Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: MrMichaelLee and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Looking Ahead

Note: for a review of yesterday's trade deadline activity and a look at where the Wizards are in terms of the future, read my previous post titled "Breaking It Down."

Now that the trade deadline has come and gone without the Wizards deciding or being able to make a move, we can all get down to the business of seeing where this thing is going for future.

As I said in a story I wrote on Ernie Grunfeld's "plan" the other day, the future of this team will hinge on three factors: the health of Gilbert Arenas, the development of young fellas like JaVale McGee, Andray Blatche, Javaris Crittenton, Dom McGuire and Nick Young and what Grunfeld does with that lottery pick this summer.

Arenas is progressing I hear and the team expects that he and Brendan Haywood will play at some point before the season is over. The jury remains out on the young bucks but we know that McGee has limitless potential, that Blatche can be pretty effective and that Crittenton has flashed some real skill of late.

McGuire looks like he can be a pretty solid role player though I'd like to see more garbage buckets from him over these next 28 games. You know, the Ruben Patterson type rebounds and putbacks, scores on the break, steals that turn into layups etc. Is Young just a streaky scorer or is there more there?

The other day after practice, Young and McGee were putting on a dunking clinic. After Young wowed everyone by lobbing the ball off the side of the backboard before smashing it down with one hand, I half jokingly said I'd be more impressed if he'd learn to get over and under a screen. He smiled - as he always does - and said: "I got you. I got you. I'm working on it." We'll see.

As for tonight, interim coach Ed Tapscott said that Darius Songaila will continue to start at center as Blatche finds his legs after missing nine straight games with a left knee injury. Blatche looked pretty good in 27 minutes the other night against Minnesota.

Also, look for Crittenton to continue logging the bulk of minutes at point guard in the fourth quarter unless James really has it going. James shifted to shooting guard in the fourth the other night and the two did a pretty good job of playing off of one another. I can't quite put my finger on it but there is something about Crittenton that I really like.

It's not just the obvious speed he has with the ball in his hands on the break or the flashy skills he's shown at times, I also like the way he carries himself. He's got a little swag that is starting to come out and from what I can tell, he really wants it. He's one of the first on and off the court at practice and he's very attentive whenever being instructed by the coaches. He wants to be good and he wants to do the right thing out there on the floor.

For him and some of these other guys, these next 28 games are huge.


By Ivan Carter  |  February 20, 2009; 7:33 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Breaking It Down
Next: Suns Keep Stoudemire, Then Lose Him

Comments

If a guy doesn't know how to get over and under screens 50 games into his 2nd year, blame the coaches.
I was shocked to hear about Massenburg being a volunteer. Does that mean we have no big man coach? If so, no one has any right to criticize any of our big men cuz they're on their own. It's not like Tony Massenberg was a solid big in his prime, either. His career average is 6 points, 4 rebounds and half a block per game. JM can probably teach HIM some things.

Until we get coaches in here who can teach both offense and defense, we'll always be underachievers. I hope we realize that sooner rather than later.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 8:09 AM | Report abuse

Good write-up. Hopefully, the same tone and tenor reflects the thinking and actions of the current Wiz management and team captains.

Let's get focused on having 9 players start next year and end next year with a PER rating greater than 15. (That implies less reliance on the Big 3 to carry the whole load and more emphasis on D).

Who other than Ivan can set a marker down for this team and drive results?

Posted by: Izman | February 20, 2009 8:37 AM | Report abuse

We ought to have some video of that, Ivan you gotta get a handheld.

Posted by: emmet1 | February 20, 2009 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Looking Ahead? This team is 12-42 while having 2 all-star caliber players healthy. Sorry to say, but the total reliance on GA/CB/AJ should be scrapped.

Two out of those three should be key figures in the Wizards future. All 3 can stay on the squad, that's fine, but not all every one should be a centerpiece (hint: AJ). Gilbert Arenas, if he's going to return to form, is at least another year away. He may come back healthy next year, but you better believe it's going to take longer than a couple months to shake the rust off. That means that at the earliest, the Wizards should plan to be 2 years away from a run. Below is a list of the guys on this team, in order of priority, that should factor in the run 2 years from now:

-Arenas
-Butler
-McGee
-Draft pick (depending on who it is, could move up or down)
-Blatche
-Jamison
-Crittenton
-McGuire
-Young

That leaves these players out of it:

-Songaila
-Thomas
-James
-Stevenson
-Dixon
-Pech

And it leaves one toss-up:

-Haywood

IMO, that should be the Wizards goal. Next year it should be planned to bring in the new coach, set the foundation, bring Gilbert up to speed, let him shake his rust off, and continue to develop the youngsters to the point where they can be legitimate pieces of a contending puzzle. The hope is that at the end of the season, this team will have improved to the point of being a playoff team. The year after that, with another year of learning under the youngsters belt, hopefully the Wizards will be able to move an expiring contract or two, pick up another piece or two, and push for a serious run.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Ernie sounds awful confident that he will be retained. Even if Ernie's best case scenario pans out, the ceiling for the Wizards is realistically a 5 or 6 seed follwed by an early exit in the playoffs.

Just like the Bucks and Knicks were under Ernie's stewardship, this team is drastically flawed.

Posted by: SteveC28 | February 20, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

@psps23

No way do the Wiz need to even be thinking about another lost season next year. Gil (and Brendan) need to come back at the end of this season and get their game legs under them so that next season they can try and fulfill the potential we saw 2 seasons ago when a healthy Wiz led the (admittedly awful)East at the break. I don't think Wiz nation has the patience for another half-assed, hold-down-the fort season while Gil tries to get healthy. I'm all for Gil being overly cautious with the knee and taking all this time to make sure it's right...but dude, it's been 2 seasons at this point. He needs to come back for training camp next year ready to ball, with the team already having made some progress in reintegrating him into the team. The fans (and rightfully so) don't have any more patience for crappy, maybe-we'll-be-netter-next-year basketball. Time to start getting the show back on the road THIS SEASON, not 2 seasons from now...

Posted by: Plix | February 20, 2009 9:50 AM | Report abuse


I'm going to comment on Ivan's earlier blog of "Breaking It Down". Before anything luxury taxes, draft picks, etc Ernie will need to focus on bringing in a coach. I think Ed is working with what he has but he doesn't seem to reach the players like Eddie did. That's why i think Tapscott needs to go. Once that is figured out then, Ernie should look at the draft. If the Wizards could land Blake Griffin they should go for it, anyone outside of him they might have to trade. Problem is, how is out there worth a top 3 pick in return?

As for the team right now, I don't see much improvement from some of the young guys. Blatche has his moments but so did Kwame when he was here. Also McGuire is looking more like a NBDL player. McGuire may have to play overseas to improve his game. It happened with Bobby Simmons and he won Most Improved Award. Young is pretty good, he may turn out to become a Mike Redd/ Danny Granger type player....MAYBE. The Wizards will be interesting to watch when the team is fully health.

But first there is the need to address the future of the Coach position.

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Why is Songaila starting instead of McGee?Since this is a lost season, let the youngsters get the playing time.The experence will be valuable to their long term development.Just look at Portland as an example (& they don't have 3 all-stars).Since we will probably get a top 3 pick (GRIFFIN or THABEEK a true defensive stopper),lets go over the cap unless we can shed some excess baggage(ET,Stevenson who can't feel his face or make a basket).If Abe cannot afford to go over the tax,let Ted take this burden off of his hands.

