Wizards turned down Harden for Beal and Singleton deal

And clearly, Washington's track record of evaluating talent speaks for itself.

Your argument is terrible.

 

Usuallyyou have to overpay a guy to play on a mediocre team. There are many "good " players with max contract, and guess what, none of them are on championship caliber teams.

 

This report seemed to have struck a nerve with Wizards owner Ted Leonsis...

 

The Wizards will not be good for 20 years, and by then Harden will be too old.

They need to be investing in younger assets.

 

What a pathetic attempt to save face. Notice how he didn't actually deny that they turned down the offer.

He just debunked one of the suggested reasons they turned it down, and then made some self-stroking comments about how the Wizards invest in their teams.

This means two things:

1. The offer was indeed made -AND-

2. The offer was refused for another reason. Maybe they thought Harden wasn't *worth* the money (that as they've pointed out, they've been so willing to provide to lesser players.) In which case, haha, Washington. Haha.

 

I think it's a good choice for Washington. They've got Beal at rookie scale for the next 4 years, and he should become a pretty special player. If they cashed him in now for a proven player like Harden but have to pay max salary much sooner, they upset the timing of their rebuild -- their coming draft picks aren't as good because Harden gets more wins in the short-term than Beal, and they have less cap flexibility for free agents and trades because of Harden's salary. Picking up a guy like that would be premature for them, especially considering the potential Beal has if they stand pat.

 

This makes an awful lot of sense, but the caveats are that Beal will never be the player James Harden already is, and it's completely unclear what picks Washington ends up getting and whether or not they work out. Supposedly this upcoming draft will be the weakest in years.

Tanking may not be the right word for it, but deliberately passing on better players for the sake of developing questionable young talent sure is, what, "strategic badness?" "Planned mediocrity?"

 

I don't think I'd call Beal questionable young talent or write off his potential a month into his first season. Sure, Harden is legit and is proven and would certainly have helped the Wizards. I could just as easily make an argument that Harden is too good to pass up and the Wiz should have grabbed him and figured it out later. But, it's something on which educated men may disagree. There's a path to success either way. It's not clear (and probably never will be) that they would have been better off one way or the other. I certainly don't think lambasting the management for choosing the way they did is justified, even if they are ultimately proved to be wrong because it is a rational bet.

 

There was some merit in it. Didn't Beal say before the draft that OKC wanted to trade up to draft him? Even I don't trust Wizards' talent evaluation but considering how highly Presti rated Beal, I wouldn't write off Beal as "will never better than Harden" yet. Harden wasn't so hot in his rookie year either. Time will tell.

 

Actually, without hingsight, and you just forget the player names, in most drafts, would someone trade a No 3 pick + a young player (Wizards package) for an expiring contract, a No 14 pick, a Top 20 pick and a Top 8-10 pick (Rockets package)? Most wouldn't I bet.

The Rockets package would not look that good either if the Raptors are not sucking and Jeremy Lamb is not looking better than his draft position suggested.

 

The expiring contract has no context until you name Kevin Martin who is a legit 20+ PPG scorer, the 14 pick was actually a 12 pick and the garuntees lottery pick could be as high as 4 in 2013 draft or 2 after that. With the way Torornto is playing there is I very high chance that pick is top 5.

There is absolutely no way Bradley Beal could give the Thunder (this season) what KMart is giving them.

 

If Im a Bullets fan and I know another team's GM is very very good and he really really wants one of my players then I appreciate my GM turning down any offer for said player from the smart GM.

 

Clearly you are not old.

 

Again, you said this with hindsight. Didn't people say that the side ending up with the best player always wins a trade? Chances are (and yes there are still chances even knowing how well Martin is doing or how high that Raptors pick is), a No 3 pick player is going to turn out to be the best player of that bunch.

I am not saying the Wizards should not take that deal as Harden most likely ends up as the best player. I am saying that OKC had a reason to prefer the Wizards package than the Rockets package as Beal also has the highest chance of ending up as the best player among Martin, Lamb and whatever future picks.

 

Actually, based on history, your supposition is likely to be quite wrong. Tristan Thompson, Tyreke Evans, Westbrook, Conley, Tyrus Thomas, Chris Paul... I would put the odds of Beal reaching Harden level at 30%? Maybe 40% since Presti likes him? And Beal has no chance to be better.

Harden has 100% chance of being as good as Harden.

 

A 20 point scorer on an expiring contract was a known asset. There's nothing "hindsight" about it. The only thing that was still unknown at the time of the trade was the value of the Toronto pick

 

This is based on what though? Beal isn't an athletic freak that you just know will break the league like LBJ/KD/Rose/Griffin, and while he did play well in college his numbers weren't exactly jaw dropping either. Out of the sgs Beal had the best intangibles, but if you look at actual potential and athleticism he seemed be behind Beal, that dude Toronto drafted and that dude the Cavs drafted. So if you think about it Beal actually has a high superstar bust rate...there's a high chance he won't get past Kevin Martin level in the league. But Harden's already better than that, right now. And he's only 23 years old or 4 years older than Beal so it's not like you're living on borrowed time.

Money shouldn't even factor in the equation at all because in the event Beal becomes a special player you'd end up paying max contract anyway. Sure you'd have more spending power now, but that would be offset with you having a rookie instead of a superstar like Harden on the team. More importantly, signing free agents with your capspace would make you better anyway, so in this case it would be better to have Harden and not suck rather than have some other non-superstar FA and slightly suck.

Not getting Harden for fear of not being able to tank properly seems the most r****ded argument to me. You tank to get guys like Harden lol, getting superstars is the whole point of tanking right? You can argue that if you stand pat you might get two superstars (beal+pick), but what are the chances of that happening though? Every year 14 guys end up in the lottery and yet guys like TD, Kobe, KG and Dirk are still considered the best of the best even after 10+ years in the league. Superstars are rare, and even when you get the number 1 pick you could still screw it up. Harden's a sure thing, and the Wiz are total idiots if he was offered and they passed him up. For all they know, Wiz could have passed on Harden for Martell Webster 2.0 and Tyrus Thomas 2.0.

 

OKC also had a reason to want a player like Martin who can help them compete right away. They are trying to win a title right now!! The Raptors lotto pick has a chance to get them a player as good as Beal later while still staying in win now mode. Beal slone doesn't help them win at all this year.

 

Ehh..... If the Wizards knew that Harden was going to average 26/5/6/2 and be among the leaders in FT attempts at 23 years old, they would glady pay him the max. The NBA is very much a stars league. The elite players are worth far more than their salary. While Beal has talent, I doubt he ever approaches what Harden is doing right now, and the age difference is not much.

My guess is that the Wizards thought Harden was fools gold and did not want to get involved.

 

agreed.