If you want to sum up last night's win in two words, I'd go with defensive effort. The bench was outstanding, there were some eye-opening individual performances, but the Sixers won this game because they got a superb effort on the defensive end from just about everyone who stepped on the floor. Oh, and Scott Skiles might have had something to do with it as well.
Charts first:
In the preview, I spoke at length about Andrew Bogut's massive mismatch against pretty much every front court player on the Sixers roster. Well, it never materialized. The Sixers used a ton of their 1-2-2 zone to blanket Bogut and Scott Skiles' brilliant offensive mind couldn't figure out a way to get a shot within 16 feet against it. By my count, they went to Bogut in the post twice the entire game. (The Bucks shot 11 for 41 from beyond 16 feet, including 0/12 from three).
The Sixers offense was downright pedestrian, but that was to be expected against the league's number two defense coming into the game. They got a ton of points in transition early to build their lead, then relied on the defense to hold on late. Milwaukee made one run late in the game, but they clearly didn't have enough time to score the needed points with their pitiful offense.
If you look at the numbers, the Sixers didn't force a whole lot of turnovers (14), they didn't do a particularly good job on the defensive glass (71.7%), they fouled a whole lot (30 fouls, 31 FTA for MIL), but they did make the Bucks take terrible shots for whatever reason. The Bucks wound up shooting a pathetic 33.8% from the floor.
Jrue did a good job on Brandon Jennings (3/13 for 12 points), Turner played some excellent D on Salmons (3/9). Only Drew Gooden and Corey Maggette had any success at all on the offensive end for Milwaukee. Gooden hit a bunch of long twos (which is exactly what you want if you write up a defensive game plan) and Maggette went to the line an ungodly amount (10/11 from the stripe). Getting to the line is Maggette's game, and it's really the only thing Milwaukee wanted to do and succeeded at.
The two stars of the game on the offensive end were Lou and Thad. Lou was much more "Good Lou" than "Bad Lou," scoring 19 on 13 shots and 6 FTA. Thad was unbelievable, and would've been perfect had he not attempted a single jumper. Thad was 8/8 inside of 10 feet, 0/5 outside of 10 feet for an 8/13 total. He also got to the line 8 times (hitting 7). 23 points total for the kid.
As a team, the Sixers didn't settle for many long twos (17 long twos, 18 attempts at the rim), they got to the line and they took fairly good care of the ball. Their raw offensive production was paltry (101.52 offensive efficiency rating), but that was actually better than Milwaukee has allowed on the season, so it's not as bad as it looks. The starters as a group were pretty inefficient, led by Jrue who needed 12 shots and 2 FTA to score 10 points. Jrue did fill up the stat sheet with 6 boards and 5 assists, but he turned the ball over four times as well. Not a good ratio at all.
The thing I don't understand about the Sixers offense is why - when Andre Iguodala is out especially - does Evan Turner only get 6 shots in nearly 30 minutes of work? They ran a couple of plays for Turner in the post, but not nearly enough IMO. He was actually hitting his shots last night, but they rarely used him as anything more than a decoy on the offensive end. He did have 6 assists, but I want to see him utilized more in the offense. Spencer Hawes had
his best game of the season, and I'll just leave it at that unless some Hawes apologists come out of the woodwork.
The effort was there tonight, good enough to pick of their third win of the season. Would it have been good enough against anything but a pitiful offensive team with a coach who seems to be on the verge of losing his roster? Who knows, let's just take the win and hope the team can build on it.
Player of The Game: Thad. Not only did he score 23 super-efficient points, but he was also hustling all over the floor and pushing people around. 6 boards in 39 minutes is nothing to write home about, but he also had three assists and a handful of hustle plays that swung momentum. Great work by Thad.
Team Record: 3-10
Up Next: @ WAS on Tuesday night
Game CapsuleTwo more somewhat related notes:
- Speights has completely lost his shot, but he had a monster game with 10 boards off the bench and a couple charges drawn in only 17 minutes. You'd have to think Collins will reward that type of effort.
