Doug Collins has a roster full of young players with varying levels of maturity, skill and intellect. For the most part, he's done a very good job of using playing time to motivate this young squad, and as we hit the second half of the season, his methods seem to be paying dividends. Collins has used the proverbial carrot or the stick to get these young guys to buy in to the type of basketball he wants them to play. No one has received the stick more than Marreese Speights and it looks like he's finally coming out the other side.
I realize this was one game, against a terrible team, but this is also the perfect opportunity for Doug Collins to send two vital messages. Speights has been a healthy scratch 8 times this season. He's only averaged 12.6 minutes heading into last night. He's been yanked out of games for defensive lapses more times than you can count on your fingers and toes. Every form of tough love you can throw at a player, Doug Collins has thrown at Speights. Through it all, we haven't heard a word from Speights. Throughout it all, the guy starting in front of Speights has coasted.
Has Speights earned the starting spot? Under normal circumstances, I'd say absolutely not. But normal circumstances would involve having a legitimate center on your roster. The Sixers do not. Speights has been penalized for lazy play while Spencer Hawes has been rewarded for it, by default.
Collins has gone the tough love route for more than half the season. He's getting results from Speights, now is the time to go the other way. Coming off his best game of the season, a game in which he showed tremendous energy, effort and effectiveness, Collins should call Speights and Hawes into his office tomorrow and say, "Spencer, Marreese has taken your job." Send Speights out with the starting five on Friday night, make it his job to lose. Tell Hawes he can take it back, but he's going to have to prove that he wants it. Remind Speights of how long the road was to get here, and tell him if he reverts he can lose the job in the blink of an eye.
In the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure if putting Speights on the floor is going to make the team appreciably better. One thing I do know is that it would be hard for Speights to hurt the team as much as Hawes has recently, and if he's on offensively, he's at least close to being the athletic big Iguodala and Jrue desperately need to take advantage of their playmaking. Best-case, the Sixers will probably get better offensively and stay the same on defense in their starting lineup. Hawes shows a backbone and plays with a mean streak in a reserve role. Worst-case, being given the job will have the opposite effect on Speights, he'll stop hustling to spots and trying to draw charges and go back to taking nothing but 18-foot jumpers on the other end. Hawes will pout and continue to be a net-negative when he's on the floor.
From a psychological standpoint, I think this is the right move for both players. From a basketball standpoint, I think it's definitely worth a shot. The counter argument is that you don't want to mess around with the starting lineup. To me, though, this starting lineup consists of three legit players and two guys who you cross your fingers and pray they'll at least be average on any given day. On most days, they're drags on the team. You're just swapping one wild card for another, and who knows, maybe playing next to Brand with Iguodala and Jrue on the floor will elevate Speights' game.
At this point, I'm really not sure what Collins has to lose. I mean, so what if Hawes doesn't like it? He's gone after this season anyway, and his handful of halfway decent games happened about 20 games ago, since then, he's been the same stiff who blamed his slow start on an injury for the first 20 games.
Coaches rarely change a starting lineup that produces results. That is why i don't expect Collins to change the lineup soon even though it's the right move to make. There is a way out of it though. How about having both Meeks and Hawes play not more than 10 minutes a night. That's basically the first 4-5 minutes of the first and the second quarters. Play Speights, Young and Turner 30 minutes a night off the bench. That way he will both do the right move psychologically and basketball-wise IMO. At worst that can be some sort of a transition period.
*meant first and third quarter
The minute distribution would be something like this:
Jrue 36
Iguodala 36
Brand 36
Hawes 10
Meeks 10
Young 30
Turner 30
Speights 28
Lou 24
Nocioni and Battie should be used situationally at first.
Eventually after the transition Battie can take over Hawes's minutes if Speights is finally moved to the starting lineup.
First off 'producing results' is a relative term. Second off, Jodie Meeks sucks right now, and couldn't hit a barn if he was right in front of it, so is the 'first team' productive because of him or in spite of him.
While the first team might seem productive as a whole it doesn't mean that Hawes or Meeks are productive parts of it, and more often than not, they aren't productive.
