Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: MrMichaelLee and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS
Posted at 12:48 PM ET, 03/ 3/2011

Jump ball: What if the Wizards hadn't traded the 5th pick in the 2009 draft?

By Washington Post editors

In last night's postgame wrap-up, Michael Lee brought up a provocative point. The Warriors' Stephen Curry scorched the Wizards with 29 points, nine rebounds and five assists.

If you recall, Curry thought that the Wizards were going to take him with the 5th overall pick in the 2009 NBA draft before they shipped the pick to Minnesota for Randy Foye and Mike Miller. "That was definitely a spot that was on my radar," Curry said last season after his first game against the Wizards. ...
But whenever you see Curry, you have to take a step back and wonder, what if. As in, what if the Wizards had taken a different philosophy two years ago and decided to add some talented young players, in Curry and DeJuan Blair, to their veteran core instead of just getting two established players. They were able to recover and get Wall last summer, but would you rather just have Wall or some combination of Curry, Blair and a top five pick from the 2005 NBA draft....DeMarcus Cousins? Wesley Johnson? Just something to ponder.

What do you think? Should the Wizards have taken a different path?

By Washington Post editors  | March 3, 2011; 12:48 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Nick Young breaks out of slump, but Stephen Curry makes sure Wizards losing streak continues
Next: Lewis might need season-ending surgery

Comments

Of course they should have taken a different path!

At the time, I am sure EG was encouraged to give Abe the best season EG could provide, given the circumstances. That was understandable--Abe deserved it. In my mind, EG is forgiven, especially in light of what has transpired since Ted took over. Now the Wiz are focusing on the future, collecting draft picks and not dumping them in a short-sighted way.

Over many years, the Wiz/Bullets have traded young for old, and traded draft picks for some immediate hoped-for payoff. Now we have a new day in Wiz-land, for which we should be grateful.

Posted by: EdDC | March 3, 2011 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Besides speculation, is there any evidence that Abe Pollin was behind the 5th pick for Foye and Miller trade?

How you evaluate EG has a lot to do with how you think that trade went down, although extending Blatche is looking like a whiff and sadly reeks of EG's vanity getting in the way of cold evaluation of characer and talent.

Posted by: mugsybol | March 3, 2011 1:14 PM | Report abuse

you can play the what if game all you want. what if we got blake and he injured himself then we got wall and we got the next best guard center combo of the decade. However, the context was win now, win now, win now. Abe Pollin's health was ailing and he wanted to see one more championship. Last year abe was on his deathbed willing to pay luxury tax to see one more deep playoff run. Would you have the heart to tell a dying man we need young talent for the future and possible rebuilding project can you stay alive for 4 more years? Maybe thats why Ted didn't fire EG. Ted was around during this time period observing his investment.

Posted by: jefferu | March 3, 2011 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Not only was the trade terrible, but the justification for the trade undermines who was obtained in the trade. The two "rentals" included Randy Foye, who EG thought could adequately fill in for Gilbert if/when he was injured. Here's the problem: the trade was designed to make the big 3 a bigger threat to contend. So if the Wiz had to rely on Foye to start, there would be no big 3, only a okay 2 with a couple of role players for the number 5 pick.

Not only was that a terrible trade, but the Wiz got almost nothing in return for Jamison, Caron, or Haywood. EG should have done better.

Posted by: ZardsFan1 | March 3, 2011 1:37 PM | Report abuse

Its so easy to speculate in hindsight...yes curry and favors or curry and cousins of course are better than foye and miller for one yr plus wall and seraphin, however if we did draft curry and kept the entire roster intact last year we probably wouldnt have had such a low draft and may not have been able to select wall, cousins or favors this yr so who knows. We got Wall and thats all I care a bout right now.

Posted by: bbachrac | March 3, 2011 1:37 PM | Report abuse

What is the policy for hounding players like Blatche or Young from behind the bench, even if it's the team you love?

Always supported D.C. teams to the fullest, never booed even the most putrid performances. Read about players on all DMV teams ask why fans would boo their team instead of support them.

Gonna be behind the Wiz bench in a future game, planning on chastising Blatch and Young for their attitude the past three years, and don't wanna cross any lines.

Posted by: saltine182 | March 3, 2011 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Well, the Wiz would have gotten a good player like Curry or Brandon Jennings, or a serviceable one like Jordan Hill or Demar Derozan. The trading of the 5th was based on an overestimation of the existing Wiz roster, particularly those core players. I should point out it wasn't just Ernie and Flip who overestimated it; the Wiz were picked to finish in the playoffs by nearly everybody. If they'd been as good as people thought, then the Miller/Foye acquisition would have seemed better, and both would probably still be with the team.

But it was not to be.

That's the thing about the 'what if' game -- it can only be played in the rear view mirror.

Posted by: Samson151 | March 3, 2011 1:48 PM | Report abuse

To me, this is a silly hypothetical. Because even if the Wizards had drafted Curry, they would have had to develop him into what he is today. Who's to say he would have turned out the same?

@jefferu: You are so right. "What if" is a game played by losers second guessing decisions that didn't pan out. You don't see the Patriots going "What if Drew Bledsoe hadn't gotten injured and Tom Brady had stayed on our bench?"

Posted by: tundey | March 3, 2011 2:01 PM | Report abuse

If they'd taken Curry then either (A) they would have missed out on the chance to get Wall or (B) passed on Wall because they had Curry. I like Curry, but I don't like either of those alternatives.

Posted by: kalo_rama | March 3, 2011 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Give me Curry and a lottery pick this year.

Washington did not have the most ping pong balls last year and won the lottery and drafted Wall. They leapfrogged. Who said they would not have leapfrogged anyway, with Curry making the team better with less ping pong balls. Sure it probably would have hurt our choice this year, but Curry has already made the U.S. team, so he is no bum. We would have an extra building block.

Posted by: G-Man11 | March 3, 2011 2:36 PM | Report abuse

I meant give me Curry and a the lottery pick not being Wall last year.

Posted by: G-Man11 | March 3, 2011 2:37 PM | Report abuse

I'll tell you what, if things don't change around here, this move (or lack of) will be the one that shines the brightest. As it is right now.

Posted by: AllDCSports | March 3, 2011 2:48 PM | Report abuse

Not only was that a terrible trade, but the Wiz got almost nothing in return for Jamison, Caron, or Haywood. EG should have done better.

Posted by: ZardsFan1 | March 3, 2011 1:37 PM | Report abuse

This was the beginning to what we are today. We got Cap Space and Picks.

Posted by: AllDCSports | March 3, 2011 2:50 PM | Report abuse

The way things are going for this franchise now, he'd have just opted out of his deal here after a couple, 3 years and jumped to the Knicks. Supposedly he badly wanted them to draft him.

Posted by: BMoreChil | March 3, 2011 2:53 PM | Report abuse

The Wiz should have picked Curry knowing that he could given them insurance if Arenas didn't return to form as well as some young talent for the future. Everyone knew that Miller and Foye were rentals, not guys to build the team around. If EG was told by Abe Pollin to go all in last year, this was still a terrible trade. I've never seen any GM trade a Top 5 pick for essentially two role players who wouldn't have even helped a contender get over the top.

EG has not redeemed himself in my mind. The net gain we have from trading Butler, Jamison, and Haywood was one No. 1 draft pick which turned out be Trevor Booker and some cap space by buying out vets. The Wiz are actually worse off at this point than last year as only NY has shown improvement. Both Blatche and McGee have regresssed and the former has a bad contract thanks to the extension. Except for Wall, NY, and possibly McGee, I see no players to build around for the future. I am happy not to have spent a penny to see the Wizards play this year.

Posted by: wizfan89 | March 3, 2011 2:56 PM | Report abuse

I hated the trade the day they made it and hate it today.

The Wiz weren't good enough even given perfect health as previously constructed to actually contended for an NBA championship, and it wasn't until Leonsis took over and admitted that the Wiz were in "no man's land" - not good enough to really win, not bad enough to get high draft picks. That is why the Wizards are rebuilding - a term another team around here needs to learn and embrace.

I get the sentimentalism for Abe, but the deal was puke awful then and looks just as bad now.

Posted by: BrokenClipboard | March 3, 2011 3:00 PM | Report abuse

" I've never seen any GM trade a Top 5 pick for essentially two role players who wouldn't have even helped a contender get over the top."