- By my count there were 14 offensive fouls called in this game, just a ridiculous amount. I've never seen anything like it.
My favorite part of last nights game was Thorns reaction to the play on the court
Lou's TS% of 54.1% is higher than any season Allen Iverson ever had in Philadelphia, besides 05-06 when he had a mark of 54.3%.
Lou has 7.6 FTM per 36 minutes. Allen Iverson's highest career mark was 7.8.
Lou's 2.8 TOs per 36 minutes ties Allen Iverson's career best in 97-98.
In Allen Iverson's MVP season, he scored 26.7 points per 36 minutes. He attempted 21.9 FGA and 8.7 FTA.
Lou, this season, has scored 21.5 points per 36 minutes on 16.1 FGA and 8.6 FTA.
5.2 points on 5.8 more FGA and .1 more FTA.
Just thought that was interesting.
Also, Lou Williams and Derrick Rose have essentially identical TS%'s this season.
Joe, coincidentally, I just wrote something that Brian might not be able to use (it's 5 pages long when I was done) all about Louis Williams
Unreal. Thanks for this.
Nobody questions that Lou Williams is very good on offense. It's his defense that makes him just an average basketball player.
BTW - something from Larry Coon CBA expert regarding a question regarding a players ability to play in Europe during a lock out.
"If they're under contract, they can't do anything," Larry Coon told HOOPSWORLD. "Let's say a player is under contract and he wants to go to Europe. They need to get a FIBA letter of clearance in order to sign and they won't be able to if they're signed to the NBA. Anyone who is under contract basically has to just sit there."
Does that mean Thad will be able to play in europe? I don't know how the qualifying offer works, if that counts as having a contract for Thad. Watch him go overseas and have a monster year causing us to pay a premium for him or let him walk.
A. I don't know
B. It's doubtful that Thad would have a monster year in Europe, but if he did it probably gets dismissed because it's against lesser competition.
C. If he has a 'killer' season out the and the sixers don't offer him a qualifying offer - then some other team gets stuck with his contract - that's good
"then some other team gets stuck with his contract - that's good"
So you're saying for a fact that Thad couldn't potentially be a good starter in this leauge? How is it good for us to lose more young talent?
From what I remember, Magee believes that after 3 years in the league the potential to get better is close to none, regardless of age. I think it's just a fundamental difference of opinion, but I'm with you, when you consider Thad is the same age as ET, I'd still value him a potential piece for the future.
Rosz
Your memory of what I believe, as usual, is flawed. My comments were regarding Thaddeus Young, they are my beliefs about Thaddeus Young, they are not my opinions of fourth year players in general, they are my opinions of thaddeus young.
Others try to make excuses for Thad's piss poor progression into his fourth year in the league, much as his supporters used to make excuses for Sam's ability to learn the basic fundamentals of basketball, but in the end, whatever excuses defenders want to make, a player gets better because THEY WANT TO GET BETTER.
Tell me what Thaddeus Young has done BETTER since his first season in the league, tell me what aspect of his game has grown and matured and still isn't based purely on his athleticism. He still demonstrates a low basketball IQ as well, he's shown no evidence throughout his career (it's in its fourth year now) that he'll ever be much more than an athletic guy who really can only score in trasnition but is shit defensively and can't rebound very well for his height, and why should one believe that 4 years into ones professional career one will finally get it.
Thad has a good year this year, BFD, how many players have a good year right before they're about to get a contract and then fade off once they get paid reverting back to what they were before the motivation for a new contract caused them to break out. Money motivation is not a good reason to give a guy who has one good year a long term contract. MOTIVATION TO BE BETTER is why you give a guy a contract, and that shows up EVERY YEAR not just the year you're trying to get a contract extension.
Young has shown no on court achievement since his rookie year that demonstrates any successful motivation to be better, to believe that he'll finally find it is usually from folks who lack experience working with motivated and unmotivated people of all ages.