Hell, Hawes was benched to start the third quarter, just one game ago, so why should pulling him from the starting lie up concern Collins.
Play your best five
I guess the important question is what did Hawes do to 'earn' the starting spot anyway cause he's been mostly crap all season
"I guess the important question is what did Hawes do to 'earn' the starting spot anyway cause he's been mostly crap all season"
Maybe he took advices from Willie Green :)
Tom Moore
Could you see if anything is wrong with Tony Battie?
In the fourth, with a lead, Battie should be your big man option I would think as he's the 'best' defensive option of the 3.
Team flying home today because of bad weather here, so no practice today. Won't have access to Collins until Friday.
Collins likes Battie in certain situations. Believe he's healthy. Collins had used him for defense against big centers in fourth quarters. Toronto has little size (Bargnani plays at the 3-point line), so guess he didn't call on Battie for that reason.
Speights quote from Cooney's article:
"I saw that they were playing zone and I watched during the first quarter [from the bench] to see what I could do to get some buckets. I went out there and rolled."
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/sports/20110127_Young__Speights_lift_Sixers_over_Raptors.html
I wouldn't be against Speights starting before the season is over, but for the time being I think Speights needs to show he can produce in extended minutes off the bench. If Speights can measure the D for a few minutes while Hawes is out there sucking, then come in and deliver for 10 min. stretches, I'll take it for now. I'd love to see Speights start but I'm afraid of regression and deflated confidence when teams start actively gameplanning for him.
I think Speights needs to show he can produce in extended minutes off the bench.
Why? Has Hawes shown he can produce anything in extended minutes at all?
I'm just curios why people have this double standard for some players.
What does Hawes do BETTER than Speights that is beneficial to winning basketball games?
2 points:
1) Speights has an extensive track record of being a turd, I need to see more to reward him with a starting role and heavy minutes.
2) Speights is a blackhole on offense - early in the game it is often the strategy to get your primary players going by getting everybody some touches. Having Hawes out there allows an opportunity for plays/sets to be run through and the ball ending up in the hands of Iguodala, Brand or Jrue. Similarly, having Meeks out there provides some degree of spacing to help those 3 get going offensively. Having only 3 guys out there that you're looking to get going simplfies things. As you bring each of the young guys, you have the advantage of having the freshest guy be the one who is most shot-hungry while the others are warmed up and in the flow.
Neither Hawes nor Meeks is a legit NBA starter, but they each play a role that seems to be working okay for this team right now. The scoring that comes off the bench is one of this team's strengths - why change that dynamic just to "reward" another guy that's not a legit NBA starter either?
Because he's playing well
because he's playing better than speights
Why are they 'rewarding' meeks and hawes for sucking?
An argument could be made for starting Turner with Jrue and Andre over Meeks because of the fact that Turner has been out playing Meeks for more than just one game (as everyone seems to think Speights has onliy had one good game)
Actually - forget Speights for a minute and let's focus on the back court.
Jodie Meeks isn't exactly scoring right now, and defensively he's basically as good (bad) as Lou.
Lou is a bench guy, I think that fits his role, but at this point, with the way he's played over the past couple weeks, sure he hasn't been perfect but he is improving, isn't it time to 'carrot' Evan Turner and plop him in the starting line up - best way to see if JTI can work at all don't you think?
I understand Doug wants to make the playoffs, but I'd rather see him start JTI and give them solid minutes, let them go through the growing pains, and experiment for a good amount of games (at least 15 or so) before deciding if it's a failure or success
I think that from the beginning, Collins made it clear that this is a team where the best players may not always be on the floor together, may not get the starting nod. The lineups have achieved some semblance of balance and consistency, we're winning games. Hawes/Meeks are starters in 'name only', and I think Collins makes the most of the bevy of mismatched talent on this roster by dividing them into 2 squads, each of which is competitive. Not many teams can rely on their bench to help them keep leads, let alone get them back in games. It's a luxury we have and a wise technique IMO. If that means Hawes and Meeks start, I'm okay with it because they're not the ones getting starter's minutes. Roles are more clearly defined this year, and it's helping the team win games. 'Play your best 5', I just don't think that works wit this roster.