Posted by: wizfan89 | March 3, 2011 2:56 PM

The Clippers just traded Baron Davis and what could be a top 5 pick for Mo Williams and Jamario Moon, two players we know for a proven fact can't help a contender get over the top.

Posted by: kalo_rama | March 3, 2011 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Wow, some of you sure are sensitive. I wonder how old some of you are.

Posted by: G-Man11 | March 3, 2011 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Baron Davis was traded to get rid of his contract(like the Wizards "big 3") and to get his play when I feel like it attitude out.

The Clippers are not contenders for a championship this year, btw.

Posted by: BrokenClipboard | March 3, 2011 3:07 PM | Report abuse

I do believe that Ernie's decision was based on direction from the Pollins but O am not sure that should let him completely off the hook. The judgement against the players is ruthless and non tolerant and I think the same should be for the all emplyees of the franchise.

I am very glad we ended up getting J Wall with the number#1 pick the next year, but I would like to know that management will make good off-season moves. That was a stupid trade and it DID NOT "make sense at the time"

That team never was in the company of NBA elite. They did not value developing a squad and were delusional in thinking they were on the cusp of a title.

Posted by: gmac78 | March 3, 2011 3:25 PM | Report abuse

correction;

"I am not sure

Posted by: gmac78 | March 3, 2011 3:26 PM | Report abuse

"Baron Davis was traded to get rid of his contract(like the Wizards "big 3") and to get his play when I feel like it attitude out."

True. Irrelevant but true.

"The Clippers are not contenders for a championship this year, btw."

Posted by: BrokenClipboard | March 3, 2011 3:07 PM

(A) I didn't say they were (B) Neither were the Wizards when they traded the #5 pick (despite what Abe may have wanted to believe).

wizfan said he'd never heard of another example of a team trading a high lottery pick for 2 role players. I simply cited another example. In other words: It happens. Get over it.

Posted by: kalo_rama | March 3, 2011 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Even with hindsight the move doesn't look that bad.

Obviously if the Wizards had known in advance that 2009 was going to be a monumental bust, you probably stick with the pick. On top of that you probably try to move Jamison and Butler in the summer. Of course no one could have know that the team would start the season with Jamison and Miller getting injured and missing significant time. On top of that the Arenas gun incident was completely out from left-field.

The organization's path made sense based on the fact that it was trying to win with its "big" three while it still had a window to do so. They decided they needed to play it out. Things didn't work out.

Plus the counterfactual isn't necessarily that the Wizards get a guy like Curry and then get another top 5 lottery pick in 2010. It's entirely conceivable that they could have been a bad team that was just on the edge of being a lottery team, or at the high end of the lottery. If Curry is all that maybe he and Jamison, Butler with Miller and Foye could have scraped their way near to mediocrity. Maybe they're close enough in the mix by the All-Star break that the management decides to play things out, get that 7th or 8th seed, and let the chips roll where they may.

If I was building a roster from scratch at the PG position, I'd still rather have John Wall than Stephen Curry (or any of the 2009 PGs). As a cornerstone I'd still rather have Wall than anyone other than Griffin in 2009.

e.g. Thabeet going #2. Harden at #3? Jordan Hill? Johnny Flynn (not too bad in his rookie season, but his injury looks like it could limit him for the rest of his career). If the Wizards had started a year earlier on rebuilding, it's not really clear to me that they would be that much further ahead of the curve.

Posted by: JPRS | March 3, 2011 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Every team makes draft day mistakes. We did in 2009 but would curry have had a chance on our team in which Agent 0 was running the show? i think so, but we were building a 'contender' and mike miller and randy foye are ok players. Im not particularly regretting Ernies decision to trade that pick but it was unlucky.

Posted by: Joe08121990 | March 3, 2011 3:47 PM | Report abuse

Never look back, it is a dumb thing to do. What if God had picked me instead of Jesus to become his son? LMAO. It will be an entirely different world.

Posted by: hock1 | March 3, 2011 3:57 PM | Report abuse

The damn trade was horrible any way you slice it. We gave up a top 5 pick and have nothing to show for it less than a year later. What is there to debate? how does Grunfeld still have a job. Arenas guns and breaking up the big 3 is irrelevant and are not the excuse for this.

Who over estimated this team's talent? Who thought Foye and Miller were the missing pieces? They were two more offensive players when the team needed defensive help? Didn't the Wiz also sell their 2nd round pick 2-years in a row? So in truth the Wiz have added nothing from the 2009 draft and it's a crying shame.

Posted by: oknow1 | March 3, 2011 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Baron Davis was traded to get rid of his contract(like the Wizards "big 3") and to get his play when I feel like it attitude out.

The Clippers are not contenders for a championship this year, btw.

Posted by: BrokenClipboard | March 3, 2011 3:07 PM | Report abuse

let's not mention that what "could be a top 5 pick" could also end up outside of the top ten depending on how the rest of the yr goes and then the lotto. EG traded a surefire NO. 5 selection in the draft for 2 players he grossly overvalued, with no safety net in case it didn't pan out that season. And it wasn't even a draft day trade to see how things were playing out, he shipped our pick off like 3 days before the draft.

W

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | March 3, 2011 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Besides speculation, is there any evidence that Abe Pollin was behind the 5th pick for Foye and Miller trade? How you evaluate EG has a lot to do with how you think that trade went down, although extending Blatche is looking like a whiff and sadly reeks of EG's vanity getting in the way of cold evaluation of characer and talent.
Posted by: mugsybol | March 3, 2011 1:14 PM |

Yes, of course it's speculation. But how else to explain the total shift in priorities from the previous era to the new Ted era? Is it only EG who suddenly is becoming focused on the future, or is Ted driving that?

Owners count. Is it a coincidence that the Skins run their front offices differently under Dan Snyder than they did under Jack Kent Cooke? Isn't it funny how the Nats and the Red Sox front offices have totally differing philosophies? Does ownership have anything to do with that?

Yes, EG could have whiffed on Blatche. If Blatche wastes the off-season instead of getting in shape, developing his skills and motivating himself, then that's a bit of a disaster. EG just went on what he saw the latter part of last season. Maybe he didn't read Blatche's mind well enough.

Posted by: EdDC | March 3, 2011 4:29 PM | Report abuse

I remember instantly being furious when hearing we traded for Foye and Miller, I knew they would blow, and they did.

I also remember getting so excited seeing DeJuan Blair still there for us to get in the 2nd round.... but then we drafted some guard that we traded for cash.

Seeing this article only brings me back to my anger of that night... grrrr.

Fire Grunfeld.

Posted by: Smashionals | March 3, 2011 4:31 PM | Report abuse

What if is of past .. it did not happen .. EG has a chance to fix things and I hope he does but overall I think if we would have drafted Curry then Wizards would have won more games and chances of landing Wall would have diminished .. I am glad we have Wall who can really change the game for us and having Wall will attract more players to come and play in DC .. EG has to be smart this year and draft wisely otherwise he is gone too .. Saunders got to go and I have a feeling he will resign at the end of the year .. We need a young coatch .. Mark Jackson will be a great coach for the young Wizards

Posted by: svafai2000 | March 3, 2011 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Are you kidding? I would have taken Curry number one in that draft. Now, it turns out I would have been wrong. Griffin is a beast. But I don't think anybody else in that class is going to better him in the long run. I have been crying the blues ever since we traded that pick. I wish Curry was a wiz. He's a special, special talent. And I don't think I'll ever be able to see him play without hating our franchise just a little bit for whiffing on him.

Posted by: Matte | March 3, 2011 5:27 PM | Report abuse

If they don't get a coach it ain't gonna make a difference who they draft,Curry should have been on their radar but let's be honest i didn't know who Curry was until he torched G'Town in NCAA's and neither did anybody else. The kid is very,very,good and doesn't mind getting his hand's dirty(rebounding,playing defense) and can do something most young players can't do; shoot the mid range jump shot with consistency. The fact that he has his dad as his mentor can't hurt his brother play's at Duke(if i'm not mistaken) and is going to very good when it's all said and done.

Posted by: dargregmag | March 3, 2011 5:31 PM | Report abuse

What if? What if? What if?

What if we drafted Ricky Rubio? Everybody got amnesia? You can't speculate too much on that, we still had our core team. Nobody thought this all would happen, Miller and Foye added depth and outside shooting.

