DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

Can Eddie Jordan Mold Good Shooters?

"will more open looks turn the Sixers' shooters into better shooters?"

Did the Sixers have problems getting open threes last year?

I suppose there's a difference between open threes and good looks. If either Iggy or Williams has the dribble and his man sags off him, I don't really consider that three off the dribble a good look, though he's technically open. I think what I'm talking about is catch and shoot threes with time to shoot them.

Joe reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 18:36

fair enough.

"More than anything, however, I think these numbers illustrate the quantity of open looks the P.O. can produce. Jordan gives the green light to his shooters, and creates opportunities for them to hit shots."

That is the general idea. The min issue is that some of these guys don't shoot any better, even when wide open.

These are the players who could improve their shots (whether they o is another matter.):

Speights (eFG% surprisingly only .356 on jumpers)

I doubt Iguodala, Miller, Brand, Green Ivey, Evans or Sam will shoot much better due to being open. Iguodala maybe, but he won't be left open.

Trap Shoot reply to tk76 on Jun 2 at 9:45

Agree with your assessment, TK. I'm actually not surprised about that Speights statistic. And I definitely think Thad can flourish in the P.O.

Now, on to Lou Williams. He needs one thing to get better... maturity. Stop playing at 1000 mph, stop thinking you're the center of the basketball universe (both on and off the court), and stop thinking you have to score every friggin' time you touch the ball. Will the P.O. help this jackass? It should, but only if he takes the time to learn how it works and to take advantage of what it can do for him. I really don't know whether or not he'll do this.

As I posted before, EJ is going to help Lou free his inner Hibachi.

Will that be a good thing? Only if he can learn to shoot.

I'm not sure how Lou's going to react to no more 1-4 isos. Theoretically, the offense should really help him. I thought he was much better as a catch & shoot guy in the second half of the season than he was playing one on one, pump faking a couple times, then taking a lean back 18-footer. I'm pretty sure dribbling into the corner when you're doubled on the pick & roll isn't part of the princeton offense either, so he's either going to have to can that behavior, or Jordan's going to have to keep him out of those situations.

"I'm pretty sure dribbling into the corner when you're doubled on the pick & roll isn't part of the princeton offense either..."

That and jump passing are the 2 things that drive me nuts. But he is a good pick and roll player with Speights (and Smith 2 years ago.) He could thrive in this offense and it could save his career (which seems to be careening into a ditch alongside WG.)

Being a 'PG' in the Princeton offense sounds easier than in a conventional one. In theory, the guards do not have to do as much directing or initiating the offense. But on the flip side, for next year it will be new for everyone- so it would be best to have a steady, experienced guard at the helm.

Can you think of some names of vet gurads who have played under similar systems:


Anyone of those guys could be a legit option with the MLE. I have a feeling Kidd goes to a team ready to contend next year, possibly CLE? Blake is under contract, but POR may move him if they land either Miller or Bibby. I think Alston stays in Orlando.

Miller and Bibby are big questions for me. I have to assume Portland will try to use their cap space for one of them. I really have no idea if ATL wants Bibby back, nor if the Sixers are truly willing to meet Miller's demands. We're just going to have to wait and see (and hope whoever they get, his contract doesn't run longer than 2 years, although that's doubtful).

Here's a shocker. Vince Carter as supposed to do a chat on ESPN at 11:00 a.m. this morning.

SportsNation Buzzmaster: (11:20 AM ET ) Vince is running a little late but he'll be here shortly.

11:48 and still no VC. Good to see his tremendous work ethic and dedication extend beyond the basketball court.

Wouldn't this work on a couple levels. Portland signs AMILL and we trade Reggie E for Blake.

If they want Evans it would work. But that's an extra year of salary for them, so I'm not sure they'd be interested.

sfw reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 12:04

He would provide some toughness which they are surely lacking.

john reply to sfw on Jun 2 at 12:08

He'd provide bad basketball that doesn't fit their system...and a bad salary to match.