Posted by: dcpirate11 | February 20, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

rcnasa,

McGuire Is no way an NBDL player. He is starting on a Professional basketball team which is super tough for a young guy like himself. With him coming off the bench next year, like what was supposed to happen this year, you will be impressed...Michael ruffin with a jump-shot baby!!!!

Posted by: BurgwithaU | February 20, 2009 10:05 AM | Report abuse

Good point by one of the earlier posters....it's ludicrous that Songaila is starting on a 12-42 team when we have McGee just sitting around twiddling his thumbs.

LET THE KID START AND GIVE HIM MINUTES. I really can't overstate how bad Tapscott is, I think even Ivan would do a better job coaching

Posted by: insanity999 | February 20, 2009 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Mcguire is nowhere close to a NBDL player. Right now, he's the most professional out of all the youngsters (both in maturity and in on-the-court play), and he has the best shot at being a fixture in this league for a long time. He doesn't have as much upside, but he's already arrived as a professional player. There's a reason he's starting and not Young.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Michael ruffin with a jump-shot baby!!!!

LOL! More like James Posey without the 3 pointer. That range may or may not come for McGuire, but either way, he's a keeper. Any offensive utility he adds will be icing on the cake. I do agree with Ivan in that he should try to be more active on the offensive glass and on the other end try to get a few more steals on the wing and convert them to fast breaks.

Another plus is that he helps to bring the ball up court. Its always advantageous to have a 2 or 3 that can do that well, to take pressure off your 1. And its been especially beneficial this year with CB logging minutes at the 2. He needs to work on his passing and ball handling in halfcourt sets though.

I don't understand why folks around here are getting down on McGuire.

Posted by: jones-y | February 20, 2009 10:21 AM | Report abuse

There are a couple of trades I don't understand, wonder if anyone can explain to me.

1. Why does Thunders trade Wilcox for Rose, a lesser player with bigger contract? (Both are in their last year of contract.) Is Wilcox casuing any problem in the locker room?

2. Why did Sacramento take Sam Cassel from Boston's hands? Simply to help Celtics out of goodness of heart?

Posted by: sagaliba | February 20, 2009 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Plix,

I think you're setting yourself up for disappointment next season if you expect Arenas to just come back and ball. He won't be clean, I can guarantee you that. He's missed 2 years, and as someone that has had major knee surgery twice, I can tell you it takes a LONG time before you even feel like a competent player once you start again. I never said wait until Gil tries to get healthy, I said they can't expect him to come back next year in top form -- regardless of how healthy he is. In that respect, with the shape of the East, the smart thing to do is to plan on contending when Arenas IS in form, and when the youngsters have legitimately developed. At the earliest, I see that being 2 years down the road.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse


BurgwithaU,

I understand that he is young and is playing stater minutes but that's the goal of all professional players to become a starter on a team. I just think he sorely lacks the scoring ability and his free throws are horrible I don't see him making it on any other team than the Wizards. When the team is healthly I don't see him getting any backup duty he won't be good enough to steal, Young, Blatche or Songalia spots.

If McGuire goes to the NBDL he can develop his skills and come back into the league improved. It has happened to a lot of young talents, Like Bobby Simmons, Rafear Alston etc all were in the NBDL and look at them. McGuire is young so there is potential but playing on a NBA team he won't be able to develop like he will in the NBDL.

I also think that of Jarvis Critteon

Thanks

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

I think fans gets easily distracted by who's starting and who's not. As long as McGee is getting lots of minutes, I don't care whether or not he starts. He's not going to be starting next year anyway (not unless Haywood breaks his other hand).

Posted by: tundey | February 20, 2009 10:33 AM | Report abuse

For sagiliba,

Both of those trades included "cash considerations" - NY paid OKC cash for Wilcox, and BOS paid SAC cash for Cassell. OKC and SAC also hope to save additional money if Rose or Cassell agrees to a buyout to go a contending team.

As far as the Wizards go, I still have hope, though it is a bit of a bad sign when the beat writer is referring to the GMs "plan" in quotation marks... hahaha.

Posted by: GshawnJohnson | February 20, 2009 10:34 AM | Report abuse

What's with this "go to NBDL"? With this team at 12-42, why bother going to the developmental league? When he can get experience playing against NBA-caliber players for the next 28 games.

Posted by: tundey | February 20, 2009 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Ivan,

I have never seen a reporter contradict himself like you do (besides kal?).

You write…

I wrote on Ernie Grunfeld's "plan" the other day, the future of this team will hinge on three factors: … the development of young fellas like JaVale McGee, Andray Blatche, Javaris Crittenton, Dom McGuire and Nick Young…

But then you add…

As for tonight, interim coach Ed Tapscott said that Darius Songaila will continue to start at center as Blatche finds his legs after missing nine straight games with a left knee injury. Blatche looked pretty good in 27 minutes the other night against Minnesota.

You do not even mention JaVale McGee until…

The jury remains out on the young bucks but we know that McGee has limitless potential,… and that Crittenton has flashed some real skill of late. Also, look for Crittenton to continue logging the bulk of minutes at point guard in the fourth quarter unless James really has it going.

We don’t know McGee has limitless potential or how good Crittenton can be since neither play against the other team’s best players?

Posted by: bulletsfan78 | February 20, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

McGuire is a keeper in this league. He has something that Blatche and Young lacks which is toughness.

Posted by: Dave381 | February 20, 2009 10:51 AM | Report abuse

Quote: "I think fans gets easily distracted by who's starting and who's not. As long as McGee is getting lots of minutes, I don't care whether or not he starts".

Huh? McGee is getting only 15 minutes a game on average. That's ridiculous given:

1) the alternative is Songaila;
2) the Wiz are 14 and out; and
3) McGee is averaging 17 points, 11 boards and 2.7 blocks per 40 minutes.

Starting Song at center typifies the mentality of this team.

Yes, given his current viewpoints, Ivan would do a better job than Taps for the rest of the year.

Posted by: Izman | February 20, 2009 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Adam, for me it's comments like yours on Crittenton that make this blog special. I respect your background and willingness to lay it out there as you see it. Thank you.

Posted by: joe2chase | February 20, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

Thanks, GshawnJohnson.

Posted by: sagaliba | February 20, 2009 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Quote: "I don't understand why folks around here are getting down on McGuire".

Last year, he had one of the worse stats in the league. Since starting this year, he hasn't shown much improvement.

What's his upside potential? A PER of 15?

I'd rather see McGee and Blatche getting his minutes. Much more upside.

Posted by: Izman | February 20, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

I don't think that 28 games will improve McGuire? NBA is tough and he has trouble keeping up, so far. Yes he can very play well against the weaker teams but if the Wizards want to go to the next level. Players like McGuire will have to play better against tougher teams like, Celtics, Cavs and Magic etc. That is not just with McGuire but also with the rest of the young players on the team, Young, Blatche, etc.

Can you say that McGuire is better than someone like Trevor Ariza? Both the same age came out in the same round in the draft.

