Over the weekend a few rumors broke regarding point guards named Watson. Earl was bought out by OKC, and the
Magic were rumored to be considering signing CJ to an offer sheet. Thoughts on both situations after the jump.
First, let's talk about Earl. He's logged a little over 13,000 minutes in his NBA career and he's really done nothing to differentiate himself from any other backup PG. 41% shooter from the floor, 33.8% shooter from three, both below average. He has a good assist-to-turnover ratio for his career, but if Indy does in fact sign him, it's no big loss in my eyes. There isn't a whole lot of upside to Earl, maybe he's capable of not killing you for 20 minutes/game at the point, but I think I'm beyond that type of fill in at the point. I want a guy who can make a difference, or a guy who's ready, willing and able to play minimal minutes and tutor the young guys. I don't see Earl as being an ideal fit for that role.
On the other hand, CJ Watson, could make a difference. CJ is only 25 years old and he's coming off a very strong season in Golden State (45% from the floor, 40% from three). CJ is the type of guy who could come in and fit this roster, and I think if they want to, the Sixers could quickly become a favorite to at least sign him to an offer sheet.
Orlando used the lion's share of their MLE on Brandon Bass. They also have a couple of other holes to fill and they do not have their Bi-Annual exception. Meaning, they really can't offer Watson a decent contract, at least not in the first year salary. The Sixers have their MLE and Bi-Annual at their disposal, they can outbid the Magic, and they could outbid them by a wide margin. Add to the money the fact that Watson will be a career backup in Orlando, whereas the Sixers could offer him a legitimate shot to compete for the starting job this season and it should be a no-brainer.
From the Sixers' perspective, CJ Watson would be more than a one-year fill in at the PG position until Jrue can assume the starter's role. He could be a long-term rotational player at the point. He would fit into the overall plan, add depth at a position that has none right now, and provide some insurance should Jrue not pan out. I don't see a downside to offering a decent deal to Watson, one that Orlando couldn't come close to matching.
One problem, though. Whatever offer sheet Watson signs can be matched by Golden State, and every indication has leaned toward GSW keeping CJ. In my mind, though, that's not a reason to avoid going after a player. If you make your best offer and Golden State matches, so be it. You did everything you could. There are ways to make it hard for a team to match, especially a team who just drafted Steph Curry to play alongside Monta Ellis in the backcourt, but at the end of the day, they can keep Watson.
To this point, I haven't seen a lot to fault the front office about. I wanted them to go after Gortat, and I still think they should have, but it wouldn't have mattered, Orlando matched a full MLE offer for him anyway. Jason Kidd and Mike Bibby both signed for too many years and too much money, same with Jarret Jack. Anthony Parker went to a contender, as did Rasheed Wallace. Truth be told, there really hasn't been a missed opportunity to this point, at least not a realistic one. CJ Watson would represent that to me if Orlando did, in fact, sign him to an offer sheet. The Sixers can top Orlando's offer, and they should. Force Golden State to make a tough decision, consider it your due diligence.
Brian, it seems to me their whole summer revolves around Miller, with a 2 year offer of 8 mill. total in the back of their mind. They may act to the contrary but if they sit back and be patient he may have no choice.They can!t afford a major step back and not adding a 2 guard of any kind makes me think they hope L.Will. can remain in his combo guard role. That move alone may get them, in their minds, back in the mix with the additions of Elton, Kapono and Jason now looking more vital.It just seems that he is the key to anything at all happening here.
Miller would probably be more likely to accept the 1 year, MLE offer of $5M+ and then try again next year as an unrestricted free agent than to sign a 2 year $8M deal with the Sixers. I really don't see him coming back to Philly at this point under any circumstances. Someone will offer him what the Sixers did and he has to be furious with the organization.
I think if we're already wondering about insurance for Jrue, that's a bad sign. I'm a CJ fan, I think I was one of—if not the—first to tout him as a Miller replacement, but this was before the draft. Now you've bought Jrue, so you might as well go all in and look to coach him up to whatever's his potential. A three-front point-guard war I don't know is beneficial to the team.
I doubt GS is going to let him go anyway, all indications are that Donnie really likes this kid. But if I were CJ with a choice between Philly and Orlando (and I know he doesn't, just sayin), I'd much rather go to Orlando where if I'm going to be a backup, at least it's with a serious contender. But, bottom line, is CJ a real nice stop-gap starter? You could do a helluva lot worse.
