The Official Washington Basketball Thread: Wizards, Mystics etc

[Hersh]

35 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

No it isn't.  If Wiseman sucks and you didn't get lucky and hit a grand slam with 7, then the Warriors deal effectively nets you nothing of long term value in return for Beal.  The Raptors trade gets you a significantly better prospect than Wiseman plus some cap space.

 

Wiseman would not go top five in this class, and that's not factoring in his poor rookie season and his injuries.  When you do factor those in, I'm not sure he goes top ten.  Young high draft picks who struggled as rookies are massively depreciated assets.  They are worth less than draft picks themselves.

That's why there will be such a push to get a Beal trade done before draft night.

 

Everyone understands that you hate Wiseman and you think he's already a bust. I mean, 19 year old 7fters that average 11-6 and shoot over 31% from three their first year while playing 21 minutes per game and  they are the 4th scoring option on a good team, those guys are always busts.  

[Going Commando]

2 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

Everyone understands that you hate Wiseman and you think he's already a bust. I mean, 19 year old 7fters that average 11-6 and shoot over 31% from three their first year while playing 21 minutes per game and  they are the 4th scoring option on a good team, those guys are always busts.  

 

You've been listening to too many homer Dubs takes.  The same fans who are convinced that Andrew Wiggins is some super valuable three and D player they can't afford to lose, and that they'll be back to winning championships just as soon as Klay Thompson returns.  Wiseman wasn't any good as a rookie and then he tore his meniscus.  But even if he was coming out in this draft and was perfectly healthy, no draft expert thinks he's as good as the top four in this class.  That's completely throwing his rookie season out.  But if you actually consider it instead of pretending like all of his red flags don't exist, then there is no way you can consider him a good enough bet to give up Beal for.

 

I'd like for Wiseman to be a great prospect because I'd love for the Wizards to have more options, especially an option for a dominant center prospect.  But I'm asking if anyone can think of a precedent where a rookie big with a negative VORP and just a 13 PER ever ended up becoming a star?  I can't think of one.  The closest situation I can think of is Julius Randle struggling for years before breaking out with the Knicks, but Randle was a face up forward coming into the NBA.  His perimeter oriented game explained his inefficiency better.  Why did Wiseman struggle so much?   It's not like the Warriors haven't been good at developing their players.  Do we really expect him to be a much better prospect here?

 

If you give me a choice between Evan Mobley or Jalen Suggs versus the much sketchier bet on Wiseman, I'm taking one of the first two for sure.

[Hersh]

 

6 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

But I'm asking if anyone can think of a precedent where a rookie big with a negative VORP and just a 13 PER ever ended up becoming a star?

 

I so can't wait for your 10 paragraph response how they are too different to be compared. 

[PeterMP]

2 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

I'd like for Wiseman to be a great prospect because I'd love for the Wizards to have more options, especially an option for a dominant center prospect.  But I'm asking if anyone can think of a precedent where a rookie big with a negative VORP and just a 13 PER ever ended up becoming a star?  I can't think of one.  The closest situation I can think of is Julius Randle struggling for years before breaking out with the Knicks, but Randle was a face up forward coming into the NBA.  His perimeter oriented game explained his inefficiency better.  Why did Wiseman struggle so much?   It's not like the Warriors haven't been good at developing their players.  Do we really expect him to be a much better prospect here?

 

If you give me a choice between Evan Mobley or Jalen Suggs versus the much sketchier bet on Wiseman, I'm taking one of the first two for sure.

 

Wiseman's VORP and PER are both misleading because of the team he played on.  Not very many good big man go to a team that is that same season fighting for a playoff spot.  Wiseman wasn't asked to contribute much to his teams points because he wasn't made the focal point of the teams offense like most good big man are their first year.

 

The answer to your question is essentially the same as what was the last time a 19 year old went in the top 5 to a team that was trying to make the playoffs the next year with a player that is serious candidate for MVP?

 

The answer is none.  The only comparisons for Wiseman are going to be lower drafted players that weren't given the keys to franchise right off the bat.  But because they were lower drafted, they were never expected to be as good.

 

For example, Gobert at 21 had a PER of 12.9 and a negative VORP. 

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

Apparently, Beal is miffed because we didn't hire his boy Sam Cassell.

 

He thought he had more pull..😒

[Ball Security]

In CBS’s latest mock, they have us making the trade with GS and taking Kuminga at 7, DMitchell at 14, and Garuba at 15.

 

Keon Johnson and Kai Jones are also available.

 

They have Cleveland trading back to 6 and taking Bouknight.  That’s how Kuminga drops to 7.

[Going Commando]

8 hours ago, Hersh said:

I so can't wait for your 10 paragraph response how they are too different to be compared. 

 

If you already know the comparison is lousy, why make it?  Or if you seriously think Giannis is an apt comparison and that Wiseman has a future like his, then we're going to have to agree to disagree, because I have no idea what you're basing that on.

3 hours ago, Ball Security said:

In CBS’s latest mock, they have us making the trade with GS and taking Kuminga at 7, DMitchell at 14, and Garuba at 15.

 

Keon Johnson and Kai Jones are also available.

 

They have Cleveland trading back to 6 and taking Bouknight.  That’s how Kuminga drops to 7.

 

Almost every mock I've seen has Mobley going #3 to Cleveland.  What is the reasoning they give for Cleveland trading down and taking another undersized combo guard?  Don't get me wrong though, that scenario would be fantastic for us.  Even better would be to get Cleveland to trade #3 to us for 7 and 14 instead.  Then we get Wiseman and Suggs and don't have to make a choice between them.  Everyone is happy.  But I think Cleveland would be foolish to do it.

[Going Commando]

8 hours ago, PeterMP said:

 

Wiseman's VORP and PER are both misleading because of the team he played on.  Not very many good big man go to a team that is that same season fighting for a playoff spot.  Wiseman wasn't asked to contribute much to his teams points because he wasn't made the focal point of the teams offense like most good big man are their first year.

 

The answer to your question is essentially the same as what was the last time a 19 year old went in the top 5 to a team that was trying to make the playoffs the next year with a player that is serious candidate for MVP?

 

The answer is none.  The only comparisons for Wiseman are going to be lower drafted players that weren't given the keys to franchise right off the bat.  But because they were lower drafted, they were never expected to be as good.

 

For example, Gobert at 21 had a PER of 12.9 and a negative VORP. 

 

Well then throw the high draft pick stipulation out of it, as I'm mainly just looking for comparable players who struggled as rookies but ended up becoming ~All Star caliber players--precedents that could make Wiseman a justifiable return for Beal.  Rudy Gobert is the best answer so far, but I'd say his rookie season was even more small sample size theater than Wiseman's since he only played 400 minutes.  The next season was night and day as his numbers exploded and he had a 21 PER, a 122 ORtg against a 98 DRtg, and a 3.4 VORP.  It's pretty confusing why Gobert didn't get more run as a rookie in hindsight, and I can't see Wiseman making that kind of jump next year.  It's not out of the question but it feels pretty unlikely to me.  But let's say the situations are comparable and he has a future like Gobert's, I'm still not sure I prefer that as the return to the potential of Green/Mobley/Suggs.  I still wouldn't be convinced that it was the best offer on the table for Beal.

 

Andrew Bynum feels like the most optimistic and comparable situation for Wiseman.  He made a huge leap from his age 19 to age 20 season, so if that's in the cards for Wiseman, it'd get me to consider the trade.  But again, I'd still prefer the 2-4 guys in this class to an Andrew Bynum-type outcome.

[Mr. Sinister]

Give me Beal, now. 

[Ball Security]

7 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

If you already know the comparison is lousy, why make it?  Or if you seriously think Giannis is an apt comparison and that Wiseman has a future like his, then we're going to have to agree to disagree, because I have no idea what you're basing that on.

 

Almost every mock I've seen has Mobley going #3 to Cleveland.  What is the reasoning they give for Cleveland trading down and taking another undersized combo guard?  Don't get me wrong though, that scenario would be fantastic for us.  Even better would be to get Cleveland to trade #3 to us for 7 and 14 instead.  Then we get Wiseman and Suggs and don't have to make a choice between them.  Everyone is happy.  But I think Cleveland would be foolish to do it.

It was because OKC wanted Barnes and didn’t think he’d get past number 5.  Cleveland also gets Kai Jones at 11 and other future picks.

[PeterMP]

7 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

Well then throw the high draft pick stipulation out of it, as I'm mainly just looking for comparable players who struggled as rookies but ended up becoming ~All Star caliber players--precedents that could make Wiseman a justifiable return for Beal.

 

Most people that aren't high draft picks struggle their rookie year for a reason.  They aren't very good, which is why they weren't high draft picks.  Especially if you are a big man if people think you're going to be good, you'll go high.

 

How many good big man are there that are good in the NBA that weren't high draft picks?

 

At that point your only talking about a handful of players.  And even somebody like Jokic went to a bad Denver team.  

 

(You're also most likely talking about Euro who have very different experiences and likely have been playing pro basketball for years before coming here.  Comparing Wiseman coming into the NBA off of a year of Covid to a Euro that played years of pro ball in Europe directly before coming to the NBA is foolish.)

 

Putting up stats on bad teams that lead to inflated VORPs and PERs isn't uncommon.  The flip of that is when good players go to better teams, it isn't uncommon for good players to see their PER and VORP slip when they go to to better teams.  And it isn't that they got worse.  It is just when you are on a better team, you contribute less to the team's points.

 

I'm not saying Wiseman is going to be good.  I know essentially nothing about him.  But you are taking essentially an unprecedented situation, saying you can't find many cases that match his where the person turned out to good, and are using that to conclude he won't be good.  Of course you can't find many cases where the person turned out to be good because there aren't many cases like his.

 

 

Edited July 27, 2021 by PeterMP

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

I wish...

Edited July 27, 2021 by BRAVEONAWARPATH

[PeterMP]

I'm extremely confused why the Knicks would give up anything for Westbrook.

[Ball Security]

Knicks have a lot of picks from the Porzingis deal, right?

[Warhead36]

27 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

I'm extremely confused why the Knicks would give up anything for Westbrook.

Its the Knicks.

 

 

Honestly if we can trade Beal and dump Westbrook and get a completely clean slate of youth and draft picks, I'd go ahead and pull the trigger. This current roster as constructed isn't winning jack.

[Hersh]

8 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

If you already know the comparison is lousy, why make it?  Or if you seriously think Giannis is an apt comparison and that Wiseman has a future like his, then we're going to have to agree to disagree, because I have no idea what you're basing that on.

so laughably predictable. 

52 minutes ago, BRAVEONAWARPATH said:

I wish...

If an offer materials that is something this glorious and Shep doesn’t take it, I’m done. 

[Going Commando]

15 minutes ago, Hersh said:

so laughably predictable. 

 

"I made a useless ****post because I have nothing left to offer the debate."

[bearrock]

3 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

"I made a useless ****post because I have nothing left to offer the debate."

 

You asked for an example and he gave you an example.  You moved the goalpost and @PeterMP explained why Wiseman is not going to have a lot of comparables to begin with.  

 

But let's just save everyone's time.  No, there's no precedent for a player named James Wiseman drafted by GSW in 2020 who went on to become a great player.  None whatsoever.

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, PeterMP said:

I'm not saying Wiseman is going to be good.  I know essentially nothing about him.  But you are taking essentially an unprecedented situation, saying you can't find many cases that match his where the person turned out to good, and are using that to conclude he won't be good.  Of course you can't find many cases where the person turned out to be good because there aren't many cases like his.

 

The fact that it's an unprecedented situation is certainly relevant to assessing Wiseman's value.  The truth is that there just aren't many highly drafted young bigs who struggle as rookies--on good teams or bad ones--that end up being good.  It's rare, because young highly drafted bigs who did end up becoming good usually showed more promise as rookies.  They tended to rebound better and they scored more efficiently, hence the better PER and VORP scores.

 

And I want to add that GS wasn't a team with serious aspirations for contention last season.  Steph Curry was great, but the team wasn't.  They were a play-in team and their offense struggled and could have definitely used Wiseman's scoring and rebounding if he was capable of giving it.  Wiggins led that team in minutes and was second in FGA, and that kid is not good.  This is the reason they're trying to poach Beal in the first place, as apparently they need two scoring title threats to run their offense well now.  And Draymond Green led the team in rebounding with just 7 per game.  So again, I'd like to know what the issues holding Wiseman back were as a rookie, and whether they are merely situational or if they are coming with him in a trade.

 

I think it's obviously the case that Wiseman's asset value has significantly diminished since the draft, and the fact that he's even being shopped is evidence of that.  Teams will hold onto a highly drafted seven footer for dear life if they truly believe in them.

[Going Commando]

Just now, bearrock said:

 

You asked for an example and he gave you an example.  You moved the goalpost and @PeterMP explained why Wiseman is not going to have a lot of comparables to begin with.  

 

But let's just save everyone's time.  No, there's no precedent for a player named James Wiseman drafted by GSW in 2020 who went on to become a great player.  None whatsoever.

 

I didn't move the goalpost, I asked for an example of a big like Wiseman whose career started similarly that eventually became a star.  He gave an example that he knew was a crappy comparison as a snarky throwaway response.  But since that apparently was not clear, the reason the comparison to Giannis was not apt is because Giannis came into the league as a slashing/playmaking wing.  Plus he was a late lotto pick and long term project that took years to grow into the player he's become--literally and skill wise.  His game is far more expansive than Wiseman's, and was from day one of his career.

 

I get that Wizards fans want to move on and buy into the idea of a promising new start, and that casual NBA fans want to see a new super team built in Golden State.  But the Wizards need to make a good deal and be realistic about what's coming back to them in that hypothetical Golden State trade.  Make no mistake, it is not a good sign that Wiseman did not play that well as a rookie.  And we haven't even talked about the fact that he tore his meniscus and leg injuries are always worrisome with bigs--particularly ones whose game is entirely predicated on athleticism.

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

Honestly if we can trade Beal and dump Westbrook and get a completely clean slate of youth and draft picks, I'd go ahead and pull the trigger. This current roster as constructed isn't winning jack.

 

I wouldn't necessarily feel the need to dump Westbrook since he's probably got negative trade value, and his mentorship could be useful if we got a Jalen Suggs or Jalen Green type of prospect for Beal.  But if we could include him in the Golden State trade for Beal and drop his salary without having to take back negative value assets... then I would be much more interested in that Golden State trade.  We could presumably either get out of having to take back Wiggins, or we could take on his salary and still have cap space.

 

If we actually get positive value assets in return for Westbrook, while still getting Wiseman and the GS picks, then I would pull the trigger on the trade.  We could package those assets together to go up and get Suggs from the Cleveland spot and end up with Wiseman + Suggs + cap space.  That's the best outcome for us.  Wiseman then becomes a lottery ticket and we're not putting all of our eggs in his basket.

[Ball Security]

9 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I wouldn't necessarily feel the need to dump Westbrook since he's probably got negative trade value, and his mentorship could be useful if we got a Jalen Suggs or Jalen Green type of prospect for Beal.  But if we could include him in the Golden State trade for Beal and drop his salary without having to take back negative value assets... then I would be much more interested in that Golden State trade.  We could presumably either get out of having to take back Wiggins, or we could take on his salary and still have cap space.

 

If we actually get positive value assets in return for Westbrook, while still getting Wiseman and the GS picks, then I would pull the trigger on the trade.  We could package those assets together to go up and get Suggs from the Cleveland spot and end up with Wiseman + Suggs + cap space.  That's the best outcome for us.  Wiseman then becomes a lottery ticket and we're not putting all of our eggs in his basket.

If we were able to get enough assets to move up to 3, would you take Suggs over Mobley assuming Cunningham/Green go 1/2?

[PeterMP]

  

3 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

The fact that it's an unprecedented situation is certainly relevant to assessing Wiseman's value.  The truth is that there just aren't many highly drafted young bigs who struggle as rookies--on good teams or bad ones--that end up being good.  It's rare, because young highly drafted bigs who did end up becoming good usually showed more promise as rookies.  They tended to rebound better and they scored more efficiently, hence the better PER and VORP scores.