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

McGuire is not a player whose value can be judged by stats. He's not a guy who will put up big numbers or make a lot of highlights. But if you actually watch him play, he does a number of things that don't show up in the boxscore that can potentially impact a game. Good teams aren't just made up of guys who fill the stat line. Ask the NY Knicks.

Speaking of the Knicks, here's something for those still pining for Larry Hughes to chew on:

Larry Hughes'contract ($12.8 million, $13.6M next season) almost certainly would have been bought out by managing partner Jerry Reinsdorf had GM John Paxson been unable to deport him. Hughes' mantra is straight from the Supreme Court justice handbook . . . he ain't ever comin' off the bench. Not starting was the issue in Chicago. When the 6-foot-5 guard returned from the injured list roughly six weeks ago, coach Vinny Del Negro offered him 30 minutes a game (sound familiar?) at the point, off guard and small forward. He impudently declined. "Larry doesn't give a damn about winning or losing unless his team win and he's the focal point," a Bulls official harpooned. "All he cares about his starting, playing 36-to-38 minutes and getting his." Talk to some Cavaliers, professionals who don't bother anybody and, generally, slam nobody, and they croon the same cheerless tune. "It's about Larry and that's all it's about," one Cav confirms. Another says, "All I'll say is he's a different guy. It was hard to figure out what is important to him. He actually has a decent understanding of the game. . . . but not as much as he thinks." The same Bulls official advanced disapproval an additional step. "You don't need distractions. If Larry is not playing you don't know what he's saying to the young kids or how he might be conspiring with the veterans behind the coach's back. One way or the other, he had to go."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02202009/sports/moresports/two_ok_moves_156106.htm

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

"Can you say that McGuire is better than someone like Trevor Ariza? Both the same age came out in the same round in the draft.

Posted by: rcnasa"

Ariza is one of the best bench players in the entire league, and a large part of why the Lakers are so dominant. That's like saying Nick Young should should have his minutes cut or sent to the NBDL because he isn't as good as Rodney Stuckey, despite coming out in the same round of the same draft.

Dominic McGuire is already by far the most complete youngster we have on this team. He's a good defender, a great rebounder (particularly on the offensive boards), a great energy player, a good ball-handler for his size, an above average passer, is an explosive athlete, and has a good mind for the game. None of the other youngsters even come close to that combination of skills, other than Crittenton. He also has real potential to be a finisher at the rim due to his explosiveness. Every one of the attributes listed before will continue to improve due to his youth. The only thing he doesn't have is the scoring ability (i.e. any sort of jumpshot). That can also be developed, to a point.

McGuire is most definitely a keeper, and will be a major part of this team's future.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 11:22 AM | Report abuse


Izman,

I agree that McGee should get more minutes but there is a reason why he isn't a starter. If you watch him play against teams with solid big men he struggles in fact his numbers seriously drop. He only got 6 points vs Lakers, 8pts vs Balzers, 9pts vs Magic and 11pts vs Boston. In the Boston game he got 5 fouls. You can throw in the 18pts vs Lakers in LA, but that was during clean up time when Phil sat Gasol and Bynum.

McGee will be really good but he doesn't have the strength to handle the solid inside defenders in the league. He'll get there but right now he needs to understand more about how to play against teams with better more solid (in some case all-star) players. I'm such in Mid-March and April Ed will play McGee more minutes.

With me saying this, i still don't like Ed Tapscotts rotation and don't think he's our future head coach....just want to make that point clear..lol

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 11:22 AM | Report abuse

To say nothing of the fact that Ariza is in his 5th year in the NBA and McGuire is only in his second.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 11:30 AM | Report abuse

There have too many games this season where McGuire did very little. If he were consistently getting 10 rebounds or playing very good defense, or could hit a wide open 3 that would be one thing but he's not.

No good team in this league has a starter as one dimensional and inconsistent as McGuire. I like him but he's just not ready to start.

He's started 29 games and averaged 30 minutes in those games. His averages in those games has been:

4.9 ppg
6.1 rpg
.418 fg %
2.8 apg
1 block per game

That's just not good enough to warrant 30 minutes per game. Until he learns how to shoot an open '3', we'd be better off putting Caron back at the sf spot and starting Nick Young.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse

"McGuire looks like he can be a pretty solid role player though I'd like to see more garbage buckets from him over these next 28 games."

I really appreciate the hard work that D-Mac has put in, but i believe he should be sacrificed for another player who can run with Crit and be better at cleaning up around the boards etc. I am advocating that the Wiz call Pops up from the D-League and add him to the roster. Pops has been an absolute monster all-round where-ever he has gone, but just needs a chance again in the NBA. Pops would be an up-grade over D_Mac, and we can have him for the same salary. I would not be surprised at-all of Dallas invites him back.

Posted by: closg | February 20, 2009 11:33 AM | Report abuse

izman: "Huh? McGee is getting only 15 minutes a game on average. That's ridiculous"

I thought from the time Tapscott replaced Jordan that the best scheme for the Wiz was to limit the two stars to 30-35 minutes a game and try to get the main kids (which at the time didn't include Crittenton) somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 minutes.

At the time, I thought there was a chance Arenas/Haywood might be back in the second half, and if Jamison and Butler were healthy and not overtired, there was a chance of a late run.

Such is the stuff dreams are made of...

Anyway, now that we're in the home stretch, I don't see any reason to conserve the kids' minutes. I don't know that I agree that Tapscott is wasting talents like McGee, Young, and Crittenton by not playing them enough; what they really need is practice, and the NBA doesn't provide that. Throwing a kid like McGee into games willy-nilly carries some risk, because he's frequently physically overmatched by older, stronger centers (or even young, strong centers like Marc Gasol). You get stronger between seasons, not during the season, so a reasonable compromise is to give McGee big minutes against selected opponents, less against others.

But you run into factor X: the point of the NBA regular season is not to develop young players. It's to win as many games as possible. It's one thing for sideline Wizards like us to give up on a game; it's another thing for professionals to do it.

The second consideration: most coaches believe (there are exceptions) that young players get better by playing alonside veterans. So they prefer to have 2 or 3 vets on the floor at all times, even when they're thinking developmentally. The theory is that if you put four or five inexperienced players on the floor at once, who's going to set the example?

Of course we've also reached the point in the long, painful season when attitudes are set in concrete and no one is willing to change. So I doubt anything I say here will change anybody else's mind.

Geez, it's just like America!!!

Posted by: Samson151 | February 20, 2009 11:34 AM | Report abuse


McGuire is most definitely a keeper, and will be a major part of this team's future.

Posted by: psps23
---------------------------------------------

There is no way McGuire is in the Wizards future. Unless his name is Caron, Jamison or Gil, Ernie will move you. McGuire numbers does not show his improvement. Even when you watch the game I don't see anything that stands out, nothing has improved from last season.(He reminds me of a lesser verison of Jefferies when he was here), but the Wizards as a team are terrible on defense. I don't want to bash McGuire any more than I'm doing now but I just want to say that..on a 12 win team there aren't many talented players so to think some of the young guys have potential is not really saying much. Esp when teams like the Thunder, Grizzles, and Timberwovles who seem to manage more wins and that is what bothers me about the young players on the team. They don't so much desire.

For the record, Rodney Stucky has played better than Nick Young, granted Stucky is on a better team but he has done a nice job.

