Welcome to Basketball Purgatory, Washington Wizards

[Built Ford Tough]

Earlier this morning, the Washington Wizards and New Orleans Hornets completed a trade sending Rashard Lewis' mammoth contract and the 46th pick in the draft to New Orleans in exchange for small forward Trevor Ariza and big man Emeka Okafor.

 

For New Orleans, the logic of this trade is easy to understand.

 

After having traded away disgruntled superstar Chris Paul prior to the start of 2011-2012 season, the Hornets were clearly entering into a rebuilding phase.

 

The team has also finally been sold to New Orleans Saints owner Tom Benson after being league-owned since December of 2010. Previous owner George Shinn was forced to sell the team due to financial difficulties.

 

The Hornets can buy out the final year of Lewis' contract of $13.95 million and, by doing so, they will free up roughly $30 million over the next two years.

 

Owning the first pick in the 2012 NBA Draft, what better time than now to rid themselves of long-term salary commitments and rebuild the team from the ground up around future first overall pick Anthony Davis?

 

For Washington, it is more difficult to wrap your head around their rationale for making this trade.

 

On paper, it is easy enough. Okafor and Ariza are both veteran players who are above-average defenders.

 

For a Wizard team who was ridiculed for being immature, unprofessional and poor defensively for much of this past season, it would make sense why they felt the need to go out and get some veteran leaders in that locker room.

 

 

 

 

However, Washington is now facing a team that is going to be very hard pressed to score points.

 

They have very little perimeter shooting, which will allow opposing teams to pack the paint to take away John Wall's drives or Nene's post opportunities.

 

The likely solution to the lack or floor spacing will be the Wizards drafting shooting guard Bradley Beal. But, one player won't be able to solve this problem when the rest of the roster consists of poor shooters.

 

Washington is a team who's biggest problem this year was the ability to shoot the ball and space the floor. This trade not only doesn't improve their shooting woes, it actually makes them more pronounced.

 

Despite the likely offensive struggles, the biggest problem with this trade for the Wizards is that they have completely ruined their flexibility for the next two seasons by taking on the inflated contracts Okafor and Ariza both possess.

 

Even if the Wizards use their amnesty clause on Andray Blatche, they still will not have cap flexibility to improve their roster.

 

The Wizards will now be out of the running on any big free agents, as they will only have their mid-level exception to use.

 

They won't be able to absorb a contract while picking up a solid player. They won't be able to be a factor in amnesty waivers either. Their ability to add any impact talent to their roster has basically been nullified by going out and trading for Ariza and Okafor.

 

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong, Ariza and Okafor are solid players and many contending teams would love to have what they bring to the table—although not necessarily at their price.

 

The problem is that the Wizards are far from a contending team. The best-case scenario for the Wizards is that they sneak into the playoffs as a low seed and promptly get blown out in the first round.

 

 

 

The problem is, we've seen Ernie Grunfeld make this kind of trade before.

 

After an abysmal 19-win season, the Wizards traded their fifth overall selection to the Minnesota Timberwolves for Mike Miller and Randy Foye. The thinking was that Foye and Miller would be the missing pieces and make the Wizards legitimate contenders in the East.

 

Fast forward three years later, and both Foye and Miller are on new teams while Ricky Rubio, who Minnesota selected with that fifth overall pick, is one of the best young players in the NBA.

 

You would think Grunfeld would learn his lesson from that disastrous trade, yet here we are seeing history repeat itself.

 

Now the Wizards are stuck without cap flexibility and overpaid for non-impact talent, all to be a .500 team at best. In a weak Eastern Conference, they will be too good to add an impact player via the draft, but will be too bad to make any noise in the playoffs.

 

In other words: welcome to basketball purgatory, Washington.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1230023-washington-wizards-enter-into-nba-purgatory-after-trade-with-new-orleans-hornets

[Real Deal]

I agree with most of it. Don't think the Wizards will stand much of a chance in free agency, regardless, so looking at it from that standpoint, to me at least...they made a move to improve their team.

 

Now, with that said, you're right: they have no shooters. They will draft Beal (and if they don't, at this point, they are idiots)...OR, maybe they will trade the pick, but that's potentially taking on even more money down the road (length of contract), and I doubt the Wizards want to do that.

 

To make sense of it, Washington wanted to improve on the defensive end. The problem is, they are a worse offensive team than they are back on defense WITHOUT the trade, and when you have a guy like John Wall, you want to stick the necessary help around him, players that he can feed. At the end of the day, as good of a defensive team you can be (and the Wizards won't be that great), you still have to score points. Ask the 2010 Bobcats, one of the worst offensive teams in the NBA, but the best defensive team, winning 44 games and swept by the Magic in the first round.

[Built Ford Tough]

I agree with most of it. Don't think the Wizards will stand much of a chance in free agency, regardless, so looking at it from that standpoint, to me at least...they made a move to improve their team.

 

I can understand that.

 

The part that I don't like about tying up all of their money is that they can't make those moves that the Cavs have done the past two years where they absorb a contract in order to pick up an asset. That is the best way for these small market teams to go about their business. Tying up all of your cap space into average veterans is just a terrible idea unless you already have a great core established, which Washington definitely does not.

 

Now, with that said, you're right: they have no shooters. They will draft Beal (and if they don't, at this point, they are idiots)...OR, maybe they will trade the pick, but that's potentially taking on even more money down the road (length of contract), and I doubt the Wizards want to do that.

 

I don't see them trading it at all.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but depending on their MLE usage, won't they have to amnesty Blatche just to avoid paying luxury tax in a year or two? I haven't looked it up myself, but I do believe that is what will happen assuming no real cost saving moves are made.

 

To make sense of it, Washington wanted to improve on the defensive end. The problem is, they are a worse offensive team than they are back on defense WITHOUT the trade, and when you have a guy like John Wall, you want to stick the necessary help around him, players that he can feed. At the end of the day, as good of a defensive team you can be (and the Wizards won't be that great), you still have to score points. Ask the 2010 Bobcats, one of the worst offensive teams in the NBA, but the best defensive team, winning 44 games and swept by the Magic in the first round.

 

I'm really glad you brought up the Bobcats because they were the inspiration behind me writing this.

 

They were in the exact same position that the Wizards were in before. Then they dealt a lottery pick for Richardson, made a move for Stephen Jackson and acquired all of these pricey vets well before they had an established core in place (I believe their core at the time was Okafor, Felton and Wallace). They made these win now moves way too early, tied up all of their flexibility and for what? A 44 win team who was swept in the first round.

 

Fast forward a few years later and they are coming off of the worst season in NBA history and are looking at a rebuild that will take at least 3 years before they even have a core to build around.

 

Washington is doing the exact same thing that the Bobcats did and I hate to say it (well, not really, haha) but in 3 years time, I'd be shocked if they aren't right back in the position they were in this past year with John Wall and nothing else.

[Real Deal]

That is the best way for these small market teams to go about their business.

That's true, unless you're the Thunder or Spurs, and you draft like you're Nostradamus. I think these small market teams need to spend a little more time and money trying to find excellent scouts, and concentrating more on the draft than free agency, but that's just me.

 

I don't see them trading it at all.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but depending on their MLE usage, won't they have to amnesty Blatche just to avoid paying luxury tax in a year or two? I haven't looked it up myself, but I do believe that is what will happen assuming no real cost saving moves are made.

Nah. They have six team options next summer. If the luxury tax threshold hangs around $70 million, the Wiz will be approximately $10 million under it next season...and that's with Blatche still on the roster.

 

The following season, you're looking at a payroll around $42-43 million (with Ariza, Okafor AND Blatche), without those six team options...and $63 million with them. Wall will have a team option of $7.7 million, so you're going to automatically factor him in. They should be fine...a 10-man roster with enough wiggle room for minimums to fill out the rest (and again, that's if they keep Blatche, and I doubt they will).

 

I'm really glad you brought up the Bobcats because they were the inspiration behind me writing this.

 

They were in the exact same position that the Wizards were in before. Then they dealt a lottery pick for Richardson, made a move for Stephen Jackson and acquired all of these pricey vets well before they had an established core in place (I believe their core at the time was Okafor, Felton and Wallace). They made these win now moves way too early, tied up all of their flexibility and for what? A 44 win team who was swept in the first round.

 

Fast forward a few years later and they are coming off of the worst season in NBA history and are looking at a rebuild that will take at least 3 years before they even have a core to build around.