Now Blair was a different sorry. There was no reason not to take him. The risk/reward was too high to pass up, but we did.

Posted by: tischmid | March 3, 2011 5:39 PM | Report abuse

The Clippers just traded Baron Davis and what could be a top 5 pick for Mo Williams and Jamario Moon, two players we know for a proven fact can't help a contender get over the top.

Posted by: kalo_rama

This one doesn't count because it's Clippers aka Wizards West. This Sterling made move was about money. Not about getting better but not having to pay a high draft pick

Posted by: zack5 | March 3, 2011 5:43 PM | Report abuse

"let's not mention that what "could be a top 5 pick" could also end up outside of the top ten depending on how the rest of the yr goes and then the lotto."

Posted by: lilhollywood10 | March 3, 2011 4:10 PM

Mention it all you like. Doesn't change my point. That pick will, without question, be a lottery pick and very well could be in the top 5. The Clippers knew this and traded it (along with Davis) for Williams and Moon anyway. In fact, in one of the many post-trade day reports, a writer noted that the pick could end up being a high one and, in response, a Clippers exec was quoted as saying that trading the pick is indicative "of how little we think of this draft." So don't act like the possibility of it being a high selection was lost on the Clippers. It wasn't. They knew what they could be missing out on and traded the pick anyway. Period.

"This one doesn't count because it's Clippers aka Wizards West."

Posted by: zack5 | March 3, 2011 5:43 PM

Sorry, but no. Doesn't matter why it happened. Fact is, it happened. That's the whole point. Deals like that happen, which means that Grunfeld wasn't out on some crazy flight of fancy when he made his. The fact that they happen for a multitude of different reasons only strengthens my point.

Whether you like the deal or not is a separate issue and one, quite frankly, I'm not particularly interested in. But the suggestion that it was some kind of crazy, unheard of, out of the blue, random occurrence is just wrong.

Posted by: kalo_rama | March 3, 2011 6:10 PM | Report abuse

The trade was fine at the time IMO. I always liked Miller & thought he'd finally take the starting 2 spot from Deshawn Stevenson with his solid all around game, passing, rebounding & 3 pt shot. I liked Foye as a combo G with upside & Gil injury insurance.

The players I really liked in the draft were all taken before 5. Curry in hindsight would of been a great pick, biut we could've taken Rubio. I liked Jordan Hill too for help inside. But at the time I was ok with the move. I was more mad about giving away the 2nd rounder for cash & not taking Blair! But IMO the Booker pick helps cause I really like him.

Posted by: Darnell1 | March 3, 2011 6:43 PM | Report abuse

The trade was fine at the time IMO. I always liked Miller & thought he'd finally take the starting 2 spot from Deshawn Stevenson with his solid all around game, passing, rebounding & 3 pt shot, and round out the starting 5. I liked Foye as a combo G with upside & Gil injury insurance.

The players I really liked in the draft were all taken before 5. Curry in hindsight would of been a great pick, but we could've taken Rubio. I liked Jordan Hill too for help inside. But at the time I was ok with the move. I was more mad about giving away the 2nd rounder for cash & not taking Blair! But IMO the Booker pick helps cause I really like him.

Posted by: Darnell1 | March 3, 2011 6:45 PM | Report abuse

No sweat Mike...As history is the best indicator, I'm sure there will be plenty of "what if" questions coming in the future.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | March 3, 2011 7:08 PM | Report abuse

It was one of the great whiffs in Wizards' history, and the kind of decision that could set the team back for a decade. I remember before the draft, several posters in here were moaning about how there were few surefire picks at the top, how it was a weak draft, etc.... mostly, I presume, because they read mock drafts which told them so. When Grunfeld traded the pick, they were elated that we finally assembled the missing pieces needed around our 'Big Three': two more jump shooting guards to go with our franchise player, a jump shooting... guard... coming off an injury, and a... jump shooting Power Forward in Jamison and a... jump shooting small forward in Butler. It violated every personnel rule: trading young for old, known mediocrity for unknown potential, making the falsely safe, GM-job-saving move versus the risk-taking & franchise-making fence swing. It is one of the only chances, the other being in a huge and/or beach & bikini saturated market (NY, LA. Miami) an NBA team has in landing the type of transcendental player who elevates clubs into contention. Grunfeld mortgaged our lottery ticket for two guys who played LESS THAN AVERAGE ball for a SINGLE YEAR, then WHIFFED ON BLAIR, thereby doubling his error. It was an awful draft by any measure, the proof being that we have NOT A SINGLE PLAYER TO SHOW FROM BEING ONE OF THE WORST TEAMS IN THE NBA AND GETTING HIGH PICKS IN COMPENSATION. Those on here who say hindsight is 20-20, Grunfeld couldn't have known, etc., set a very low bar for a GM whose job it is is to do exactly that. Would people in here really rather have Wall than Curry AND, say, Demarcus Cousins? Why do some people in here continue to defend Grunfeld?

Posted by: glaytham | March 3, 2011 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Bottom line: Never, never, never trade a 5th pick in the NBA Draft (one that could have a game changer) for two "serviceable" players. Bad, bad, bad trade...regardless of how you look at it. The concept is akin to trading a big man (CWebb) for a once top star player, on the decline which translates to "serviceable" (MRichmond).

Posted by: humen8r | March 3, 2011 8:36 PM | Report abuse

Ask any Warriors fan who they'd prefer, Curry or Wall, and most would say Wall. Now, the fifth pick for Miller/Foye.... yeah, that was an awful trade.
Wiz should have a top five pick again this year. Do they take Jimmer? Barnes? Walker? Or do they trade the pick for Antoine Walker? lol

Posted by: Mrawl | March 3, 2011 8:48 PM | Report abuse

So why is Grunfeld still employed by Les BouleS?

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | March 3, 2011 9:17 PM | Report abuse

Helllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Yes, the Wizards should have taken another path.

Like quite a few Wizards fans...I watched DeJuan Blair in the Big East at Pitt and I saw a poor man's Larry "Grandmama" Johnson.

I liked Tyreke Evans, John Calipari appears to be the new Lute Olson, able to develop guards and wingmen better than anyone else right now (D.Rose, T.Evans,J.Wall).

I hated the trading of the 5th pick. As a lifelong Bullets/Wizards fan except for last offseason, we don't get lucky with high picks- we tend to be the team that unexpectedly "slides" so that a franchise that the NBA fears is losing fans can get the franchise player.

So when we get the 1st through the 5th pick, we should take a player.

Plus, Miller and Foye were one-year rentals and they were barely average.

I generally like Grunfeld's moves, but he outsmarted himself with that one.

Posted by: ArmchairGM | March 3, 2011 9:43 PM | Report abuse

glaytham
~~~
Co-sign wholeheartedly. When I saw Blair nearly rip Thabeet's arm off in college for a rebound, he became my guy. That's exactly what the Wizards have needed since they couldn't see what they had in a young Ben Wallace, a fierce rebounding machine.

And yes, fans need hope, hope that comes from being a losing franchise and getting rewarded with a high pick and a promising young player.

It tends to rejuvenate a fan base more than a trade/free-agent signing...something mystical/magical about it.

I remember how that night went for me, I was all pumped up trying to figure out if we were going to take Tyreke Evans and then the trade was announced.

I turned the draft off, I needed that shot of hope that wouldv'e come from a using that pick instead of trading it.

Posted by: ArmchairGM | March 3, 2011 9:58 PM | Report abuse

Tyreke Evans was gone, as was Hardin, both of which I wanted. If we kept the pick we probably would of taken Rubio.

Miller was the legit starting SG we lacked. Foye was a promising player. They only became "1 yr rentals" after the team imploded.

And if we didn't get Wall we may of ended up w/ Evan Turner. Would you rather have Rubio & Turner than Wall??

Look, I didn't agree with it, and watching that draft was a joke, but I could understand the trade at the time. Hopefully lesson learned. We basically got 4 1st rounders last year (Wall, Booker, Seraphin, Crawford) and 2 more this year. Leonsis appears to value picks so hopefully we are headed in a new direction.

Posted by: Darnell1 | March 3, 2011 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Tyreke Evans was gone, as was Hardin, both of which I wanted. If we kept the pick we probably would of taken Rubio.

Miller was the legit starting SG we lacked. Foye was a promising player. They only became "1 yr rentals" after the team imploded.

And if we didn't get Wall we may of ended up w/ Evan Turner. Would you rather have Rubio & Turner than Wall??

Look, I didn't agree with it, and watching that draft was a joke, but I could understand the trade at the time. Hopefully lesson learned. We basically got 4 1st rounders last year (Wall, Booker, Seraphin, Crawford) and 2 more this year. Leonsis appears to value picks so hopefully we are headed in a new direction.

Posted by: Darnell1 | March 3, 2011 11:23 PM | Report abuse

What is the policy for hounding players like Blatche or Young from behind the bench, even if it's the team you love?

Always supported D.C. teams to the fullest, never booed even the most putrid performances. Read about players on all DMV teams ask why fans would boo their team instead of support them.

Gonna be behind the Wiz bench in a future game, planning on chastising Blatch and Young for their attitude the past three years, and don't wanna cross any lines.

Posted by: saltine182 | March 3, 2011 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I'm a season ticket holder behind the bench. You can yell whatever you want. Take it from me though, they don't care. I regularly let blatche know how much he sucks (with support from the entire 101 section) and he looks at me and smiles. Don't waste your time... although it is fun to hear the fans yelling at them during the tv broadcast

Posted by: vanllathunder | March 4, 2011 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I initially liked getting Mike Miller, but that was before I realized we sacrificed the Steph Curry pick. Miller brought some hustle to the Wiz but his jumpshot and legs weren't what they used to be. Nowhere near the days of co-starring on the Magic with T-Mac. Then they let him walk without signing and trading him. That irked me. Although a headcase, Beasley was on the table and I'd rather have him than "Baltche". The Seraphin pick also pissed me off. Buying out Thornton's contract is mind boggling. I thought he could've been an offseason trade chip. Being under the cap is cool if there are quality free agents interested in coming to DC in the next 2 yrs. Not really the case as of right now. The only decent thing that went down was getting Jordan Crawford and a 1st rd pick for Hinrich and Armstrong. All water under the bridge at this point. IF he still has a job, we'll see what Ernie can muster up with two 1st round picks and a lot of money to play with.

P.S. Trade Blatche!!!

Posted by: Akiraw | March 4, 2011 2:23 PM | Report abuse

I was infuriated at the time with the decision and remain so. One can't use revisionist knowledge of the Wall lottery luck to justify what was at the time, and remains an incredibly idiotic and short sighted decision. If EG didn't like the players available (and w/time, it appears the vast majority of the players available were awful, save Curry, and Jennings in that area) he could have and should have traded out of the pick for future picks, not someone else's garbage. The choice was simple, grab Curry, or accumulate future picks. The only decision that didnt make sense was the decision that was made. To trade a top 5 pick for two bench players.

Freaking moronic. I said it at the time and it remains so. I do not care a whit that the motivation may have been to make some farcical run to a 4 games to 0 sweep in an 8 v 1 playoff matchup. This is not the way anyone can, should, or could build a franchise into anything of consequence. It's obvious then, and its obvious now.

Posted by: graywolfe81 | March 4, 2011 2:42 PM | Report abuse

One other note. A lot of posters are suggesting that its a waste of time to dwell on it, that it's a pointless enterprise. Don't look back, move on.

My answer. If you don't look back and honestly evaluate decision making, you will continue to make idiotic decisions. It's important to dwell on this to note the idiocy in the organization, source it, and fire anyone that had to do with it, and hire someone who makes better decisions.

If we simply ignore it and move on, it's very likely well continue to make stupid moves going forward, and where we are now, we need to consistently make quality decisions to climb out of this whole.

One other note. To argue that there was no way of knowing how bad '09-'10 was is besides the point. The trade essentially flushed huge future assets down the toilet for a boondoggle of a dream that was never going to happen in the first place (contending in '09-'10). I have no problem imagining that the team could have won 39-43 or 44 games if things had broken differently and in a more predictable and expected fashion. But so what. What does that get you? A sweep at the hands of whomever was the #1 or #2 seed (Cleveland or Orlando I think?). Utterly pointless. Utterly stupid. Unconscionable. Really sucks to have had two teams in DC run into the ground through exactly the same sort of clueless team building strategies and clueless approach to reality.

Posted by: graywolfe81 | March 4, 2011 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company