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

"No good team in this league has a starter as one dimensional and inconsistent as McGuire. "

To call him one dimensional is simply untrue. He can defend, rebound, pass, and handle the ball. Just because he doesn't fill up the stat sheet every day doesn't mean he's not impacting a game. And complaining about him not being good enough to be a starter is the ultimate in straw man arguments. It goes without saying that if this team hadn't been decimated by injuries, he wouldn't be a starter. On a good team he'd be an improving role player off the bench. Aside from Jamison and Butler, none of the players the Wizards have started this season are good enough to be starters on good teams.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 11:44 AM | Report abuse

To say nothing of the fact that Ariza is in his 5th year in the NBA and McGuire is only in his second.

Posted by: kalo_rama
--------------------------------------------

OJ Mayo is in his first year and Nick Young is in his second...I'm sorry but thats not a good point.

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 11:51 AM | Report abuse

rcnasa,

Well, we'll just have to disagree. The Wizards are a bad team because half the team is either injured or doesn't provide any sort of positive presence on the court. Couple that with the fact that the other half of the team is playing out of position, 60% of the starters from last year are either hurt or have been traded away, and there's an interim head coach that hasn't coached anyone in decades, and you have the makings of a really bad team.

What that doesn't mean is that ALL of the Wizards are bad players. All the youngsters, save for Pech, are part of the reason this team has won any games at all. No, our youngsters aren't as talented as OKC or Memphis, nor should they be. Those teams have had years and multiple picks in the lottery. They SHOULD have more talented youngsters. We should have 1-3 future starters out of this group, or at the very least, 5 solid bench contributors. That's more than good, considering we still have 3 all-star caliber players under contract for the next 3 years.

And if you can't see the attributes that McGuire brings to the game, then you simply aren't watching close enough. Scoring points isn't everything (or even close to the only thing).

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 11:54 AM | Report abuse

"OJ Mayo is in his first year and Nick Young is in his second...I'm sorry but thats not a good point.

Posted by: rcnasa"

And Nick Young is possibly the most one-dimensional player on the roster, on top of not starting. I don't know what you were trying to prove by bringing him into this conversation.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 11:55 AM | Report abuse

I can't quite put my finger on it but there is something about Crittenton that I really like.

That's because he's good, duh! ;)

Seriously though, I was very happy when EG traded for him. Now get Gil to move to the 2 and we're set!

- Ray

Posted by: rmcazz | February 20, 2009 11:58 AM | Report abuse

"OJ Mayo is in his first year and Nick Young is in his second...I'm sorry but thats not a good point.

This from the author of the utterly irrelevant McGuire/Ariza comparison? Priceless.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

original_mark, who would play defense if you start young and sit mcguire? jamison? james? young? songaila? honestly, do you watch the games or just sit and look at stats? mcguire is starting because of his defense, which is excellent. mcguire's a young guy, and his offense will come around. i can't even believe this is a discussion. there isn't a team in the nba that wouldn't take mcguire.

Posted by: BulletsFan1 | February 20, 2009 12:07 PM | Report abuse


And if you can't see the attributes that McGuire brings to the game, then you simply aren't watching close enough. Scoring points isn't everything (or even close to the only thing).

Posted by: psps23
===============================================

You are correct that we agree to disagree. Yes some of the other teams have high lottery pick players, but the point I'm trying to make is 1.) age isn't the only factor to why the team has under performed. Yes injuries has beset the team but that should not be any excuse as to why they lose so many of the the games they have lost. In some games they flat out gave up; others they had leads (huge leads in some games) and they manage to blow it. The young players on the team aren't showing the kind of toughness that should be shown.

You can sit here and defend McGuire as much as you like but the Washington Wizards always had player with "potential" and 2 yrs there gone. I'm sure you remember Courtney Alexander. The NBDL isn't a bad thing. I don't get why you think it's terrible plenty of players came out well. Roger Mason came from the NBDL darfted by the Bulls second round, bounced around and ended up out of the league but he worked hard re-joined the Wizards and you know the rest of the story so it's not the end of the road.

McGuire doesn't have a future with the Wizards. There is a reason why Ernie went after players like Posey and Barnes during the off season. McGuire isn't showing that potential.

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 12:11 PM | Report abuse

He can defend, rebound, pass, and handle the ball. Just because he doesn't fill up the stat sheet every day doesn't mean he's not impacting a game.

Precisely why I mentioned consistency. Although he has the ability to do all of these things, I see a lot of games where he, in fact, does NOT impact the game. On a good day, he does everything well in one game and puts up modest yet decent numbers.

On others, he puts up clunkers like the loss to Atlanta week ago in which he played 25 minutes and went scoreless, had 2 rebounds, 2 turnovers and 3 fouls.

In the game before that against Indiana he played 26 minutes and had 2 points, 4 rebounds, 4 fouls, 4 blocks, a steal and 2 turnovers.

In his defense, usually the opposing sf doesn't go off against him but I'm looking for a little more out of that position. Most sf's in this league are 3 point threats. If he could establish himself as one, he'd be much more valuable.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 12:14 PM | Report abuse

On another topic, I don't get why Etan Thomas' contract is deemed so untradeable. And expiring contract is an expiring contract. I know there's a 15% kick-in clause, but can't the other teams just factor that in when matching up the salary? Maybe I don't have the full facts with that, but it seems way too simple of an obstacle to overcome.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 12:14 PM | Report abuse

I watch the games, BulletsFan1. section AA seats 21 and 22 lately.

I quote stats because they are indisputable and usually they give a pretty good picture. If you've read the majority of my posts, I've been talking about the need for defense on this team for years. I was talking about CB and AJ and the complete disregard for D 2 years ago. I was talking about moving CB to the 2 and starting McGuire late last year. I've advocated a front line of BTH, Ab and Aj for the defensive possibilities. I've been the #1 guy who hates Songaila's play because he can't rebound and doesn't defend or even foul. I get that we need to play defense.

Personally, I think that since this team is built with offensive players we should concentrate on offense a la Phoenix (now) and the Wiz from years ago. But...

to answer your question...

This incarnation of Wiz team cannot and will not play defense as constructed. No matter who starts at sf, there's no interior defender to help out. Without a backstop at PF or C, even an all star defender at the 3 would not be able to stop anyone. I don't know but would be curious to know whether our defense has improved as a team since McGuire has been starting. I doubt it.

He's our best defender without a doubt. But on a team with only one defender, that's not saying much. Rue McClanahan was the best looking Golden Girl. Doesn't make her beautiful.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 12:23 PM | Report abuse

"McGuire doesn't have a future with the Wizards. There is a reason why Ernie went after players like Posey and Barnes during the off season. McGuire isn't showing that potential.

Posted by: rcnasa"

Alright well let me put it this way:

Mcguire is a 2nd year player that is starting. Why would you assume that he has less of a future with the Wizards than, say, Etan Thomas? Mike James? Juan Dixon? Oleksiy Pecherov? Darius Songaila? DeShawn Stevenson? That's 40% of the roster. All of those guys provide less than DM and are older than DM. Even if he could, using his comments as a barometer, do you think Grunfeld would pull a full roster turnover?