I like Earl b/c he's a steady player and if you can't get Brevin, who'd be perfect for the mentoring role, of the FA points left, Earl'd be the next best thing. Jrue really needs mentoring on distributing responsibly and taking care of the ball and Earl can do that. I'd give him a long term (4yrs?) contract and see if he'd be willing to play out his days in Philly with an up-an-comer and let Jrue know that he's got at least two years of tuetelage to go. I bet Earl still thinks he's starter material (and it's not a terrible argument).
A four year deal for Earl sounds like a spectacular BK idea. No way they'd wind up regretting that one.
He's a below-average point who can't shoot and by no means is he a legitimate starter in this league. He had one season in Seattle, for a horrible team, in which he had even passable numbers. That team bought him out a season later even though they don't have a backup PG on their roster.
Or they like Shaun Livingston
It's not (soley) about the length so much as the *money* on the contract what makes a player tradeable (see Brand, Elton). If you say you're committed to keeping Earl as your starter for two years while Jrue understudies, then that's what it might take to entice him. Two years left on an eatable contract isn't a big deal to trade, if it comes to that, as long as the player's still useful.
Why would Earl want to come here for significantly less than a 4-year deal? A two-year deal? Is he biting at that kind of bait? Then again, it's a buyer's market out there.
You wouldn't be getting Earl for his all-star potential, dude. No one's claiming he's a lights-out shooter. He's probably not much worse than Jrue is right now in the scoring department though. But in any event, he's here hopefully so that his appreciable skill at responsible distribution can rub off on Jrue. I know you'd rather play look-at-his-faults-only, but that's the key win in that acquisition. Failing him, I still like Brevin Knight for the same reasons. We already have a bunch of capable scorers, the point guard doesn't have to be the perimeter shooter, just smart with the ball.
No question, I think it was a mistake to skip Lawson for Jrue (though we still have a couple of years before anyone can claim 'victory' one way or the other), but I'm trying to make the best of what they've done. Jrue's supposed to be the man for the future, a steady third or fourth option guy, so might as well see what we can do to coach him up to where he needs to be. Why're you looking for Jrue insurance already?
I'm not looking for Jrue insurance, but having a guy who can be a long-term fit for the team as a backup to Jrue, or even an alternative if he doesn't pan out isn't a bad idea. Add to that the fact that CJ can shoot and you're kind of killing two birds with one stone while still moving the team forward. Earl for one year I guess I could stomach, although I'd probably prefer the upside of seeing what Lou/Jrue can do to a guy like Watson coming in as the starter.
But a multi-year deal for a guy who was just bought out, and was just horrible last year offensively, and defensively, doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Watson isn't a mediocre guy who's going to come in, run the offense and not really hurt you. He's a bad player.
Don't get me wrong, I like CJ. I was the first one in here to mention him as a replacement for Miller. But post-draft, with Jrue in place, I don't see how the resulting point-guard mess with three guys thinking they have a legit shot at the starter spot is going to be good for the team.
With Earl, a guy clearly on his last contract, there's no controversy. We'll have to agree to disagree on how bad/good he is. I think in terms of overall impact and what he can teach Jrue, he's good for the team. I know it's always fashionable to harp on a player's scoring skills (or lack thereof), but the fact is there aren't 15 starting guards who had a better ast total per 40 or A/TO per 40. He's a crap shooter, but he at least has the smarts not to compound his flaw by taking many shots. He's a solid rebounder and generally passable defender. He doesn't get into foul trouble. He's serviceable. And he's got tools today that Jrue really needs to get under his belt.
Just don't break the bank to bring him in.
He was a worse defender last year than Andre Miller, according to 82games.com metrics. Worse than Miller for the past two seasons, actually.
(look at the opp under production) on all the links.
1) You're not paying him Miller $, you're not expecting Miller performance.
2) You keep ignoring Earl's strength. Not sure if I should go to all-caps.
3) You've got a defensive backstop in Jrue if there's an opponent that's continually shredding Watson.
4) You're not expecting to win anything now. Coach Jrue up with someone who can pass on the skills he desperately needs to polish so he can be option#1 in 2 years' time. You picked him and not mr. boring solid guy b/c of that potential, right? Mine it, don't undermine it.
5) The relevant quote from 82games.com: "These stats represent how the team performed while the player was on the floor." (emphasis mine) Philly, for all its warts, is still comfortably better than Watson's. And, again, nobody's claiming Watson's any kind of offensive genius (which helps account for the net difference in the two b/c Miller can score pretty well). If we focus on just the more objective stats of steals and blocks, the two are essentially the same. You'd have to watch a lot of tape to see if there are qualitative differences in how they go about getting those numbers but in case of worst case, see point #1.
You're not looking at the right stat on 82games.com, I'm talking about opponent's production, which is derived from their analysis of who a player was guarding and how that player produced. Watson's man, burned him. I'm not talking about the differential, (his production vs. his man's production), just his man's production. Miller made up for his poor defense with stellar offense, but that's not the case with Watson. He compounded his piss poor defense with horrible offense.
I'm also having a hard time figuring out what Watson's strength is and what he's supposedly going to impart on Jrue. He turned the ball over on 23.8% of his possessions last season. Lou's number was 13%, Miller's number was 14%, Iguodala's was 13.9%, Ivey's was 9.2%.
Watson has typically had good assist-to-turnover ratios, but his turnovers are still too high, way too high. He average more TOs/36 minutes than anyone on the Sixers last season.
I'm amazed at your insistence on making this about Earl's weaknesses, which I've already conceded. You seem to be saying a) that if they switched teams, Miller would have been a significant defensive upgrade, and b) that team defense has zero effect on opponent-you're-guarding scoring. Interesting theories. Moving on...You're not getting him for offense. I'm not sure how much plainer I can say that, but I guess you will read what parts you want to read. There's a theme there.
I guess it goes for everybody that we see what we want to see. Your selectivity is a little bit comical though. Here's a comparison of Miller, Ivey, Lou and EW. Anyone can scroll down to the per36 section that shows the turnovers and what the actual differences are between them. It also shows the differences in assists. It's easy to calculate the ratio.
A little further down is the "advanced" stat section showing the turnover percentage that you noted. It also shows the bits you turned a blind eye to, namely assist percentages (and, considering the argument re defensive prowess, his defensive rating). His turnovers are way too high? It's a common enough affliction for high assist guys. Chris Paul's turnovers/gm is only sliiiightly lower than Earl's on a per40 basis and Earl's is better than Deron Williams and Russell Westbrook who it seems everyone would like Jrue to aspire to be.
All I've ever said is that this guy is good at distributing responsibly (ie. gets a high number of assists without turning the ball over too much); he can come relatively cheap; and won't cause a controversy re expectations on present and future role; he would be in position to teach Jrue the one skill he needs drastic improvement on. He is my second choice if Brevin Knight is not available (I was the first to tout him here, too). The rest, re wtf Miller comparisons etc, is all smoke and mirrors.
Jrue Holiday was the number two rated player coming out of high school, but didn’t exactly light it up his freshman year at UCLA. He finished with a less then impressive 8.5 points and 3.7 assists per game, and has announced that he will be in the 2009 NBA draft, much to the chagrin if head coach Ben Howland.
If Holiday and Darren Collison are drafted in the first round, which is quite possible, Ben Howland would have four first round point guards selected in four years. Although, there is a chance he’ll change his mind, I think Holiday will stay in and be a solid pick for whoever takes him.
First off, this is not a 6 foot 175 pound player. Jrue Holiday has the build NBA coach’s love; he’s 6’2 and a solid 200 pounds. He can get anywhere on the court he wants to get either with speed or muscle. He’s also equally good in the half court or the up-tempo, and has a nice stroke for a young player. Jrue Holiday will probably get drafted somewhere in the twenty’s on draft day, and many feel he should go back to UCLA for his sophomore season. However, I think he’ll be a very good pro and leaving early will not hurt his progression.
Number one, he came to UCLA to play point guard, as everyone on the planet expected Darren Collison to go to the NBA. When Collison decided to stay, Holiday still started for UCLA, but at shooting guard. If it were any other position, it would not be a big deal, but points guards are not as interchangeable as shooting guards, forwards and centers. It would be like drafting Chris Paul, putting him at the two guard position, and complaining about the results later.
I also felt, although it’s never been reported, that Jrue and Ben Howland were not on the same page. Anytime I saw Howland speak to him alone, whether at the end of a time out, or while the other team was shooting free throws. Holiday would walk away with that dumbfounded look on his face, or be shaking his head. This is not a knock on either, but leads me to believe that Jrue is staying in the draft, and is an undervalued player.
