DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

2nd Half D Brings Home the W

Your speadsheet link is going to a box score...

Good win. Tomorrow night gotta take care of some business. Bucks without Bogut.

Thanks, the link is fixed.

It's a good thing this team, and Iguodala particularly, is young. Heavy minutes for the key players tonight, the first night of a back-to-back. Milwaukee had an off day.

See, isn't it possible that the real explanation is that the two guys who made those four threes only combined for one attempt thereafter? McGrady has a pretty shot, but it's never really been any good. Alston and Brooks also aren't too accurate.

Here are the shooting percentages for the guys who took the rest of those threes this season:

McGrady: 39%
Alston: 35%
Brooks: 37%

You could also look at is as the Sixers never let Barry and Wafer get an open look the rest of the game, which is pretty much true. They identified the guys who were hitting from deep, and didn't leave them.

The fact of the matter is they didn't leave anyone open from three after the first. That's a night and day difference from the defense they've been playing on the perimeter.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Jan 7 at 1:16
+/-

Well what do you know. Yeah, you're right. I have to say, Houston would be nuts to trade him with their injury issues, but I came away from the game with a newfound appreciation for Von Wafer.

I'll give credit where it's due... Iggy had a career performance. He knocked down outside shots and lay-ups with ease. I usually curse the guy when he's heaving up 18 footers in the fourth quarter, but last night I had no problem with it... because I actually believed they had a good chance at going in.

I LOVE the combo of Theo and Marreese at Center. We absolutely have to trade Sammy this season and as soon as possible. The right trade (for a guard who can shoot) could really put us on the right track and improve our chances for a winning season.

I'm looking forward to Brand's return. We should keep doing what we're doing and simply ask him to assimilate into the offense (and the other things) that are now working well for us.

user-pic
PeterPatrelli on Jan 7 at 9:53
+/-

The sixers must rebound on the defensive end better. Grabbing less than 2/3 of the available defensive rebounds is just unacceptable. I don't know why they were that bad on the glass last night but it must improve.

Dalembert has a trade kicker. Trading him is a lost cause IMO. He is better than what you are going to get in return likely. I think we have to accept this as Sixer fans. They would need to find a guy with 3+ years on his deal who makes between like 11 and 16 million a year.

I haven't given up on Sammy yet though. He can still rebound and he is still probably the teams best overall defensive player. He has been bad this year, but he will return to what he normally is, which is 50% from the floor, some blocks, and one of the better rebounding Centers in the NBA.

user-pic
Bart reply to Joe on Jan 7 at 10:48
+/-

Perhaps he will. I don't know. I just see his huge Billy King contract (six years AND a trade kicker, Billy???) and grimace knowing that he's not worth half of it. Plus, I'm not convinved we can't sell him to a team that's desparately in need of size and athleticism up front. As you say, he's not necessarily a bad player, particularly if he's placed in the right situation. And as the last six years have proven, Philly is definitely NOT the right situation for this man. It might take a three or four team deal, but I'm convinced that moving him is the best thing thing Ed can do to improve the team this season.

Sam Dalembert is an over paid bench player - most of the dumber GMs in the league have lost their jobs - and his contract - with or without the kicker - is one year too long to have the 'magic year' lure...to get even a mediocre deal for sam I think you'd have to include picks and or talent. To just DUMP Sam from your roster, you'll probably have to take back an equally over paid player with a bad contract.

If Sam could be convinced to stop being a whiny bitch - he'd be a fine bench player I'm sure - but history doesn't indicate he'd take that well - he's worried about 'his' minutes and 'his' playing time, etc....not the teams performance and how he REALLY can best help it

user-pic
Joe reply to john on Jan 7 at 11:58
+/-

I agree with most. As always though, Sam is an average NBA starting center. How you classify him as a "bench player" despite his last 3 seasons is mind boggling to me. Whatever.

He has been a productive player for the Sixers and the team is always better defensively when he is on the court, historically.

I say "historically" because his recent play seems like it hasn't been very good.

And he is overpaid. He should be making like 2-3 mil less a year and not have a kicker. You do have to pay for size in the NBA typically, but Billy just gave him too many damn years for the amount he paid him and also gave him a kicker for no reason... reminds me of the Calvin Booth player option... ummm why?

user-pic
john reply to Joe on Jan 7 at 12:07
+/-

Some of the 'sammy isolated' 2007/08 stats

http://www.82games.com/0708/07PHI15D.HTM

"Better" defensively is not exactly unqualified based on these numbers.

Sam isn't any better or any worse (to me) than he has been in the past few years - the argument could be made that his defensive impact this year is better while his offensive impact is just much worse

http://www.82games.com/0809/08PHI13.HTM

But Sam, in general, is a net neutral player - net neutral players aren't exactly 10 million dollars a year - and they shouldn't start...he's a bench player who should be used when his strenghts are most valued and his weakness will have the least impact - to me that's the definition of a bench player - a guy valuable in specific situations to maximize his strengths and mask his obvious weaknesses


user-pic
Joe reply to john on Jan 7 at 14:47
+/-

Dalembert is obviously not playing even similar to last year. He can't score at all this year and has reverted in his fouling.

His PER has dropped from distinctively average to Willie Green territory as Brian pointed out a week or so ago I think.

PER underrated Sammy as well because it punishes a player for not chucking.

His WP48 has gone down despite his rebounding increasing as well, which is not something you see too often.

user-pic
john reply to Joe on Jan 7 at 16:41
+/-

PER is wonderful as long as you don't care about defense - and how the player is impacting a teams performance defensively - it's a gaping wound if you care about a players defensive impact as it mostly (not entirely) looks at offensive stats (I have actually read the fromula at least from the 2004 basketball hand book)

Here's a simple trade that would arguably help both teams (though I'm no GM, so I could be mistaken here)...

