DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

The Lineups I Want To See

They should just stop f-in around and just start Jrue, Lou, Iggy, Thad, and Speights already.

It's not like we are going to win anything with Brand and Sammie anyway.

user-pic
JohnMagee on Nov 11 at 9:56
+/-

They should just stop f-in around and just start Jrue, Lou, Iggy, Thad, and Speights already.

Close, but no cigar

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Nov 11 at 10:33
+/-

Brian, my best defensive lineup; Jrue/Carney/Iggy,Elton/Sam : If I am coaching this team, Elton or Sam are on the court at all times and until proven to be effective, no small lineups.After all, when 2 of your better shooters are bigs [Spieghts, J.Smith], and they also can run the court, what is the point of going small. And until Thad gets his jumper back, Kapono or Carney would also always be on the court, with one of them starting, for the time being. With less pressure coming off the bench, Thad may be allowed to play with the ball in his hands more and Iggy and Elton may get the ball more to start games, a good thing all around.

After all, when 2 of your better shooters are bigs [Spieghts, J.Smith], and they also can run the court, what is the point of going small.

Excellent point.

Small Ball Line-up

PG: Jrue
SG: Lou
SF: Igoudala
PF: Thad
C: Speights

Tall Ball Line-up

PG: Lou
SG: Igoudala
SF: Kapono
PF: J. Smith
C: Speights

user-pic
JohnMagee on Nov 11 at 10:42
+/-

It's not specific line ups I'm looking for s opposed to intelligent substitutions based on the game flow and situation. No more DNP CD for Holliday, Speights starting (to motivate both him and Sam if that is at all possible), just something to give me some more faith in Jordan

You're going to love Jordan's quotes in this Tom Moore piece.

"(Starting) means something," Jordan said. "We look at Elton and Samuel as our starting four and five. We give them the chance to keep those minutes. They won that in training camp."

user-pic
JohnMagee reply to Brian on Nov 11 at 10:48
+/-

And the follow up questions should be something like this

"In regular season games, it's pretty clear that Speights has outplayed Samuel Dalembert (and you play Speights more than Sam most nights), so if starting means something, it's something you win, don't you think that Speights has won the 'battle' to be the starter, in the games that matter?"

The funny thing is that he's already taken the minutes away from them. All he's left them with is the Games Started stat.

user-pic
JohnMagee reply to Brian on Nov 11 at 10:51
+/-

But if it 'means' something, than it should mean something if it's taken away and serve as motivation...you don't get to be a starter all year just cause you 'earned' it in 2 weeks, if you're out played (speights) you get moved back to the bench and you have to earn it all over again.

History indicates that Sam won't try to earn it, he'll complain to the media until he gets his way, but maybe it's time someone tell Sammy to get better or shut up?

user-pic
Real and Speightacular reply to Brian on Nov 11 at 11:38
+/-
"“We’ve looked at it,” Jordan said. “When you deal with a starting lineup, that can be a sensitive issue among players. I don’t want to touch a nerve right there, right now."

One of the difficulties in coaching by armchair/stat printout is that we can't appreciate some of the unseen softer issues of coaching wrt motivation, ego management, etc. This side of things is an important skill, too.

Jordan's still relatively new to these dudes. Seven games in and he's already made some adjustments. He's still learning (and this is the time of year to do it) though I'm sure he's starting to get some firm ideas.

Oh please

First off we know what happens when Sammy gets benched, he whines he complains and ends up getting his way...who cares...he's been out played, sit his ass down, if he's not a man about it, fine his ass...stop coddling the over paid under performing employee...it's not like you can make his trade value worse.

How about the psyche of a guy like Speights? If Jordan points out that Starting is important and something earned, at what point does he get 'fed up' and say 'WTF do i have to do to earn that starting job?'

The psyche of Speights is a lot more important to the long term success of this franchise than the psyche of Sam Dalembert....who is only part of the sixers plans for about another 17 months or so and then will be shown the door he should have been shown 5 years ago

user-pic
Real and Speightacular reply to JohnMagee on Nov 11 at 12:00
+/-

Only seven games in and I'll bet my boy Speights is feeling like he's on holiday compared to the psyche treatment he got from last year's coach. He's getting more burn than the big money starter. You forget too soon that Speights did not exactly have a barn-burner of a pre-season/summer league while Sam was playing well and motivated. We've just started, no need to get so tense this soon.

I'm just saying it's all well and good for us to say oh just plug so and so in and bench whatisface, but it's not always that simple. Good coaching requires good IQ (strategizing, etc) but also strong EQ. The jury's still out, sit loose.

Except Jordan hasn't shown much IQ and 7 regular season games should pretty much matter more than some bad pre season games - if it's a meritocracy then Speights merits starting and Sam merits sitting (of course Sam merits sitting almost constantly)

user-pic
Real and Speightacular reply to JohnMagee on Nov 11 at 12:13
+/-

Spoken like a fan with a lot of EQ ;-) I suspect Jordan gets which should have more weighting, which is probably why he's already made some adjustments. Recall last year this time, some guys wanted to give more than a month's worth of experimentation with iggy at the two even tho it wasn't panning out at the time. We don't have to make radical changes this early. People are more complex than statlines. Aggravating, I know.

Your condescending attitude aside and dismissal of statistics aside, I was one of the people talkinga bout giving more time to Andre first of all (and thad)

But this isn't '7 games' for Sam Dalembert, this is YEARS of BS and terrible play and usually there were no better options available...and now there are. If you want to start sam when the only other viable option is old broken down theo ratliff or barely in the league five minutes speights, that's fine, but Sam Dalembert is not an NBA starter and that's apparent to anyone who has watched any sixer games over the past 5 years.

This is an apples and oranges situation, Sam being terrible isn't new, it's consistent, he's horrible....you want to meander into the 'psychology' of Sam Dalembert that's fine....let's look at the evidence.

A. He never is going to get better nor does he seem to care about getting better
B. When he gets benched he'll whine about minutes and he'll whine about HIS minutes and how he doesn't know his place.
C. The sixers have been trying to trade him since February and nobody wants him.

I really don't GIVE a rats ass about the psyche of Sam Dalembert because he's not part of the future of the sixers, and everyone in the NBA pretty much knows it...he's a malcontent, and everyone knows that, when he doesn't get what he thinks he deserves.

If it hurts Sam feelings to be benched, tough noogies, how do you think Comcast feels every time they remember how much money they're over paying him?

Plain and simple, Speights is out playing sam and is the future of the franchise in the middle, Sam's 'feelings' should be irrelevant since the long term plans for the sixers don't involve Sam

user-pic
DeanH reply to JohnMagee on Nov 11 at 12:24
+/-

I think your comments are common sense. Wow, can't believe I agree with you 100%

user-pic
JohnMagee reply to DeanH on Nov 11 at 12:28
+/-

It's the presuppositioni that I don't know what I'm talking about that tricks you ever time...when I posted under my psuedonym many people agreed with me who won't usually do so (proving my point)

user-pic
Real and Speightacular reply to JohnMagee on Nov 11 at 13:39
+/-

Your condescending attitude aside and inability to read anything but what you want to read aside, you've missed the point yet again. If you believe all there is to coaching is a statline, then you're arguing simply from the perspective of a fan who has the luxury of not having to deal with the entire set of issues (including the GM's and owners -- his bosses -- perspective on things).

I am the last person to put out there that Sam is overall more productive than Speights. I'm betting we'll see even more floor time for Mo Speezy in the fullness of time. But you can continue to mischaracterize as you wish, no big deal to me. I'll bet that's a habit that gets your strong-willed girlfriend's juices going.

user-pic
Real and Speightacular reply to Brian on Nov 11 at 14:42
+/-

For a full context of Jordan's comments check this bit here.

Changes are sure to come. Just mayhaps not in stomp-on-the-brakes fashion. Hold on. Hold on.

Jesus, he likes the way this team has been closing games?

Is Jordan worried about sitting Brand at the end of games?

"I don't really worry about that . . ." Jordan said. "There's a bottom line to this business and if I like the six or seven guys I rotate at the end of games with matchups and the way they're playing, I'm playing those guys."

His "closers" blew a huge lead against the Knicks, then when he came back with Brand in overtime, they pulled away. His closers needed Sam to bail them out against the Nets. His closers blew a lead against the Suns. The only game this team has effectively closed was against the Bucks, and either Dalembert, Brand or both were on the floor for the entire fourth quarter.

If I really wanted to put in a defensive lineup (say, to get a stop at the end of the game), I would substitute Ivey for Thad in your "defensive lineup" and let Iguodala play SF. Ivey is a better d-rebounder than Thad (sad but true) and is probably no worse defending SGs than Iguodala, and Iguodala is a much better defender at SF than Thad. Over long stretches, that lineup would struggle to get points, though.

Re: the offensive lineup, I'm skeptical about Brand's ability to do anything other than catch and shoot off dribble penetration by someone else. If one could take that lineup and replace it with last year's Thad, that would be a lineup to get excited about offensively (defensive rebounding would be a major issue).