 

Washington is doing the exact same thing that the Bobcats did and I hate to say it (well, not really, haha) but in 3 years time, I'd be shocked if they aren't right back in the position they were in this past year with John Wall and nothing else.

Charlotte didn't have a John Wall, and that's where it all falls into place for me. If John Wall can do something with this current roster (with Ariza, Okafor and Nene), and he turns into one of the best PG's in the NBA, Washington could survive something like that...but then, you run into the risk of him leaving after that team option, assuming he doesn't think he's getting the help he "deserves" in Washington.

 

Felton and Emeka were with the Cats for a full five years. Wallace was with them for 6 1/2 years. The only thing that I had a problem with, though (with that core), was that you were sticking a defensive-minded big man and a defensive-minded tweener with a PG that was not going to carry the load on offense.

 

Right now, the Wizards aren't where they should be, offensively...so I'm going to make that comparison between those two teams. Nene isn't going to turn into Shaq. But, what will Washington do with the expiring contracts of Ariza and Okafor before the trade deadline in 2014? If they can find a suitor, a team that is desperately trying to get under that tax threshold after being burned by it, maybe they can turn it around.

 

Then again, that's just me trying to make sense of the trade, long term. Short term, something else has to happen. First thing's first: Bradley Beal.

[DunkinDerozan]

Good read. I think it wasn't a very smart trade for the Wizards at all. We'll see how they do this year, but if I'm them I'm worried about John Wall going into next year. So far, he has not played up to expectations, and his complete lack of a jumper has a lot to do with that. Now it's going to be even harder for him to drive to the basket. Hopefully he works on his jump shot a lot this off season.

[Built Ford Tough]

Right now, the Wizards aren't where they should be, offensively...so I'm going to make that comparison between those two teams. Nene isn't going to turn into Shaq. But, what will Washington do with the expiring contracts of Ariza and Okafor before the trade deadline in 2014? If they can find a suitor, a team that is desperately trying to get under that tax threshold after being burned by it, maybe they can turn it around.

 

Then again, that's just me trying to make sense of the trade, long term. Short term, something else has to happen. First thing's first: Bradley Beal.

 

Well, yeah, the situations aren't exact. What they are, though, is two teams who made a bunch of "win now" moves a year or two before they should've and it resulted (or will result in Washington's case) in them wasting away at .500 with no way to improve their roster. Washington has John Wall, which is better than anything Charlotte had, but it is still a far cry from having a legit core established like you should before making these types of moves.

 

The only thing that will prevent this trade from not being a complete and utter disaster is if Beal actually becomes the ridiculous "Ray Allen meets Eric Gordon" comparisions that people have been throwing out there. Really, though, what are the chances of that happening?

 

The Wizards won't bottom out as badly as Charlotte did this past year, but I'd be very surprised if in two years, once Ariza and Okafor are gone, that they won't be right back flirting for a top 5 pick unless Wall turns into Derrick Rose and Beal is a stud.

 

At the end of the day, they should've just stood pat for at least another year. I know they wanted to add vets, and I really liked the Nene trade, but this is just overkill.

[AboveLegit]

Great write up BFT.

 

Many have followed the same logic in regards to this trade, but I find myself right in the middle. The Nene trade was a tough one for me to swallow because of his contract, but it turned out absolutely great for us ( I think I underestimated how vital it was to get rid of McGee and Young). So bringing in two vets, on paper, seems like a solid move.

 

Basically, the trade is two-fold, how much better will they make the Wizards, and is that improvement worth their salaries? I think as a whole, we underestimate the impact established veterans have on young players. OKC is such an aberration among the basketball community, so I don't think they're worth bringing up. But teams such as Chicago with Derrick Rose, or Boston with Rajon Rondo, have proven this theory.

 

As for the salary implications, it doesn't really strike me as a major problem. I sure as hell would take these two over the prospects of overpaying for a player like Nic Batum, or OJ Mayo. At the very worst, they're tradeable assets in a year, and if there's one thing we can praise Grunfeld for, it's the ability to move players regardless of the price.

 

I'm more concerned with the perimeter shooting. The trade did absolutely nothing to ameliorate this need, if anything it made things a lot worse (barring another trade of course). Factoring in the likelihood of drafting Bradley Beal, we essentially have 2 floor spacers in the starting lineup (Beal and Nene). That's not exactly ideal.

 

I don't love the size of their deals, but they're movable in the way Rashard's has proven itself to be. Bottom line is we get incrementally better and develop a winning brand of basketball. If we were to win 50% of next year's games (which is totally possible), that's a huge step. From then on, the front office just needs to keep pushing.

 

To put it bluntly, John Wall won't become an actual basketball player without actual basketball talent around him. Subtracting a worthless player from the roster while bringing in two legitimate players makes perfect sense basketball wise.

Edited June 22, 2012 by AboveLegit

[YugoRocketsFan]

PG-John Wall

SG-Their draft pick

SF-Ariza

PF-Okafor

C-Nene

 

That actually doesn't look half bad, especially defensively.

[Built Ford Tough]

Great write up BFT.

 

Many have followed the same logic in regards to this trade, but I find myself right in the middle. The Nene trade was a tough one for me to swallow because of his contract, but it turned out absolutely great for us ( I think I underestimated how vital it was to get rid of McGee and Young). So bringing in two vets, on paper, seems like a solid move.

 

First off, thanks for the compliment. I'm glad you decided to weigh in on this since, obviously, you have a greater understanding of the Wizards and what they hope to do than I do.

 

I loved the Nene trade for the Wizards. You can't just throw a bunch of inexperienced, sometimes immature, young players together and hope that they will just magically get it. You need to have solid vets who can show them the ropes and help them understand what it takes to win in this league, how to behave both on and off the court, the type of work you need to put in during practice, watching game film, preperation, etc...

 

So on paper, it makes sense to bring in veterans. What doesn't make sense to to completely handcuff all your roster flexibility by doing so. I liked the Nene trade, would've liked if they just traded for Ariza or signed a similar vet in free agency.

 

I just think the Nene trade and then tying up everything on Ariza and Okafor is overkill.

 

Basically, the trade is two-fold, how much better will they make the Wizards, and is that improvement worth their salaries? I think as a whole, we underestimate the impact established veterans have on young players. OKC is such an aberration among the basketball community, so I don't think they're worth bringing up. But teams such as Chicago with Derrick Rose, or Boston with Rajon Rondo, have proven this theory.

 

You absolutely need vets, but the problem is how the Wizards have gone about this. You need to have the right balance of veteran players, talented players and flexibility to improve your roster. The Wizards got the veteran players down, but they neglected the other two and that is a recipe for a treadmill team.

 

As for the salary implications, it doesn't really strike me as a major problem. I sure as hell would take these two over the prospects of overpaying for a player like Nic Batum, or OJ Mayo. At the very worst, they're tradeable assets in a year, and if there's one thing we can praise Grunfeld for, it's the ability to move players regardless of the price.

 

But the thing is, what if something comes along midway through next season when a team performs below expectations and wants to blow it up? Wouldn't you rather have the option of trading for, say, Rudy Gay, Josh Smith or Danny Granger (just names off the top of my head) than being stuck with Trevor Ariza and Emeka Okafor?

 

What if bottom 10 team wants to dump a contract and is willing to add an unprotected pick with it? Isn't having that card to play better than being capped out and having no wiggle room to improve the roster?

 

I agree with you about overpaying for average free agent talent. I don't think that is the right course to take either. I also don't believe trading for overpriced, average talent is the way to go and that is basically what Ariza and Okafor are. They aren't bad, but they aren't anything to get excited about, from a basketball standpoint at least, either.

 

I'm more concerned with the perimeter shooting. The trade did absolutely nothing to ameliorate this need, if anything it made things a lot worse (barring another trade of course). Factoring in the likelihood of drafting Bradley Beal, we essentially have 2 floor spacers in the starting lineup (Beal and Nene). That's not exactly ideal.

 

That is why I am worried if this team could even be considered a .500 team. Floor spacing is absolutely critical to winning games in the NBA. We saw it in the playoffs this year when the Heat finally decided to go small and surround James and Wade with knockdown shooters instead of forcing the issue with the Joel Anthony's of the world.

 

Even if they draft Beal, who's to say he will be that floor spacer you need anyways? I know everybody loves his jumper and think he will be a great shooter (myself included) we also have to consider that maybe he is just the type of player who has textbook form on his jumper but can't convert? After all, he did struggle with his jumper for a large part of the year at Florida. I don't think it will be a problem and I do think he will be a knockdown shooter, but it is a concern when you are basically throwing all of your eggs in the basket of a rookie.

 

This is all assuming Beal is even available to be drafted. I don't think Charlotte will pick him, but what if Cleveland trades up and picks him at 2? Washington showed their hand very early and everybody knows Beal is there guy now. That gives a team like Cleveland or Portland the incentive to trade up to 2 if they want Beal, which I think would be the case for Cleveland (not as much for Portland). That would throw a wrench in the Wizards plans as well.

 

I don't love the size of their deals, but they're movable in the way Rashard's has proven itself to be. Bottom line is we get incrementally better and develop a winning brand of basketball. If we were to win 50% of next year's games (which is totally possible), that's a huge step. From then on, the front office just needs to keep pushing.

 

That is fair, but it is also worth noting that expirings don't have nearly the same amount of value as they did before. Of course, with a harsher cap system in place, they may regain some of that value they had a few years ago.

 

Keep in mind that Shard's contract was easy to move because of the circumstances. New Orleans was just sold, has a shiny new toy, needed money to ensure being able to keep Gordon around and only around half of his contract was guaranteed. Those all played a significant factor in why it was so easy to move his deal.

 

To put it bluntly, John Wall won't become an actual basketball player without actual basketball talent around him. Subtracting a worthless player from the roster while bringing in two legitimate players makes perfect sense basketball wise.

 

That makes sense.

 

However, does it make sense to basically commit to a core that has the upside of a .500 team and then two years later finding yourself right back to where you were today, which is John Wall and basically nothing (well, and their draft pick this year)? Sure, Wall will have improved over those two years and it will help his development, but you will also have less time to convince him that it is in his best interest staying with the Wizards. He will be into his 2nd contract then and you will only have so much time to get a team around him that he would be comfortable signing with.

[AboveLegit]

All valid points, and again, I'm not here to refute them. Every point you have made is 100% true.

 

I don't think the front office can sit on their hands, sit back, and watch young talent grow on virtually the same team. It's why I advocate the basketball aspect of this trade. The trade isn't about making John Wall happy, it's about making him better. Management has given up on their Dwight Howard, Carmelo Anthony, and X-insert superstar talent pipe dreams, and realized the only way to develop their one prized franchise player is by developing him on a good team. I can't stress this enough.

 

Off the top of my head, Derrick Rose, Rajon Rondo, Chris Paul on the Hornets (David West and Peja were vital in his development), any player on the Spurs, and Mike Conley have all taken the "leap" while playing for competitive teams. This trade is about facilitating the jump John Wall inevitably HAS to make, and once that happens, when he reaches his potential (which I still believe is higher than Derrick Rose's), Washington becomes a destination for free agents.

 

And if you think about that, 2 years is the time frame. Randy Wittman is hired for the next 2 years, as is Ernie Grunfeld. 2 years is the amount left in Wall's rookie contract (unless he makes that huge jump this year), and 2 years is the length of both Ariza's and Okafor's contracts.

 

Hypothetically speaking, say Wall does make the jump next year. Ariza and Okafor become expiring contracts, with a draft pick around the teens, and a roster with 9 solid young players, that superstar pipe dream could become reality.

 

Again, you're not wrong in your stance, I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I still don't know whether or not I like the trade, there's so much to weigh in here, if I had to give this deal a grade, it would be incomplete. I think it's best to just sit back and see how the team performs this year.

 

 

 

This is all assuming Beal is even available to be drafted. I don't think Charlotte will pick him, but what if Cleveland trades up and picks him at 2? Washington showed their hand very early and everybody knows Beal is there guy now. That gives a team like Cleveland or Portland the incentive to trade up to 2 if they want Beal, which I think would be the case for Cleveland (not as much for Portland). That would throw a wrench in the Wizards plans as well.

This is what irks me the most about this deal. If Beal is gone, I'd be devastated. I don't like the idea of settling for Harrison Barnes (which is essentially what would happen, it's a two man race now for us). He's clearly a step below the second tier of prospects (MKG, Beal, Robinson), and I hate the fact that Washington could turn him into a SG.

Edited June 24, 2012 by AboveLegit