The unmotivated tend to stay unmotivated, the motivated tend to work their asses off regardless of situation or circumstance.
Your memory of what I do or do not believe (and your irritating need to keep using my last name for reasibs passing understanding - if you must know I attempted to change my screen name because one of you internet dolts either here or on another blog thought it would be fun to try and get me fired by my companies facebook page - so please - just fuck off about it) is flawed.
My comments were regarding Thaddeus Young and applied only to Thaddeus Young
So you're saying for a fact that Thad couldn't potentially be a good starter in this leauge? How is it good for us to lose more young talent?
Jason
Is Thad's fourth year in the league.
Please provide some sort of evidence that Thaddeus Young could be a good starter in this league.
Provide evidence that he can do anything but score in transition
Provide evidence that he'll ever rebound at a reasonable rate for his size
Provide evidence that half court sets and plays won't confuse him
I've seen no evidence in his career that indicates that he's a starter in the NBA on a team that contends for a champion...if you have, please, share it with me (and anyone else who doubts he could be a starter in the NBA)
This is his fourth year in the league, what matters is what he's done, and aside from scoring points in transition (which works great for him on a team that loves to run but can't score in a half court set all that well) there seems to be little evidence he can do anything else. That doesn't make him an NBA starter, hell that makes him a 7th/8th man
What does he do for his height that Willie Green can't do for instance?
Is Willie Green a starter?
He rebounded well in his rookie year, right? If he played like that, he could start for many teams. Not every starter has to have a nuanced half-court offensive game.
And moreover, like some people have pointed out, he is very young. It took Travis Outlaw, what, five years to start looking like a decent player. Ariza, same thing, four or five years. What both had in common was that they were raw athletes taken after high school or one year of college. Eventually they became more than just transition finishers.
Thad has a lot to work on if he wants to be a starter. I don't think he should ever be a starter for this team, but I love him as an effective 3/4 scorer off the bench. I think he has definitely made improvements on the offensive end this year and I feel like he can get even better. The last two years he looked totally lost every time he touched it in the half court. Now when he gets a pass he is quickly facing up his man and either jab stepping him to set up a nice mid range shot that he's been hitting or blowing by him for an easy two. There hasn't been a whole lot of hesitation. He's even started to be able to pass off the dribble as he's attacking the basket. I can't even recall one time this year where he did his whole "I'm gonna do a wild spin move and pray that I can get a shot off at the basket" routine. He can be an absolute nightmare match up for forwards and someone who the Sixers need to make an effort to get the ball to more. That's kinda hard since he plays with Lou most of the time. He is also our best finisher around the hoop, someone who can take advantage of the passing skills of Jrue, Turner, and Andre. Sure he needs a lot of work on defense(last night was encouraging,) but he definitely has value and has made improvements on the offensive end.
Paragraph excerpt from John Hollinger trade analysis (he loves it for new orleans on many levels)
In the past five months, the Hornets have dumped the four contracts that had left them boxed in a salary cap corner. First came the divestiture of full midlevel deals for Morris Peterson and James Posey, and then just prior to opening night, they dumped a bloated Darius Songaila contract left over from a cascade of bad trades emanating from another midlevel mistake (Bobby Jackson). Now, the worst mistake of the Fatal Four is off their books, as the final year of Stojakovic's five-year, $60 million deal becomes property of the Raptors.
Emphasis mine
"Now, the worst mistake of the Fatal Four is off their books, as the final year of Stojakovic's five-year, $60 million deal becomes property of the Raptors."
And this matters why? When it's the final year of his deal? They saved some money but he's making it sound like they got out from under a five-year, 60 million dollar contract.
hey Brian, are you by chance keeping track of who earns how many of your Player of the Game awards? Seems like that might be something semi interesting to keep track of, kinda like the Flyers do with their three stars of each game...and maybe check in with for each ten game update?
You can see them listed out here.
At certain intervals we'll take a look at the leaderboard (it's a three-way tie right now, between Jrue, Thad and Brand).
sweet, thanks!