Two Hidden Benefits To Drafting & Stashing Jonas Valanciunas
by Jake Whitacre on Jun 23, 2011 11:06 AM EDT
Email
PrintThis whole thing is probably moot given the reported promise to Jan Vesely, but here it goes...
1. It drives down JaVale McGee's asking price
If management has decided that he's truly the center of the future and he's not worth giving up for Derrick Williams, the Wizards owe it to themselves to do what they can to keep JaVale's next contract in check. Having Valanciunas around will give the Wizards some leverage in negotiations and gives them a back up option if McGee finds an offer the Wizards aren't willing to match.
2. Stashing Valanciunas makes the Wizards worse in the short run
This probably sounds like a negative, but consider that most teams in a rebuild have three years to put together their core through the draft. The Blazers and Thunder both had three year windows where they stocked up on lottery picks before they became playoff contentders. The Wizards appear to be headed on that same trajectory. WIth that in mind, why not subconsciously tank a little bit by drafting someone who won't be on the roster next season? It would allow the Wizards to optimize their last chance to get a major building block of the franchise via the draft before that phase of rebuilding ends.
This represents the view of the user who wrote the FanPost, and not the entire Bullets Forever community. We're a place of many opinions, not just one.
67 comments
|
Do you like this story?
Comments
Your second point
Is the reason I can still see the Cavs taking JV 4th. They can afford to have patience if that patience nets them a better draft position in a better draft next year.
You're a Wizards fan
How can you not be patient? One thing about sucking for a long time is it gives you a greater tolerance for sucking.
A fourth benefit
We can continue developing assets we already have. Namely, Booker. We’d also be able to give Seraphin another opportunity to prove himself. Not that I would mind having either Kanter or Valaciunas join the Wizards this year, but being able to stash away JV this upcoming season allows us to play for the future (2012 season) by developing promising prospects like Booker
I have a very hard time
understanding why anyone would go into a season and conceivably “tank” just because you think that next year’s draft is a sure thing. This is by far one of the dumbest things that any GM or Team can do. The players in this year’s draft are unproven as are the players in next year’s draft. That losing mindset is the reason we are in the position that we are in each year. Lets start changing the culture and believing that we can win with whatever we have. I know we will be bad, however, I don’’t want my team to tank for the sake of tanking!
by KonartistNupe on Jun 23, 2011 11:28 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs
They aren’t tanking, they are pushing their assets into the future. Its not a reason to draft him, but its an aspect that would benefit the team. Thats why he uses the term “hidden” because its not a primary or even secondary consideration.
Jake left out another benefit: letting him develop on someone else’s dime. He’s like a freshman in college. Do you play them right away or redshirt? I think of this year as Jonas’ redshirt year. You may get some production out of him this year, but nowhere near the amount you’d get by keeping him around for his 5th year/senior season. So he stays in Europe for a year and we pay him for his season as a 20-24 year old, as opposed to 19—23.
by Jheiser3 on Jun 23, 2011 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed
I don’t have a problem with it because we have the 18th pick and know we’ll be adding someone to the rotation there. If we didn’t have that pick, I’d be more skeptical.
Exactly
Described that better than I could. Drafting JV with the sole purpose of getting worse next year would be terrible, but it is a nice perk should the Wizards decide to go in that direction.
Bullets Forever: Waiting for the Fat Lady to sing since 2006. | @jakewhitacre
by Jake Whitacre on Jun 23, 2011 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
It's not necessarily about tanking
but to jones-y’s point above, it’s about realizing that nothing is going to prevent you from sucking next year anyway. The Cavs and the Wizards … neither will be contenders next year. So who cares if you have to stash a player for a season, especially if that stashing adds a positive in recruiting better talent for your team the following year?
the wizards dont have to suck next season
unless of course John Wall isnt really that good.
by DCrez on Jun 23, 2011 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
There are different degrees of sucking
And I imagine we’ll be somewhere in the very top tiers of sucking, perhaps brushing into mediocrity.
And again
Though I know I’ll get jumped on for this, I don’t mind them sucking because we’re still more than a few pieces away from being a contender in this league. I’d rather have a good stab at the salivating crop of picks next year.
37 wins was the 8th seed in the East last season.
If 37 wins is beyond comprehension for the Wizards in Flip’s 3rd year and Wall’s 2nd…you could argue the team is headed in the wrong direction
I like how you do business (Victor Sweet voice)!!!
I have always thought that if we couldn’t get to at least 38 wins this season that we were headed in the opposite direction!
by KonartistNupe on Jun 23, 2011 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm not saying we must or should win 38
but a 10-15 game improvement should NOT be considered impossible. We’re expecting Wall to be an MVP-type player by his 3rd or 4th year, and Flip is supposed to be this great winning coach and it’s the East
Being in the east
really helps our chances. I for one don’t think that Philly has staying power. I think that they are going to have the same drop as the Bucks did this year. The Pacers are good and I can see them moving up a bit. If the Hawks don’t get better this year, their window will shut. I also believe this for Orlando. Too many vets, not enough skill to compete with the top 3 in the East.
by KonartistNupe on Jun 23, 2011 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions
To be clear
I don’t think a 10-15 game is impossible, just unlikely.