 

And I want to add that GS wasn't a team with serious aspirations for contention last season.  Steph Curry was great, but the team wasn't.  They were a play-in team and their offense struggled and could have definitely used Wiseman's scoring and rebounding if he was capable of giving it.  Wiggins led that team in minutes and was second in FGA, and that kid is not good.  This is the reason they're trying to poach Beal in the first place, as apparently they need two scoring title threats to run their offense well now.  And Draymond Green led the team in rebounding with just 7 per game.  So again, I'd like to know what the issues holding Wiseman back were as a rookie, and whether they are merely situational or if they are coming with him in a trade.

 

I think it's obviously the case that Wiseman's asset value has significantly diminished since the draft, and the fact that he's even being shopped is evidence of that.  Teams will hold onto a highly drafted seven footer for dear life if they truly believe in them.

 

Again, the fact that there aren't many comparable cases to a highly unusual case isn't surprising.  Then you are going further and mispresenting/misunderstanding what PER and VORP are.

 

PER and VORP are not a measure of scoring or rebounding efficiency.  PER and VORP are often higher for players on bad teams vs. an equivalent player on a better team.  KD was even on a good team before going to GS, and he saw his VORP go down (7.8 to 5.5) when going to from OKC to GS.  KD's PER also goes down when he goes from OKC to GS.  KD didn't get worse when he went to GS.  Playing with a great scorer like Curry lowers the PER and VORP of even another great scorer.

 

If you want to look at something scoring efficiency look at something like his eFG% which is actually very good for a rookie big. 

 

He was at 53.5% last year.  Embiid was only at 50.8% as a rookie.  Durant was at 45.1% as a rookie.

 

His rebounding also doesn't look bad.

 

His TRB% was 14.4%  Embiid his rookie year was at 17%.  That's not a huge discrepancy.  KD was 6.9%.

 

(Just looking at his efficiency stats, the thing that jumps out is that he doesn't appear to block many shots for an athletic 7 footer.

 

But it certainly looks like he can score and rebound.  He doesn't turn the ball over a ton too so that's a plus.

 

Though I wouldn't look at has TS% and claim he's going to be a better scorer than Embiid and  KD because their situations were not really comparable.

 

If you simply take his efficiency stats and put them over a usage level that people like Embiid and KD saw their rookie years on a comparable team (ones that didn't score as much as GS), his PER and VORP would be much higher.  Though again, that's probably not realistic.  On a bad team where he's the focus of the offense, his eFG% is probably lower.)

 

You want to say that you have concerns with how good Wiseman is?  Fine.  But don't use his PER and VORP as some sort of measure of his efficiency as a player last year and don't use the fact that there aren't many historical comps in general for him to measure that there aren't many positive historical comps for him as a negative.

 

(And Wiggins is a good player.  He's overpaid for how good he is, but he's a net positive player.)

 

With respect the to the Knicks, the Knicks haven't been dysfunctional in terms of making trades for a while.  They seem to regularly misvalue how much NBA stars will want to play for them.  But it seems unlikely they will make a bad trade and give up really anything for Westbrook simply because they are the Knicks.

Edited July 27, 2021 by PeterMP

[PeterMP]

To make an analogy of the Wiseman case:

 

Let's say somebody comes up to you and says if you push this button, something negative will happen to you, but I'll also give you $10,000.

 

The question becomes is $10,000 enough to offset the negative thing that is going to happen to you.

 

If you don't know anybody else that this offer has been made to, the fact that you don't know of any cases where somebody has pushed the button and the process (the negative thing + being given the $10K) has been a net positive isn't good evidence that you shouldn't push the button.

 

Wiseman's situation is essentially unprecedented.  That there aren't really many cases that are reasonable comps that are positive isn't at all surprising.

[bearrock]

Wiseman is also essentially a high school draft pick with just 3 NCAA games as a freshman.  Nor is his strength as a traditional big.  Now, he may junk out of the league for any number of reasons, including injury and/or ability.  But it is not surprising that there's no clear comparison.  He was in a very unique circumstances as a pretty unique player.