Kispert + #26 = what pick?

[Texas Chuck]

Maybe #20 if a team likes Kispert?

I could see Cleveland and Phoenix interested [#20 and #22]. Maybe New Orleans at #21 if they move C.J.

I seriously doubt the Wizards move off a Kispert just to move up 4-5 spots in this draft. That doesn't make a ton of sense from the Wizards perspective when the cupboard is already bare.

Eh. I mean it just depends what the Wizards think of him. If they see him as just the guy he is, a bench shooter with solid size but who hasn't really developed other parts of his game, you probably don't want to give him a new long-term deal. And at that point, realizing his limited value in trade is probably the smartest thing to do.

No team is giving you a first for him on an expiring deal. So take 2 2nds or move up? If there is a guy the team loved, moving up using a guy not in your future is a good plan.

Now if they see more upside and think even on a bigger deal he's good value then sure don't trade him. But he's not a guy who is moving the needle any.

[Dat2U]

Maybe #20 if a team likes Kispert?

I could see Cleveland and Phoenix interested [#20 and #22]. Maybe New Orleans at #21 if they move C.J.

I seriously doubt the Wizards move off a Kispert just to move up 4-5 spots in this draft. That doesn't make a ton of sense from the Wizards perspective when the cupboard is already bare.

Eh. I mean it just depends what the Wizards think of him. If they see him as just the guy he is, a bench shooter with solid size but who hasn't really developed other parts of his game, you probably don't want to give him a new long-term deal. And at that point, realizing his limited value in trade is probably the smartest thing to do.

No team is giving you a first for him on an expiring deal. So take 2 2nds or move up? If there is a guy the team loved, moving up using a guy not in your future is a good plan.

Now if they see more upside and think even on a bigger deal he's good value then sure don't trade him. But he's not a guy who is moving the needle any.

I assume they'll try to give him a modest extension like they did Deni and see if he continues to improve.

Trading up 4 or 5 spots in a draft where no one can tell the difference between the 15th best prospect or the 35th just doesn't pass the sniff test no matter how logical you try to make it sound.

[Texas Chuck]

I mean if you think Washington scouts don't see differences between 15 and 35 on their talent board, you have much bigger problems than getting value out of Kispert.

Yikes what an indictment of your own franchise.

[Skybox]

I think ORL at 18 makes some sense, but I’d prefer to send some salary back to preserve cap space …

What about Cole Anthony straight up for Kispert ?

[TGW]

I mean if you think Washington scouts don't see differences between 15 and 35 on their talent board, you have much bigger problems than getting value out of Kispert.

Yikes what an indictment of your own franchise.

You’re enamored with draft positioning and not the actual prospects in this draft. Dat is one of the best draft experts on realgm, if he says it, it’s probably true.

[Texas Chuck]

I mean if you think Washington scouts don't see differences between 15 and 35 on their talent board, you have much bigger problems than getting value out of Kispert.

Yikes what an indictment of your own franchise.

You’re enamored with draft positioning and not the actual prospects in this draft. Dat is one of the best draft experts on realgm, if he says it, it’s probably true.

I;m not. I've been super open I have no idea about the specifc talent in this draft. I have no doubts Dat has a better idea than me.

But what we think or what Draft Express thinks matters not at all. What matters is what Washington thinks. And I assume their big board absolutely has a clear distinction between who they see as the 15th best prospect and who they see as the 35th.

And if they don't that means you have the wrong guys in those jobs.

[brackdan70]

Kispert is nothing special.
Lots of holes in his game.
He moves you up a few spots much like others have suggested. I think a trade like this goes down if a team really wants Kispert and is willing to trade back in the draft.
I am not sure the demand is there.

[brackdan70]

I seriously doubt the Wizards move off a Kispert just to move up 4-5 spots in this draft. That doesn't make a ton of sense from the Wizards perspective when the cupboard is already bare.

Eh. I mean it just depends what the Wizards think of him. If they see him as just the guy he is, a bench shooter with solid size but who hasn't really developed other parts of his game, you probably don't want to give him a new long-term deal. And at that point, realizing his limited value in trade is probably the smartest thing to do.

No team is giving you a first for him on an expiring deal. So take 2 2nds or move up? If there is a guy the team loved, moving up using a guy not in your future is a good plan.

Now if they see more upside and think even on a bigger deal he's good value then sure don't trade him. But he's not a guy who is moving the needle any.

I assume they'll try to give him a modest extension like they did Deni and see if he continues to improve.

Trading up 4 or 5 spots in a draft where no one can tell the difference between the 15th best prospect or the 35th just doesn't pass the sniff test no matter how logical you try to make it sound.

I can see that POV. It might not make sense to move up a few slots this year, but Kispert isn’t going to move you up much farther.

[jayjaysee]

Does Dallas’ top 12 protected 2025 first count as an answer? Turns into two 2nds if not conveyed..

The chance that Dallas is the 6th seed and Washington gets the 18th pick is the same as getting the 8th pick in this draft right?

Then you dump THJ else where and either use 26th on a guard or trade it for Grimes or such… maybe end up ducking the tax completely for a year and hope the new guys are willing to spend big through KAI’s (fingers crossed) next contract..

[A BETTER DJ]

Thinking the Magic would give you 18

Just ask for their 2nd and they would add that too...

I agree. I think we would do 18 for Kispert and #26. Magic might even throw in a 2nd as well

[Scoot McGroot]

GMs talking about this draft is like drafting Tobias Harris at #1 yet Deni Avdija on one of the best contracts in the league is only worth a late lottery pick & cap filler. Make it make sense!

Well, a Tobias not on a max contract in the last decade has been a pretty good player, right? So, put a Tobias Harris on a rookie contract for 4 years, and restricted free agency (so a path to team control for u to another 5 years), and that’s a pretty valuable player/contract, no?

If your looking at it from that perspective it's only valuable for the rookie deal because the next 5 years are going to be wildly overpaid.

Generally, restricted free agency suppresses costs a bit unless the player is worth it, or has shown solid potential warranting an overpay. Barring completely mismanaging a free agency, they usually come cheaper on the second deal than they would on the open market.

[Devilanche]

I mean if you think Washington scouts don't see differences between 15 and 35 on their talent board, you have much bigger problems than getting value out of Kispert.

Yikes what an indictment of your own franchise.

+1 this so much.

If you want argue you can’t be bothered with the difference of #25 and #31 for this draft other than the longer contract (if player pans out) that’s reasonable but 20 spot is quite a fair bit of different selections available to you.

If

[nate33]

The Wizards desperately need Kispert’s shooting. They’re not going to trade him to move up 6-8 spots in a weak draft. Once you get out of the lottery, drafts are just a crapshoot anyhow. The historical difference between draft picks in the 16-20 range and draft picks in the 24-28 range is virtually 0.

[Def Leppard]

Maybe the raps at 19

Sent from my SM-S901W using RealGM mobile app

[gswhoops]

Maybe #20 if a team likes Kispert?

I could see Cleveland and Phoenix interested [#20 and #22]. Maybe New Orleans at #21 if they move C.J.

I seriously doubt the Wizards move off a Kispert just to move up 4-5 spots in this draft. That doesn't make a ton of sense from the Wizards perspective when the cupboard is already bare.

Eh. I mean it just depends what the Wizards think of him. If they see him as just the guy he is, a bench shooter with solid size but who hasn't really developed other parts of his game, you probably don't want to give him a new long-term deal. And at that point, realizing his limited value in trade is probably the smartest thing to do.

No team is giving you a first for him on an expiring deal. So take 2 2nds or move up? If there is a guy the team loved, moving up using a guy not in your future is a good plan.

Now if they see more upside and think even on a bigger deal he's good value then sure don't trade him. But he's not a guy who is moving the needle any.

Yeah I mean this is the difference between how good orgs and bad orgs think. Good orgs (especially in a rebuilding phase) are always assessing whether a guy is part of their long-term core, and if not, let's get value for him now before we have to pay him and open up that playing time for guys who might be part of the future. Bad orgs will keep guys until they hit FA because they have "untapped potential" and then re-sign him because "he's our guy" and "we can't lose him for nothing" and then end up with an overpaid role player who doesn't move the needle.

(to be clear, I'm not commenting on whether Washington is a good or bad org here)

[Dat2U]

I seriously doubt the Wizards move off a Kispert just to move up 4-5 spots in this draft. That doesn't make a ton of sense from the Wizards perspective when the cupboard is already bare.

Eh. I mean it just depends what the Wizards think of him. If they see him as just the guy he is, a bench shooter with solid size but who hasn't really developed other parts of his game, you probably don't want to give him a new long-term deal. And at that point, realizing his limited value in trade is probably the smartest thing to do.

No team is giving you a first for him on an expiring deal. So take 2 2nds or move up? If there is a guy the team loved, moving up using a guy not in your future is a good plan.

Now if they see more upside and think even on a bigger deal he's good value then sure don't trade him. But he's not a guy who is moving the needle any.

Yeah I mean this is the difference between how good orgs and bad orgs think. Good orgs (especially in a rebuilding phase) are always assessing whether a guy is part of their long-term core, and if not, let's get value for him now before we have to pay him and open up that playing time for guys who might be part of the future. Bad orgs will keep guys until they hit FA because they have "untapped potential" and then re-sign him because "he's our guy" and "we can't lose him for nothing" and then end up with an overpaid role player who doesn't move the needle.

(to be clear, I'm not commenting on whether Washington is a good or bad org here)

This idea that there's only one way to do things is completely nonsensical. Wiz signed Deni to a below market declining deal using the exact same logic you trashed. Now its one of the best contracts in the league. Same with Kuz, and now there's a good chance they'll recoup a 1st for keeping an asset.

[gswhoops]

Eh. I mean it just depends what the Wizards think of him. If they see him as just the guy he is, a bench shooter with solid size but who hasn't really developed other parts of his game, you probably don't want to give him a new long-term deal. And at that point, realizing his limited value in trade is probably the smartest thing to do.

No team is giving you a first for him on an expiring deal. So take 2 2nds or move up? If there is a guy the team loved, moving up using a guy not in your future is a good plan.

Now if they see more upside and think even on a bigger deal he's good value then sure don't trade him. But he's not a guy who is moving the needle any.

Yeah I mean this is the difference between how good orgs and bad orgs think. Good orgs (especially in a rebuilding phase) are always assessing whether a guy is part of their long-term core, and if not, let's get value for him now before we have to pay him and open up that playing time for guys who might be part of the future. Bad orgs will keep guys until they hit FA because they have "untapped potential" and then re-sign him because "he's our guy" and "we can't lose him for nothing" and then end up with an overpaid role player who doesn't move the needle.

(to be clear, I'm not commenting on whether Washington is a good or bad org here)

This idea that there's only one way to do things is completely nonsensical. Wiz signed Deni to a below market declining deal using the exact same logic you trashed. Now its one of the best contracts in the league. Same with Kuz, and now there's a good chance they'll recoup a 1st for keeping an asset.

I mean, they clearly decided Deni was part of their core in step 1 of the exact logic I described, and they were right.

If you think Kispert is a part of the core long term then keep him. But don't keep him just because it's the path of least resistance.

[HartfordWhalers]

Just a reminder that offering a counter you know is awful is still against forum rules, no matter how much you didn't like the other person's offer.

[HartfordWhalers]

The Wizards desperately need Kispert’s shooting. They’re not going to trade him to move up 6-8 spots in a weak draft. Once you get out of the lottery, drafts are just a crapshoot anyhow. The historical difference between draft picks in the 16-20 range and draft picks in the 24-28 range is virtually 0.

What is your basis for this? And then how does 24-28 compare to 34-40? Because it would seem the obvious zag to me here would be something like:
#26 for #34 and #40
Washington gets 2 similar players to 1, while Portland gets 1 shot at a better player.

[Chris Porter's Hair]

Take out Avidja, make it Kuzma and it's a deal.

Is this a serious response or just an over the top response? Cause I don't see anyway Kuzma is worth 9, let alone 9 plus a few things.

Sent from my SM-S901U using RealGM mobile app

And I don't know how the #9 and what I feel is junk filler is remotely worth Avidja. See how easy that is? Oh and I think Kuzma for #9 in one of the weakest drafts in memory isn't that far off at all. The #9 in this draft is like #18-20 in a good draft.

Which means you tried to respond to a poor trade offer cluttering the board by cluttering it further with another offer that was just as ridiculous, if not more. Thanks?