RealGM

Even if we draft a PG with our late 1st, I'd resign either Tyus or Butler. Poole has looked good at PG but that's after the wake up call with getting benched. When he felt comfortable, he was awful. I think he may be one of those guys who needs to feel insecure to be pushed to focus and play smarter.

Aggressive tanking job…

?s=46&t=GWeuz7j_sc5cBYZzdD92Tw

I hated the Kyle Kuzma resigning, and while I didn’t really like the Chris Paul for Jordan Poole trade, I was willing to give the new management the benefit of the doubt and put the best possible spin on it.

After a full season, Patrick Baldwin jr had a higher ws/48 than both Kuzma and Poole. And Johnny Davis had a better ws/48 than Poole. Most people on this board are ready to get rid of both Baldwin and Davis. I mention this because the Wizards are stuck paying ~$58 million combined to two players who are arguably worse than Baldwin and Davis. Also stuck giving them a combined ~60 mpg.

If shepherd were still gm, many poster’s would probably be claiming Bilal is a bust and wizards missed taking lively or mason.

Hopefully, the front office starts making moves that make the past off season look better in hindsight.

leswizards wrote:I hated the Kyle Kuzma resigning, and while I didn’t really like the Chris Paul for Jordan Poole trade, I was willing to give the new management the benefit of the doubt and put the best possible spin on it.

After a full season, Patrick Baldwin jr had a higher ws/48 than both Kuzma and Poole. And Johnny Davis had a better ws/48 than Poole. Most people on this board are ready to get rid of both Baldwin and Davis. I mention this because the Wizards are stuck paying ~$58 million combined to two players who are arguably worse than Baldwin and Davis. Also stuck giving them a combined ~60 mpg.

If shepherd were still gm, many poster’s would probably be claiming Bilal is a bust and wizards missed taking lively or mason.

Hopefully, the front office starts making moves that make the past off season look better in hindsight.

Baldwin and Davis played meaningless minutes in meaningless end-of-season games against G-Leaguers who surely never even bothered to scout them. The idea that they are better than Kuzma is preposterous.

The fact that Dallas was willing to give us a FRP (and perhaps more according to rumors) is proof that the Kuzma signing was a good one. I guarantee you that nobody is giving us a FRP for Baldwin and Davis.

nate33 wrote:

leswizards wrote:I hated the Kyle Kuzma resigning, and while I didn’t really like the Chris Paul for Jordan Poole trade, I was willing to give the new management the benefit of the doubt and put the best possible spin on it.

After a full season, Patrick Baldwin jr had a higher ws/48 than both Kuzma and Poole. And Johnny Davis had a better ws/48 than Poole. Most people on this board are ready to get rid of both Baldwin and Davis. I mention this because the Wizards are stuck paying ~$58 million combined to two players who are arguably worse than Baldwin and Davis. Also stuck giving them a combined ~60 mpg.

If shepherd were still gm, many poster’s would probably be claiming Bilal is a bust and wizards missed taking lively or mason.

Hopefully, the front office starts making moves that make the past off season look better in hindsight.

Baldwin and Davis played meaningless minutes in meaningless end-of-season games against G-Leaguers who surely never even bothered to scout them. The idea that they are better than Kuzma is preposterous.

The fact that Dallas was willing to give us a FRP (and perhaps more according to rumors) is proof that the Kuzma signing was a good one. I guarantee you that nobody is giving us a FRP for Baldwin and Davis.

Yeah I'm no Kuzma booster, but pulling out the WS/48 stat to prove try to even start to act like that PBJ in any stretch of the imagination is better is a bad argument given circumstances. PBJ was an absolute bum all season save for a handful of game we were playing teams resting large portions of there squad.

Plus, if you want to diminish a player, using Deni as the comparison is your obvious route.

You two simultaneously missed my point, and proved my point about how bad Kuzma is.

My argument was Kuzma puts up a worse stat than pbj. The two of you interpreted that as I was trying to argue that pbj is good. He isn’t, and I was arguing as such. I was arguing that it is pathetic that a guy like Kuzma who gets 30 mpg can’t even produce a ws/48 better than pbj’s.

The way you bash pbj, goes to prove my point regarding how unproductive Kuzma is.

leswizards wrote:You two simultaneously missed my point, and proved my point about how bad Kuzma is.