I don't know. I have to disagree.
I think its very probable that we can win 10 more games. For starters, I think we developed a slight homecourt advantage. I think confidence is up and this team believes it can win on a given night. We still have to work on the road woes, but I think that we can win a few more games at home and 5 or 8 more games on the road.
by KonartistNupe on Jun 23, 2011 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Or laying foundation
Kevin Durant’s Thunder won 23 games in his second season. Again, I have no problem with patience if the right talent is being put into the team. It takes time to put together a durable contender
And
John Wall’s Wizards won 23 games in his First season. Why can’t we make a bigger jump in JWall’s second season?
by KonartistNupe on Jun 23, 2011 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
OKC only won 23 in Durant's second year
And that netted them Westbrook. So were they headed in the wrong direction?
And while this may be Flips 3rd year with the organization, I think it’s fair to say this will only be his second year with THIS team. We traded away the team he came here to originally coach.
by segastyle on Jun 23, 2011 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The Thunder had Kevin Durant for years....
and sucked. It takes time and more than 1 player.
I’m all for trying as hard as you can with what you’ve got — the game isn’t worth watching otherwise — but you still have to think in the long term about how you acquire pieces.
The worst place to be in the NBA is in the middle of the pack (just out or just in to the playoffs). You get mediocre picks, other teams draft stars and leap past you, and eventually your own assets (Wall) get pissed off and bounce.
It’s much harder to move from mediocrity to contender in the NBA than from doormat to contender, paradoxical as that sounds. Don’t get me wrong — I’d rather watch a .500 team get bounced in the 1st round than a .250 team with no hope, but I’d also rather watch 1-2 years of a .250 team followed by 5+ years of a contender than 10 years of a .500 team.
My point
Is that as of this moment, players in this year and next year’s draft are all unknowns. Why would you stash a player for a year or two when you can grab a player that can get better in the league this year? Anyone remember whatever happened to Vladimir Vareemko???
by KonartistNupe on Jun 23, 2011 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
How do you know this?
Didn’t Vareemko have upside as well? Wasn’t the same reason for stashing him the same reason for stashing JV? I just think that we should get a player that can play in in the NBA today! Who knows whether or not Jonas’ game translates to the NBA. Grab someone who can acutally learn this year in the league
by KonartistNupe on Jun 23, 2011 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Veremeeko was a random dude picked in the second round
Valanciunas is a highly-regarded center prospect that teams like OKC and San Antonio are trying to move up to get. Not all Euros are the same.
The draft is not an exact science
Everything we know is based on a few Youtube clips and what the “experts” are saying. All I am saying is that we need to live for today. Get players that we think can come in and contribute right away. Jonas may or may not pan out. If he does great, if he doesn’t, then everyone even you will call for Earnie’s head!
by KonartistNupe on Jun 23, 2011 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Sure the draft isn't perfect
But on the whole, NBA GMs do a good job of evaluating player talent. Guys in the top 5 have at least a 60% chance of becoming a star. If you want to see the data:
http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm
Comparing the upside of a 2nd rounder to a guy who could go in the top 3-8 in the draft is bats$%t nuts.
The NBA draft
is a silly place to expect to “live in today”. These are mostly 19-21 year old kids. There are probably less than 10 kids who will be picked tonight based on what they do right now. The other 50 are being projected to do something in the future, because they won’t be entering their prime for a couple more years.
Who contributes right away?
Even Durant, Wall, and Blake Griffin (three of the best recent prospects) came in and their teams were just as bad with them than without them. So If the tier one guys aren’t making great waves in their rookie seasons, what good is a tier 3 guy (Vesely, Leonard, etccc) really going to do?
Ha, maybe we can pull a Veermenko and trade him next yr for a second top 10 pick and a good veteran
"My logic fails all the time...especially when talking to females" Rook6980
"I'll be lounging on the couch, just chillin in my snuggie, klick to MTV so they can teach my how to dougie" (Buno Mars, The lazy song)
by Dutch Hoopfan on Jun 23, 2011 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm pretty sure he did my most recent oil change.
by ryasch on Jun 23, 2011 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
LOL
"My logic fails all the time...especially when talking to females" Rook6980
"I'll be lounging on the couch, just chillin in my snuggie, klick to MTV so they can teach my how to dougie" (Buno Mars, The lazy song)
by Dutch Hoopfan on Jun 23, 2011 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I wrote earlier about this option
of playing for next year’s draft. Ultimately, I thought it’d be bad for the team’s culture and would send the wrong message to Wall and the other players on the team.
But, it’s absurd to say it’s the stupidest thing a team can do. Examples:
1. Spurs tanked to get Duncan
2. Rockets tanked to get either Olajuwon or Jordan
As a fan, I hate that “tanking” often works. The lottery discourages it slightly. Nevertheless, it’s often the best move a team can make.
Great Point!
Draft Valanciunas and wait a year.
Then package the #18 and #34 to move up to get someone who drops.
Maybe but...
We had the #1 overall pick, in a stronger draft last year and it didn’t make much difference.
Michael Lee's article is very on point
Our draft pretty much hinges on whether or not Utah takes Knight at #3. If they do, there is still a good chance of making some type of trade happen with Cleveland who seems to value Valanciunas over Kanter. Personally, I would have no issue with packaging #6 and #18 just to move up 2 spots because I believe we will buy our way back into the 1st round. Even if we don’t, however, I would be fine with a draft that went #4- Kanter, #34- Nolan Smith/ Chandler Parsons/ Malcolm Lee.
Great point
For all we know, the season could be cut by more than half. If such a scenario plays out, nabbing JV would be even better; the team lets their guy develop for a year in a pro league, and we as fans suffer only half the length of a regular season
Its not only about that
what if they feel someone like Vessely would do well in learning the pro game this year then wait for 2 yrs and get jonas?
by Meraj Chowdhury on Jun 23, 2011 11:48 AM EDT reply actions
Additionally
Drafting a player and stashing him abroad might allow us to pick up another player in the draft. Currently the Wizards have 3 picks in the NBA draft and 3 slots on their roster, since they extended qualifying offers to several d-league call-ups from last season. If they stash one of their picks aboard, they’d be able to add another player without cutting any of the d-leaguers.
I agree with this article and I would like to do this if we keep 6 over drafting Vesely or Thompson I guess
But my option of preference is still to move up to grab either DWill or Kanter
"My logic fails all the time...especially when talking to females" Rook6980
"I'll be lounging on the couch, just chillin in my snuggie, klick to MTV so they can teach my how to dougie" (Buno Mars, The lazy song)
At all costs I don't want Jonas
He’s a tall skinny unathletic guy who hustles and is a great ft shooter. I’m not excited about Vesely, but I’d take him over Jonas b/c he can jump over him for rebounds. Vesely has tools that Jonas will never have.
I would like to see the Wiz move up to grab Kanter, but as long as we don’t get Jonas, I’m happy.
The Jonas we see now may not be the same JV we're going to see next year
The kid’s only 19. He’s at an age where he could easily bulk up 20+ lbs in muscle within a year or two. I wouldn’t mind taking Kanter either, but JV really isn’t that bad of a pick for a rebuilding team like ours.
Very astute, Jake.
Both of these points have been in the back of my mind and have led me to feel ok if Valanciunas falls to us.
As long as he is a real prospect.
Thanks MR
I’ve got no problem if Wiz pass on JV if they just don’t think he’s good enough, but if it comes out later that they were scared off by waiting, that will upset me.
Bullets Forever: Waiting for the Fat Lady to sing since 2006. | @jakewhitacre
by Jake Whitacre on Jun 23, 2011 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
If both Jonas V and Jan V are available at #6, then I agree take Jonas. That’s the value a center brings.
But assuming we draft Jonas in that scenario, then why not trade JaVale right now? If we draft Jonas, then he’s our center of the future, and JaVale is on his way out. JaVale’s stock is really high right now, too — but it will probably also be high before the season starts, assuming we have a season. All I’m saying is, pull the trigger on a JaVale trade whether for Kanter or an established player, if we’re drafting the Lithuanian Big Man. Don’t think the front office hasn’t thought about it…if we don’t do it in this scenario, then maybe the scouts aren’t as high on Kanter as we are…
We don't have to trade McGee if Jonas V pans out.
We can hedge our bets. What’s the worst that happens if they both turn out to be good? We have two good centers. Man, that’d stink!! The only problem that would arise would be keeping them both under contract. But, Jonas V will be on a rookie contract for the first 4-5 years unless the CBA changes, so I don’t think it’ll be a problem till McGee is 28-29.
Btw, can we officially refer to him as Jonas V from now on? That way none of us have to learn how to spell his name.
Very interesting points
im beginning to come around to the draft jonas if he’s there at 6 camp… i don’t think he’s quite the next zydrunas or arvydas but with a year or two of seasoning i think he could be a serviceable starting center who can cause matchup problems with his jumpshot and finesse game… i think id prefer him to vesely or leonard…
bring back darvin ham
Spurs after Valaciunas?
Apparently the Spurs view Valanciunas as the eventual replacement to Tim Duncan and are trying to trade up for him. If this is genuine, this is about the strongest recommendation a player can get.
Several teams believe the San Antonio Spurs’ desire to get the Sacramento Kings’ pick at No. 7 centers on a desire to draft Valanciunas as a future replacement for Tim Duncan
I dunno.
Seems they may have whiffed on Tiago Splitter. Though the book isn’t written on him yet.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Bullets Forever
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Miami Heat are moving on to the conference finals
- Kevin Durant is tired of hearing about the Spurs
- The 10-man rotation, starring your Indiana Pacers
- Blake Griffin highlights, ‘NBA Jam’-style (VIDEO)
- Finally, Shelvin Mack and Robert Pack have a dance dedicated to them (VIDEO)