Dave reply to john on Jun 2 at 12:32

Recall the most recent trade deadline. This is from David Aldridge (http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/david_aldridge/02/19/dish.20090219/index.html)...

"Elsewhere, a source indicated that a potential trade of 76ers point guard Andre Miller to Portland still had a faint heartbeat before Thursday's deadline. The deal would involve the expiring contract of Blazers center Raef LaFrentz and another Portland guard in exchange for Miller and forward Reggie Evans. The problem is that Philly wants Portland rookie guard Jerryd Bayless, and the Blazers have made Bayless next to untouchable. Portland would be more amenable, the source said, to include a guard like Steve Blake or Sergio Rodriguez, but the Sixers aren't currently interested."

john reply to Dave on Jun 2 at 12:34

Don't see the word 'toughness' in there.

I believe however, that Miller and Lafrentz didn't match up one for one - so when you add in other players you gotta find a balancing contract somewhere.

That's the same rumor that SF1976 talked about at realGM. At least it sounds like they have similar sources.

Dave reply to tk76 on Jun 2 at 12:52

Yeah, apparently it was pretty close to happening.

Well, his toughness is unquestioned... it's his calling card, really.

According to Aldridge, the Blazers would have traded Raef and either Blake or Sergio for Miller and Reggie. We were the ones who nixed the deal, suggesting we'd need Bayless rather than Blake or Sergio.

It's not really a stretch to believe, with Miller in their ranks, that they'd still be interested in the results of original deal. They don't need Blake with Miller, Sergio, and Bayless on the team, but they definitely need the toughness down low that Reggie would bring to their roster.

john reply to Dave on Jun 2 at 12:54

Lafrentz made 12+ mil last season - expiring deal + whatever rookie deal you're looking at - that's about 14 million

Miller and Evans made a combined 14 million approximately last year.

I see no reason not to think it was just matching salaries - and it didn't happen - so the blazers weren't 'that motivated' to get either miller or evans if they didn't budge on the guys who don't play much.

Additionally, Millers a free agent so easier to get and lafrentz deal has expired.

Dave reply to john on Jun 2 at 12:59

Ughhhh... this is exasperating. Listen, the things you're spewing are patently obvious. Neither Reggie nor Blake was the key to that deal... obviously. It doesn't mean the Blazers weren't interested in Reggie, even if he was just a minor piece to the puzzle, and it also doesn't mean they wouldn't listen if we now approached them and said we'd take Blake for him.

Also - the trade didn't happen...either portland wasn't that interested in miller and evans or the sixers wouldn't that motivated to get rid of them - either way it fell apart, but no where does it say 'portland wants evans for his toughness' - and while that may have happened then - no reason to say it happens now.

Dave reply to john on Jun 2 at 12:55

LOL... you're damn sure you're right about this, in spite of the evidence to the contrary. That's really funny.

john reply to Dave on Jun 2 at 13:02

There's evidence that says the blazers wanted evans for toughness? Please show it to me. You saying it say doesn't make it true - the salaries match up though - that's a fact...the facts we know are the teams discussed certain players, we don't have any information as to why - but the facts are that the salaries worked out almost exactly evenly - that's a fact.

Reggie Evans 'toughness' is like David Ecksteins 'grit' - it's something people bust out to justify his waste of salary or time on the floor.

Dave reply to john on Jun 2 at 13:06

Reread everything, a$$clown. SFW said "toughness". I simply pointed to the Aldridge-supported fact that the Blazers were ready to make a trade that would have allowed them to acquire Reggie Evans. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't think toughness is the issue here. The issue is that Evans' contract runs for two more seasons, Blake's expires after this year. If that deal is available, the Sixers make it without blinking. I find it highly doubtful that the Blazers would take on the extra year of salary, no matter what they think of Evans.

Evans will cost Portland $6M more than Blake over the next two seasons if they made the trade. Blake's contract isn't even guaranteed. As a matter of fact, if they really want Miller or Bibby, Blake probably won't be on the team come July 1st. His contract isn't guaranteed if he's released before June 30th.