No shot. Grunfeld wants this roster to remain intact. If he's getting rid of players, it's the older guys that don't provide much. In a post up above, I had Mcguire listed as the 8th highest priority asset for this franchise's future (behind Arenas, Butler, McGee, the draft pick, Blatche, Jamison, and Crittenton). I stand by that judgment.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Pops for D-Mac, do it.

Posted by: closg | February 20, 2009 12:29 PM | Report abuse

rcnasa,

you said, "When the team is healthly I don't see him getting any backup duty he won't be good enough to steal, Young, Blatche or Songalia spots."

Mcquire plays the 3, those guys are not, unless you go huge in the case of Blatche and Darius.

He doesn't shoot often because he is not instructed to. his job is to be aggresive defensively, move the ball, rebound and hit an open jumper. BTW, he hit a huge shot in the 4th quarter off a caron Butler drive and dish I believe during the T-wolves game. He covers the opposing teams best player which can tire you out and interrupt your offensive game. for a second rounder, he's a steal

Posted by: BurgwithaU | February 20, 2009 12:36 PM | Report abuse

"Speaking of the Knicks, here's something for those still pining for Larry Hughes to chew on:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02202009/sports/moresports/two_ok_moves_156106.htm

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 11:16 AM "

What?

Didn't you get on my case a few weeks go when I posted a Peter Vescey article with regard to his credibility, and now loh and behold, you are posting a Peter Vescey article?

Curious too how the Bulls were reported to be ready to "buy out" Larry in case he wasn't moved.

That's Larry and Joe Smith so far this week with buyout rumors.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | February 20, 2009 12:42 PM | Report abuse

No shot. Grunfeld wants this roster to remain intact. If he's getting rid of players, it's the older guys that don't provide much. In a post up above, I had Mcguire listed as the 8th highest priority asset for this franchise's future (behind Arenas, Butler, McGee, the draft pick, Blatche, Jamison, and Crittenton). I stand by that judgment.

Posted by: psps23
-------------------------------------------

psps23,

Okay, we shall see when McGuire's contract comes up whether he'll remain on the team. As far as a starter, i believe Jarvis Hayes was a starter on the Wizards his second year in the league and he played nice defense also. Many fans, I'm sure plenty on this message board said he had potential just like D-Mac. (I was one of those folks who like Jarvis, I'll admit..lol)

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Rumors: 2. Actual buyouts: 0

And, of course, even if Smith is bought out, he still doesn't fall under your heading of teams buying out players because they're "garbage" (your word) in order to "send a message" (your words) "even if it costs them money" (your words). He's in the laast year of his deal and not in the Thunders' future plans. If he gets bought out, it'll be to save them money, not to "send a message" (your words" even if it costs them money (your words).

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 12:51 PM | Report abuse

I quote stats because they are indisputable and usually they give a pretty good picture.

Indisputable? Well, yeah, a number is a number.

'usually give a pretty good picture'? Stats don't give anything. They're numbers. It is the analysis of stats that gives anything (or in other words, some person's interpretation or opinion about what those stats mean). And it is precisely that analytical layer that leads people to say stuff like: 'lies, damned lies and statistics'.

Posted by: jones-y | February 20, 2009 1:02 PM | Report abuse

rcnasa - We shall see. If McGuire does end up leaving, it will be because of salary cap reasons, not because of his ability (similar to Mason).

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Judging McGuire's future with the team or in the NBA based on his potential as a starter is like judging a turkey sandwich by how much it tastes like pasta. McGuire is not currently a starting caliber player in the NBA. That doesn't mean he has no value or can't be useful.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 1:09 PM | Report abuse

McGuire is starting because he can stay in front of his man on defense, which is a skill sorely lacking on the Wizards roster, and because he can defend big 2s, 3s and even some 4s. Also, he can block shots and goes hard to the glass all the time. Even if he only gets 6 rpg himself, he creates situations where Butler or Jamison are able to get a putback. He's still erratic when he gets the ball on offense, but he's made great strides with his jump shot. With another summer of hard work, I wouldn't be surprised to see him develop into a decent spot-up 3pt shooter in the Bruce Bowen mold.

Nick Young is the one who's problematic. When he's in the groove, he's a fantastic scorer, but he's a completely one-dimensional player. I'd almost rather have Roger Mason, who's more limited on offense but plays way better D and can play either backcourt position on offense.

Posted by: pjkiger1 | February 20, 2009 1:12 PM | Report abuse

"And, of course, even if Smith is bought out, he still doesn't fall under your heading of teams buying out players because they're "garbage" (your word) in order to "send a message" (your words) "even if it costs them money" (your words). He's in the laast year of his deal and not in the Thunders' future plans. If he gets bought out, it'll be to save them money, not to "send a message" (your words" even if it costs them money (your words).

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 12:51 PM "

Did you get that assessment from Vescey too?

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | February 20, 2009 1:12 PM | Report abuse

I guess judging by your high regard for Vescey's reporting now, you also buy into his report that Paxson would have bought Larry out, even though he's a good player, but because he wanted nothing to do with Larry because of his attitude and influence on younger players (eg. send a message).


-------------------------------------------


Vescey:

Larry Hughes'contract ($12.8 million, $13.6M next season) almost certainly would have been bought out by managing partner Jerry Reinsdorf had GM John Paxson been unable to deport him. Hughes' mantra is straight from the Supreme Court justice handbook . . . he ain't ever comin' off the bench. Not starting was the issue in Chicago. When the 6-foot-5 guard returned from the injured list roughly six weeks ago, coach Vinny Del Negro offered him 30 minutes a game (sound familiar?) at the point, off guard and small forward. He impudently declined.

"Larry doesn't give a damn about winning or losing unless his team win and he's the focal point," a Bulls official harpooned. "All he cares about his starting, playing 36-to-38 minutes and getting his."

Talk to some Cavaliers, professionals who don't bother anybody and, generally, slam nobody, and they croon the same cheerless tune. "It's about Larry and that's all it's about," one Cav confirms. Another says, "All I'll say is he's a different guy. It was hard to figure out what is important to him.

He actually has a decent understanding of the game. . . . but not as much as he thinks."

The same Bulls official advanced disapproval an additional step. "You don't need distractions. If Larry is not playing you don't know what he's saying to the young kids or how he might be conspiring with the veterans behind the coach's back. One way or the other, he had to go."

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | February 20, 2009 1:20 PM | Report abuse


rcnasa - We shall see. If McGuire does end up leaving, it will be because of salary cap reasons, not because of his ability (similar to Mason).

Posted by: psps23
==========================================

psps23,

based on your earlier evaluation you should be confident the Wizards will keep him. Besides, Wiz shelled out big dollars to keep Etan and Blatche both are bench players.

You are incorrect on 1 point. They had the money to keep Mason(Gil took less than the max and Jamison contract is smaller than expected), only reason why they didn't sign him was because Mason wanted more minutes and the Wizards, with Deshawn and Gil at the guard spots, the Wizards could not guarantee Mason more minutes....that ended up burning the Wiz and Mason will likely win Most Improved Player, a person who came from the NBDL system.

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 1:29 PM | Report abuse

"I guess judging by your high regard for Vescey's reporting now, you also buy into his report that Paxson would have bought Larry out, even though he's a good player, but because he wanted nothing to do with Larry because of his attitude and influence on younger players (eg. send a message)."