Roles are more clearly defined this year, and it's helping the team win games.
Except I don't care about the Winning Percentage this year, I care about seeing if Turner and Iguodala and Holiday work as a unit. And now that Evan seems to be adjusting to being in the NBA he (collins) needs to find a way to work the three of them together to see if it works. That is the most important thing for the sixers organization going forward this season (in my opinion). Just spent the second pick on the kid, need to see if he works with your best players, more important than a few more wins.
As for how collins coaches, i disagree with your assertion of what he's doing being a good idea, I disagree with his double standard buillshit that allows guys like meeks, hawes, williams to suck on ice game after game with no reprecussions but Speights will make a mistake or two and sit the rest of the game, jrue will be benched ofr too much time for a bad start as opposed to just taking a time out and talking to him to settle down.
I don't like the way Collins coaches this team because to me there are more important things about the future of this franchise than a first round playoff loss
About half Turner's minutes last night were with Holiday and Iguodala. The rest of the time he was on the floor with either Iguodala or Holiday (save for a short stretch with Meeks and Williams).
So it's not as if we aren't getting a chance to see how he gels with Holiday and Iguodala. And I don't really mind him playing with Lou Will or Meeks if he's assuming more of a point guard role (which he has been)
Except installing a winning atmosphere is more important to the development of the young players compared to just being on the starting team and getting 5-10 more minutes per game. It's not like Turner doesn't play with Jrue and Iguodala at all for example. Even of he is ni the starting lineup he won't spend all of those minutes with both of them.
That's a matter of opinion that I don't agree with.
I believe collins is concerned about the W-L record more for his own reputation than the future of the sixers.
Not sure why you keep assuming Doug benches Jrue for 'a bad start'. Granted, Jrue has had some very inefficient shooting games and increased turnover games lately, but why not assume Doug is just limiting and pacing his minutes for the long grueling season and attempting to keep him relatively fresh for the playoffs, assuming they do in fact make it? Yeah he's young and all, but you admit yourself that he hasn't even started a full season yet and this is the most minutes he's ever played at any level.
Maybe you're just looking for anything to be critical of the coach for? He's handled these misfits and youngins' about as good as could be expected when considering what he has to work with.
Last night, it was pretty clear why he took Jrue out in the first quarter, and it had nothing to do with rest. Jrue actually started the game off with a couple made shots and assists, but on the second somewhat careless turnover Collins yanked him immediately. It was very early in the quarter.
really good post and something I agree totally with and also they way I see how Doug is managing these guys, especially the "wise technique" and starters in "name only" parts. He mixes and matches nightly with different combos (sometimes weird to us) and seems to be squeezing as much blood out of this turnip as he can. He's stuck to his preseason guns of saying that he didn't really have a 'best five' but two teams of five that were somewhat indistinguishable.
One other out of the blue question
Is Jason Williams a better back up PG option than Louis Williams?
Better Back up PG yes, but Lou is still a better player for the sixers as we need his scoring off the bench at times.
Bench getting offense going for Sixers:
http://ow.ly/3LlE2
I would give Speights the Hawes start, where he gets ~20 minutes, but he would still have to earn true starter minutes. I am not a fan of giving players roles that they can't handle, due to the fact that it will inflate their stats, especially Speights, which come extension time will make him cost more.
Key example of a player that got too big of a role and is now a negative would be Lou Williams. Handed the starting job under Eddie Jordan out of a lack of PG, and he failed. Now we have to deal with Lou thinking he's a starter and deserves the ball. Once a player gets a full time starting gig, and it turns out that it's not right for him it makes the player much harder to extend, as well as harder to keep that player effective in a scaled back role.
I don't like the way Collins coaches this team because to me there are more important things about the future of this franchise than a first round playoff loss
How about a first round playoff win? I don't think Collins and the organization is as convinced as you are that the team has no shot at winning a first-round playoff series, assuming continued improvement as the season progresses.
Boston
Orlando
Miami
If the sixers fell they have a chance to take out any of these teams in the first round, with the talent they have on the roster, then they are again over valuing their talent and that means bad contract extensions for at least Thad (and Meeks is up this year too isn't he - 2nd round pick 2 year deal?)
The sixers beating up on bad teams (and the jazz are bad right now folks - real bad - like lost 6 in a row bad) and if the front office now thinks they can win a first round series against the magic heat or celtics, they're delusional.
Rightly or wrongly, playoff officiating changes, defenses get more physical, that means Dwight Howard probably doesn't get called for the same fouls he gets called for in the regular season, the Celtics 'commit a foul every defensive set' gets away with more things that make Tommy Heinsohn Happy.
And the stars get more calls in the playoffs, guys like wade and lebron are going to get so many more calls than the sixers non stars.
The playoffs are a different animal for some reason and this team has no realistic shot of winning against the top 3 teams in the east (assuming complete health on both sides) Unless Elton Brand turns back into a 20PPG guy and Spencer Hawes suddenly plays defense
Chicago is a lock at the three seed. Top three spots go to the division winners. Chicago is a team the sixers have a definite shot of beating in the first round. Their two best offensive weapons match up against two of our best defensive stoppers. (Rose/Holiday & Boozer/Brand). The sixers would have a legitimate shot at winning that series.
Damn you're right, I always forget that Miami and Orlando are in the same division.
And no - both squads at 100% - the sixers don't have a shot to beat Chicago in a 7 game series in my opinion.
Oh yeah - the sixers are currently 3 1/2 games behind the 6 seed. Doable - but unlikely in my opinion.
3.5 back with 2 games against the NY Knicks coming up and the Knicks sliding fast.
We'll see what happens
The sixers have to play better on the road the second half of the season - 250 is unacceptable - 4-13 on the road the rest of the season just isn't something i would find good.
plus - all this 'they can win a first round series' - they need to improve on the road to have me believing they can win a first round series.
They'd need to go at least 6-11 (preferably 8-9 at worse) the rest of the season on the road for me to believe they have a chance in the playoffs as a road dog
PS
at this time it's not inconceivable that the bulls get the 2 seed and the heat get the 3 seed , the heat only have a half game lead (1 loss) on the bulls at this time and the heat have 8 divisional games left (the bulls 6) and the heat division is slightly more competitive
The Bulls have had a fairly easy schedule thus far. It's unlikely they will move into the top 2 seeds.
Anyway i think it's unlikely that they will be able to win a series against any of the 4 teams unless they are severely hit with injuries to key players. That being said the Sixers matchup fairly well with both the Magic and the Heat. Stranger things have happened...
I'd feel a ton better against the Bulls if Jrue could learn to draw fouls on opposing PG's.
I seems like players regularly force contact and draw fouls against Jrue. There is no reason with his size, quickness and handle that Jrue should not be getting opposing PG;'s in foul trouble. Yet he only ever seems to draw fouls against bigs.
Derrick Rose - 2 stomach ulcers - gotta work on those h pylori Derrick
It's from chewing on those lemons at halftime...
They are in a crappy division - they get 16 games against their crappy division - worst division in the east - that doesn't help
Well the Sixers are crazy if they think they can win a 7 game series against one of the top teams with a Hawes, Brand, Thad, Speights rotation up front. That is a disaster waiting to happen on the defensive end when the intensity is turned up in the playoffs. I think if they got Camby then they would at least have a somewhat decent shot at pulling off an upset. Without a legit presence in the middle they got no realistic chance so they shouldn't delude themselves.
The Blazers center will undergo arthroscopic knee surgery for a torn meniscus later this week--the fifth Portland player to require knee surgery this season. Camby was averaging 11.3 rebounds and 1.87 blocks this season.
How long does that recovery take?
He's gonna be out a few weeks which I think should actually help him down the stretch, you know, give him a chance to rest the legs. :)
So that could work to the sixers advantage, but snce it's a new team / system - he has less time to learn it
Not to mention his public statements re trading anywhere but houston
Camby wasn’t happy about the rumor and would not take kindly to being traded to Charlotte or any other non-contending team, according to a person close to him. The 36-year-old Camby would even consider retirement if he were traded to a mediocre or rebuilding team, the source said.