Sam Dalembert and Willie Green for Mike Miller and Brian Cardinal (Minnesota). Cardinal has two years left at a total of almost $13 million (talk about overpaid!). So, we'd be taking a bad contract off their hands and getting a quality starter in Mike Miller. They'd be getting defensive help and athleticism for their front court and a bench scorer for their back court. Plus, with their record, I'm sure their fans are begging for a trade even louder than we are.

Thoughts? I think this is as easy as it gets with respect to trading Sammy.

Sammy and Willie both have one more year left on their contracts than Miller and Cardinal. That would probably be a deal killer.

user-pic
Bart reply to Brian on Jan 7 at 14:57
+/-

Yeah, you're right about that. I concocted the trade using ESPN's Trade Machine and that definitely occurred to me. Though, I can't help but think it would come down to the GM's perception of value. To me, Sammy and Willie for Mike Miller (and Cardinal, who we wouldn't really use) is a fair swap. Would Minnesota's management feel the same way? Don't know. The problem, as you've already mentioned, is that Miller probably has a lot of suitors. So, Minnesota might think they could do better than Sammy and Willie... and they might be right.

I also really like the A. Miller for M. Miller and Sammy for Hinrich (Bulls) scenario you brought up earlier. Boy, that would work nicely, wouldn't it?

user-pic
john reply to Bart on Jan 7 at 16:46
+/-

Mike Millers already supposedly in SERIOUS play - lots of teams would like a piece of him.

Willie and Sam have bad contracts - Sam has two seasons left at 20 million - that's more than 13 - and then you throw in Willie's contract?

Plus I think the wolves want to try the jefferson/love front court a bit longer before giving it up

And Millers got more value than that - maybe if you offered them cap room you could get miller and foye (for miller) but i can't see them taking on sam and willie (or just sam) with such a strong asset as miller

The bulls really do need help in the front court - but they really need offensive help (which is why there are rumors they'd look at curry if he shows anything) and Sam isn't really that helpful right now - i'd love a sammy for hinrich deal - but that can't work straight up can it? I mean hinrich doesn't make 10 mil?

If you're trading for hinrich - keep in mind that he probably isn't a point guard any more - he's probably a 2 guard - and do the sixers really need another one?

Hinrich shoots better than any 2's on the Sixers' roster, and I'm not really sure why you think he can't run the point anymore.

As for the math on the trade, Hinrich makes $10M this season, so the Bulls can take back $12.6M in salary (125% of salaries sent out, +$100K traded player exception).

Sammy makes $11.2M (if the trade kicker is really 15%, then his cap number would be $12.88M.)

I'm not sure where that 15% number is coming from, though. Last season, Chris Sheridan reported it as 7.5%, could there be an escalator clause in the contract that doubled the kicker from last season to this season? Also, I wonder if there's any flexibility, like can he waive the kicker to facilitate a trade? If he's convinced he'll get more than 15 minutes/game someplace else, he may just do it.

The 15% number came from another report I saw on the LB blog...they were quoting a local paper - I'm not sure who has more credibility a sixers beat writer or Chris Sheridan - i mean both are really low - but which is lower?:)

Hinrich makes that much? HOly crap - i thought he was a 'bargain' type player.

I got the idea that Hinrich can't run the point any more from the fact that I keep reading it almost everywhere - i don't watch the bulls play a lot and hinrich hasn't done much recently anyway - but that's just what i've read. his career A:TO ratio isn't exactly much to right home about (it's less than 3) in fact his best season so far it was still below 3.

He's a career 41.4% FG shooter with a 37.8 from the 3 point line.

I'll take hinrich over sam and over willie but still need a 'better' point guard I think

Yeah, I saw the 15% number today, may have been Jasner, but he's a hack.

user-pic
john reply to Brian on Jan 7 at 18:06
+/-

All the sixer beat writers tend to be - i used to like tom moore but he's gotten bad - fagan isn't bad - but she's a 'blogger' so they look down on her at the paper (which works to her advantage I think) - but the guys who work for ESPN are hacks as well by definition - you have to be a hack or you get fired (see Aldridge, David fired but SAS still working).

Whichever it is - it's ridiculous that Sam Dalembert has a trade kicker.

You know what else is ridiculous that i was thinking today

Allen Iverson for Andre Miller and Joe Smith

Allen Iverson for Chauncey Billups

WTF?

Well, in trade A he was a super-expensive contract being dealt from a team with no leverage. In trade B he was a super-expensive expiring contract that can still play, being dealt to a team that desperately wanted to shake things up after failing in the conference championships 24 years in a row.

The CBA shapes every move more than talent going in either direction. That's the hidden truth of this league.

user-pic
john reply to Brian on Jan 7 at 18:20
+/-

And yet

Rajon Rondo and Al Jefferson

If only the former GM of the sixers wasn't an idiot

You keep saying the Sixers turned down that deal, but I don't have any recollection of it even being reported and I can't find any reference to it anywhere on the web. Do you have a link?

user-pic
john reply to Brian on Jan 7 at 18:52
+/-

I don't any more no - but people I trust have told me it'st rue in the past - before i got banned from realgm - they had a reliable sixer source on that board and a trustworthy moderator (you might know derek) backed it up...it's the sixer equivalent of the phillies/red sox deal that didn't happen that made me sad.

Of course I'm sad the dalembert/childress deal never happened :)

I don't know. If it isn't reported at all, I don't really think it's reliable information. And I can't find it anywhere. Never heard the Childress/Dalembert rumor either and I find that highly dubious considering their contracts were so far apart in value.

Everything I've been able to find says Ainge never offered Jefferson, and I didn't see Rondo's name mentioned once. Even the rumored deals were mostly West or Telfair plus either Wally or Jefferson.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif