DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

On Second Thought

I will throw this game out. It was so incredibly bad that it's of no consequence to the future.

Oh, forgot to add that it matters in the sense that the Sixers are now half a game behind the Heat.

i think your point about lou has a lot to do with why they commonly lose 2 games in a row. i'm not going to pull up the stats, but it would seem logical that when he starts reverting to bad habits in garbage time minutes, he carries that mentality over to the next game. he's been so good lately because he's been taking the ball to the rack and not settling for jumpers. i didn't watch the 4th Q tonight, but seeing that he shot 4-15 makes me think he probably chucked up a bunch of terrible shots late in the game. i personally feel that lou has cost us at least 3-4 games alone this season with some horribly inefficient play. it would be a shame if this carries over into charlotte. he is a huge key to their success, because he's really their only scoring option off the bench. all those games in the beginning of the season where they immediately lost leads when the 2nd unit entered the game was mostly on him, unfair as that is.

Tom Moore on Apr 6 at 1:04

You would've thought the Nets were the playoff team and the Sixers the one headed for the lottery with this awful performance.

Thought it was interesting that Iguodala, who was horrible, said, “They just played the same they did all year. We just never adjusted from game to game. That’s why they beat us.”

That's really interesting to me. Did anyone notice anything the nets did differently against the Sixers? I mean, did they use some kind of exotic defensive scheme? I thought every game we played against them was ugly, but I didn't notice anything out of the ordinary, other than the horrible free throw shooting.

Anyone have any idea what Andre was talking about?

ok i'm bored. in the 2nd game of back-to-back losses (this is not including losing streaks of more than 2 games), lou has shot: 4-11, 3-10, 1-9, 7-15, 4-9, 3-14, 5-17, and 4-9. this adds up to 31-94, or 32.9%. that's obviously an extraordinarily low percentage (it's late but i think the math is correct). this could be due to a pretty large number of scenarios. these games are all losses, so the chances are everyone performs more poorly than normal. but who knows, it could be something noteworthy.

also, i love your bullet on willie green. i almost spit my drink out laughing. "You're just a nothing, aren't you?" soooo dead on. ladies & gentlemen, willie green!

in regards to lou's 3pt shooting, last season he made .7 out of 1.9 per game, good for 35.9%. this season he's making .8 out of 2.7, at 28.6%. so he's making the same amount, but attempting (missing) almost 1 more per game. in my opinion, anyone shooting 28.6% should stop shooting. i know he's been hot lately, so that's encouraging i guess.

"Unfortunately, the Sixers rarely lose one game, then bounce back. In fact, it's only happened 7 times this season that one loss was followed immediately by a win. 10 times, the loss has turned into 2 losses in a row, at least."

So it sounds like we've done it 41% of the time, which isn't so rare.

Well, I suppose the odds should be a bit better than 50/50 that they'd win any particular game, regardless of circumstances. So winning only 41% after a loss would be below expectations by over 10%. Which is significant. Maybe tomorrow I'll take a look at who they lost to in those 10 out of 17. That may be a better indicator. How many were expected wins.

Real and Speightacular on Apr 6 at 7:31

I find it interesting that you didn't mention anything re Iggy's performance tonight other than to lump him in with Miller and the back-to-back pain. Coach had him out there for 38+ minutes and it was obvious Iggy was in distributor mode. Understandable considering the crazy burn he got night before, but five points in 38 minutes, even while applauding his usual solid defensive effort, back2back or no, does not a "number one" make.

Fortunately the facts for Speights are that he's had more good-to-great games than poor-to-abysmal. The number of poor ones are coming more frequently of late but there isn't anything unusual about this nearing the end of a rookie season. And, no tales out of school here, flaws are going to be exacerbated in a crap game, strengths floodlighted in a good one. That goes for anybody.

Go back to that Boston game from last december and you'll recall, oh yeah, it is possible for Speights to do really well in a "no pressure" game.

-28 (same as Lou) in 15 mins ain't all or even mostly on him. Sometimes that stat is just plain ridiculous in a basketball context.

I think frequent and consistent reps are far more important for a player with potential than playing under "pressure." If he was on a crap team, he'd've had the burn, on a regular, consistent basis, to polish his game on both ends and establish a basis for confidence going forward.

You can't count on both Evans and Sam having good games for long stretches so they're going to need Speights balance of season. And since they're going to need him next season too, might as well play him in the blowouts, too should any occur and sit the obviously wasted Andres.

You give DiLeo credit for trying different combinations (really just throwing anything out there after the supposed game plan's been thrown out the window first) but ignore Iggy's point about not having a new strategy in place even tho NJ hasn't tried anything different in any of the games. On his side, Thad was out and he pushed the Andres extremely hard the night before. But did you see a different team strategy this time or the same ol, same ol?

Where's the spotlight on DiLeo's weaknesses and how those contribute to losses?

Real and Speightacular reply to Real and Speightacular on Apr 6 at 9:31
"More than anything, I think this shows why Speights was an excellent choice for this team, whereas had a team taken him earlier in the draft he may be considered a bust. Remove any sense of urgency, put him on a bad team and the worst of Marreese Speights would be on full display."

I still can't fathom this line of reasoning at all. KLove is the example. They kept trotting him out there through months of suckage til he figured it out and became the consistent beastie he is now. And that's the thing with guys with real NBA potential -- give them opportunity and trust and they do figure it out, sooner than later.

Does anyone know how much, if anything, DiLeo had to do with getting Brand here? Honestly, I can't wait til this team has a bright, strong coach in place.

Do you just choose to ignore what happens on the floor with Speights? I know you love the guy, but take the leash off him and he just starts throwing up bad shot after bad shot. Did you notice the fall-away three he took?

They give the kid structure, a purpose and accountability and he produces. This isn't a bad thing, considering the Sixers play games that actually matter. If he was on a team like the Clippers, or the Knicks, he'd probably wow you with his cumulative numbers and be a terrible player.

john reply to Brian on Apr 6 at 10:35

Everyone has their blind spots - for instance your comments on Sam Dalembert ignored the fact that one of the reasons the sixers were so bad offensively when he was on the court was that he was god awful (even for him) on the offensive end from the first play of the game.

Real and Speightacular reply to Brian on Apr 6 at 11:05

Something's happening with M16 of late. I agree that he seems to be rushing more than he used to. And my personal peeve with him that no one's mentioned yet is the way he sets screens. They're soft and it bugs me. I don't like his flaws any more than you do. My point is that he needs time, confidence, feedback and coaching from the coaches to overcome any bad ways he may be falling into. You don't show confidence by keeping him chained to the bench in a blowout. KLove wouldn't have learned much if he kept getting yanked after bad shot he took in the first few months (look it up, he was turrible in the beginning).

As my moniker implies I'm a Speights fanboi so, mood willing, you'll probably see some kind of retort to things that just don't make much sense to me.

This kid's no Chris Paul or LeBron type who come right out of the gates dominating (and even they're not flaw-free, according to hatin nitpickers). He, like most rookies, is going to take some time. Avoid the headgames and you'll see something special develop. It's right there. He's not far. Just gotta keep him in play and in bounds.

"If he was on a team like the Clippers, or the Knicks, he'd probably wow you with his cumulative numbers and be a terrible player."

Sez who? Based on his overall play season to date?? I see far more Al Jefferson in him than Zach Randolph.

Kevin Love didn't have character issues coming out of college. if anything he was drafted so highly because of his great character. you throw a guy with question marks like speights into a losing situation and they tend to develop bad habits. watch it happen with oj mayo & eric gordon the longer they are stuck in the sludge.

Real and Speightacular reply to Mike on Apr 6 at 16:11

Please define, "a guy like Speights." You got special access to info we don't? Please link us to these stories of so-called character issues. Credible news sources, thank you.

KLove got drafted so high largely on account of his dominaing freshman performance. Robin Lopez got drafted much lower cuz he wasn't so dominating. Beasley went high on account of his all-world freshman year, despite all the negative hearsay.

Not saying character issues don't ever count (and that's a pretty vague term, btw. there are all manner of "character issues," many of which don't have much to do with effort on the floor. ask one allen iversen.), but please don't extrapolate based on whispered rumours/backfence hearsay. Try some specific, well-reported examples.

Derek Caracter had serious character issues. They've been reported far and wide. Same goes for Walter Sharpe. One got drafted, the other didn't even get to finish his college career. Not all character flaws are equal. But anyway, as far as we know, Speights doesn't have any. Be a more critical of what you read/hear.

If Mayo and Gordon don't turn out to be great pros it'll largely be b/c they never did shoot well consistently despite their athletic gifts. Fix that "character flaw" and see what happens.

every single draft analyst said he had a reputation as a dog. someone who did not give full effort throughout the span of a game. that is why dropped to us in the draft. i thought that was common knowledge.

Real and Speightacular reply to Mike on Apr 6 at 17:41

Every single draft analyst? You read them all, did you? How about this one from RealGM:

"Speights’ in-game work ethic is as impressive as any player on any level..."

Again, if you have a link to any draft analyst who reported pre-draft that he saw Speights with his own two eyes (even via tapes of games) often dogging it through most of the games he played in college, I'd love to see it. Seriously. Back it up.

See, just because a person lies once in their lifetime doesn't make them a liar. It's about frequency of the lying and/or scale of the lie. I've seen just about every player on the Sixers roster "dog it" on occasion. Does that make the Sixers a roster full of dogs?

In Speights I see a guy who hustles his ass off for the vast majority of the time he's on the floor. Say he's raw (defensively) if you want, that he lacks technique (defensively), that he's too nervous, unsure of himself of how he's to react to certain situations, but won't accept lazy b/c a bunch of bloggers repeat the same "word is" bullcookies they saw on some other blog. That's lazy.

wow dude

Real and Speightacular reply to Mike on Apr 7 at 8:33

What, too much? ;-)

my point is that it might not be the best thing to give a guy who was widely reported to lose focus and lack intensity for stretches at time in college garbage minutes where he can build on bad habits he might already possess. anyone who has watched speights as a pro has seen him drift off at times especially on defense. it might be a better idea to let him sit & watch.

Real and Speightacular reply to Mike on Apr 6 at 17:43

You haven't even begun to prove your initial premise (which, obviously, i reject).

You can't improve much in pro ball by watching. Reps, reps, reps. Coach, coach, coach.

In terms of Iguodala's comment about them not adjusting to the Nets... I think it has to do with the Nets offense. They score one the two ways the Sixers always get burned: wide open 3's keyed by penetration by a quick PG.

The Sixers all year have been vulnerable to quick PG's and give up open 3 pt shots. Their weaknesses play into the Nets hands, and that (and some luck and lack of effort) is why they got swept by the Nets.

The Sixers defense is what it is. They will likely change their strengths and weaknesses this year. Hopefully they will be able to deny penetration and cover the 3pt line better next year. A lot of t goes back to Miller trying to cover PG's.

Was defense really the issue? They fell apart late last night, but NJ only had 68 points through three. In the last loss they had 95 points before the Harris miracle three. The loss before that, the Nets scored 85. And the first loss of the season they gave up 95 points.

In all four, they held the Nets under their season scoring average (98.4 points)and only in the Harris miracle game did the Sixers allow more than their season average in points allowed (96.6 points).

On offense, however, the Sixers scored 84, 83, 96 and 67 points. Seems like whatever the Nets were doing to the Sixers, it was on the defensive end.

For the Sixers defense and offense are closely related. Much of their running depends on forcing turnovers and getting run outs.

NJ started 2 PG's last night. That meant Miller had to guard a PG. There was lots of open 3's and penetration. They may not of scored a ton, but they were in a comfort zone.

As for the offense- Miller and Iguodala had dead legs. They tried to drive, but were less successful than usual. Without any other good option and no running game, their offense was impotent.

I don't know, they had 7 steals, 6 blocked shots and 31 defensive rebounds last night, that's plenty of opportunities to run.

We got anal raped hardcore...67points?! was that the lowest score from a team this year?

Poor shooting and free throw shooting will ALWAYS lose games. Willie G and Dumbert shot way too much in the beginning and missed every shot along w/ Miller shooting horrible.

We do not understand what it means to give the ball to who is hot and ride their hot hand. Iggy was not even involved in shooting till it was too late. Dalembert and Green on their own lost this game. I think if they were not on the court, we may have won.

Who to blame, I don't know. I am glad that Rush played enough to shut people's mouths about him (I hope atleast).

Brian, do you know any one in NYC that can take care of Green?

Unfortunately, no. My neighborhood is full of pacifists and hippies. Makes me sick :)

Willie Green is a pretty good bench player.

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment