The Official Kyle Kuzma Thread

[GoneShammGone]

Descending $$ per year makes this a nice deal. I mean, let's get real, Kyle's value to the Wizards is only from the draft capital he can bring us when we inevitably trade him at the deadline in the next two years. This deal makes him a nice attractive trade chip, so good for us!

Will be interesting to see what the market for Kuz and Poole (and Jones and Deni and Corey) is like at the deadline this year.

[payitforward]

I've pointed to the marketing reasons that make the decision to re-sign Kuz easy to understand.

GoneShammGone makes the further point -- an even better one -- that Kuz's declining contract that when it's time to trade him in a couple of years, he'll look like a bargain.

That's all the truer given how much of a $$ jump in salaries we can expect over the coming years!

All the more decisive is one other factor, which no one has mentioned: essentially, Kuzma is pretty much free this year.

Before we signed Kuz we were at $114m -- way way below the minimum -- with virtually a full roster. We had to find a way to spend a bunch more money on the roster this year!

Thus, signing Kuz to a declining contract was pretty brilliant! Essentially, he costs us nothing this year. &, year by year, he'll become more & more easy to trade.

I didn't want to bring him back. But... these guys are smarter than I am!

[AFM]

Talk that **** PIF. I think you may be my favorite poster!

[pcbothwel]

I've pointed to the marketing reasons that make the decision to re-sign Kuz easy to understand.

GoneShammGone makes the further point -- an even better one -- that Kuz's declining contract that when it's time to trade him in a couple of years, he'll look like a bargain.

That's all the truer given how much of a $$ jump in salaries we can expect over the coming years!

All the more decisive is one other factor, which no one has mentioned: essentially, Kuzma is pretty much free this year.

Before we signed Kuz we were at $114m -- way way below the minimum -- with virtually a full roster. We had to find a way to spend a bunch more money on the roster this year!

Thus, signing Kuz to a declining contract was pretty brilliant! Essentially, he costs us nothing this year. &, year by year, he'll become more & more easy to trade.

I didn't want to bring him back. But... these guys are smarter than I am!

Totally agree. For context, In the last year of Kuz’s contract he’ll be making ~11% of the cap.
That’s equal to what McDermott, Kennard, and Gary Harris made this last year.

[gambitx777]

I've pointed to the marketing reasons that make the decision to re-sign Kuz easy to understand.

GoneShammGone makes the further point -- an even better one -- that Kuz's declining contract that when it's time to trade him in a couple of years, he'll look like a bargain.

That's all the truer given how much of a $$ jump in salaries we can expect over the coming years!

All the more decisive is one other factor, which no one has mentioned: essentially, Kuzma is pretty much free this year.

Before we signed Kuz we were at $114m -- way way below the minimum -- with virtually a full roster. We had to find a way to spend a bunch more money on the roster this year!

Thus, signing Kuz to a declining contract was pretty brilliant! Essentially, he costs us nothing this year. &, year by year, he'll become more & more easy to trade.

I didn't want to bring him back. But... these guys are smarter than I am!

Totally agree. For context, In the last year of Kuz’s contract he’ll be making ~11% of the cap.
That’s equal to what McDermott, Kennard, and Gary Harris made this last year.

Plus no player option in the last year so Kuz is locked in for 19 a year and will be very tradable!


Sent from my SM-G991U1 using RealGM mobile app

[tacosman]

dont get all the people saying this is a movable contract. A LOT of teams arent interested/wouldnt touch kuzma at any
number. This is not one you sign expecting to trade, and if they did....well, thats a bag they may be a holding.....

[FAH1223]

dont get all the people saying this is a movable contract. A LOT of teams arent interested/wouldnt touch kuzma at any
number. This is not one you sign expecting to trade, and if they did....well, thats a bag they may be a holding.....

Cap is going up. Kuzma is on a descending salary.

This contract can be traded. Very easily.

They just traded Beal's deal and didn't give up major assets. The previous regime traded Wall's after he didn't play for TWO YEARS and the cost of doing business was a protected 1st which will probably never convey.

[DCZards]

Kuuuuzzz!

Read on Twitter

[nate33]

dont get all the people saying this is a movable contract. A LOT of teams arent interested/wouldnt touch kuzma at any
number. This is not one you sign expecting to trade, and if they did....well, thats a bag they may be a holding.....

