I would like to \u201csecond\u201d this question. While we all respect Will Dawkins and Michael Winger, Wizards fans are already starting to fall into a mode where fellow fans can\u2019t question their moves, circa the 2020 Nats with Mike Rizzo (but without the championship).<\/p>\n
I think there are real, hard questions that can be asked about roster construction thus far. The team elected to pass on Khaman Maluach this year (and traded up in the draft last year, but not for a Zach Edey type) and hand the center position to a wiry Alex Sarr who may not be able to rebound his position.<\/p>\n
While we understand that they can\u2019t\/shouldn\u2019t try to win this year, you also can\u2019t develop all these wings at the same time. They already had to ship out Colby Jones for pure roster-spot availability reasons, but how in the heck can these guys all develop at the same time if they all play the same position? They certainly can\u2019t all develop on the defensive end, where some of them will be playing out of position just to get minutes. And we all know that five minutes into the season, we will all be complaining about a lack of defense and rebounding. \u2013Malcolm H.<\/a><\/p>\n I agree that, against the backdrop of traditional NBA roster construction, the Wizards are super-heavy on wings, light on traditional bigs and thin on traditional point guards.<\/p>\n I also agree that the 2025-26 Wizards almost certainly will be below-average in terms of defensive rebounding \u2014 probably even bottom five. I mean, the team finished last season 27th in defensive-rebounding percentage<\/a>, and that was with two strong defensive rebounders, Jonas Valan\u010di\u016bnas and Kyle Kuzma, on the roster until the trade deadline. Now, without major offseason additions to shore up the already weak defensive rebounding, it\u2019s difficult to envision significant gains in that area.<\/p>\n But at this stage, positional roster imbalance is not the Wizards\u2019 primary concern, or perhaps even their secondary concern. They are attempting to bring as many high-upside players as possible onto their roster \u2014 through the draft, through trades, through signings \u2014 and do their best to develop those players into upper-level NBA players. Think of it as casting a wide net in an effort to see who, eventually, will stand out.<\/p>\n Who will fill the Wizards\u2019 No. 1 bucket, that of a franchise cornerstone, someone along the lines of who Shai Gilgeous-Alexander is for Oklahoma City or who Jayson Tatum has been for Boston? Who will fill the No. 2 bucket of someone who isn\u2019t quite a franchise cornerstone but contends for All-NBA honors, someone akin to Jalen Williams for Oklahoma City or Jaylen Brown for Boston? And who will fit the No. 3 bucket, like Chet Holmgren for OKC and one of any number of very strong tertiary players for Boston last year?<\/p>\n That, in my opinion, is Washington\u2019s greatest challenge and ought to be Washington\u2019s top priority: finding players who fill those broad roles.<\/p>\n This explains why Wizards general manager Will Dawkins always says before every draft that he\u2019s looking for the \u201cbest-available player\u201d instead of trying to fill specific positional needs. He\u2019s looking for the prospects who have the best chances to fill one of those top-three buckets.<\/p>\n So, why did Dawkins decide to draft wing Tre Johnson sixth overall instead of big man Khaman Maluach or anyone else who was still available? Dawkins thought Johnson was the best-available player, the player who has the best chance of becoming an upper-level NBA player.<\/p>\n Once the team starts to fill those buckets, it can fill in the rest of the roster around those top-level guys.<\/p>\n In June, the Wizards selected University of Texas wing Tre Johnson sixth in the NBA Draft. (Brad Penner \/ Imagn Images)<\/p>\n The roster is not built to win now. Heck, it\u2019s more accurate to say that, with a roster skewed so heavily toward youth and inexperience, this roster is built to lose in the short term. I say that without negative overtones. I think the front office did the responsible thing by not making roster moves this offseason to try to eke out a few more victories in 2025-26. As an impartial observer, I think the Wizards need to attempt to win the 2026 lottery to try to draft the franchise-changing player they so desperately need, to try to fill that No. 1 or No. 2 bucket that, for the moment, seems to remain unfilled. If I were in Dawkins\u2019 shoes, I\u2019d be willing to sacrifice defensive rebounding this season if it were to help the Wizards land the 2026 draft\u2019s top prospect. Washington can use next offseason\u2019s ample cap space<\/a> to shore up its defensive rebounding in free agency or trade for defensive rebounding from its full cupboard of wings and future draft picks.<\/p>\n The questions you\u2019ve posed here are more about development, specifically whether the seeming overabundance of wings will inhibit those wings\u2019 long-term improvement. The point about the difficulty of the wings developing on defense is well-taken if we assume that some of the Wizards\u2019 wings will defend opponents who are either much faster and more agile or much larger and stronger.<\/p>\n My conclusion is that all of us \u2014 me included \u2014 need to acknowledge that the NBA game has changed, and continues to change. Our traditional notions of positional roles don\u2019t apply as much as they once did. Because of the prevalence of the 3-point shot and because so many teams play fast on offense, defenders now have to cover more ground than ever before. It\u2019s now common for players we don\u2019t consider \u201cpoint guards\u201d to initiate offenses, and it\u2019s now rare for centers on offense to play with their backs to the basket.<\/p>\n It\u2019s a league increasingly populated by versatile players in the 6-foot-4 to 6-foot-9 range. The distinctions among what shooting guards, small forwards and power forwards are expected to do are murkier than ever before, particularly within switch-oriented defensive schemes.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s examine the league\u2019s reigning champs, the Thunder. When everyone\u2019s healthy, the Thunder\u2019s starting lineup features a pair of 7-footers, Holmgren, who is ultra versatile, and Isaiah Hartenstein, who is more of a traditional big.<\/p>\n A close look reveals that, with Holmgren missing more than half the season with an injury, the Thunder relied heavily on lineups dominated by players we regard as wings. During the regular season, nine of Oklahoma City\u2019s 10 most-used five-man lineups included only one big or no big at all<\/a>. Wings such as Jalen Wiliams, Lu Dort, Cason Wallace, Aaron Wiggins and Isaiah Joe received tons of minutes. Even the Thunder\u2019s primary initiator, Gilgeous-Alexander, is 6-foot-6, a height typically associated with that of a wing. And Williams, commonly considered a wing, initiates the Thunder\u2019s offense quite a bit<\/a>.<\/p>\n Look, also, at the Celtics\u2019 teams of recent years. Yes, Jrue Holiday and Derrick White were referred to as the Celtics\u2019 \u201cpoint guards,\u201d but in reality, Tatum and Brown were the Celtics\u2019 primary creators.<\/p>\n My point isn\u2019t that the Wizards are trying to become the Thunder or the Celtics. My point is that great teams have versatile players, and that there\u2019s no such thing anymore as a player who is solely a small forward. You and I may think of Justin Champagnie, Bilal Coulibaly, Kyshawn George, Khris Middleton, Corey Kispert, Dillon Jones, Will Riley, Jamir Watkins and Cam Whitmore as guys best suited as threes, but in reality, many of them play the two, the three and the four and sometimes the one, with those roles varying by lineup or varying from possession to possession.<\/p>\n This goes back to one of my biggest pet peeves in the roster-construction punditry space. Pundits apply the guiding principles of NFL roster construction to the NBA, when, in fact, many of those principles are specific to football.<\/p>\n \u201cThe game of basketball is so fluid, and positionally things are changing,\u201d Dawkins told me a few days after this year\u2019s draft.<\/p>\n \u201cAnd unlike football, where you\u2019re drafting for one position on one side of the field, you have to play both ends of the floor in basketball. So sometimes you\u2019re playing one position on offense but you\u2019re playing a different type of position on defense, and there\u2019s cross-matches and mismatches. So the way the game is going, with the flexibility, the type of players we\u2019re drafting gives Coach (Brian) Keefe options. So we\u2019re just going to continue to find people who fit our attributes and bring them into our building.\u201d<\/p>\n Coulibaly and George are quintessential examples of this. With Coulibaly listed as 6-8 and George listed as 6-7, we\u2019d traditionally consider them as threes. But last season, the Wizards often deployed Coulibaly and George defensively to guard opponents\u2019 top offensive initiators \u2014 a critical defensive role that, years ago, probably wouldn\u2019t have gone to 6-foot-8 or 6-foot-7 players.<\/p>\n The Wizards moved up in the 2023 NBA Draft to acquire the draft rights to wing Bilal Coulibaly (0). (Nick Turchiaro \/ Imagn Images)<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/USATSI_26532874-scaled.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/USATSI_25620346-scaled-e1755127100805.jpg\")
<\/p>\n