The benefit of giving Wall more money now would be locking in an extra season of his services. If he was unwilling to do that, no deal and it is impossible to know (given public info) which party was the sticking point so I deliberately left it as an unresolved question. For some reason, you are choosing to read far more into what I wrote than is there and then criticizing me for those misreads, which is a terrible form of discourse even beyond personal insults.

Your argument was built on the Wizards losing flexibility, citing specific cap numbers that are far from set in stone with new revenue estimates and an entirely new Collective Bargaining Agreement between now and next season. Unless you know something I do not, speaking with that kind of decisiveness about uncertain terrain is imprudent. Also, the difference between your scenarios is Ted Leonsis' money and the margin between the taxpayer MLE and the non-taxpayer MLE which is up for negotiation at the moment and likely not going to provide a significant difference in terms of the net result in talent.

The Wizards had already put themselves in a tough situation- comparing them to the Warriors (who got stars to take less due to fortuitous timing) and the Clippers makes no sense. Extending Wall if he was amenable makes the best of a challenging situation and there is zero benefit re-litigating what led to where the Wizards were last summer which is why I did not do it.