Doesn't matter what he would have done. The fact is, he didn't do it. Hughes wasn't bought out, so you can't claim that Paxson considering buying him out supports your argument. The "message" (your word) isn't sent until they actually pay the guy to go away. The fact is that Hughes has been a DNP-CD for almost 2 months. If he really wanted to just dump him like "garbage" (your word), Paxson had plenty of time to "send a message" (your word). He didn't do it. So, once again, you were wrong.

Oh, and last I checked, the Knicks were still paying Marbury, so you can take that one off your list.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 1:31 PM | Report abuse

Why would anybody want to get rid of McGuire? If he's hurting the team, you can always sit him down. We know he can help the team, because we've seen him do it.

You know what I think is behind this? The realization that the Wiz need players of a type and skill set they don't have. And can't seem to get.

So the team's stuck. They can play a little better or worse over the remaining games than they have so far -- but they're about as good as they're gonna be.

Fanz don't want to hear this. So we get complaints and helpful hints. Fire this coach, promote that coach. Bench a player, start a player. More minutes, less minutes. Take that guy out behind the arena and kneecap him. You know: 'suggestions'.

Just as Jamison can't be Garnett, and Butler will never be Kobe, Dom McGuire will not magically turn into Kevin Durant or Michael Beasley. He ain't that good. But that doesn't mean he isn't a worthy piece of the puzzle.

Posted by: Samson151 | February 20, 2009 1:34 PM | Report abuse

In other news:

Amare Stoudemire out eight weeks following eye surgery. The Suns are now a full-fledged train wreck.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3921500

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Stats don't give anything

We'll have to just completely disagree about this one, jones-y. They're not the whole story but they are a huge part of it IMO. In any case, I also watch the games closely. My comments usually reflect my observations as well and the stats just happen to usually back up any assertions.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 1:41 PM | Report abuse

"Did you get that assessment from Vescey too?"

Nope.I got it by examining the facts (the Thunder are a rebuilding young team, they're concerned with payroll, Smith is a vet in the final year of his deal, Smith has no rep for being a troublemaker or a locker room headache, Smith can still play) and applying some basic logic and common sense. You'd be surprised how often that works.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Please, please, please: Stop talking about Haywood as part of this team's future. If they're counting on him, they're in permanent trouble. He's a stiff: He can't score, and he's and a 7-foot pussy who can't/won't stop anyone from an unimpeded roll down the lane for a dunk. Get over him and there just might be a future for the Wiz. Stick with him and you're already looking at the future, and it's truly bleak.

GA is a marvelous entertainer who sells seats, but even if healthy (a big question) he ain't the cornerstone for a franchise. Not only does he not play any D, but he doesn't seem to feel any obligation to; he acts like it's optional. Contrast that with LeBron's obvious commitment to, and improvement in, his D this year. Your cornerstone has to excel in all facets of the game, and has to be committed to improving those areas in which he doesn't yet excel. That makes GA 0-for-2. Sorry, gang. This organization has been lame for a long time and remains lame now, which keeps the team lame. It ain't pretty, but there it is.

Posted by: salescoach | February 20, 2009 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Just as an example, jones-y...let's take Songaila.

Some folks think that he does a credible job defensively but when you look at the final stat sheet and see that he gets 3 rebounds per 30 minutes, you start to get a feel for what he ISNT doing and not just what he IS doing.

Some stats aren't really open to interpretation. We can look at Deshawn's 32% shooting and know without a doubt that this year has been horrible for him.
I agree with you that they certainly do not give the whole picture.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 1:45 PM | Report abuse

While it's not true that "stats don't give anything," it is, however, indisputably true that stats don't give everything. That's the distinction that a lot of fans are unable to make.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Hey, salescoach ...How did you sneak that word through the filter? LOL.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 1:46 PM | Report abuse

One thing, salescoach ...Before this year the main complaint about LeBron was no defense but he is still a cornerstone.

I'm not willing to say GA will play no defense until he gets a coach that teaches and demands it and THEN refuses.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 1:48 PM | Report abuse

"They had the money to keep Mason(Gil took less than the max and Jamison contract is smaller than expected), only reason why they didn't sign him was because Mason wanted more minutes and the Wizards, with Deshawn and Gil at the guard spots, the Wizards could not guarantee Mason more minutes...

Posted by: rcnasa"

I find this hard to believe, considering the Spurs have Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili as their top options at the 1 and 2. Mason did not have any promises of more PT with the Spurs than he did with the Wizards. Collectively, those two would have been much harder to beat out than Arenas and Stevenson. Mason lucked out because Ginobili had to have surgery prior to the season, he was put in to take a majority of those minutes to start with, and he stepped up to the plate. Mason wasn't even their starter on opening day, even with Ginobili out. He played his way into the lineup. He wasn't promised anything.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 1:49 PM | Report abuse

While it's not true that "stats don't give anything," it is, however, indisputably true that stats don't give everything. That's the distinction that a lot of fans are unable to make.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 1:45 PM

Like the fact that AJ's 20 and 10 mean nothing because he never plays defense?

Posted by: bulletsfan78 | February 20, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse


Samson151,

You just made your own point. McGuire isn't that good, show me since being a starter, teams stats in defense, rebounds, blocks, steals, and most importantly wins. Even if the team made a slight improvement I would think otherwise

3 yrs from now a lot of folks defending McGuire will forgot the mans name. I'm sure folks forgot about Courtney Alexander.

Wiz fans every year have one guy they love, 2 yrs ago it was Ruffin today it's McGuire

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

"Some folks think that he does a credible job defensively but when you look at the final stat sheet and see that he gets 3 rebounds per 30 minutes, you start to get a feel for what he ISNT doing and not just what he IS doing."

Pointing out what he doesn't do in no way invalidates the value of what he does do. People point to his statistics to claim that he's no having an impact, but the impact he does have is pretty clearly seen if you watch him play instead of focusing on the box score. Just because a player doesn't do everything doesn't mean he's not doing anything.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

The most encouraging developments this year are the emergence of McGee and Critt. Young's game is erratic and one dimensional. I project McGee and Crit as starters on a playoff team. Blatche and McGuire are role players. Unless he rounds out his game, Young has the potential only to be a Vinnie the Microwave scorer off the bench. He's a scorer on a team that features only scorers.

Posted by: mickeyb | February 20, 2009 2:03 PM | Report abuse

"I'm not willing to say GA will play no defense until he gets a coach that teaches and demands it and THEN refuses.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 1:48 PM "

Hmmm, did you miss Gilby's interview about 2.5 seasons ago when he said he doesn't do D after EJ told him to starting focusing on D?

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | February 20, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

"Nope.I got it by examining the facts (the Thunder are a rebuilding young team, they're concerned with payroll, Smith is a vet in the final year of his deal, Smith has no rep for being a troublemaker or a locker room headache, Smith can still play) and applying some basic logic and common sense. You'd be surprised how often that works.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 1:43 PM "

Logic, common sense, and credibility for that matter goes out the window when you bash me for posting a Vescey column, and then you come back and do the very same thing.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | February 20, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Stat alert:

The opposition scores more points per minute when McGuire is on the court than when he is off the court.

