Jump to content

Off-Topic: The Washington Wizards Thread


turtle28

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Skinsin2013 said:

How long does it take you to concoct these inferential leaps about what I'm thinking?    O.o

And where do you come up with stuff like this? That's the first time I've ever read an assertion like this... from anyone... probably because it's blatantly homerish.

It’s not homerism. I watch almost every Wizards game. I see what happens on the floor. On many plays John Wall dribbles towards the hoop and after he gets past his defender - almost every time down the court - Wall kicks it out to shooters if he doesn’t have a lay up. Most of the time Wall sucks in other defenders and then he usually kicks it out to a shooter (Beal/Porter/Morris) for them to have open shots.

They’ll also run plays for Beal which are similar.

Then, they run pick and roll with the bigs. If the defenders come towards Wall he throws it to Morris or whomever for a layup/dunk if they sag off to the big Wall either goes to the hoop or shoots the midrange jumper.

 

Edited by turtle28
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Skinsin2013 said:

I appreciate the analysis.

But you said they pass up on the open shots.

And why did so many players FG%s go up with John out?

They did temporarily for a week or two and then they sank like the titanic once defenses adjusted.

And players do pass on open shots. I’ve seen it, it’s like you don’t even watch the games. It’s not often, but sometimes guys - even than Beal and Wall - make an extra unnecessary pass and pass on an open shot, when they shouldn’t.

Edited by turtle28
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jeezy Fanatic said:

You couldn’t watch that wizards team at the tail end of the year losing to the Magic and the other dregs of the NBA and tell me they were better without Wall. That everybody eats bit was always nonsense.

 

I don’t believe you can build a title contending roster around a $40 Mil per year Wall though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

It’s only gone up like $7 Mil in two years.

No one knows what the future holds but I can’t imagine that the cap won’t go up in the future. 

In fact the salary cap is projected to be $114 in 2020 and that’s the year Wall’s # jumps to $40M a year.

 

Edited by turtle28
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, lavar703 said:

Why? 

Because supermax players rarely live up to their contracts.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2018/2/5/16972634/trouble-nba-max-contracts

Wall’s new deal doesn’t even kick in until the 2019-20 season. But adding capable role players or another star will be problematic when his contract continues to rise by at least 7 percent each season as the cap continues to level off.

The lucrative new TV deals the NBA signed created a huge influx in cash, which meant more for player salaries. But the players voted against “smoothing” (i.e., a steady climb in teams’ available cap space) in favor of one large spike. As a result, the cap took a historic jump, from $70 million in 2015-16 to $94.1 million in 2016-17. It has since leveled off. The cap this season is $99 million. Next season, it’s projected to rise to just $101 million.

Good article here - https://bballbreakdown.com/2017/07/31/nbas-new-supermax-contracts-backfiring-owners/

That begs the question: Which players may wind up returning positive value on a supermax?

Using a metric called “consensus plus-minus,” which draws upon real plus-minus, box plus/minus, win shares and player efficiency rating, Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight evaluated the caliber of top players on average championship-winning teams and divided them into “alphas” (the best player), “betas” (the second-best player) and “gammas” (the third-best player). Based on that metric, only six players project as alphas during the 2017-18 campaign: Curry, Westbrook, Harden, LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard and Kevin Durant. While a career-altering injury could affect the trajectory of their long-term outlook, all six would be relatively safe bets for a supermax (if eligible).

Butler and Cousins slotted in as betas, according to Silver, while George fell between DeMar DeRozan and Mike Conley in the gammas category. Wall likewise projects as a gamma, as do Beal and Porter. Drastic internal improvement could cause those projections to fall short—as is, Butler wasn’t far off from alpha territory already—but second- and third-tier players such as these will have a far more difficult time returning positive value on a supermax, especially if they aren’t already surrounded by the requisite All-Star talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Skinsin2013 said:

Because supermax players rarely live up to their contracts.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2018/2/5/16972634/trouble-nba-max-contracts

Wall’s new deal doesn’t even kick in until the 2019-20 season. But adding capable role players or another star will be problematic when his contract continues to rise by at least 7 percent each season as the cap continues to level off.

The lucrative new TV deals the NBA signed created a huge influx in cash, which meant more for player salaries. But the players voted against “smoothing” (i.e., a steady climb in teams’ available cap space) in favor of one large spike. As a result, the cap took a historic jump, from $70 million in 2015-16 to $94.1 million in 2016-17. It has since leveled off. The cap this season is $99 million. Next season, it’s projected to rise to just $101 million.

Good article here - https://bballbreakdown.com/2017/07/31/nbas-new-supermax-contracts-backfiring-owners/

That begs the question: Which players may wind up returning positive value on a supermax?

Using a metric called “consensus plus-minus,” which draws upon real plus-minus, box plus/minus, win shares and player efficiency rating, Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight evaluated the caliber of top players on average championship-winning teams and divided them into “alphas” (the best player), “betas” (the second-best player) and “gammas” (the third-best player). Based on that metric, only six players project as alphas during the 2017-18 campaign: Curry, Westbrook, Harden, LeBron James, Kawhi Leonard and Kevin Durant. While a career-altering injury could affect the trajectory of their long-term outlook, all six would be relatively safe bets for a supermax (if eligible).

Butler and Cousins slotted in as betas, according to Silver, while George fell between DeMar DeRozan and Mike Conley in the gammas category. Wall likewise projects as a gamma, as do Beal and Porter. Drastic internal improvement could cause those projections to fall short—as is, Butler wasn’t far off from alpha territory already—but second- and third-tier players such as these will have a far more difficult time returning positive value on a supermax, especially if they aren’t already surrounded by the requisite All-Star talent.

Very few players live up to their contracts. At least Wall brings $ in for Leonsis. He  fills the building like Arenas used to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...