My argument was Kuzma puts up a worse stat than pbj. The two of you interpreted that as I was trying to argue that pbj is good. He isn’t, and I was arguing as such. I was arguing that it is pathetic that a guy like Kuzma who gets 30 mpg can’t even produce a ws/48 better than pbj’s.

The way you bash pbj, goes to prove my point regarding how unproductive Kuzma is.

WS/48 is a garbage stat that ranks Daniel Gafford as the 3rd best player in the league for his time while on the Mavericks, and Mike Conley as the 19th best player in the league. Meanwhile, it ranks Curry the 46th best player, and Wemby the 121st best player.

I'm not saying Kuzma is a great player or anything, but at stat like WS/48 absolutely crushes guys who play on bad teams and overrates role players on good teams.

nate33 wrote:

leswizards wrote:You two simultaneously missed my point, and proved my point about how bad Kuzma is.

My argument was Kuzma puts up a worse stat than pbj. The two of you interpreted that as I was trying to argue that pbj is good. He isn’t, and I was arguing as such. I was arguing that it is pathetic that a guy like Kuzma who gets 30 mpg can’t even produce a ws/48 better than pbj’s.

The way you bash pbj, goes to prove my point regarding how unproductive Kuzma is.

WS/48 is a garbage stat that ranks Daniel Gafford as the 3rd best player in the league for his time while on the Mavericks, and Mike Conley as the 19th best player in the league. Meanwhile, it ranks Curry the 46th best player, and Wemby the 121st best player.

I'm not saying Kuzma is a great player or anything, but at stat like WS/48 absolutely crushes guys who play on bad teams and overrates role players on good teams.

A huge reason that the wizards have been a bad team for the past 3 seasons is because Kyle Kuzma is an awful player, and the wizards have not had any coaches who recognize his limitations and reign him in.

leswizards wrote:

nate33 wrote:

leswizards wrote:You two simultaneously missed my point, and proved my point about how bad Kuzma is.

My argument was Kuzma puts up a worse stat than pbj. The two of you interpreted that as I was trying to argue that pbj is good. He isn’t, and I was arguing as such. I was arguing that it is pathetic that a guy like Kuzma who gets 30 mpg can’t even produce a ws/48 better than pbj’s.

The way you bash pbj, goes to prove my point regarding how unproductive Kuzma is.

WS/48 is a garbage stat that ranks Daniel Gafford as the 3rd best player in the league for his time while on the Mavericks, and Mike Conley as the 19th best player in the league. Meanwhile, it ranks Curry the 46th best player, and Wemby the 121st best player.

I'm not saying Kuzma is a great player or anything, but at stat like WS/48 absolutely crushes guys who play on bad teams and overrates role players on good teams.

A huge reason that the wizards have been a bad team for the past 3 seasons is because Kyle Kuzma is an awful player, and the wizards have not had any coaches who recognize his limitations and reign him in.

The team was 2-10 in games that Kuzma did not play.

nate33 wrote:

leswizards wrote:

nate33 wrote:WS/48 is a garbage stat that ranks Daniel Gafford as the 3rd best player in the league for his time while on the Mavericks, and Mike Conley as the 19th best player in the league. Meanwhile, it ranks Curry the 46th best player, and Wemby the 121st best player.

I'm not saying Kuzma is a great player or anything, but at stat like WS/48 absolutely crushes guys who play on bad teams and overrates role players on good teams.

A huge reason that the wizards have been a bad team for the past 3 seasons is because Kyle Kuzma is an awful player, and the wizards have not had any coaches who recognize his limitations and reign him in.

The team was 2-10 in games that Kuzma did not play.

That is almost the exact same winning percentage that the Wizards had when he played. And, he missed 7 of the last 8 games when people like Baldwin, Davis, Vukcevic and Gill were starting and getting major minutes. Even though the wizards were 1-6 in those last games, they looked much better than they did early in the season when Kyle’s teams were getting blown out by 20 points or more. (Granted the opposing teams might have been emptying their benches in these games as well)

nate33 wrote:

leswizards wrote:

nate33 wrote:WS/48 is a garbage stat that ranks Daniel Gafford as the 3rd best player in the league for his time while on the Mavericks, and Mike Conley as the 19th best player in the league. Meanwhile, it ranks Curry the 46th best player, and Wemby the 121st best player.

I'm not saying Kuzma is a great player or anything, but at stat like WS/48 absolutely crushes guys who play on bad teams and overrates role players on good teams.

A huge reason that the wizards have been a bad team for the past 3 seasons is because Kyle Kuzma is an awful player, and the wizards have not had any coaches who recognize his limitations and reign him in.

The team was 2-10 in games that Kuzma did not play.

Pretty close to being winless. A 4 point win against the Bucks (I believe the Bucks were 1-6 without Dame) and a 2 point win against the Bulls

leswizards wrote:
That is almost the exact same winning percentage that the Wizards had when he played. And, he missed 7 of the last 8 games when people like Baldwin, Davis, Vukcevic and Gill were starting and getting major minutes. Even though the wizards were 1-6 in those last games, they looked much better than they did early in the season when Kyle’s teams were getting blown out by 20 points or more.

(Granted the opposing teams might have been emptying their benches in these games as well)

Your last sentence is everything. There’s a BIG difference between playing a Boston team led by Tatum, Brown, Holiday, and KP (which Kuz, Poole and the other starters typically did) and a Boston team led by Sam Hauser, Peyton Pritchard, Luke Kornet and Jordan Walsh.

Do we bring back Keefe on some kind of 1 year deal for another year of tanking? Or do they hire the head coach of the future this offseason?

I have ZERO long term interest in Keefe. He’s a significantly below average coach IMO.

NatP4 wrote:Do we bring back Keefe on some kind of 1 year deal for another year of tanking? Or do they hire the head coach of the future this offseason?

I have ZERO long term interest in Keefe. He’s a significantly below average coach IMO.

Keep him. Players seem to like him, has a history with Winger. He should agree to an affordable short term contract which will please Ted. Supposedly a defensive guru, so give him rim protector or 2 and let’s see if we can play defense for the first time since the Randy Wittman era.

NatP4 wrote:Do we bring back Keefe on some kind of 1 year deal for another year of tanking? Or do they hire the head coach of the future this offseason?

I have ZERO long term interest in Keefe. He’s a significantly below average coach IMO.

I like what Keefe has shown in terms of player development. And since player development is what matters right now, I'm totally cool with him being coach for another season.

But more importantly, it's obvious that our intent is to tank hard for at least one more season. Any first-rate coaching prospect looking for a new job isn't going to want to start off his coaching career with a 20-62 record in 2024-25. So, we would be selecting from a pool of second-tier prospects. I'd rather keep Keefe for another year, let him do what he does best and develop our talent. And then we can look to hire a first-rate coach in 2025 after drafting Cooper Flagg.

nate33 wrote:

NatP4 wrote:Do we bring back Keefe on some kind of 1 year deal for another year of tanking? Or do they hire the head coach of the future this offseason?

I have ZERO long term interest in Keefe. He’s a significantly below average coach IMO.

I like what Keefe has shown in terms of player development. And since player development is what matters right now, I'm totally cool with him being coach for another season.

But more importantly, it's obvious that our intent is to tank hard for at least one more season. Any first-rate coaching prospect looking for a new job isn't going to want to start off his coaching career with a 20-62 record in 2024-25. So, we would be selecting from a pool of second-tier prospects. I'd rather keep Keefe for another year, let him do what he does best and develop our talent. And then we can look to hire a first-rate coach in 2025 after drafting Cooper Flagg.

This sounds great to me but where does trading for Jokic fit in?

nate33 wrote:And then we can look to hire a first-rate coach in 2025 after drafting Cooper Flagg.

I’m not sure what a first-rate coach is anymore. I look around the league and see that many of the top teams are coached by former assistant coaches that most of us never heard of before they got hired.

If Keefe does a good job next season and we see growth in individual players and the team…that qualifies as a first-rate coach, imo.

DCZards wrote:

nate33 wrote:And then we can look to hire a first-rate coach in 2025 after drafting Cooper Flagg.

I’m not sure what a first-rate coach is anymore. I look around the league and see that many of the top teams are coached by former assistant coaches that most of us never heard of before they got hired.

If Keefe does a good job next season and we see growth in individual players and the team…that qualifies as a first-rate coach, imo.

He may well be. As I said, I've got no problems with giving Keefe the job next year. And if he does well, keep him longer.

Thrilled to have these two running the show