As some would proffer, there must be another variable such as sun spot activity that would help explain this perverse result.

Posted by: Izman | February 20, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

"Some folks think that he does a credible job defensively but when you look at the final stat sheet and see that he gets 3 rebounds per 30 minutes, you start to get a feel for what he ISNT doing and not just what he IS doing.

Posted by: original_mark"

2006-2007 Season - Bruce Bowen (DPOY) per 30 minutes:

6.2 pts, 2.7 reb, 1.4 asts, .30 blk, .76 stl

This season - Dominic McGuire per 30 minutes:

5 pts, 6.4 reb, 2.5 asts, 1.09 blk, .9 stl

Plus, you even mentioned yourself earlier, you don't see the man he guards going off on offense. And as Bowen's stats show you, stats clearly don't tell you everything about a player.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I'm surprised EG can go on the record with this statement to Ivan.

I guess Roger wasn't considered a good player by EG, which is why Roger wasn't even offered a contract. Just Dee Brown was.

------------------------------------------

""Those are issues that will be looked at in the offseason," Grunfeld said of the team's looming luxury tax situation. "We didn't want to give up a good player just for financial reasons. We have flexibility. You want to be responsible, but at the same time we don't want to give up any assets that can help us as a basketball team." "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/19/AR2009021903166_2.html?sid=ST2009022000012

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | February 20, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

He has something that Blatche and Young lacks which is toughness.

What a croc - I am tired of uniformed, deliberately stupid comments about Blatch; i.e., his work ethic, his toughness, etc. Watch a damm game and learn. When he is on the floor the Wizards plus/minus is invarabily better. Geez, some people(?)

Posted by: h20law2000 | February 20, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

"Logic, common sense, and credibility for that matter goes out the window when you bash me for posting a Vescey column, and then you come back and do the very same thing."

I didn't bash you for quoting Vescey. I bashed you for quoting him and then using only half of what he said to justify your clearly biased argument (that the Clippers would/should trade Jamison for Kaman), while ignoring the clear underlying point the piece (that the only reason the Clipper were supposedly considering trading Kaman was to save money). In other words, I called you on doing what you always do, selectively parsing peoples' words to make them fit what you want them to say, the truth be damned.

And there's a big credibility difference between a speculative trade rumor article with no supporting evidence or quotes (Kamen) and a report on an actual factual event (Hughes' trade) filled with quotes from insiders. Esp. when the latter is just the latest in a number of reports from different sources on the same topic.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse


psps23

McGuire's Stats are:

3.3ppg 4.7 reb, 1.8 ast, 0.8 blk
=============================================
Bowen, probably average the same stats as McGuire now because Bowen's minutes have been taken by Mason

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

"As some would proffer, there must be another variable such as sun spot activity that would help explain this perverse result."

Or, y'know, maybe the other 4 players on the floor might have something to do with it. Possibly.

Naaahhh . . .

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

McGuire is not supposed to be a starter, damn. He's a seat-warmer getting invaluable experience. Jesus, the kid is far better than Ruffin already. He could stop any teams' second unit 2,3, or 4,...count it!!!!

Posted by: BurgwithaU | February 20, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

psps23

McGuire's Stats are:

3.3ppg 4.7 reb, 1.8 ast, 0.8 blk
=============================================
Bowen, probably average the same stats as McGuire now because Bowen's minutes have been taken by Mason

Posted by: rcnasa

-----

Those stats are not per 30 minutes.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

"I didn't bash you for quoting Vescey. I bashed you for quoting him and then using only half of what he said to justify your clearly biased argument (that the Clippers would/should trade Jamison for Kaman), while ignoring the clear underlying point the piece (that the only reason the Clipper were supposedly considering trading Kaman was to save money). In other words, I called you on doing what you always do, selectively parsing peoples' words to make them fit what you want them to say, the truth be damned.

And there's a big credibility difference between a speculative trade rumor article with no supporting evidence or quotes (Kamen) and a report on an actual factual event (Hughes' trade) filled with quotes from insiders. Esp. when the latter is just the latest in a number of reports from different sources on the same topic.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 2:23 PM

"

Oh puh-leaze.

You bashed me for quoting Vescey as you shot down his credibility.

And, with regard to the buyouts, I already named 7 people who had buyouts over the past 5 seasons....7 and counting.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | February 20, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Just because a player doesn't do everything doesn't mean he's not doing anything.

By the same token, just because a player does something doesn't mean he'd doing enough. A couple of good screens and a jumper or two per game isn't enough to warrant a starting spot.

Neither is 6 rebounds and 4 points per game at the sf spot. At least that's my assertion. Apparently others feel differently because DM is still starting.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

...and DSong is still getting major minutes.

Posted by: original_mark | February 20, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

"What a croc - I am tired of uniformed, deliberately stupid comments about Blatch; i.e., his work ethic, his toughness, etc. Watch a damm game and learn. When he is on the floor the Wizards plus/minus is invarabily better. Geez, some people(?)"

Posted by: h20law2000 | February 20, 2009 2:15 PM

I consider Andre as a solid NBA player and will someday reach his full potential. I'm also one of his supporters here ....just ask Kal BUT he's way below in toughness compared to DMac. I'm not sure if toughness is the right word but there is something in his game that you can't teach. Same goes with the likes of Maxiell, Perkins and Millsap.

Posted by: Dave381 | February 20, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

"A couple of good screens and a jumper or two per game isn't enough to warrant a starting spot."

McGuire has the 3rd lowest opponents PER of any player on the roster. Nick Young is number one, and that's generally because guards the worst offensive player on the opponents 2nd team. Caron Butler is .1 ahead of McGuire, and that's generally with McGuire doing most of the work defensively, guarding the other team's #1 wing option. McGuire holds Kobe, Lebron, Turkoglu, and Wade to what Caron holds Luke Walton, Wally Szcerbiak, Courtney Lee, and James Jones. Yes, that's simplifying it a bit, but Mcguire generally holds the other teams best option to the same or better than what the weaker options generally get against us.

It doesn't come out in the stats, but if you search for it, it's there. McGuire's man is rarely the key that beats us offensively. That's what he provides.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse

McGuire has the worst stats as a starting SF in the NBA. He's needs to go to the Development League to improve his game. Wizards fans don't have the patience to watch him waste 2 0r 3 seasons developing. Wizards fans want to see this team compete for a championship.. not wait, watch and grow players, many of whom may not even turn out to be a star in the league.

Wizards fans watched too many players turn to bust and we are sick of it. Those who use the "potential" word for McGuire haven't been Wizards fans for a long time. This team has a history of "potential" players who we wait to develop and turn out as bust. Sometimes they later become stars once leaving the team, either way, wiz fans are disappointed. I doubt that will happen with McGuire unless he goes to the NBDL or overseas to improve other areas in his game. He's young, and has a chance to comeback into the league and become a star. But playing for the Wizards I doubt he'll have a chance to become a star.

Posted by: rcnasa | February 20, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

rcnasa - You're missing the point. Nobody that's defending McGuire expects him to become a star. This team has enough "potential" stars as it is, and not nearly enough of the tough, gritty, dirty-work, little-things guys. That's what Mcguire is. The perfect compliment to Arenas-Butler-Jamison, or Blatche and Young for that matter. You don't need a stat filler when there's so many other scoring options on the roster. You need somebody that makes up for what those guys don't (can't) do.

