Saturday's edge-of-your seat win over the Pistons actually left me feeling pretty good. As I said in my wrap, the win itself wasn't meaningful in any way. The Pistons are a terrible team, and perhaps the only man in the NBA who has done a worse job than Eddie Jordan in the past 12 months is Joe Dumars who assembled that mismatched roster. Upon further review, though, I'm left with a lingering question: Will wins like this extend Eddie Jordan's stay with the Sixers?
We all know who Eddie Jordan is. He believes in his offensive system above all else. He believes he needs his best offensive players on the floor at all times, and they're just going to have to learn to defend. We know this because he's got a track record, both with the Sixers and the Wizards. We know this because he's told us this, again and again, as frequently as last week.
So when he goes against what he believes to barely pull out a win against the hapless Pistons, it doesn't mean a whole lot to me, and it shouldn't mean a whole lot to Ed Stefanski. Whatever the motivation was for Jordan to use a defensive lineup to hold that lead doesn't really matter. It doesn't change the fact that his philosophy is a losing philosophy. That his system probably won't work under the best of circumstances, but certainly won't work with this roster.
Did Ed Stefanski have a stern chat with Jordan and demand that he use a defensive lineup? We'll never know for sure, but we do know that something changed. Something made Jordan try a lineup we've all been begging to see the entire season. What's more likely, that Jordan spent Friday night soul searching and came to realize that his fundamental coaching philosophy was flawed, or is outside intervention more likely? Either way, Jordan's forte is the Princeton offense and no defense. Period. That's who he is. So even if he's willing to rethink his core values as a coach, and he's willing to change this team back to a defense-first squad, he simply isn't qualified to be the coach who takes them in that direction. He isn't even close.
Asking Jordan to coach like Larry Brown is pretty much the same thing as asking Andre Iguodala to play like Reggie Miller (which, incidentally, is what Jordan has asked of Iguodala). It's just not going to happen. Their strengths lie in different areas. From the diatribe Stefanski delivered the other day, I think it's apparent to him that this team is better served playing the style of basketball they've played for the previous two seasons than they are playing Jordan ball. So what's the holdup? What is Ed Stefanski waiting for? And most importantly, seeing Jordan pull off a couple of weak wins doing the things he's clearly against, philosophically, shouldn't change anything. The record is what it is for a reason. He's the wrong guy to coach this team and he's taken the team in a disastrous direction.
Whether Stefanski is dictating coaching philosophy to Jordan or EJ is changing his ways in a last-ditch effort to save his job is immaterial. This team needs to be headed in a direction Jordan cannot take them. I believe Stefanski realizes this, so he's either wasting everyone's time by sticking with Jordan or covering his own ass. Either way, a handful of sad wins over sadder teams doesn't change a thing.
Well one good thing happend this weekend for Sixers fans. With the Eagles losing there are only two teams playing in town. After the week or so of bitching about Mcnabb the talk radio shows will soon turn to EJ for somthing to bitch about. The days of flying under the radar are hopefuly coming to an end.
Well one good thing happend this weekend for Sixers fans. With the Eagles losing there are only two teams playing in town. After the week or so of bitching about Mcnabb the talk radio shows will soon turn to EJ for somthing to bitch about. The days of flying under the radar are hopefuly coming to an end.
Good point! Tonight, they have the Hornets on a back to back. Another opportunity to get a win. We'll see if EJ continues with a change in philosophy.
Actually...another opportunity to get embarrassed, and to bring the horrific EFJ era to an end.
reid bitching takes about 2 weeks, mcnabb bitching takes about a month. if the cowboys win the superbowl mcnabb/reid bitching will last until april
They'll just shift to eagles off seaosn, phillies off season and the flyers (until spring training starts of course)
I was wondering about this. Probably the focus just never shifts to the Sixers at all. The "get rid of McNabb" talk will bleed right into spring training.
I love the subtle racism about McNabb hate - especially with how well the eagles defense played Saturday night
They should be talking about how different things would've been if Stew Bradley hadn't been gone for the season :)
defense never gets blame in philly
Like this, haha.
Brian, I think the answer should be no. It shouldn't prolong Jordan's stay as head coach if a real look at what's been happening (short term and long term impact) is being done despite any wins.
But I am sure it will. Stefanski is always talking about wins being the measure. If the players somehow go on a run despite Eddie Jordan cluelessness I think that buys him more time, which would suck.
Also, I feel like you are giving him credit for thoughtfully/tactically going with the defensive line-up. I just think dude is a fool and his lineups are haphazard and for the most part due to random chance, albeit with strong offensive favoring.
It just so happened the defensive lineup got a run, but I don't think it was anything thoughtfully done by Jordan or something we can expect to see much of going forward either. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't even remember doing it at this point.
Would you be surprised?
Dannie,
I disagree that Saturday's night lineup was haphazard. I personally believe he was told by higher ups that he had to give Jrue more time. There is no way to explain why Jrue played for Green/Lou for an extended period of time last night.
But, tonight should clear up any misunderstanding.
But I agree with you that Jordan needs to be fired asap.
Why do you "personally believe" that? Because Brian hinted that might have happened in the post and you're just running with it?
There is a pretty simple explanation for it - No Iverson. Do you think he goes with that line-up if Iverson was playing? I don't and I really can't see how anyone would, we are talking about EJ here. I don't think anything can be made of it last night's lineup because Iverson wasn't available.
If we see that line-up more at the expense of Iverson and Lou than okay. But that wasn't the case last night.
His team built a 26 point lead and saw 4 slightly different line-ups give up 14 points of it. He tossed that one out there and even the defensive lineup was a net negative. I wouldn't be surprised if the reason the lineup stayed on the floor for that long was because they were scoring a little more (13 points in that 6:40).
If that lineup scores I can see him running with it, but let's not get carried away thinking he is running with it because it's perceived to be a strong defensively unit.
I think we are looking at random chance right now and nothing more.
Oh and I am not sure I would give Ed Stefanski much credit for knowing the right lineup to put on the floor either.
I thought of the same as Brian as the coach left Lou/Green on the bench more than other games when AI was not playing (during the game, I was confused). It does not make sense that he did not put both Lou/Green back in together as he has done other times.
Agree with the net negative (Obviously), but it was not as bad as it was before.
Agree with you that the proof, if Jordan was told to do this by higher ups, will be tonight with AI back.
Someone in the organization has to know his ass from his elbow, no?
Anyway, I agree that this probably doesn't have anything to do with Jordan "getting it," my point was that even if he did turn over a new leaf, and he's at least open to using defensive lineups to protect a lead, it doesn't make a difference. He still needs to go. Even he changes his stripes simply to squeak out a few wins to mollify Stefanski, he's not the guy to coach this roster.
No.
I only answer I could honest muster is - I hope so. Can't really say for sure. But there isn't much evidence that there is.
I wish Brian could be a beat writer for this team. The only beat writer worth their salt is Kate.
I just read an article by Moore on why they win more away that at home. Not a mention that EVERY WIN has atleast 1 if not 2 key starters not playing all or most of the game at their home.
The only reason this team gets a win against ANY TEAM including even the NETS), is that they do not have most of their starters playing that night. TIME FOR OUR WRITERS TO DO THEIR JOB, and by doing that job, Jordan should get fired faster.
Tom does a solid job and is very committed. He is lower profile because of who he works for. Tom also gives daily updates on realgm, which is really appreciated.
That defensive line-up of Jrue, Dala, Thad, Brand, and Sam was also tied for giving up the most points as a unit with 15. Tied with the much despised line-up of Lou/Willie G in the back court, Dala with Thad at the four and Sam (I think).
If this much talked about and little used 'defensive' line-up gave up the most points as a unit, isn't the fault on the players themselves for some of the atrocious defense?
Or....is this just exposing Thad at the three (as he was earlier in the season when he was getting abused), showing they were somehow sane in playing him at the four, only to enhance the running game (and hiding him on D but exposing him on the boards), but at the expense of Brand, who they somehow feel makes us slow (which is bull). My point being that Thad should come off the bench as your sixth man spark plug - why he continues to be anointed a starter is beyond me. He can't guard three's and he can't board at the four.
I would rather see Dala go back to the forward spot with EB starting, sending Thad to the bench and Willie starting at the two and Lou/Jrue at point depending on flow and matchups. Now, before the Willie starting gets laughed at, the guy has been playing some pretty steady ball lately.
And a final note is I have conveniently left AI out of this. His heady play and deferring to teammates is welcomed but he just can't move laterally in the slightest anymore. It's pretty bad to say that Lou plays defense about as good as he does. Yes, Lou.
The points allowed argument doesn't hold a whole lot of water unless you factor in the number of minutes played, but that's really neither here nor there.
No matter what lineup he puts on the floor, they're still using his silly system. I don't really care so much about results, I care about them getting on the floor together. I don't expect any five guys to really produce all that well defensively under Jordan, to be honest with you. There was one timeout when that lineup was on the floor that I saw Jordan yelling at Sam to get out to the three-point line to cover Prince, I think it was, on a dead ball. It's batshit insane.
Your point about Thad is valid, though I wouldn't include Green in the starting lineup, I'd probably go with Iverson, Green's value is being boosted by the ridiculous emphasis on long twos. I don't particularly like that and I don't like coaching to that strategy. And contrary to what Stefanski said, a solid defensive team can, and does, cover for one defensive liability. It's when you get 2-4 of them out there that you have problems.
The team's best defensive lineup right now is Dalembert, Brand, Iguodala, Carney and Holiday. I don't think that's up for debate, but I do still want to see Thad at the three. If you look at the play-by-play, it wasn't Thad's man that was scoring for Detroit in that stretch in the fourth.
So did one particular guy's man go off in that stretch or was it sprinkled throughout? My assumption would have been wrong in that I would have said Thad's man did the damage.
Charlie V had five (three + 2 FTs)
Daye had two
Gordon had four (three + 1 FT)
Ben Wallace had two
Rip had two
Pretty evenly spread out. One hoop for each guy on the floor (two of them threes) and three free throws.
So will Jrue get some extended minutes tonight, or will EFJ decide to "protect him?"
I guess it mostly is up to whether AI plays. Any chance someone would want to trade for AI if he continues to play unselfishly?
I doubt it. What we would we get in return anyway? He's a minimum salary.
We'd get a team without AI?
True.
I'm sure each win (even 'bad' ones) counts as a win, and a delay for change. The more they lose, the more motivation & pressure to get rid of EJ.
The main question being discussed is the gist of the one I posed the other day: what happens if this team goes on a run? Is that a good thing or a bad thing? If, as Brian hypthesized, EJ received marching orders from above to emphasize defense more, play more defensively-sound lineups, and play to the strengths of his personnel on offense, it's really not out of the question that the Sixers could challenge for the #6 seed in the East. (By the way, if this scenario sounds familiar, it is: parts of it happened in both 07-08 and 08-09.) If you've looked at the rest of the East, there are some pretty terrible teams, and the Sixers almost couldn't help moving up in the standings with the above strategy. If that happened, the loss of draft position wouldn't bother me, but the keeping of Jordan would.
On another tangent (brought up in the comments above), why do you guys think it is that Thad isn't a better defensive player? It isn't because he doesn't try (he's constantly taking charges and trying to rotate to the right man) or because he doesn't have the physical attributes needed to be a good defender. Is it a question of mindset? Lack of reflexes? Bad habits? (A lot of these same questions can be asked of Speights.)
He played inside his whole life. In the paint you are taught to help more than wing players do. Becoming a wing player is a big adjustment on both sides of the ball.
But I'm not sure he'll ever be a good defender. His instincts just seem wrong.
Look at Jrue, he's 19 and already a good defender and Lou at 23 still can't get the defensive basics down. Its not all about physical skills.
Yea, I agree. His instincts or IQ just seem to be lacking. Like he doesn't understand pursuit of angles and such etc.
I've never bought the argument that being an 'athlete' will translate to being a skillful player specifically on the defensive side of the ball. I would surmise that he has never been taught the technique side enough. His footwork leaves alot to be desired (just like when he's attempting to drive on offense).
But in addition to the non-IQ, the mindset, as asked above, is a big factor here, for him and Speights, IMO. Your will and want-to play a big part when it comes to D'ing up and rebounding.
Carney has improved bigtime from his stand up straight rookie version, yet is Thad not smarter, I.Q. wise than him ? Is there that much of a difference athletically between the 2 ? I can!t believe Mc Kie can!t improve Thad through basic drills.
Speaking solely on instincts and defensive pedigree, we should be pretty bad:
Lou- HS Kid, Easy to see that he only scored and didn't defend
Willie- Scorer in a mid-major conference, don't know if his coach made him defend, but not against great players.
AI9- Shockingly "should be bad" pedigree. 2 years at Arizona where he lead the team in rebs, assists, and steals but Olson's defense always was really bad in the late years.
Thad- HS, One year at Georgia Tech.
Speights- Only 2 years at Florida but should be better than he actually is because his first year was practicing against Noah, Horford, etc.
Jrue- HS, One year at UCLA in a great defensive system under Ben Howland. Very solid.
EB- 2 years under Coach K, in a solid defensive system. No wonder him and Jrue are 2 of our better defenders.
Sammy- Don't know how many years at Seton Hall but played at an established program at St. Pat's in Jersey where he definitely did less stupid stuff than he did here.
Overall, we have a few guys who weren't called on to defend for most of their careers, and a few who have.
If I had to guess with Thad, I'd say it has to do with two things (1) Discipline and direction. I don't think he's ever had basic defensive principles drilled into his head. He's now on the third coach of his career, and he was by far at his best under Cheeks. This Jordan debacle is really hurting him. (2) I think he's a little shy. Meaning, he doesn't like contact. It hurts him on both ends in my opinion, but maybe moreso on defense.
When he was a rookie, he was much much better defensively. I don't know what's happened since then, these are just a couple of guesses.
Guys, speaking about defense, if Sean Williams is released by N.J. is he worth a 10 day look ? He was a knucklehead in college but is his "not playing at all now" do to off the court issues or not being a smart player? E.S. was part of a group that drafted him.
Why? What's the point? Where does he get minutes? Are you trying to improve the team this season for some reason?
Because he is young and could maybe bring some things lacking here, a defensive, shot blocking big off the bench.It would be more of a future move than a now move.
I want NO ONE that can help this team till Jordan gets FIRED. No help. Not till he is gone.