Dave reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 13:03

"Evans will cost Portland $6M more than Blake this season if they made the trade. Blake's contract isn't even guaranteed. As a matter of fact, if they really want Miller or Bibby, Blake probably won't be on the team come July 1st. His contract isn't guaranteed if he's released before June 30th."

Now that makes complete sense. The $6 mil difference kills this deal.

It's actually $6M over this season and next. If Portland was going to cut Blake before July 1st, which I really think they might, then we're talking about $10M they absolutely did not have to spend over the next two seasons. Although that's kind of a chicken/egg thing. If they cut Blake, obviously they can't make the deal.

john reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 13:10

According to storytellers, both Blake and Outlaw only have partial guarantees for next year totally 7.6 millon dollars.

If they cut them both by whatever deadlines - does Portland get the entire 7.6 million of cap space right away?

Reason I ask is that if they do - they should have about 11.6 million in cap space if they cut both - more than enough (I would think) to sign Miller (or Bibby) without any messy sign and trades.

I believe so, although that's a pretty big risk. They'd have to cut both guys before free agency begins, meaning if they can't land Miller, Bibby, Sessions or Felton, they're heading into the season w/ Bayless and Sergio as their two PGs.

By my math, they'd have a little under $10M in cap space, which should definitely be enough to sign any one of the free agent points mentioned above.

john reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 19:18

I think ti's a pretty good risk to take - depending on where they rank a guy like sessions or miller - as reports are indicative that both of them would be as 'good as gone' from their respective teams for different reasons. Miller gets money and the west coast, and the bucks can't afford to match sessions.

I always get outlaw and webster confused for some reason - websters the 'upside' one right?

Yeah, Outlaw's the shooter, Webster has the upside, supposedly.

john reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 19:31

So they could lose outlaw without too much

I wonder if they'll do it - going to be an interesting summer but I worry the sixers won't be in much just due to their limitations.

And I think lots of teams may make 'upward' moves on draft night, I'm just not confident the sixers can without giving up speights at the minimum

If it lands them Curry, I vote yes. For the record :)

john reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 19:45

Yeah, I know you do, I'm not sure I do.

Big guys with talent harder to find - I think

Tray reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 21:11

Wait, actually, Webster's the natural shooter without much upside. I mean, people saw Glen Rice, but that clearly isn't happening. Outlaw became a shooter. Before that he was just this super-raw prospect who can reach the top of the backboard.

Really? I thought it was the reverse. Either way, I don't think either really has all that much upside, but both are probably better shooters than anyone on the Sixers' roster.

John reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 21:29

Thank goodness i'm not the only one getting them confused :)

Yeah, Outlaw is a crazy athlete who has learned to hit spot up 3's. He has no midrange game.

Webster is a more polished big shooter who has been hurt.

Did not know that. Would be an interesting short term solution as a FA PG.

How would you rank these stopgap PG's now that we know the new systems:

Lou Williams
Mike James
Anthony Carter

There's two discussions going on - one the trade that might have happened and one the suggested trade that exist in nothing but the mind of the original poster - i'm only referring to the original trade that was discussed and seemed to fall apart on both sides.

There's no way to tell the motivation behind a rumored trade that never happened.

Portland could've had specific interest in Evans. The Sixers could've also insisted Portland take Evans so they get some cap relief in return. It could've also just been a common sense thing that they needed Evans in the deal to make the numbers work.

There's no way to tell and it's not really worth arguing over at this point.

There is a perception that Portland is kind of soft. Earned or not, Evans has a reputation as an intimidator. It's not crazy to say they'd want his "toughness." No more crazy than patently assuming they didn't want him at all.

john reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 13:17

So the 'evidence to the contrary' that the blazers wanted evans for toughness is what exactly?

I see no evidence to support that assertion...yet I see evidence that the salaries matched up pretty well when you put miiller and evans vs lafrentz and whomever...

The Blazers are also pretty well known for just being gunshy in general...

He's using the same logic you are. You see this trade, you say, well Evans was put into the deal to match up salaries. He sees it and says Portland wanted to address a weakness. The deal could've been put together in another format. Willie Green's salary is almost identical to Reggie's. Neither assumption is sound. Neither of you deserves to be called names for making it.

john reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 13:23

Not sure where I called anyone names...almost sure I didn't actually

Probably a combination. No one 'wants' a bad contract player like Evans or Sam. But some teams are more willing to take on the bad contract if their is a good enough sweetener and if the guy fits a need.

I' fairly certain Portland is not actively seeking Evans because they can fill that role more cheaply. But they might be willing to take him on as part of a bigger trade. Don't see how that can happen now.

is the luxury tax number '1 dollar' over the salary cap or is there some wiggle room?

Um. No, it was almost $10M over the cap number this season. Roughly $58.6M cap, $67.865M luxury tax.

john reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 13:21

Ok, so as of this moment the sixers can add approximately 8 mil in salary, however they do it, before going over the tax.

Yeah, roughly. Assuming the tax holds where it is. They have 11 players under contract (counting the #17 pick) for a hair over $68M. No way they can re-sign Miller and add anything but minimum-level guys unless Miller signs for the MLE.

john reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 13:29

And if they trade up - well story tellers doesn't have lottery pick information regarding salaries - but i gotta think that's a big chunk thus meaning they wouldn't even have the whole MLE (depending on what it is this year) to use in the off season.

If the luxury tax is a 'hard limit' the sixers really can't get miller back - I don't think - not for 8 mil a year base.

And you can fill out your roster with min guys without it counting against the tax.

john reply to tk76 on Jun 2 at 13:32

Yeah, but there's a reason there min guys, I'm not thiking of roster filler, I'm thinking of roster improvement and with no contracts expiring next year and less than 10 mil to use if comcast is hard with the luxury tax - not sure exactly what Stefanski can do to grossly upgrade this team...ah well.

I can't dig right now, but I think this might be wrong. You can sign veterans to their minimum without the full amount counting against the tax. So if a 13-year veteran costs $1.6M for his minimum, only about $800K counts (this was put in to stop age-ism in the NBA), but I think that $800K counts against the cap.

John, I believe they have the money to move up and use the full MLE. They don't, however, have the money to do anything with Miller. If they sign and trade, they could only take about $2.5M in salaries back and still use the MLE, unless they send another contract out in the deal.

john reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 13:40


I knew it was bad, but I didn't think it was as dire as I now realize it is.

Miller isn't even really a viable option to re-sign unless he's willing to take a pay cut.


Ford on Curry in his chat:

Jack (New York, NY): Hey Chad, it sounds like Stephen Curry caught a lot of GMs' attention at the combine. What's the likelihood of a team drafting him or trading up for him before the Knicks at #8. Should we be worried about losing him to someone else, or will he still be there for us?

SportsNation Chad Ford: (1:25 PM ET ) I think his window starts at OKC at No. 3, the Wizards take a look at him at No. 5, Wolves at 6 and Warriors at 7. The most likely scenario is that he goes 8 to the Knicks. But yes, he was impressive and I just got the combine results and he looked good. He had an impressive 35.5 inch vertical and surprisingly benched the 185 pound bar 10 times. He's stronger and more explosive than you think.

bebopdeluxe reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 15:22

I REALLY want Curry.

I just don't know how we are going to get him.

You know, we just saved the Wiz $2 mil...time for the payback...

We could start by sending them enough cash to cover their portion of Johnson's salary, and then some. $3M + #17, + #1 pick next season (lottery protected).

Tray reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 21:13

Every year some non-athletic guy puts up athletic-looking numbers in the combine. You know, like Luke Jackson with the 42-inch vertical. Then they come into the league and continue being the non-athletes they always were. Gathering yourself and seeing how high a mark you can hit on a pole is very different from game play.

John reply to Tray on Jun 2 at 21:30

Eagles fans call it Mammulaitis

You also run into guys who get pigeon-holed, then open some eyes in the combine. Elton Brand being one, Kevin Love another.

Tray reply to Brian on Jun 2 at 21:41

Someone should do a study on undersized prospects and see how many of them get underrated (although Brand and Love went very high, of course, but there are examples, like Millsap, Landry, Hayes, Chris Paul, etc.) and how many get disastrously overrated. I get the sense that for every ballyhooed success story there are a ton of forgotten small power forwards who bust, small combo guards who do the same, etc.

John reply to Tray on Jun 2 at 21:43

Well - every draft for the past 20 years is available online

have at it

Tray reply to John on Jun 3 at 0:49

They are, but looking up each no-name's height and career stats is a bit of a bitch.

Here's the question, are there more undersized PFs who were taken too high and failed, or more undersized PFs who dropped because they were undersized and succeeded?

John reply to Tray on Jun 3 at 10:26

So you want someone else to do it for you?

Chris reply to Tray on Jun 2 at 23:31

It seems this is especially prevalent with undersized PFs. Other than Barkley, it seems there are a ton of 'sure thing' undersized power forwards who wind up being busts.

Real and Speightacular reply to Tray on Jun 3 at 7:11

Agreed. Last year 2nd rounder Richard Hendrix, a solid all-round player but generally considered a plodder put up one of the best times in some lateral movement test (pylons or something). Dude can't get a job.

I don't remember the story on Brand but Love still turned out the same as considered in college: non-athletic. Thing is, he has enough guile, heart and skill to compensate for his waddlin deficiencies.

Or he's just better than people give him credit for due to his unfortunate accident of birth. Maybe he's just good, why does it have to be heart and grit, maybe he just has talent that was dismissed because of his birth defect?

I hate Tyler Hansborough but I hope he's quite a hit in the NBA

What if we traded down. You see, I don't think we have enough assets to trade up before the knicks to grab Curry. So why don't we find a way to try and trade #17, for a late first, and second rounder. Darren Collison projected to go late in the first, is supposed to be a shut down defender, with a solid three point shot, and good playmaking abilities. I project him in the NBA as not being exactly a great starter, but maybe like a less flash, J.R. Smith, with the ability to play the point. The most attractive thing about him is obviously is defense, throw in their a three point shot, playing next to Iguodala will give the Sixers a tremendous, defensive backcourt.

With the second rounder we should be able to get A.J. Price from UCONN. He's a very good 3 point shooter, someone we could use as a project, or off the bench scoring. We could even try to look for a center here. (I don't know any)

Obviously, this is my second option, compared to trading up and taking Curry. I love this kid, his shot, and his underrated vision. I know lot of names have been thrown around as to who he is like in the NBA. But I''ve come up with my own, how about Devin Harris. Hey, they even look a little bit like each other.

Sorry for some reason I thought Devin Harris was a very good sharpshooter, my mistake. Didn't realize he only shot at 30% from three.

deepsixersuede on Jun 2 at 19:41

they probably take the safe approach of drafting at #17 and acquiring a couple 2nd rounders to fill out the roster.Douglas is working out with them and I am sure other 2nd round guys will be brought in.A lot of teams have multiple 2nd rounders and Portland has 4.

bebopdeluxe reply to deepsixersuede on Jun 3 at 10:51


BIG-TIME freaking yawn.

Be bold.

Speights to the Wiz for #5 (Curry).
Speights/$3 mil/#17 to MEM for #2 (Rubio)
Speights + Miller (S&T) in 3-way with POR for Hinrich

Speights is a guy with talent and upside, but if Smith is healthy and ready to go back into the rotation, then Speights is a luxury that this team cannot afford right now.

Could a member of that famous singing group "Maynor and the Smurfs" (Lawson, Mills, Teague, etc...) work out? Maybe. But I'd rather raise the odds of success by bringing in a guy whose skills are more proven and better fit our needs. Speights is a valuable guy to have, but the three guys I mention above are also pretty valuable guys and they fill much more of a NEED for this team right now.

But knowing Stefanski, we'll probably stay at 17 and take Lawson.

As that famous basketball pholosopher Derrick Coleman once said, "whoop-de-damn-do"...

john reply to bebopdeluxe on Jun 3 at 10:58

Hmmm...Jason Smith has no low post skills, is recovering from injury and only played half a year, so yeah, who needs Speights, the sixers don't need anyone who can pass or post up - it's irrelevant in Jordans system.

1. Published reports indicate that the wiz would not make that trade
2. Memphis can do better
3. Portland might have enough cap room to sign miller all by their lonesomes

Where's this published report that says the Wiz would not make that trade?

john reply to Brian on Jun 3 at 11:39

I've seen at least one comment on hoopshype rumors page and chad ford - both indicate the wizards want a 'veteran' for the #5 pick.

Plus I take umbrage with Speights being superfluous if Smith is healthy...I find it nonsensical considering Speights is the only guy with basketball skill AND a low post game on the team.

john reply to john on Jun 3 at 11:41

Here's one

With 76 million already in committed salary in 2010, is there any way the Wizards actually keep the number 5 pick?

Chad Ford: No, I think they probably trade it. They would prefer a veteran if they can't get Griffin or Rubio. I know a lot of teams are calling. Still unclear what they are looking for.

Ford is taken 'seriously' on this board, I see no reason not to take that seriously.

And I'm also 95% sure you posted a chat excerpt from this exact chat in another blog which means you probably read it

Rumors saying they want a veteran for the pick doesn't by any means say the wiz would turn that trade down if offered.

Speights isn't superfluous because of Smith. Speights is a luxury because the Sixers have very good depth at PF (what I believe is his best position), and zero depth at either guard position.

Saw two rumors today: Portland may be interested in moving up to get Curry and Minnesota is willing to listen to offers for any of their picks, including #6.

john reply to Brian on Jun 3 at 11:46

Uh Huh, I see, ford is only reliable when it suits certain needs...got it.

Personally I think Speights makes Smith superfluous and the 'memory' of Smith is making people forget that he's not as good as people seem to remember.

Speights to me also has more upside and more potential to be great whereas smith has potential to be a nice bench player, at best, if one of them is 'tradeable' i think it's smith, but I know his value is at it's nadir, because unlike fans, most GMs don't think a guy gets better by missing an entire season

I wasn't really even including Smith. We've got Brand at the four, for 35 minutes/game for the next 4 years. You know they're going to play Thad at the four at least for 5-10 minutes a game in a small lineup. That doesn't leave a whole lot of minutes for Speights at his natural position and I don't see him as a five. That's why I said he was a luxury.

And Ford reporting the Wizards would like a veteran for their pick, a month before the draft, doesn't mean they'd say no to a guy like Speights for the pick, does it? Don't asking prices come down, just like how Memphis said no to $3M for their late first round pick now, but may accept it when the draft gets closer and they don't get better offers.

bebopdeluxe reply to Brian on Jun 3 at 14:33

You make a great point about PT, Brian.

With Brand, Smith and Thad all playing PF minutes, the amouint of minutes available to Speights at his natural PF position will not be high. Could Brand play some minutes at the 5? I'm sure he will - especially when Thad is at the 4. Could Speights play some minutes at the 5? He could - especially if Sammy is gone (which, sadly, does not seem likely).

Speights is a nice player with upside. However, we have resources that can cover for him if we trade him. However, if we are going to get an IMPACT shooter (like a Curry or Hinrich), we need to move an asset that people will find desirable...and if the Iggy/Thad/Brand trio is untouchable, Speights is virtually the only option.

bebopdeluxe reply to Brian on Jun 3 at 14:25


I haven't seen any reputable published report (other than the kind of rumors/chat room stuff that bloggers and posters like all of us pull out of our azz) that states that the Wiz will only trade #5 for a veteran big...and if that "veteran big" is any good, they will have a salary to match, and - at least for next year - the Wiz are in BRUTAL cap shape (at least according to Hoopshype).

The beauty of Speights is that his one season in the NBA has shown that the kid has some game...and he's cheap.

Again - I like Speights. I just think we need a shooting PG more.

There's a lot of reasons I don't think the wiz would make the trade for Speights, but they're personal, I think they already have mcgee and enough young big men that they might want a different kind of player, even young, to try and make their team slightly better and not waste the jamison/arenas contract years.

I know you don't see Speights as a five, we've had that discussion repeatedly, but I've seen discussions of Brand at the five in this offense, and seriously, if Brand can play the five with eddie jordan as the coach, I think speights can.

And once again, only big man with any low post skil combined with basketball skill...that's a factor in the offense jordan runs if i watched that video correctly...someone has to do it and it won't be reggie or sam.

And, not to wish it on anyone, but guys get hurt, and I'd rather have speights ready if brand goes down than smith.

All fair points. I'd simply prefer a guy to move the team forward now -- nd I see Curry as a perfect fit as a PG in this offense, with this roster -- than an insurance policy for Brand getting hurt.

This really has nothing to do with Speights for me. I see him as the most expendable chip the Sixers have that another team would be interested in. The only other chips I see worth enough to move up to get Curry are Iguodala and Thad, so that's not exactly a rip on Speights.

john reply to Brian on Jun 3 at 12:09

On that point we can agree, I think speights has the most value that the sixers can 'leave without' short term - but I don't think Curry is the answer as much as you and others do. I don't feel comfortable with Brand for more than say two years, at best, at the peak before he starts a slide that could come quickly. I don't see the first year with brand, curry, and jordan being a year you make a run...I don't think brands a bad player but I think now he has a better than 50% chance of turning out to do more harm than good (or nothing at all) in his career as a sixer.

I understand that people want a team that can contend next year, but I don't think a rookie, a new pf and a new system are going to make that a better than 10% chance of getting a top 4 seed next year...

bebopdeluxe reply to Brian on Jun 3 at 13:33

Perfect post, Brian.

I like Speights a lot. But we NEED Curry. And if we are not moving the Iggy/Thad/Brand core, he really is the only chip we have that will gain us VALUE.

Most mock drafts have the Wizards taking Jordan Hill...so why won't the Wiz be interested in Speights/#17 for #5/#32? They get a PF and can still take the best wing guy available at 17...we get our shooting PG and should still be able to get a developmental PG/SG at 32.

Speaking of Crazy ass rumors - did you see the one about boston and phoenix involving allen, rondo, barbosa, stat and one other guy?

No. You have a link?

you gotta read the hoopshype.com rumors page every day man - it's just a good aggregator http://www.hoopshype.com/rumors.htm

Ok - which one of you asked the eddie jordan question in the thorpe chat (and yes i'm the one asking about his bias)

Original link (via rumors page) the Celtics/Phoenix rumor


I usually do read hoops hype, busy morning at work.

john reply to Brian on Jun 3 at 12:36

Ah, I usually come in a bit early to miss the traffic (yeah, it's sb traffic and only a 15 minute commute but I hate driving and hate traffic and drivers out here are bs crazy) and catch up on the readers and overnight stuff....

That rumor just sounds kind of silly to me - but if it's true and intiated by the celtics i think that shows some forward thinking by ainge...and i truly hate that guy.

Does forward thinking mean, "I'm tired of my team playing defense?"

john reply to Brian on Jun 3 at 12:45

I think it means 'yeah we might have one more year in us - but that's about it and then player values will drop precipitously and I want to get younger'.

Without KG they don't play much defense anyway :)

If Boston really offered that, Phoenix would've said yes in a nanosecond. I hope it happens, Boston wouldn't be a force with Amare and Barbosa.

Basically, Boston sold it's soul for that championship, which is fine. Their window has probably closed, or it will close after this season. It's a tradeoff I'd make in a second if you actually get the ring.

john reply to Brian on Jun 3 at 12:53

I think they have one more run in them - the lebrons just aren't that good - and how much better can they get? The hawks and magic might both take a step back next year - if they stayed together and garnett came back healthy they'd still probably be a real solid finals contender next year but then be kind of stuck...

I don't think it's a terrible trade myself, but does phoenix then turn around and move nash or expect rondo to 'carry his water' for a year?

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment