cap hit become 4 million a year on a flat contract rate?
The cap hit isn't flat
Not like the NHL. Collison’s cap hit was something like $13 million last year.
The trick is in the signing bonus....
Unless the new CBA has changed the rules – the Wizards can give Nick Young a big signing bonus — and a smaller salary in the out years ….
See this article….
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
If that's still the case
I think it’s very plausible the Wizards could give Nick a big signing bonus to avoid the luxury tax floor and make him a more tradeable asset down the road.
Bullets Forever: Waiting for the Fat Lady to sing since 2006. | @jakewhitacre
by Jake Whitacre on Nov 29, 2011 9:57 AM EST up reply actions
That's the big question
Have to wait and see…on Mike’s advice, I’m pinging Larry Coon to see if he can shed any light…
by Bullet Nation in Exile on Nov 29, 2011 9:59 AM EST up reply actions
Larry should know.....
I think it hinges on how much cap space the Wizards have…. So if Presti figured out how to do it, Grunfeld should be able to copy that…..
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
Completely Agree With This
I think 5 years $30 mil should get the job done. I would love to frontload the contract so he gets paid something like $8 mil this season. Leaving 4 years $22 mil on the remainder of his deal, averaging out to around $5 mil per year. Seems reasonable to me. I would love to sign a quality big after that (I like the Chuck Hayes idea that has been discussed lately) and spend the rest on a cheap, veteran guard.
I second this
A front loaded deal, something around 8-10 mil the first year and 4-5 the remaining years would be great. We could easily absorb it this year and it would leave us with about 30 mil or so for the next offseason. the key would be for us to be a WINNING team this year, or at least just a few games outside of the playoffs. Otherwise we won’t be able to attract any other playmakers who want to be that missing piece to send a team to the playoffs.
NY still doesn’t pass or rebound. Those are pretty big parts of the game, and he’s not just sort of bad at passing – he’s at Gheorge Muresan/Eddy Curry levels of bad passing. And remember this is somebody who has been coddled and catered to for years and had the offense essentially built around his limitations as a no-pass, no-dribble shooting guard.
by ReturnofBillyJOe on Nov 29, 2011 9:25 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
if we want a shooting guard who has horrible shot selection and a one-dimensional game, we’ve already got Crawford, and he’s much cheaper.
by ReturnofBillyJOe on Nov 29, 2011 9:26 AM EST up reply actions
On the other hand
If the Wizards want a player that is a deadly catch-and-shoot guy, that takes shots within the offense (good shots) – is terrific from the 3-point line (40%) – and plays decent one-on-one defense – then they should resign Nick Young.
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
good shots???
sorry, I don’t know about nick young taking good shots…sure he’ll make them when he’s open…but too often he drives to the midrange and takes a contested hand in the face, fadeaway shot….the best shot, even better than an open shot…is a layup…or driving to the basket…and he rarely ever does that….we should know as we saw gilbert in his prime put so much pressure on defenses by driving and forcing defenses to adjust, foul, or try to stop him….and crawford does this much better than nick young…
that being said…we would expect wall to do that…so not a big deal…and he does play a role well, even his passing inproved a lot last year….I just think 5 mil a year is too much for him…I think you sign him for 3 million a year…i have no doubt that he would be a great 6th man on a contending team…however, our team is still a few years from contending…and last thing you want to do is be stuck with a bad contract
by jasonj on Nov 29, 2011 10:05 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree that
Nick tends to take dumb shots the more he dribbles, but let’s please never mention Jordan Crawford on the positive end of a “good shots” discussion again lol.
Nick is a spot up shooter who does his thing on offense and defense. As far helping teammates, not so sure he does that all tbh. He can’t create shots for people, he can’t find the open man, he isn’t a good help defender, he just does his thing. This is where while I’m not on board with the ditch Nick crew, I don’t think losing him puts a major dent in our rebuilding plans.
As far helping teammates, not so sure he does that all tbh. He can’t create shots for people, he can’t find the open man, he isn’t a good help defender, he just does his thing.
Nick’s current style of play has the potential to help his teammates tremendously. Every time Nick comes around a pick, he puts a lot of pressure on the defense. A crafty pick-setter can find opportunities to increase and exploit that pressure, especially if the ball is in the hands of a great true PG. This hasn’t worked too well for us as of yet, but the blame lies with the other parts, not with Nick. Wall won’t be a truly great true PG for another year or two, and our bigs- what’s the opposite of “crafty”?
100% false - or at least talking about the Nick Young of 3 years ago....
but too often he drives to the midrange and takes a contested hand in the face, fadeaway shot…
As I posted in a previous comment….
Last year, over 70% of Nicks shots were either catch-and-shoot, coming off screens, or in transition. Only 14% of his offensive plays were isolation plays. Flip Saunders has changed his game so that he doesn’t need the ball in his hands to create a shot – his shots are created by the Offense.
70% – that’s a HUGE percentage of shots…. All of those shots taken within the context of the offensive system….. Now, not ALL shots that are taken off screens are open shots… but the Offensive system created that shot to be an open shot – so the majority of them ARE… As are the majority of Nick’s catch-and-shoot shots…. (by the way, Nick is the best catch-and-shoot player in the entire NBA, 47% – according to Synergy – even better than Ray Allen, 46.1% – - – and Nick takes a lot of his shots in catch-and-shoot situations, 24%….. ie: GOOD SHOTS)….
Whereas more than 50% of Jordan Crawford’s plays were isolation plays… IE: dribble, dribble, dribble shoot – or dribble, dribble, dribble, penetrate…. or dribble, dribble, dribble, turn over.
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
by Rook6980 on Nov 29, 2011 10:34 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yup.
Nick’s still battling a perception problem, and many don’t realize how much his game has changed/matured over the past several seasons. I also believe it will continue to improve, and he’s definitely worth hanging onto for the future. He fits Flip’s offense well, and has committed to defense; that’s another area in which I expect improvement.
Translation:
You’re talking about the old Nick Young. He’s mostly eliminated bad shots from his game. And because he hits at such a high clip, defenses play him tighter, and thus some of those erstwhile good shots are contested. Doesn’t make them bad shots; it makes them contested shots. And he hits them well too.
Look at his stats. They’re all the same. All he did was take more shots last year. Same lousy rebounding, still more turnovers than assists. His shooting was slightly better over the previous year, but the same as the year before that.
by ReturnofBillyJOe on Nov 29, 2011 10:50 AM EST up reply actions
Simple stats?
If we’re going to do the stats thing (which I’m admittedly not a fan of), then we have to look at more than just the boxscore. For example, his PER jumped by almost four points last year.
OK - Let's look at his stats....
His per 40 minute scoring went from 18.0 to 21.9 – that is NOT insignificant.
In addition, he had the best true shooting percentage of his career last year at 53.8% – AND, for most of the year, it was hovering around 57%….. but then he got hurt, and had some bad games after that (shooting only 37% in February) and it dragged his TSP down…. Even still, he ended up being the best catch-and-shoot guard in the NBA (47.7% , Synergy)
He played played decent defense – He held opposing Shooting Guards to a 10.1 PER (82games.com)
His per 40 minute rebounding improved by half a rebound over previous seasons. Not a HUGE increase, but incremental progress was made.
Meanwhile, he continued to be a LOW TURNOVER player, posting a miniscule Turn Over rate of 7.5% – one of the best in the League for a Guard – and again, an incremental improvement over last year.
His PER went from 10.71 to 14.51 -
The only area that he didn’t show incremental improvment was his assists…. He went from an anemic (pathetic?) 6.7% assist rate to an even worse 6.2% last year. But since he doesn’t turn the ball over, and he takes shots within the context of the offensive system (ie: good shots) -
I can overlook the fact that he’s not a good passer; and that Flip Saunders has essentially told him to either shoot if he’s open, or pass the ball back to the PG; essentially limiting Young’s chances of messing up the Offense by “trying” to be a passer.
Stats? How those?
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
by Rook6980 on Nov 29, 2011 11:15 AM EST up reply actions 6 recs
Wages of Wins ranked him at 420th in the NBA last year, worse than Seraphin. Essentially, he consumes opportunities, he doesn’t create them – no blocks, few steals, few rebounds, no assists. If the rest of the team is willing to cook the food, set the table, and dish it out, then Nick Young is marginally better than other guards at “putting it in the hole.” That’s true.
by ReturnofBillyJOe on Nov 29, 2011 12:23 PM EST up reply actions
So you got one stat?
WOW also ranks Nick Young seventh overall (and third amongst SGs) in wins prevented. Which is, in a nutshell, a measure of a player’s impact on his opponent’s wins produced. (In other words, its an aggregated defensive stat.)
http://wagesofwins.com/2011/08/11/beating-their-opponents-introducing-wins-prevented/
Anyway, its quite clear that wins produced is not the best stat for Nick Young. Whatever that reason is, I’ll leave for the experts, but there are some obvious non-starters near the top of their 2011 wins produced list too…
According to that same stat, John Wall was by far the worst defender in the league last year, and NY was in the top 20 best defenders. Hmmmm . . .
by ReturnofBillyJOe on Nov 29, 2011 12:50 PM EST up reply actions
Exactly.
In Young’s case its fair to question that stat. And thus its fair to also question his wins produced. And again, I’ll leave the why’s to those more qualified than me. I’d rather watch the games. And from that perspective, Young was clearly neither as bad on offense as WOW says nor as good on defense.
Wall, however, was pretty bad defensively last year. But no worries, he was a rookie and there’s a lot of talent at PG in the league right now.
that sounds plausible, Wall's defense was often atrocious
while Nick’s man generally didnt fare too well
Nick young has been anything but coddled and catered to.
And Crawford isn’t one dimensional.
A pure scorer who has elite court vision.
That’s two. Feel free to debunk either.
No, Young is the better pure shooter IMO
If you mean pure scorer, then yeah I’d have to give Crawford the edge.
by jones-y on Nov 29, 2011 1:31 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Why do you all pretend Nick Young was some dead eye shooting, great decision making, team player, from the day he was drafted. The team player thing is even debatable to this day. Crawford has so many more tools to work with.
He is no worse than Nick Young was his rookie year in shot selection, he’s just a (much)better playmaker, and a better rebounder.
I'm a Wizards fan. We've been trying to tell you about Lebron for years. Hated the man before it was cool.
by returnofswagger on Nov 29, 2011 3:12 PM EST up reply actions
Please don't do that.
Nobody said any of those things about Young. Don’t imply that anyone did. The comments here reflect his strengths and weaknesses accurately, I’d say. Nobody said he was Kobe. I really can’t stand that type of argumentation. Either quote others correctly, or don’t quote at all.
Jamal Crawford maybe, certainly not Jordan
Nick has one of the best strokes in the league, it’s fairly likely that neither JC nor Wall will EVER be able to shoot as well as Nick.
Nick’s got deficiencies for sure but his shooting certainly isnt one of them
Aren't signing bonuses considered a way of gaming the salary cap?
Or can you only give a signing bonus if you’re under the salary cap?
Concerning being under the salary cap, we are far below it
Concerning loopholes and possibly remedied exploits, I’m checking into it
by Bullet Nation in Exile on Nov 29, 2011 10:01 AM EST up reply actions
I'm not sure Nick wants to stay here
Obviously he is a west coast guy, but past that, the organization basically wrote him off when they signed Hinrich and EG publicly said that Nick would have to scrap for minutes at SF if he wanted to play. If it werent for injuries, who knows how much PT he would have actually gotten despite being clearly better than Kirk and Gil (at SG) basically every minute he was on the floor. All this was after Nick closed out the previous year playing very, very well and once again was in awesome condition to start camp. Gil said (ok, who knows if it was true) that at one point Nick hit like 35 3s in a row at practice and Flip/EG completely ignored him. Then Crawford gets called “big 3”
ok, maybe I am makng mountains from molehills but i wouldnt assume Nick even wants to be here, especially if there is a 55 win contender interested in his services
What I've been betting on is that even if a contender comes bidding
with our inside track via RFA and cap space (ipso facto ability to front load a contract), we can keep him if we want to. Cap holds on our QOs may be far more problematic with respect to our flexibility than I originally thought…
by Bullet Nation in Exile on Nov 29, 2011 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
They made him earn his opportunity. And he did.
Don’t see that as such a bad thing, and I don’t see how that drives him away. Now if they continue to do that, then we’re talking…
Well all of that
Could go into how big of a contract he will actually accept from of us. Assuming he was unhappy with the organization, maybe he won’t be as quick to sign on the cheap for Ernie.
I'm a Wizards fan. We've been trying to tell you about Lebron for years. Hated the man before it was cool.
by returnofswagger on Nov 29, 2011 11:03 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
He's already stated that he's going to take the best offer he gets.
But I just don’t see the unhappy angle at all. Nor do I see it having an impact in this contract negotiation.
he was pretty bummed last summer
let’s not forget the whole Gilbert fake-injury fiasco which although is Gil bs, was still based on the fact that Nick was being frozen out by Flip. As far as earning his PT, look at his play the last 8 weeks or so of Flip’s first year, he absolutely earned PT there….until Hinrich come in off the street and Flip cant stop drooling over him, EG says Nick will have to find scrap minutes at SF
basically I dont think we’ll be getting any discount for his services…..though he and Javale are so tight right now who knows
For any player at any position,
if the team brings in an ostensibly better player, then you fall back and try harder. I’m sorry I’m just not seeing it. You’re talking like NY earned something besides a fair shot in his third campaign. Its not like he was good enough in 09/10 to consider the SG position his to lose…
He got a fair shot and he made the best of it. Which is exactly as it should be. I’m having a hard time seeing hurt feelings here.
by jones-y on Nov 29, 2011 12:17 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Just because you see it that way
Doesn’t mean he has to.
I'm a Wizards fan. We've been trying to tell you about Lebron for years. Hated the man before it was cool.
by returnofswagger on Nov 29, 2011 2:43 PM EST up reply actions
except they brought in a player who was worse and handed him the job.
at any rate, like swagger said, it’s not what we think it’s what Nick thinks. They had moved on from him (which is fine) but injuries to others brought him back in play and he excelled….i’m just saying he probably feels no loyalty whatsoever to Ernie or Flip
That's because EG is the biggest thing holding us back from being a good team.
Just think of all the assets he had to work with 2 years ago and to end up with the team that we have now… As long as we have him we’ll always be a few players away from being a contender.
The only ‘homerun’ move he’s made has been drafting John Wall but that was a no-brainer that my grandma could’ve made (who’s never watched a game of basketball in her life)
We have far more assets now, a better cap situation now...
Basically, everything is better now than it was two years ago. Lots of good young talent, lots of tradeable players; players other teams might actually want. Much less dead weight, and the ability to be major players in next year’s FA bonanza.
Ernie’s done a tremendous job.
by YellaFella on Nov 29, 2011 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
eh, i cant agree he has done anything that special
not sure why people heap so much praise on him for clearing salary, teams do that all the time. Or get worked up about trading Gil, he took back the 2nd worst contract in the NBA to do it and we all know it was Otis Smith’s relationship with Gil that caused that deal rather than EG smoovness. Lebron specifically wanted Jamison rather than Amare, so again i dont see EGs brilliance there. He really wanted JJ Hickson, Rudy Fernandez, or Batum and he got none of them. He did spin an over-the-hill Hinrich into JCraw which was really good. But he also re-upped Dray without knowing he’d fatten up and party too much again and his draft history is fairly spotty
Hits and misses abound coupled with very little winning….he’s pretty average imho, and if Ves is a bust then he should be fired, again imho
He did spin an over-the-hill Hinrich into JCraw
Well yeah, but let’s back out a little bit.
First he turned cap space into Heinrich and the 2010 #17 (Kevin Seraphin). Then he turned Heinrich and some more cap space into Mike Bibby, Jordan Crawford and the 2011 #18 (Chris Singleton). Then Mike Bibby gracefully turned himself into a significant buyout (and $5m cap space in 2012).
So for $9m in cap space last offseason, Grunfeld picked up Crawford, Seraphin, Singleton, and $5m in buyout-induced cap relief this offseason.
No one transaction stands out over the last two years (well except the Arenas trade); its just been a series of shrewd, well executed moves. He’s doing a great job.
by jones-y on Nov 29, 2011 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
team won 23 games and many of his most ardent supporters expect more of the same this year
that’s hardly a “great” job imho, most especially when the majority of criticisms people have about the team involve players handpicked and in Dray’s case continually re-signed by Ernie. Everybody cries about defense, but it’s Ernie’s coach and Ernie’s players that arent any good on defense. And they werent during the supposed3 era either.
I’m not saying Ernie has to go, just that he should be feeling some job insecurity and if this team is completely lost on the floor yet again this year….Ernie and Flip probably have to go. Some measure of improvement needs to be evident or we’re not actually building anything imo
Winning wasn't the expectation.
It isn’t the expectation this year either.
Everybody cries about defense. Good two way players are rare and expensive. Better to draft them. Which is exactly what Grunfeld has been doing the past two years. Before then he was hamstrung by salary and strategy limitations.
As for people and criticisms, I have my own personal feelings about how many of them that I hear are valid and how many aren’t, but I won’t go there since everyone’s entitled. I will, however, say this: its year two of (what’s probably) a 5 year plan. Neither Grunfeld nor Saunders are going anywhere in the next couple years. Especially not with a new owner who wants to establish some stability. Would you rather he follow the Dan Snyder model?
And this team wasn’t ‘completely lost’ last year. But I understand you tend to view things in terms of absolutes.
Incremental progress was achieved last year and its all that’s expected again this year.
by jones-y on Nov 29, 2011 6:10 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
speaking of viewing things in terms of absolutes
there’s a pretty wide margin between letting EG walk (1yr left right on his deal?) and “the Dan Snyder model.”
Not really.
Being on your second GM in your third year of ownership is distinctly Snyder’ian
Who can shoot on this team other than Young?
Don’t say Crawford or Wall. Look at the FG percentages beyond 15 feet. Other than Young, it’s Lewis (who isn’t long for the Wizards anyway).
The Wiz need Young AND another real good shooter at the 3.
BTW, when Young goes to the bench and if Vesely happens to be on the floor at the 3, we’d better off with Rook taking shots from the 1st row rather than the players jacking up jump shots from the perimeter.
by Izman on Nov 29, 2011 10:49 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I have faith in both crawford and wall. they're both very young and increasing shooting effectiveness is one of the easiest things that a player can improve once they get to the NBA
We definitely can’t write them off at all right now… just look at how derrick rose and dwayne wade have become much better shooters the last couple years, and they were much worse shooters to start off than Wall and Crawford.
just look at how derrick rose and dwayne wade have become much better shooters the last couple years, and they were much worse shooters to start off than Wall and Crawford.
Huh?
Rookie Year – Derrick Rose = 51.6% TSP
Rookie Year – Dwyane Wade = 53% TSP
Rookie Year – John Wall = 49.4% TSP
Rookie Year – Jo. Crawford = 45.6% TSP (pitiful)
Doesn’t anyone fact check any more?
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
I'm talking about range... and the lack that rose and wade had...
Rose and Wade had better shooting percentages because almost everything they did was within 15 feet
Range - like shots from 16-23 feet?
D. Wade (2007) 16-23 feet = 7.0 shots per game 38%
D. Rose (2009) 16-23 feet = 5.4 shots per game 43%
J. Craw (2011) 16-23 feet = 5.0 shots per game 33%
J. Wall (2011) 16-23 feet = 4.2 shots per game 30%
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
by Rook6980 on Nov 29, 2011 5:41 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Actually, the best non-Wiz team for Nick...
Is the Bulls. They need a 2 who can score without dominating the ball, and Rose’s drive-and-kick game would give Young lots of open looks. His height would be a good backcourt fit with Rose’s smallish stature.
Yea he would thrive knocking down kick out three's from Rose
wow the more I think about the more I agree with you. He’d be perfect for the Bulls.
by Ron Carlos Jeines on Nov 29, 2011 12:12 PM EST up reply actions
definitely a perfect fit for him
but will they have the cap room to make it happen since signing Boozer?
Collison's contract structure was secondary to the Thunders commitment to him.
Clever accounting for its own sake only gets you another Blatche deal. Threaten to match any offer and keep NY for another year. That will give the team a chance to better evaluate the recent picks, and know where they stand in the next draft. And the team can always do a S&T over the summer.
As much as the Blatche deal has been blasted
It hasn’t crippled us, Andray has until the end of the year to figure it out with the new crew, and even if it’s not great for us, he’s still a talented 7 footer on a reasonable contract and a decent trade piece
by Bullet Nation in Exile on Nov 29, 2011 11:25 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
So...
you believe that Andray will be worth $8.5 Million in 2014?
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
Yes, he'll be worth $8.5M...
…but not to the Wiz.
The GM of a team should be able to figure out how his players could fit into another team’s scheme. After that, it’s just a matter of working the deal until it happens. EG ought to be shopping AB whether it takes 1 or 2 years and he ought to be using a whole lot of spin in a pr campaign.
Maybe
a la Luol Deng growing into his contract. But as Izman says, his trade value will be higher, and his production will entice someone, even if he isn’t a great fit in the system we’re running. But yeah, he’ll DEFINITELY have to grow into it
by Bullet Nation in Exile on Nov 29, 2011 3:03 PM EST up reply actions
His contract is anything but awful.
Does he need to perform better? Certainly, but he’s still a few years away from his prime. Awful contract? Not even close.
At the very least, some team is gonna take one look at him and see a 7 footer who is a talented scorer who is average or close to it in pretty much every other facet of the game and snap him up without thinking twice about it.
by jones-y on Nov 29, 2011 12:23 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed.
He comes with red flags to be sure, but skilled players of his size are rare. His contract isn’t particularly onerous for what he brings to the table, either.
by YellaFella on Nov 29, 2011 12:27 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It's an awful contract because Ernie should of known better.
Paying some random lazy defender with a poor FG% and habitual off court distraction would be just evidence of a bad contract. Ernie gave it to a player that he has been closely involved with for years.
So in other words its a bad contract because
Ernie’s crystal ball was malfunctioning that day.
I wouldn't go that far.
There were plenty of warning signs prior to the contract. But, given the reasonableness of the contract, I think Ernie figured that in. Without the incidents, Blatche would have been looking at a much larger contract.
Well, exactly...
His past performance was figured in during contract negotiations. Which, almost by definition, means that he has to hit new lows in order for that contract to qualify as awful…
Which also means that the moment he turns the corner (if he hasn’t already), he’s a huge bargain. And 83 inches is a very good reason to hang on to him until he does. And its for that very same reason that he’s eminently tradeable on that contract even if he doesn’t significantly improve this year. Which, again, is almost by definition the antithesis of ‘awful contract’: an awful contract isn’t easily tradeable.
but there are always incidents and he wasnt a FA or RFA
Ernie signed him for more than he could possibly get now, 2yrs before it was necessary to sign him. I fail to see the brilliance in that, we didnt even get a contract year performance from Dray just 30 games at the end of a lost season.
Nobody said it was brilliant. And everyone acknowledges that he needs to get better (and get consistent)
The point is that it isn’t awful either.
The reality is that if EG had waited those two years, then you have the butterfly effect in full force and for all we knew at the time, Dray could have had a breakout and gotten signed away as a FA.
I don’t think its brilliance to lock him up early and relatively cheaply. Its just a low risk potentially high reward gamble. A safe bet. All Grunfeld did was eliminate the uncertainty of letting Dray go into free agency. And the end result is still unknown. It may turn out to be a shrewd move, but at the very worst, it’ll still be a tradeable contract attached to a tempting player.
I, for one, don't think it's all that bad of a deal...
as long as he keeps getting better, he’ll be worth it. He definitely has the physical tools to be a 20-10 guy if he would just put another 10-20% more effort into his game… Time will only tell.
I think us Wizards Fans are going to get "shocked" at the enormous offer sheet Nick gets
Remember, it only takes “1” out of the remaining 28 teams to REALLY like Nick.
My guess is he is going to get a 4 year $40million offer.
I would love for someone to give him a 4 year $28million so that we can match it, but I think at least one team is going to LOVE Nick.
he had some nice auditions in front of opposing GMs
scored 20 while holding Bogans/Korver to 0-8 in Chicago
although from what I am reading here the Bulls cant offer him a lot of money, but i dont know how that exactly works
Chicago has 11 players under contract and will have a little more than $8million in cap space
Amnesting Ronnie Brewer would give them an additional $4.7million.
That now gives them over $12 million to give Nick an offer sheet if that’s what they want to do.
They're not gonna toss Boozer to get Young
That’s hustling backwards.
by jones-y on Nov 29, 2011 12:24 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Indeed. He was also hurt.
Not saying that there are any excuses, but what I am saying is that swapping him out for Young is a net negative pretty much any way you cut it.
That's the lux tax limit which in the past was 20% above "the cap".
the margin from “cap” to "the de-facto cap/lux tax limit may shrink a little
You think they are going to amnesty one of their best players in Brewer
to get Nick?…. why don’t we just do a sign and trade and make it easier for them lol… I’ll take Brewer any day of the week.
Brewer's one of their best players?
by Mike Prada on Nov 29, 2011 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Imo yes
Great defender, knocks down his shots (even though he has a funky jumper), smart player who hustles hard. He contributes a big part to the thing which makes the Bulls so good, team defense. He’s doesn’t do anything really great, but he doesn’t do anything bad, and he does what the team needs.
I just don’t think the Bulls would give up a player who does exactly what they need from him for Nick.
The team needs someone who can take some of the pressure of DRose in crunch time
and Ronnie Brewer ain’t it, that’s why many of us have our eye on the Bulls in the NY RFA derby
by Bullet Nation in Exile on Nov 30, 2011 8:26 AM EST up reply actions
NOW at the idea of Re-signing Nick Young NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I’m serious about this fellas. If we are to build a team develop a winning culture we need to have guys with the proper mentality guys who wana help their teammates as well as themselves be successful. Nick is a very skilled scorer I acknowledge that He ate Dwade up in a game last season it was impressive. But Nick only seems to care that Nick plays well.The passing thing is sort of a big deal in a team sport. I feel like if we re-sign Nick we might end up locked into him being our starter and ignore chances to upgrade at that position for years to come.
To me NY is a 6th man on a quality team MAYBE.
we have 3 dudes with mentalitites that trouble me sometimes. NY, Blatche and Mcgee of those 3 Mcgee’s game with his size is the only one thats tolerable because I think he’s alittle young still and sorta immature not malicious. Add in Crawford’s growing half cray and its not a good picture.
NY to me is a selfish scorer thats far too silly and doesn’t exude professionalism his lack of rebounding, playmaking and quality defense all give me pause to want to go forward with him.
If we re-sign him I will cheer for him he plays for my Wizards but he’ll have a big hand in whatever malaise hits this team. He’s gonna view himself as our primary scorer and just jack away, He’s gonna be asked to fill a bigger role for us then he should be filling for any quality team.
I’d just rather try and develop Crawford who seems more moldable in terms of team play until we get the right guy if he falls flat , continue developing Javale’s low post game that came on at the end of last season and see if Blatche is in shape and ready to show us a steadier offensive reportoire.
but flip asked Nick to be the primary scorer.
Flip has NEVER had a team where the primary scorer was in the post, KG has always been a mid-range jumpshooter. So basically Flip needs Nick pretty badly, his whole offense is based on guys hitting 15’+ shots and Nick is the best on the team at those ranges
But Nick only seems to care that Nick plays well.
If anyone knows what Nick Young cares about, its most likely some random fan.
lack of … quality defense
When will we be able to put this to rest? Its not 2008 anymore folks.
selfish
In that he does what his coach wants him to do?
far too silly
Lighten up. Basketball is entertainment.
doesn’t exude professionalism
How so?
He’s gonna be asked to fill a bigger role for us then he should be filling for any quality team.
That says more about the team than it does player. On any quality team without a star SG, he’d play the same exact role he does here. On a quality team with a star SG, he’d play the same role, just off the bench in fewer minutes. Just for the record.
I can agree on his lack of rebounding and playmaking. But that’s all you really got. Unless you think its still 2008.
by jones-y on Nov 29, 2011 3:59 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
still tastes good
and applicable to most, if not all, detractors
by Bullet Nation in Exile on Nov 30, 2011 8:27 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bullets Forever
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