Posted by: psps23 | February 20, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Here we go again.

McGee quite simply is not a starting center. Check the plus minus during games where the stat matters and McGee's is often one of the worst. Last game he was -20 and we won the game. Tired, tired, tired of all the start this person start that person just for the hell of it crowd. Yeah, if he gets in and is having a GOOD game then ride him. If not, sit his ass on the bench as is usually the case. Same with NY etc....

Glad to know everyone knows more than coaches or the players themselves. Just check Butler and Jamison's comments on playing time and the young player's performances. It contradicts everything the play at all cost crowd crows for in here. So, if you hate Tap, then there you have it. Two all-stars who might know a thing or two about basketball as they have lived and breathed basketball their whole lives!

Posted by: rphilli721 | February 20, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

McGuire has the worst stats

Lies, damned lies and stats.

He's needs to go to the Development League to improve his game.

Why, so he can get the same amount of PT against much worse competition? Makes no sense.

Wizards fans want to see this team compete for a championship.. not wait, watch and grow players,

That's a testament to how good of a GM grunfeld is, if I've ever seen one. Before now, wiz fans just wanted to see a decent/competitive team and wanted to see the team's mgmt stop giving away young talent for washed up veterans. Well guess what? That's exactly what we got...

many of whom may not even turn out to be a star in the league.

Most players don't turn out to be a star in this league. McGuire will be one of them. I'd rather he not be a star, that means we have a better chance of keeping him longer.

Does Boston win that championship without Posey last year? Is he a 'star?'

Is Roger Mason a 'star?'
Andre Miller?
Mike Bibby?
David Lee?
Zydrunas Ilgauskas?
Raja Bell?
Shane Battier?
Udonis Haslem?

Which one of them would you not want on your team???

Posted by: jones-y | February 20, 2009 4:30 PM | Report abuse

I just heard a live radio interview with Roger on WTEM with JT2.

Roger said that Les BouleS wanted to go in a different direction once last season was over, and didn't pursue him, so he left and has no regrets.

He said the Spurs are much more mature, accountability from top to bottom, and focus on defense. That's the big difference between his new team and his old team.

He basically said there aren't people on the team fighting for the limelight and the team is focused on winning.

He sure sounded happy where he is now.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | February 20, 2009 5:03 PM | Report abuse

"By the same token, just because a player does something doesn't mean he'd doing enough. A couple of good screens and a jumper or two per game isn't enough to warrant a starting spot.

Neither is 6 rebounds and 4 points per game at the sf spot. At least that's my assertion. Apparently others feel differently because DM is still starting."

You didn't read anything anyone else wrote, did you? No one's arguing that he "deseves" a starting spot. Multiple people have already said that on a good, healthy team, he wouldn't be a starter. He's a backup quality player at this point in his career. If that makes him unworthy to wear an NBA uniform, then you'd better be prepared to kick McGee, Crittenton, Young, and pretty much every healthy player on the Wizards roster to the D league or the curb, because aside from Jamison and Butler, ALL of them are backup quality players.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

"And, with regard to the buyouts, I already named 7 people who had buyouts over the past 5 seasons....7 and counting."

(A)It was never about buyouts per se. It was about teams buying out players because they were "garbage" (your word) and to "send a message" (your words) "even if it cost them money" (your words). Several of the guys you named didn't come close to fitting that criteria. Some were players on minor deals or guys in the last year of a contract who were bought out as cost saving measures. A completely different circumstance than the one you were rambling about. And the one you first named (Marbury), the one whose team's (Knicks) example you said the Wiz should follow still hasn't been bought out yet.

(B) Even if all of your examples did fit your criteria (and they don't) so what? Seven in five years (and out of 30 teams and 450 players) still falls well within the boundaries of being "rare." (This is the part where you jump through hoops about how I said "very" rare and then try to squirm away by making a big deal about how many times I used "very." And you'll cap it all off by claiming not to be engaging in semantics as you furiously try to parse words to cover the fact that your argument has no basis in fact.)

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Abe, we have half a season to go and the only thing people have to talk about is McGuire?

No wonder Larry from Clinton has given up posting on here.

Posted by: bulletsfan78 | February 20, 2009 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Let's talk about Ernie's replacement. Either that or who is going to be the next owner? I think Ted has rights of first refusal.

Posted by: SteveC28 | February 20, 2009 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Samson151,You just made your own point. McGuire isn't that good, show me since being a starter, teams stats in defense, rebounds, blocks, steals, and most importantly wins. Even if the team made a slight improvement I would think otherwise
3 yrs from now a lot of folks defending McGuire will forgot the mans name. I'm sure folks forgot about Courtney Alexander.
Wiz fans every year have one guy they love, 2 yrs ago it was Ruffin today it's McGuire
Posted by: rcnasa"

OK, I'm not going to pretend to understand all of the above, but a couple points in what I think must be a response:

I agree with you on the following:
1. McGuire isn't all that good.
2. He doesn't substantially improve the team's chances of winning.
3. Eventually people will forget his name.
4. It does seem like every year there's one marginal player that the fanz love.

But I disagree as follows:
1. McGuire is an unfinished product, like fully half the Wiz roster. And unlike the more talented McGee, Nick Young, Blatche, and Crittenton, a coach can give him a defensive assignment with reasonable confidence that he'll fulfill it.
2. The team's terrible. They don't play that much better when Butler and Jamison are on the court -- let alone McGuire.
3. Memories are short, for anybody but stars, on any teams but the top ones.
4. Fanz do tend to become fond of hard-working, blue collar players who all but bring a lunchbucket to the court. McGuire is one of those. So was Michael Ruffin -- who by the way, could rebound a little.

Posted by: Samson151 | February 20, 2009 7:39 PM | Report abuse

"(A)It was never about buyouts per se. It was about teams buying out players because they were "garbage" (your word) and to "send a message" (your words) "even if it cost them money" (your words). Several of the guys you named didn't come close to fitting that criteria. Some were players on minor deals or guys in the last year of a contract who were bought out as cost saving measures. A completely different circumstance than the one you were rambling about. And the one you first named (Marbury), the one whose team's (Knicks) example you said the Wiz should follow still hasn't been bought out yet.

(B) Even if all of your examples did fit your criteria (and they don't) so what? Seven in five years (and out of 30 teams and 450 players) still falls well within the boundaries of being "rare." (This is the part where you jump through hoops about how I said "very" rare and then try to squirm away by making a big deal about how many times I used "very." And you'll cap it all off by claiming not to be engaging in semantics as you furiously try to parse words to cover the fact that your argument has no basis in fact.)

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 20, 2009 5:39 PM "

And, your statements (not arguments) "very very rarely" have any basis or fact either. Nothing but conjecture.

You make these blanket statements, but then backtrack or spin it whenever someone disproves your original statement.

Nomatter how you want to say it, very rarely, or very very rarely, it may benefit this team if EG buys someone out to get them out of town in order to send a message.

None of these "good guys" on this team, as you like to put it while conveniently forgetting Andray Blatche and his checkered history, get the message and are still slackers that don't take the games seriously.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | February 20, 2009 8:12 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company