A player needs to appreciated on a team, and I don’t know the relationship between the two, but think there may have been a little difference of opinion between them. Personally, I had a problem with the UCLA offense; they seemed to hold the ball until there were 5 seconds left on the shot clock, before even looking at the basket. With the talented athletes they have, this didn’t seem to make a lot of sense to me. However, how can you argue with Howland’s success? You really can’t, plus this was never reported, so I’m just putting this out based on the body language at the games.
Basketball wise, I really like Jrue Holidays game, and think it fits in nicely with the pros. I see him as a big, pass first point guard that can play right away. His ability to set up the offense and drive and dish is already at a very high level. Like most 19 year olds, he needs to work on his outside shooting, but could probably be a reasonable back-up, while still working on his game.
The biggest impact Ben Howland had on Jrue Holiday’s game was clearly on the defensive side of the ball. UCLA has one of the fiercest half court defenses in college ball, and Holiday did not disappoint. He really bought in to the defensive philosophies of Coach Howland and it became a staple of his game. Having to guard some of the toughest two guards in college has really enhanced him as a two way player. When he faced lottery pick, James Harden of Arizona State, he forced him into 8 turnovers, and played that in-your-face UCLA defense that has made the program a great success.
Overall, he averaged 1.6 steals per game, which is pretty good for a freshman playing out of position. He was a good defender coming into UCLA, had 5 steals in the McDonalds All-American Game, but Howland really helped him take the next step. Overall, he doesn’t have the numbers, but he has the skill. He should do quite well in private workouts and move up the draft board. He’s also a quality person and a quality teammate. I see him as the third best point guard in the draft, behind Rubio and Jennings, but the one player who might provide the best value, based on where he’s expected to go and what I expect him to do.
il ike this article
The list of high school stars who never panned out in the NBA is impressive. The number of decidedly unimpressive one-and-done college ballers who didn't pan out...well, we're still sorting through the entrails. Some guys just enjoy high risk more than others. Not our money, whadda we care?
Side note: are there two johns here? uppercase and lowercase? any chance one or both of you will risk being more distinctive in moniker? i like to be clear on who's chewing my ass.
Gatorade Player of the Year
1987 J.R. Reid
1988 Alonzo Mourning
1989 Kenny Anderson
1990 Damon Bailey
1991 Chris Webber
1992 Corliss Williamson
1993 Randy Livingston
1994 Felipe Lopez
1995 Stephon Marbury
1996 Kobe Bryant
1997 Baron Davis
1998 Al Harrington
1999 LaVell Blanchard
2000 Jared Jeffries
2001 Kelvin Torbert
2002
2003 LeBron James
2004 Dwight Howard
2005
2006 Greg Oden
2007 Kevin Love
2008 Jrue Holiday
Sure, there are some busts on that list. But overall the success of this group compares well with the success for top 5 picks.
The award started in 1985 and what it mostly points to is a list of guys who should do well at the next level. For the vast majority of them, that next level was college. And doing well in college by and large is a good indicator of future success in the NBA (yes, depending on a lot of factors like college, conference, etc). The no-college exceptions like Kobe and LeBron are too glaring for words.
As you say, there are some busts on the list, so it means you shouldn't go by high school performance only. Holiday is the only one-an-done who didn't do so hot in college. The excuse provided for him was that he played out of position. Okay. Fine. But then that effectively nullifies his one year of college and we're back to trying to project how a high school star is going to do in the NBA. One who is cleeearly not a LeBron-level talent. Risky, risky business. But some enjoy that game. Whatever floats your boat, it's not our money and they're free to pick whomever they want. But you just have to admit this was far from a no-brainer call.
Time to play Guess That Quote:
I won't even keep you in suspense: That was our keen host, Brian, just a scant 6 weeks ago.
What exactly has Jrue (or Lawson, for that matter) done since then to change that opinion? Not a single thing. Obviously, Bri caught a virus that begins with H—not H1N1, but Homerism. Or maybe, if we're charitable, it's Hope.
Is this news? I never argued otherwise. Curry, Rubio, Lawson and Maynor all have more experience than Holiday, didn't realize that was a debate. I like Holiday because of the guys available I think he'll be the best pro in the long run.
Do a little more research before you say I changed my tune because the Sixers drafted Holiday. Here's my draft board from about 10 days before the draft. You'll notice Holiday above every other player who was available for the Sixers.