Two years from now, Kuzma will be paid $21.5M for the 2025-26 season. Here is how that number compares to the 2025-26 salaries of other wings signed recently:

Michael Porter Jr: $38.3M
Khris Middleton: $36.5M*
Jerami Grant: $32.0M*
Tyler Herro: $31.0M
Andrew Wiggins: $28.2M
Cam Johnson: $27.9M*
Anfernee Simons: $27.6M
RJ Barrett: $27.7M
Terry Rozier: $26.6M
De'Andre Hunter: $23.3M
Kyle Kuzma: $21.5M*
Norman Powell: $20.5M
Duncan Robinson: $19.9M
Dillon Brooks: $19.5M*
Harrison Barnes: $19.0M
Rui Hachimura: $18.2M*
Kevin Huerter: $18.0M
Max Strus: $15.9M*
Grant Williams: $14.4M*

* signed this year

I'll take Kuzma's contract on a cost/production basis over everyone on the list except perhaps Wiggins.

And the contracts signed in the next 2 seasons will only get bigger as the cap goes up.

[payitforward]

Kuz is an articulate, interesting fellow. It's hard to imagine much reason for him to improve as a player, though of course anything's possible, but even so it'll be entertaining to have him around. Easy to understand the decision to re-sign him.

We certainly operate on opposite wavelengths, PIF. Because it’s hard for me to imagine a 27 (soon to be 28) year old NOT being willing and able to improve at his craft.

Absolutely, Zards! I didn't mean to impugn Kuz individually.

It would have been better to say that few NBA players get significantly better starting when they're 28. TBH, I'm having trouble coming up with one....

Still, there must be exceptions, & we both hope Kyle Kuzma will be a notable one of those!

Meanwhile, the contract he signed is outstanding in the flexibility it gives the team. & great for him as well, since a dollar today is worth more than a dollar in a couple of years.

It's all good.
As I wrote the other day, I wouldn't have re-signed Kuz, but -- surprise! -- these guys are smarter than I am!

[payitforward]

dont get all the people saying this is a movable contract. A LOT of teams arent interested/wouldnt touch kuzma at any number....

You know what would be helpful, tacosman? Could you list all those "LOT of teams" that "wouldnt touch kuzma at any number"?

& while you're at it, it would be great if you'd explain how you happen to know that fact. For each of the teams. Thanks.

Or, I suppose, if you prefer you can just show up on the board & start making pronunciamentos that you're pulling out of your axx based on nothing. That'd be ok too.

...This is not one you sign expecting to trade, and if they did....well, thats a bag they may be a holding.....

Then again, you might be wrong about that. After all, it wouldn't be the first time you've ever been wrong, don't you agree? Not even the first time in the last two sentences!

[payitforward]

Kuz's press conference:

Watch on YouTube

[payitforward]

Without question, Kuz is a great guy -- & an extremely *interesting* person.

Hard not to like him; I'm pulling for him 110%.

[Zonkerbl]

hm. well, if the tank lasts two years, by the time they start to turn things around there will only be two years left on his contract. I assume he will still be pretty productive that year so a good, expiring pretty soon asset. In the meantime you get two years of "meh who cares" bball

[Zonkerbl]

This really surprises me. It seemed totally out of character relative to all the other moves they have made so far this offseason.

Also, I'm really disappointed that it's 4/$102M rather than something like 4/$80M or 4/$90M which seemed very plausible a few hours ago.

Still, I don't think it's a tragic mis-step or anything. I stand by my argument that Kuzma is the kind of guy that teams really want to have in late playoff series. Big guys that can shoot, make plays and defend 3-4 positions are at a high premium in the playoffs. I think Kuzma can be moved at this salary.

My initial criticisms no longer apply. We did indeed negotiate a 4/$90M contract as I had hoped. And we actually made it a descending contract which will increase in trade value over time. Overall, it's a rock solid deal. It gives us a high usage guy for the early part of our rebuild (we don't have any youngsters that can responsibly take on heavy usage) and a trade chip for the later part of the rebuild. Well done!

oh wow that's pretty good

[FAH1223]

Read on Twitter

[nate33]

Read on Twitter

I know. I know. Everyone has an offseason workout video. But it's interesting that Kuzma wants to focus on getting stronger. Maybe he sees that the biggest hole in the roster is at backup center, and if he can bulk up a bit, he can spend 10 minutes a game there. That will free up more PF minutes for Avdija (and maybe PBJ), which frees up more SF minutes for Kispert and Coulibaly.

Kuzma has a standing reach of 8'-11.5". Muscala's standing reach is 9'-0". If Muscala can play center, why can't Kuzma?

[payitforward]

...The fact that Kuzma '20-21 had a .546 TS% in '20-21 on 11.1 attempts per game, and now in '22-23 had a .544 TS% on 17.8 attempts per game means that Kuzma has improved since '20-21. Kuzma being able to maintain his TS% on sixty percent more volume means that his scoring and shooting are better now than they were in '20-21....

Joshuacf...
first off -- I tried to "retire" from this in my last post!
second -- "per game" is irrelevant. You don't have a shooting rate when you're sitting the bench. Per 40 minutes on the floor would be better. In which case, for sure, there's still an increase of almost 32% (but not 60%).
Finally -- "improved" is entirely rhetorical in your use of the word. It has no meaning.

For example, if a guy went 1-5 three years ago & 2-10 this year, would you say he'd improved?
I didn't think so.

Plus -- & this is key! -- a below average TS% helps a team lose not win. Period. No two ways about it.
Taking more shots at that below average TS% is simply doing more to help your team lose.

That's fact not opinion -- not even judgment or analysis. Just pure mathematical fact. If you'd like me to demonstrate it, I will

...So it isn't fair to compare Cam right now to Kuzma 3 years ago when determining who's better....

They were closer 3 years ago, before Kuz decided he needed to prove that he was "a star."

...Kyle Kuzma took a significant step forward when he got traded to the Wizards, and is a better player now than he was on the Lakers. I just don't get your insistence that he's not a good player....

Give me some objective criteria for being "a good player" compared to others at your position. Please don't include "points per game" as one of them.

...As others have pointed out, your logic would mean that scoring 21 at a lower-than-league-average TS makes a player worse than scoring 5 at a higher-than-league-average TS. But clearly, that isn't the case.

Sigh.... No, it would not.

Of course, it is certainly possible that a player scores fewer points than another player but is a better player all the same.
Good heavens... I hope at least that much is obvious!

[joshuacf]

second -- "per game" is irrelevant. You don't have a shooting rate when you're sitting the bench. Per 40 minutes on the floor would be better. In which case, for sure, there's still an increase of almost 32% (but not 60%).

Per game is absolutely not irrelevant. Imagine two people with the same per 40, but one plays 10 minutes a game and the other plays 35. The one who plays 35 is going to command more scouting and attention from the defense than the one who plays 10. Therefore, the player who's playing 35 is likely going to have more difficult shots on average than the guy playing 10, because the defense is more prepared for him and is focusing on him more when he is on the court. Shot volume per game does matter.

For example, if a guy went 1-5 three years ago & 2-10 this year, would you say he'd improved?
I didn't think so.

Yes, I would. Probably not by much as those percentages are so low, but that player likely did improve.

If we want to do extremes:

Imagine a player plays 40 minutes a game one year, takes 2 shots a game, and averages one made basket a game.
Now imagine that player plays 40 minutes a game the next year, takes 20 shots a game, and averages 10 made baskets a game.

Did that player improve year to year?

Give me some objective criteria for being "a good player" compared to others at your position. Please don't include "points per game" as one of them.

RPM would be one. Where Kuzma ranks very highly.

To preempt any objections, there are people much much smarter than me, with Math degrees from prestigious universities, who think those are strong metrics of how good a basketball player is. Can I tell you exactly how those metrics are calculated? No. But I still trust those people to create metrics that are decent representations of a player's aptitude for NBA basketball. I can't tell you how my rangefinder gives me the yardage when I'm golfing, but I still trust those engineers who made that device when I'm picking a club. Sometimes you have to defer to quants and scientists.

[leswizards]

This season has been awful so far, so potentially one silver lining is maybe Kuzma is turning the corner and going to make the haters (like me) eat crow. He has had 3 good games, and if he were shooting at his career averages for 3 pointers, he would be looking well worth the money the Wizards are spending.

If he can keep hitting the 2pa at the % that he currently is, and maybe shoot 2 to 4 fewer 3PA per game, and get his 3P% up to his career norms or even better, he might begin to look like the player he believes himself to be.