“If he was traded to Charlotte, he would think about retiring,’’ a source said. “He’s made plenty of money. He’d rather play, but he’s at the point in his career where he doesn’t want to get bounced around from team to team. If he’s traded, it would have to be to a contender.’’
Even going to an elite team does not appeal much to Camby, who is in his 15th season. His ultimate desire is to remain in Portland. After signing a two-year, $21 million extension with the Blazers in the spring, Camby moved his family to Portland and has his two young daughters enrolled in school there. One place Camby wouldn’t mind going is Houston, where he lives in the offseason.
Wow I didn't know that. But it would still be very surprising if he actually retired with all that guaranteed money coming to him next year. And I think you could make the case that the Sixers with Camby would have a better chance of advancing in the playoffs than Portland does in their current situation.
He won't. He's playing his hand to try to get what he wants, but if push came to shove I'd bet he'd play wherever he's sent.
Unless Portland completely 'blows it up' - do you think they'd trade him?
I mean, sure, he's old and not so durable, but Pryzbilla ain't durable and neithers Oden.
I think if you wanted Camby you'd have to include a big man (probably speights) and expiring deals...and hope that's enough for Rich Cho
Problem is that I think if Camby went on the market - there'd be high demand which would mean someone would have to over pay for him in terms of traded assets, no?
I think Speights is earning more minutes. But starting him is complicated. If the starters are getting killed consistently at the open of each half than you have to think about upgrading the starters with either Thad or Speights. I'd have to look at the numbers to see if this has been the case.
But if Iguodala/Brand/Jrue can carry the load to where the starters can break even in the beginning of halves, I'd rather keep bringing the one dimensional scorers (Young/Speights/Lou) off the bench- where there strengths are magnified. Those 3 are undeniably bad defenders. It is easier to hide bad defense with bench players, because the coach can be selective with match-ups. Likewise, it is more important to have pure scorers on the floor when your more complete players (Jrue/Iguodala/Brand) are not all on the floor. While you can get away with one or two placekeepers (like Meeks) when your 3 most complete players are out there. Because the complete players can maximize the weak ones.
Meeks is well suited as a bench player- because he is also more of a one dimentional streky scorer. He probably will look better in that role. So maybe its time to move Turner back into the starting spot. But they'd have to see if he's matured to the point where he can be effective in the more marginalized role of starter (since Jrue and Iguodala will have the ball most possessions.) I'm not sure he's quite ready=- but he's closer now than early on in the season.
Hawes, on the other hand, kills you off the bench. He can't play with speed guys like Lou and Thad. He is terrible as a starter, but at least the starters play at a tempo where he sometimes can do something positive... Basically I think Hawes should be traded for a bag of balls, because he has no role on this team. I'd rather they bring a bruiser from the D-league.
So I guess I'd go with Speights getting 30 min off the bench and Hawes getting 4-8 minutes a game. And start giving Battie the left over minutes. I don't need to see more of Hawes. And Speights can handle more than 25-30 minutes.
I think Speights is earning more minutes. But starting him is complicated.
This is a really good point (and your whole post was a good analysis). I wonder if Collins' strategy has evolved into a "stay even with the starters, make hay with the bench" type of thing. There isn't any rule that dictates you have to play your best five players at the beginning of the game (though that is convention).
That type of strategy would also explain why Iguodala and Jrue have been getting rest minutes in the middle of the first/third quarters, so that they can play with the second unit. In fact, the Iguodala/Thad/Speights/Jrue/Turner lineup -- a lineup I like a lot -- got 5 minutes and was +6 vs. Toronto in the 2nd quarter. So the strategy becomes more like, "Stay even in the 1st and 3rd, make hay in the 2nd and 4th." Kind of like when an NFL team chooses to kick off in the 2nd half so that they can play with the wind in the 4th quarter ...
I also think you almost have to try and win that way when you lack a superstar. Because a lot of the teams are going to have that type of go to offensive player in their starting line-up, so it might be a losing proposition to "ride your best 5." But you can maximize your quality role players by taking advantage of them in the 2nd and 4th quarters.
Asked Rod Thorn Friday about the difficulties of playing Holiday with Turner and Iguodala.
His response: "That’s legitimate in that none of those guys are what you call a knock-down outside shooter. Your point there is well taken. None of them are knock- down shooters. Jrue’s gotten better. He has a chance to be a really good player. Andre already is. Evan’s just starting in the league. He’s always had a period of time where he didn’t play as well as he would like. All of a sudden, he figures it out and gets better."
That’s legitimate in that none of those guys are what you call a knock-down outside shooter.
Follow up question: So rod - what you're saying is that you think of Jodie Meeks as a knock-down outside shooter?
32%
33%
36%
39%
These are the shooting percentages from 16-23 feet this season of Holiday, Iguodala, Meeks, Turner (but not in that order)
Match the four names to the four players
I'm more concerned with the 3pt ability (not just percentage) when you are talking about spreading the floor. The 16-23 feet shots should be a last resort. I don't feel like a good 20 foot jump shooter "spreads the floor." Rip Hamilton does not spread the floor as much as play well coming off of screens and picks. While KK "spreads the floor."
Right now Meeks is there best 3 pt shooter. If he demands the respect of the defense as a threat from 3 then he spreads the floor. I'm not sure that is the case.
Either way, the biggest issue with JTI right now is that J/I by design control the ball. And T has to learn to be comfortable and effective when he is not regularly touching the ball. That is most natural if you are a pure spot up shooter- which Turner is not. But at least he seems more comfortable nailing open 20 footers and can help in other ways.
Long term I agree with Tom and Thorn that having all 3 together is not maximizing what they can do.
Do you think Jodie Meeks frightens teams with his 3 point shooting or do you think they so - ok jodie - you beat us from the 3 - if you can - and we'll guard the rest of your team mates - but we ain't doubling you
I think that Meeks's man attempts to stick to Meeks and not help off of him. Much more so, at least, than Turner's man does. Of course he's not being doubled.
I don't know, I kind of agree with Magee on this one. Jodie gets a handful of open 3's every single night. It's not like his guy is glued to him on the perimeter. Teams dare him to shoot, I don't even know if I believe he legitimately "spreads the floor" anymore.
Yeah, I tried to imply that this is the question. I'm not sure Meeks does enough damage from 3 to where he effectively stretches the defense. Plus he is streaky.
But no doubt when JTI are on the floor defenses can pack it in big time.
I actually disagree with this statement. Right now, Turner's catch-and-shoot from 18-20 feet is probably more dangerous than a wide-open Meeks three, and you know how I feel about long twos. Also, Jrue's been streaky with his threes, but I trust him more with a clean look than I do Meeks. I don't think packing it in is working against this Sixers team right now, at all.
BTW - i'm sure everyone knows but
32% - Meeks
33% - Turner
36% - Iguodala
39% - Holiday
Lou is actually at 37% - so who should be doing the iso heaves at the end of the game?
Hoopsdata has monthly splits. So you can quantify Turner's improvement hitting open jumpers.
For the season, his 16-23 foot percentage is a lousy 32.5%. For the past 10 games he's been 28%. In the 30 games befoer that he was more like 38%.
None of those numbers are "spreading the floor." Although if he can get to 45% consistently then I would agree with you.
Reference: Notable High volume 16-23ft shooters:
Ellis: 38%
Dirk 51%
Durant 41%
Melo 41%
Beasley 44%
Bargs 46%
Lebron 40%
Granger 35%
Nick Young 50%
Curry 47%
Ray Allen 47%
The Speights situation will likely come down to this:
Playing more than 20min has been a problem throughout his career thus far due to fitness issues. Can he handle more minutes now or will he get fatigued early?
Landry blasts Westphal:
http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/27/kings-carl-landry-smack-coach-paul-westphal/
Sounds a lot like last year's EJ led Sixers, doesn't it?
Carl Landry's a smart guy, and Sacramento has a ton of young talent. Hope they can get a solid coach and hang on to enough of their promising young guys to turn the corner. Landry will probably be back in HOU next year, where he belongs.
Mo Speights Def reb rate is 25%. This top 20 in the league- and better than Sam's season or career numbers. But overall they Sixers have a number of players who grab defensive rebounds well.
Last year they had Sam at 30%, Speights at 20% percent, Iguodala at 17% and then a bunch of forwards between 12-15%.
This year they have Speights, Hawes and Battie all at 23-25% and Brand, Turner and Noce 18-19% and Iguodala/Thad at 14-15%.
For reference 25% is great. 20% for a big is solid. 15% for a wing is good. 15% for a big is lousy and below that terrible (Smith, Thad and Brand last year.)
Not sure how much of this is trickle down from Sam's absence. His 30% last year was top 20 in NBA history (at least as long as they kept the records.)
Link to video interviews of Sixers' players and coaches:
http://ow.ly/3Lt3J
On a cheery note, John Hollinger:
Deron Williams is the guy who may very well be a Clipper in 2012. People think of Texas with him but he actually lives in San Diego in the offseason.
The Clippers with Williams could be a champion.
That's great
I predict by 2012 there will be a 3rd team in the 'greater la area' (Anaheim) with owners more committed to building a winner than maximizing profit.
Why would the other 2 LA teams let this happen?
Because Anaheim if far enough away that it wouldn't take TOO MUCH of a bite into their fanbase.
Because Anaheim has TONS of money (orange county y'all) and the only reason the clippers aren't in anaheim yet is sterling doesn't like to drive that far.
Because the Maloofs (I predicted the kings to anaheim a year ago and still believe it'll happen) will shell out the relocation fee because they know they'll do better in Anaheim and be able to charge higher ticket prices and since vegas is killing them right now they gotta do something to boost their value.
And mostly - because I think David Stern would love to have 3 profitable teams in the southern california area.
Ther's a beautiful basketball ready stadium READY in anaheim for a team to move into.
If it ain't the kings - the hornets 'meeting their nut' to stay in New Orleans was artificially obtained and I don't care how much they 'want' to keep a team in New Orleans - it's not fiscally possible - a new orleans buyer won't pony up - allow the team access to orange county - you'll find new owners much quicker I bet.
There's too much money and a basketball ready stadium for them not to move to anaheim.
You can maximize profit while still going over the Luxury tax.
Gee - thank you for stating the obvious.
What I love the most - is that people keep expecting Donald Sterling to change.
If they can hang on to Gordon and Griffin, and get Deron Williams, and Gordon can stay healthy (which is a concern) and Griffin doesn't suffer another serious injury (which is an even bigger concern), then yeah, they'd have a chance. Lot of ifs in there.
that's really not that many ifs. Also I think the Clippers could easily move Gordon for talent, or to move B-davis contract to get a 2nd max offer that year.
If they move gordon to facilitate signing Williams, they aren't as good
Not what i'm saying, they don't have to move B-davis's contract in order to get Deron Williams. They will have 1 max contract in 2012, hell they could probably find a way to move BD's contract without moving gordon, by using aminu/bledsoe/whoever they pick this draft/2012 Minny pick/Clippers pick than have Griffin/Gordon/Max contract/Max contract.
They have a lot of flexibility, obviously they could mess up, but I like how we act like our owner isn't as inept as Sterling.
Deron/Griffen on the P&R would be devastating. While De'Andre Jordan is a good enough C to fill out the front court.
They would need Aminu to develop into a quality defensive SF who can hit an open 3 for the roster to really click. they also need a coach like Sloane who knows how to run a P&R team.
Don't young players pretty much always sign the second contract? None of them leave in restricted free agency. I guess Boozer did, years ago.
Didn't david lee and nate robinson play under one year tenders last year?
And Ben Gordon.
I would guess if a player signs the QO then it is likely they will leave as a FA the following year.
Did Charlie V take the QO or did Joe Dumars just offer him stupid money and the raptors (I think) laughted?
I don't remember.
I don't think MIL even made the qualifying offer.
Sixers ranked 16th most valuable NBA franchise by Forbes
I didn't have much time to read at work so not exactly sure how they determined these rankings
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/32/basketball-valuations-11_land.html
I'm sorry, that should have been 17
Like I wrote elsewhere, the Sixers have one of the larger markets for a single team city. NY and LA have 2 teams. So of all of the remaining cities, only Chicago has only 1 team and a much larger metro area.
The Sixers also own their arena and TV network and have a good deal with the city and little to no debt. If they ever became relevant again on the floor to where they inspired the fanbase, they quickly would jump to being one of the most valuable franchises.
The problem is they have been mismanaged. They are treated like a hockey team, with the thought that a balanced squad is better than building around a singular star. That makes sense for a hockey team, since they have a larger roster and play in shifts. It makes no sense in the NBA, were revenue and wins is almost completely star driven.
"The problem is they have been mismanaged. They are treated like a hockey team, with the thought that a balanced squad is better than building around a singular star."
I think if you asked Thorn and Stefanski honestly, off the record, they'd prefer to build around a star. I think they've gone this route because the opportunity to get a star hasn't presented itself.
Thorn has the track record for me to agree with this.
But Stefanski wanted to build around Brand/Iguodala/Miller/Young and went all in for 5 years on that "Pistons" model- So I call BS (in a nice, non-confrontational way.)
I think he thought Iguodala would develop into more than he is, thought Brand would return to what he was, and didn't see a way to go the Cetlcis way and get the superstar to build around, so he went with the next best (so he thought) option.
I understand his reasoning. I just think it does not point to a guy who wants to build around a single, franchise player.
Or maybe Snider said he couldn't after being annoyed by years of Barkley and then AI and their strong personalities.
Meddling owners piss me off
Hire smart people - trust em - sign the checks
The NBA CBA makes it nearly impossible for a team to rise from mediocricy. Since only about 15 decent starters/year enter the league and probably less then three stars per year, few teams can improve significantly each year. Free agency or trades are the other ways to improve. Free agency doesn't work well because of "Bird" rights, where teams can keep a third or fourth star or near star. With a hard cap, teams could only keep 2-3 high salary players. For example, Miami would have been able to sign Bosh or James to play with Wade, not both and would still be strapped to fill out a roster with quality role players. The Lakers would have been able to sign Bynum or Odom. In this scenario Bosh and Bynum or Odom would be making two other teams significantly better than they are. If you didn't have to match salaries, a team with a star or near star they can't afford could trade for a less expensive player to fill a role. It's not going to get much better until the CBA is drastically changed.
I think it probably gets complicated on 'ownership' of the stadium because the sixers don't own it - comcast owns it - so they don't get any sort of 'rent' from the flyers who use it because the flyers are also owned by the owners of the center.
Then again, how much does a stadium contribute to value? The Heat don't own their stadium - the lakers don't own staples center (AEG group - who will build the NFL stadium does)
AEG gets payment (rent I guess) from four sports teams
Comcast certainly can shift around the numbers. the Sixers and Flyers give them programming for CSN. So the ad revenue generated, does that reflect on Comcast, Specator or the individual team's ledgers?
Ultimately, it does not matter, since it is synergy.
It reminds me of medicine- where employed primary care providers drive revenue for specialists, pharmacists and other ancillary services... and yet they are often told that individually they are not "earning" their salary with enough production.
It's all a mess - i don't try to figure it out - but I think by the fact that while the sixers do 'own' their stadium - they don't get 'rent' from the other major tenant (flyers) it would probably decrease the value of both teams.
Maybe in an accounting sense. But in a big picture sense, cutting out the middle man maximizes total earning. Although independent management would probably be more "motivated" to maximize revenue. Being part of a giant mega-corporation sometimes is like working under communism.
I'm about to give Collins more credit than I've given him all season: I think that Collins is using this method with the young guys not just for tough love but to force them to fight and show some backbone, almost like the opposite of a Rudy-move. It seems like he's basically saying to them "If you make a mistake or stop hustling or anything else, I'm going to put in players who you are clearly better than and make you watch them screw things up just to piss you off"
Look at how Speights, Thad, Jrue, and to an extent Meeks have responded. They're not letting themselves be marginalized or taken out of the game while they're on the court. They're being aggressive offensively, battling on defense, and not passing up shots the way they were before. Meeks and Turner both really need to start taking open looks or driving though. No more of this "drive for a foot and then pass" shit. Either shoot or drive.