Alright, fair enough. It's really interesting though, considering the write ups you had for each of them, that you still went ahead and put Holiday above Lawson. It's weird. On the face of it, it doesn't make much sense at all.
After the combine, we knew Lawson's not a short point guard and he has plenty of the other three attributes you love about Jrue. Oh, plus that proven record bit that you mentioned. You may be a "defense first" kind of guy, but with Jrue, right now, you pretty much have a defense only guy. Coach his feeble-offense ass up.
Anyway, it was uppercaseJohn who pulled us into this Jrue thread and I'm gettin off this tired ride right about...now.
Howland said after the season Jrue is a lot further along than Westbrook was at the same stage (I have a link to a video on an earlier thread). Jrue wasn't my first choice, Jennings was, but I think he was a good choice where we picked and he has (potentially) a very good skill set for the Sixers.
1. We don't need a big scorer at the PG. With Iggy, Thad and Brand, they'll get the yeoman's share of the shots and if anything, Thad should get more shots. Iggy is the best all-around player but Thad is our Carmelo lite (very good post game, good mid-range game and improving 3-ball) and should be our #1 option. Before he got hurt at the end of the year, nobody was able to stop him (other than him getting benched or not getting the ball).
2. We need a good defensive PG. This seems to be a strength of Jrue's. Seems everytime someone got dribble penetration against us our perimeter defense broke down. Thad's big problem on D was every time someone got around Miller he'd wind up leaving his man he'd wind up collapsing in and leaving his man. Sammy also did this on the interior (abandon his man leading to dunks and layups) also. If Jrue can stay in front of some people this would really help.
3. Don't make mistakes (turnovers). I'm curious how Jrue does with this. Since he was playing out of position at UCLA this is sort of unknown. I can't tell anything from summer league. That is a crap shoot anyhow but since they shared with the Nets (who had differing goals) it was completely meaningless this year. This is something (combined team) they should never do again.
If Jrue can do those 3 things we will be in good shape. He doesn't need to set the world on fire scoring and he doesn't even need a ton of assists as Iggy can really help in that regard.
"Howland said after the season Jrue is a lot further along than Westbrook was at the same stage"
Yet Westbrook was ready to be a big-time contributor his first season, while very few people think the same will be true of Holiday. So maybe Howland was wrong. It's pretty well-established that Westbrook's talents weren't anywhere near being fully utilized in college.
Well, Westbrook went back for a second season at UCLA, right? Howland is saying Jrue is ahead of where Westbrook was one year before he came to the NBA and was ready to contribute.
Tray,
I think Jrue was poorly utilized also. The small sample I saw Jrue doesn't seem to know how to play off the ball (he'd kind of stand around waiting). When he had the ball he looked OK and played better. Collison coming back unexpectedly really screwed him up. He probably should have re-evaluated his commitment to the Bruins.
Well said, Chris. Point number three is the extra dicey bit at this point.
Where did you find the article?
Anyone buying this Sessions to NYK rumor?
I mean, I don't see them making an offer for more than 1 season, and wouldn't Milwaukee just match a one-year MLE offer if he signed the offer sheet?
If the Knicks offer more than 1 year, it eats into their cap space.
Clips have agreed 2 send Quentin Richardson to Wolves for Sebastian Telfair, Craig Smith and Mark Madsen,
I haven't looked at the contracts - but did the clippers have a problem meeting that 12 player minimum?
It looks like they were at 11 prior to the trade, but I don't think teams really make moves to get to the 12 player minimum. Especially not cheap teams. They could just sign NBADL guys for like $500K if they needed warm bodies.
Talk about a trade that evokes the old, if a tree falls...
Am told Sixers' list includes Ivey, Arroyo, Brevin Knight, Jason Hart and Lue as possible vet minimum PGs if no sign-and-trade for Miller materializes.
Of this group, I suppose I'd go with Brevin Knight or Ivey.
If it's true that the sixers are 10.5 million (or so) under the tax rate and they got vet minimum i'm going to be sick.
Of course if they get Knight I'm going to look rather prescient
My figures show it's about $10.2 million. With three guys to fill out the roster, they'll be at $7.5 mill or so. But part of it is not wanting to pay more than a one-year deal with $57.9 mill already committed for 2010-11 and the cap/tax going down again.
Wonderful - ho much money does comcast gross in a year again?
They do know the better the team is the more money they'll make right?
Cuban had an interesting comment about this at that geek conference. Something like each win is worth $500,000. Not saying Comcast uses this math, but if that's the case, paying $4M for a stopgap guy would have to produce 6 more wins than a vet minimum guy to make financial sense, which is highly unlikely.
So if that is the choices for PG's, then where is the shooting coming from? I would assume that Ed is going to sign a knock-down shooter also? There really aren't any left...?
Jasner says the list also consists of Bobby Jackson and Juan Dixon. Hope these two are at the forefront before any of the others listed above.
Am told they're looking to sign a 1, 3 and 5 for the vet minimums. Not sure who the possible 3s would be.
So it seems the problem might be that the sixers aren't willing to pay ANYONE past this season?
http://www.insidebayarea.com/warriors/ci_12879691
Good link. Brevin made $2M last year. He might go for a one-year thing for the same amt. Looks like Philly is really playin hardball, fully prepared to go with Lou/Jrue if that's what it comes to. Waitin the summer out to see who is desperate enough for a 1yr gig.
Actually how I see it is that they are so terrified of the 10/11 luxury tax that they don't want to take on any additional salary from anyone...not hard ball...cheapness...so this ought to be fun for the next season or two.
hardball...cheapness...probably both. I don't get why they'd still be looking at more frontcourt men though (click thru to full PI article).
Something's definitely on the slow, low boil over in ED land.
This isn't exactly news - it was reported by Mr Moore last week, just insurance, none of the back up big men are exactly defensive stalwarts, would be my guess
One year, $2.3M. If it's true, ugh. Wonder what the Magic are offering. If they sign Barnes they probably won't have more than the minimum avail.
They're offering multi years according to the reports, 3 years, like I said, not the 2.3 that bothers me, the one year bothers me, I just don't like how it 'feels' to me regarding the future of this team.
If they sign anyone beyond this season they will likely be over the tax next year. I was worried about this last winter, and its even worse now that the cap is coming down.
Since they clear a bunch of space for 2011/12 (Sam/Green/Kapono- but not enough for a really big signing) they could pay someone now if they were willing to bite the bullet on the tax for one measly year. Unfortunately, sound like the 'shareholders' voted that idea down.
I'm hoping it's not that they absolutely won't pay the tax next season, it's that they're only willing to pay it for a player who can make a difference, and/or this team proves they're close to contending as currently constructed, then they'd pay the tax to put them over the top. Hoping is the key word in this comment, however.
"Hope" seems to be a regular refrain when it comes to this franchise nowadays. Maybe they should change the mascot from Hip-Hop to High-Hopes!
If they would have just taken a more NBA-ready point in the draft, they wouldn't be in this lack-of-point conundrum. They could concentrate their efforts on a wing/shooter. And from that article above from John, Matt Barnes would fill that role ideally but the rich keep getting richer.
And somehow ownership thinks people and fans want to buy tickets to watch this mess. The old mantra rings true as John said yesterday, - the more you spend, the more you make. Guess all those increased cable rates are lining individuals pockets and not the franchise's. ARRRGGHHH!!
To be fair, the team consistently ranked from 4th-7th in payroll from 2002 until last year (often with payrolls 70M+ when the median was under 55M.). I think Brian is right in thinking they would pay if they thought it made them a contender.
Or maybe Comcast sees the team differently now then it did a few years ago. If so they should sell. In fact, they have stayed under the tax since they looked into selling 2 years ago.
I've wanted the to seell for a while now - but if you think about it - (corporate ownership again) it's not as easy to just sell the sixers...comcast spectacor owns (I believe) the sixers, the flyers, the wachovia center and what used to be the spectrum. So, you buy the sixers from comcast, but comcast still owns the tv network (as well) that broadcasts the sixers - you can shop for another deal, but that would be difficult. JUST buying the sixers I don't think is a doable project really, because the other 'assets' would still be owned by comcast and negotiating deas would be I believe rather difficult. Ideally, like if i had a spare 2 billion, i'd just buy the whole kit and kaboodle, spin off the flyers to some unsuspecting schmuck and make em pay rent to pay in the wachovia center
I'd rather just buy Comcast. Then at least I could watch CSN Philly. As it now, I can't even pay to watch it since I like outside Philly.
2 billion for the sixers and flyers is a pipedream
As of close of market today comcast corporation has a market cap of 41 billion
If I had 41 billion, i wouldn't buy a friggin cable company :)