Hmmn. I can get behind your offensive adjustment. If we're looking for a hoop, plain and simple, Thad's quickness advantage is a huge plus. On defense, I don't know. I think I like the size with Iguodala at the two and Thad at the three, but you make a good point.

user-pic
Mike P reply to Statman on Nov 11 at 12:05
+/-

Co-Sign, Sammie is garbage and it's depressingly obvious that Elton just doesn't fit at all in this system. Whatever system we are trying to run at all these days.

That's why the Sixers should just look forward to the future now and give the young guys as much PT as possible. Too bad Eddie Jordan's fight for his job is going to neuter what could be a helpful developmental acceleration.

If only we had a coach who used to be a point guard for a championship team. Man, that would sure be great!

Let's just start tanking for John Wall already. Put in the young guys and let them run the whole game so the tanking is at least entertaining.

But that won't happen and the Sixers might just make it in the playoffs to get ousted in the first round and get an amazingly valuable 16th draft pick. HURRAY!

I would be happy with any of the above lineups or even a different one IF our coach started making sense. At this point, he looks completely incompentent, more so when you compare his rotations to many of the above ones!

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Nov 11 at 11:52
+/-

I had this discussion last night with a good friend of mine; If Elton is 75 % of what he was [20 pts./10 reb.], why can!t he be more of a low post factor than he seems to be. Hasn!t the p.f. position changed bigtime from 5 to 10 years ago,with weaker defending, outside shooting guys taking the place of more physical, stronger guys when Elton was getting his numbers? My friends reply was he probably had a quickness advantage than and has lost that. What do you guys think?

To my eyes, they've abandoned going to him. Over the past 3 or 4 games, he's been effective in the post, looks more explosive and he's shown quality moves down there. They simply refuse to give him the ball with his back to the basket. I could be wrong, but that's what it's seemed like to me.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Brian on Nov 11 at 12:03
+/-

It seems our coach expects his bigs to either pass out of the high post or face up and shoot a jumper and has no post ups in his offense.Even Sam, for the most part, has done his damage facing the basket.Princeton never had a back to the basket threat.

user-pic
Statman reply to Brian on Nov 11 at 13:27
+/-

I'd be happy (and relieved) to be proven wrong over time, but I haven't seen too much of Brand getting the ball in the low post with his back to the basket and creating (and making) his own shot. He certainly didn't do any of that in the Phoenix game (baskets were dunk off steal, dunk off pass, lay-up off 3 pump fakes, jumper), and he was 3-10 in the Detroit game. There was a stretch in the 1st quarter of the Nets game where he scored 3 baskets in quick succession, which is maybe what you're referring to.

The problem, as I see it, is that he can't elevate enough to get a turnaround jumper off without being challenged, and he's not strong enough to bull most defenders to the point that he can turn around and dunk (a la prime Shaq). So the only other shot for a back-to-the-basket post player is the jump hook, and I haven't seen that (wasn't that a large part of his arsenal with the Clips?).

Brian, you've made some good points that the Sixers haven't gone to Brand in the post consistently enough for him to do damage, but my question is: how much of a commitment do you make to finding out how well he can do and how many games are you willing to sacrifice if he's not effective over the long haul? An underrated part of the Sixers' resurgence last year after Brand got hurt was the matchup problems Thad (again, last year's Thad) created for most opposing power forwards. Last year's Thad was much more dangerous offensively than this year's Brand.

My opinion at this point (again, I'd be happy to be proven wrong) is that Brand would be most effective staying the 5th wheel on offense (jump shots and putbacks) and doing what he does well on defense (helping, trapping, rebounding, blocking shots). Whether he's willing to do that and not be a "primary" option on offense remains to be seen ...

user-pic
Real and Speightacular on Nov 11 at 11:52
+/-

Redacted, per the Ty Lawson Rule.

user-pic
Real and Speightacular reply to Real and Speightacular on Nov 11 at 12:05
+/-

Holy schmokes, Brian. I didn't realize that any mention of that other guy was going to be yanked. The thrust of my comment was not about which guy was better. I was responding to a direct statement you made. Geebus.

Anyway, this is the direct link to my comment.

I just moved it. You weren't too far off course, but things snowball. Just leave that man out of discussions.

I would be happy with any of the above lineups or even a different one IF our coach started making sense. At this point, he looks completely incompentent, more so when you compare his rotations to many of the above ones!

And, IF, Jrue does not play every game, it will make it clear to me imo that our management is incompentent.

user-pic
DeanH reply to DeanH on Nov 11 at 12:13
+/-

sorry, it was posted twice.

I can't understand why Willie has turned into one of our crunch-time players. It was especially painful because Jordan brought back Lou for Jrue (who was a FREAKIN spark all night) and left Willie out there. That being said Willie wasn't bad offensively, but I know Jrue would have done a better job on Nash than Lou did.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif