DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

Pick One

Add Evan Turner or Wes Johnson to that team and I think the transition with Iggy aging becomes much more manageable. I see Iggy as a defensive stopper and offensive glue piece in a few years, hopefully not still the center of our offense by the time he's 30. I see him as a more athletic version of what Grant Hill has been for the Suns.

I still like Speights. We have to be realistic about the situation the kid has been placed in. Jordan doesn't give him much run all season, and when all the team is asked to do is try and score points, it is perfectly logical that Speights would just fall back on what comes natural to him- even if it isn't what's best. It doesn't help that there doesn't seem to be anyone trying to teach him how to play defense.

In three years, if Jordan has been fired, and we have the four players mentioned above, I think that is a good core, especially if we can add a guy like Turner or Johnson to the mix. I think it's really going to depend on a coach being able to come in a develop the obvious raw talent in these players.

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Feb 26 at 7:38
+/-

My improvement thoughts on our young core; Marreese seems to be passing more lately and rebounds well and if pushed by a coach defensively, may become a Z.Randolph type guy, and with our team scoring, his main strength, is needed. Like Detroit found out with C.Villanueva, just because a guy puts up big numbers in limited minutes doesn!t mean they go up with more minutes so before his rookie deal is up, give him 30 minutes a night and find out.Detroit is paying dearly now. With Thad and L.Will. it comes down to me that one sub can be overpayed, but not 2, so if either aren!t starters than move one and keep the otheer, but how to choose. If L.Will. can get to the 36 to 40 % range from 3 pt. land, he is improving, that may make him worth keeping. Thad seems to be doing the little things better, hitting the boards and handling and if I had my choice, and he gets what Lou gets now money wise, I keep him and move Lou. As far as Jrue, I love him but for him and Iggy to work, our 3rd perimeter guy has to be a 20 ppg. guy and I would use any of our other young players to acquire that guy.

I've always liked Thad as a person and a player, but I've thought that he should be the first youngin moved. I'm not a fan of "tweeners" or player who don't really have a defined roll. Iguodala is going to eat up most minutes at 3 and I really don't like Thad at the 4, or at 3 for that matter. He isn't big enough to guard most 4's effectively, and he doesn't have the lateral quickness to stay in front of most 3's.

Teams are still very high on him, i believe anyway. If you're not trying to keep Sam after next year on the cheap, I think the first order of business is to try to package him and Sam together for a solid player, a player with size that can shoot and defend, or a couple of young guys. Don't know who that would be, but that would be the idea.

I like Speights. He is extremely one dimensional, not too much more than Thad or Lou, but he has the potential to be great on that side of the ball. He's more efficient than either of those two, and can flat out score.

get rid of everyone except for iguodala & holiday

user-pic
Duracorr reply to mike on Feb 26 at 9:08
+/-

If we had made some attempt at player development and evaluation I could agree. Unfortunately, we have very young players who appear to be largely uncoached in the finer points of playing in the NBA. One or more of them could end up somewhere else and be very good.

user-pic
Duracorr on Feb 26 at 9:05
+/-

My frustration with this team is that because of coach Quirky, we still don't knw the answers to several important questions. Can Williams, Young and Speights defend at the NBA level? Can Iguodala and Young play on the wings together? These are questions that should have been answered last season. We will never know without appropriate coaching. What we need is a defensive-minded (or balanced) coach who has a shooting coach and a big-man coach as part of his permanent staff. If those questions had been definitvely answered last year or this year, we would know what we have and what we need.


Wake up! Iggy will never refine his shot.
That much is abundantly clear. Wake up!

user-pic
Duracorr reply to Terry on Feb 26 at 9:16
+/-

AI9 is a driven competitor. He wants to be among the best. He'll do what he thinks he needs to do. Again, consistently working with a team-appointed shooting coach might work wonders.

Brian, I view the needed rebuilding differently. Although I agree that you have to evaluate each piece in terms of keep or trade, I don't think about "building around a core."

This is not baseball, football or hockey. In the NBA you need to build around a superstar (or ideally 2). And the complementary players should be dictated by the strengths and weaknesses of that singular star. Look at CP3, Howard and Lebron. Those three young players fit better surrounded by different pieces. Of course a top player like Iguodala would help any superstar, but the rest of the pieces should just be collected, with little regard to "fit" right now.

So if you think you can sign Thad or Speights to reasonable deals (whatever that is with the new CBA) then you keep them. If not, move them while you still have their rights. A young player signed to a reasonable longterm deal (like Lou) is NEVER a problem. You can always move them for value and get a better fitting piece. It is the 10M+ deals that are the issue. You cannot make them until you have identified your core star(s). And that was Stefanki's big error.

user-pic
Duracorr reply to tk76 on Feb 26 at 9:27
+/-

Excellent points. I agree completely and wouldn't want this coach to have any say in which pieces go ans which stay anyway. That highlights the need for a championship-level coach.

On the flip side, this type of approach can leave you in the basement for a long time. But I was thinking about long-time doormats like the Clippers... and I think their failure has not simply been the inability to draft a superstar. They also have decided to invest big money in their non-superstars (again, Brand being an example.)

I do think guys like Iguodala and Brand (during prime) warrant big money. Just that needs to be a final piece after you have your key player instead of having Iguodala/Brand as your "building blocks."

"This is not baseball, football or hockey. In the NBA you need to build around a superstar (or ideally 2). And the complementary players should be dictated by the strengths and weaknesses of that singular star. Look at CP3, Howard and Lebron. Those three young players fit better surrounded by different pieces. Of course a top player like Iguodala would help any superstar, but the rest of the pieces should just be collected, with little regard to "fit" right now."

I endorse this post 100%.

user-pic
The Greek on Feb 26 at 9:34
+/-

Besides his lock down defensive ability, I love the fact that Jrue has shown flashes of being a special passer/play maker. He just needs to get stronger and finish around the hoop better and his overall fg% will go up. Brian, I don't think it's unreasonable that he could put it all together by year 3.

Lou Williams in my mind is a loser.

If the choice is between Thad and Speights then for me its a no brainer who to keep. I haven't soured on Thad as have others. I predicted that he would regress with the loss of Miller and the addition of Lou at the point. I just never thought that Eddie Jordan's stank coaching would also factor in his regression.

As I have said before we should trade Speights for either a center or a shooting guard because we sure as hell need both.

user-pic
JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 9:35
+/-

WElcome to the Island of Mis Matched Toys brian :)

I think thad and speights are here for their rookie deals because they are cheap labor - I don't think they'll leave soon - unless someone REALLY wants one of em and is willing to take Brand along with it.

If we could get a great player(who is around Iggy's age, maybe a bit older) by trading our first this year and any combination of Young/Speights/Holiday/ I would do it. However, it would have to be a truly great player. I'm not sure that is out there. If an opportunity like that is out there.

user-pic
JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 10:30
+/-

One more note...I don't think Iguodala is part of the 'young core' - because his game is in its prime and the rest aren't there yet - which is part of the problem - you have a 3 tiered system really

Brand

Dalembert
Iguodala
Green (let's face it he's not getting any better)
Williams

The Rest

None of these are super stars, probably only one has the outside chance of becoming a super star (sorry Thad and Speights, you just don't seem interested in defense or getting better and that's the difference)

My primary problem with Stefanski is that I don't think he views the roster properly, I don't think this roster can really contend for anything even at its best possible outcome because of the various 'career arc' differences

user-pic
Duracorr reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 10:39
+/-

Why would anyone trade a great player for one of our questionable young guys and a pick?

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Duracorr on Feb 26 at 10:45
+/-

Don't know - it's not a comment I made.

user-pic
Duracorr reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 10:57
+/-

Sorry. Clicked on the wrong reply button. I was examining your idea that the team is too spread out in age. Most reams seem to have a 10 year spread among theor starters. Bostom's big 3 are close but Rondo is much younger. LA has a 13 year spread among their starters. I don't think the 6 year spread between Holiday and Iguodala is a big deal.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Duracorr on Feb 26 at 11:01
+/-

Don't look at age - look at NBA experience - how long they've been in the league and where they are in their career arcs.

Kobe/Pau/Odom are at pretty much tehe same place, you got fisher on the down side and bynum on the way up

Cleveland is Unique because Lebron is a freak

Boston - I think they're done - Pierce, Allen and Garnett are far enough down the wrong side of their careers that they can't last a full season or endure the entirety of the playoffs.

But Boston and LA have multiple QUALITY guys at or near the peak of their careers when they won - the sixers have four guys probably 'at their peak' but only one of them is quality in my opinion

Not to be a broken record.... but wasn't this issue raised when they signed Brand at nearly 30 years old? By the time the young guys are finally in their prime Brand will be past his (and making 17/18M per year.)

Sorry, wish I actually had something new to add, but there's not all that much new to say at this point.

In fact, there will not be much new to discuss untill the draft and the crazy 2010 FA zoo.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Feb 26 at 11:15
+/-

I don't recall if I noticed it or not - but it might have been - or should have been.

I still think Stefanski backed him self into a corner to do 'something' or lose the cap space and Smith wasn't a viable option.

It was Brand or just waste the space...wasn't it?

user-pic
ojr107 reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 12:10
+/-

Stefanski likes to say "We had to use the money that space, it wouldn't have carried forward" Which I think is an oversimplification. We wouldn't be able to offer someone 80 million over 5 years, that is true, but we would have some cap space had we not signed Brand.

This summer, If we didn't have Brand under Contract, I think we would have something like 8 million in cap space, and we'd probably be able to offer a player something that averages out to 10 million a year.


looking ahead to the summer of 2011, if we hadn't signed brand, with Green/Kapono/Dalembert coming off, I'm pretty sure we would have a ton of cap space without Brand

Lets say the the 2011-12 season the Cap is 60 Million.
With Brand we will have 43 Million committed. Without Brand it would only be about 29 million committed. (These numbers don't including signing Thad/Speights to extensions, should we choose to go that route). But I think its clear that in the long term we would have a lot more flexibility without having Signed Brand.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to ojr107 on Feb 26 at 12:14
+/-

No it's not an over simplification

The next summer, Andre and Lou got their contract extensions - which would have eaten most if not all of the cap that he 'saved' by not signing brand.

That cap money was a one shot thing...it's not like this summer as much - that cap money would have been gone.

People want Stefanski to have been wrong, much likepeople keep saying 'should have signed smith' even though the sixers wouldn't have gotten him.

Stefanski however, to me, is now wrong, because he sees a roster that could compete for a title - and I don't

There was not a simple solution for using that cap space. But there were creative ways. he could have taken on other teams short term 1-2 year contracts in exchange for picks. he could have taken on a valuable short term deal like adding Camby (like the Clippers did when they lost out on Brand.) They could have traded for a young player during the next season.

There were lots of option.

To Quote Mr. Stefanski here in 2008:
http://www.depressedfan.com/basketball/sixers/exclusive-interview-with-ed-st.php

"We're in a position right now where we want to go into the Summer with cap space. Right now, we're at a low of $10M in cap space, a high of $12M depending on where the league number comes in. We are under the cap and our options are much, much more liberal than they would be if we were over the cap. We can use this money either to sign a free agent, or to trade, with a player or without a player, to another team in a situation where that team doesn't have to take money on. If you look around the league, there are always teams that are unhappy with what went on. They're spending a lot of money on their players, and you know, it's just not working so let's see if we can get rid of a guy or two. We'll be situated in the Summer so that if an opportunity like this arises, we can seize that opportunity. We feel that it's really important that with the team we have, it's crucial that we have this flexibility."

A shame he did not listen to what he was saying, because he is now on the other side of the equation and ready to be fleeced this summer by a team with cap space.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Feb 26 at 12:23
+/-

There were other options sure

but hindsight is an amazing tool isn't it?

At the time - most people thought Stefanski pulled off a coup by getting that extra space to lure Brand away from the Clippers after his 'agreement' with Baron Davis

Did it work out - no

But people are blaming him for it not working out and many of those same people were in favor of the move at the time (regardless of how history is rewritten in peoples minds) - I thought it was a good move at the time.

Blame... or responsibility.

Regardless of whether it was a good or bad choice at the time... Stefanski is responsible for the outcome.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Feb 26 at 12:52
+/-

That's very true - which is why I give him grief for how he's handling the roster now - but too many people want to re-write the history - can't do it - most people thought it was a good move - now it wasn't a good move - the roster is a mess - don't pubilcly lie to people with a clue and imply you think this roster can win.

Don't claim defense if your priority and hire a coach who couldn't care less about defense.

It's his actions recently that lead me to want his ouster - but i'm not changing history and saying I knew the brand thing was a bad idea - i thought it would work - and maybe the right coach makes it work - but right now - it's just not going to work and the roster isn't going to win even if adolph rupp comes back to zombie coach the team - so he needs to stop trying to sell me this nonsensical bill of goods he spouts off....it's a lack of respect for fan base - the portion that truly cares about this team - they don't buy his nonsense

If I remember correctly, I think I was excited that Ed was able to "steal Brand"- especially in that it showed he could execute a plan (back from trading KK to landing the FA he wanted without giving away the "young core.".)

But at the same time I was really concerned about age, fit, health and size of contract. I did not think Miller/Brand/Iguodala were good for more than 50 wins, but at very least I was hoping for a couple of years of entertaining basketball. I also thought there was lkittle shot at the team contending, so was overall fine with building a very good if not truly elite team.

I do remember thinking that if you give big money to a young player (Iguodala, Josh Smith) you can always trade them elsewhere for value if things don't work. But when you sign an older player the back end of their contract has negative value, and is hard to move.

user-pic
ojr107 reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 13:08
+/-

This summer the money wouldn't be gone. We'd have somewhere around 9 million to go after a free agent If brand wasn't on the roster. It wasn't a one shot thing. Just because the money wouldn't carry over to the NEXT season(although I think some of it would have) doesn't mean it wouldn't carry over into the future. A good GM needs to think about more then the next two seasons ahead of him, unless he is sure he has built a contender.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to ojr107 on Feb 26 at 13:09
+/-

That's 2 summers after the fact - you can't project that far out.

The sixers could have cleared cap space at the deadline by doing the rockets trade...

user-pic
ojr107 reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 13:21
+/-

You can project cap room two years after the fact. Of course a major Trade like dealing Iggy for an expiring alters things, but I'm GM projects those possibilities and knows that If he trades a player making X amount of money in 2010 how much cap space he would have.

I was for signing Brand at the time, but I get annoyed when Ed says it wouldn't have carried forward, its not that simple. The signing has ham-stringed our flexibility a great deal. If he were to say I decided to take a chance, because of his potential and my hope that he would return to his previous form, I would be fine with that response.

user-pic
ojr107 reply to ojr107 on Feb 26 at 13:23
+/-

potential was the wrong word, because of his past I meant to say.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to ojr107 on Feb 26 at 13:25
+/-

I got the point - but just for edification - it's ham strung, not ham stringed :)

As for the point - things Stefanski couldn't control

1. The hammer from comcast regarding the luxury tax combined with
2. The downturn in the economy

That made it impossible for him to keep andre miller - and rightly or wrongly he believed in a miller/iguodala/brand core...but ownership wouldn't let him make the offer he needed to make to keep miller purely for financial reasons.

Keep miller, maybe Joran gets fired sooner, or not even hired because Miller isn't a Joran PG is he?


user-pic
Duracorr reply to ojr107 on Feb 26 at 13:36
+/-

It is true he could have passed on Brand, but we as fans would have declared that the Sixers were cheap and unwilling to spend to improve the team. Brand was the best available free agent that summer. He signed him and most of us felt good about it. If he hadn't we would have still been complaining.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Duracorr on Feb 26 at 13:38
+/-

It is true he could have passed on Brand, but we as fans would have declared that the Sixers were cheap and unwilling to spend to improve the team.

That's a pretty good point, but at the same time, if a GM is motivated by what the fan reaction will be, he's a bad GM, he should make the moves HE thinks are best for the team.

If he was iffy on Brand but signed him because 'i have to do something or the fans will revolt', that's yet another reason to fire him

Its a shame that Brand opted out in the first place. Or at least it would have been best had he stayed a Clipper.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Feb 26 at 13:45
+/-

For the sixers sure - not for him :)

user-pic
stan reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 14:26
+/-

It would have been the best the best for him also.

1. He wouldnt have been criticized for betraying his team.
2. People wouldnt complain about his salary as much
3. He wouldnt have to put up with Eddie Jordan

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to stan on Feb 26 at 14:39
+/-

Well I'm not sure betraying the clippers (and their racist owner) is a big deal.

But in your list of points you miss the most important one

He got injured again last season - if brand opts in - maybe he gets half the contract extension he got - or none at all.

Sorry folks - it's a business - brand opted out to maximize earnings and be closer to home.

He does that last summer instead - after a second injury - he might not have any offers above the MLE

So no - opting in probably would not have been better for Brand than me turning down a 125K offer now to stay another year at my 70K job would be because i want to give it 'one more year' for my stock options to become valuable

user-pic
ojr107 reply to Duracorr on Feb 26 at 11:46
+/-

I think a team that wants to rebuild might trade a great player for a the number 8 pick and young guys with talent, like Thad/Jrue. For example, The Supersonics traded the number 5 pick for Ray allen when they decided to rebuild. The Timberwolves traded Garnett for young talent, that is about on par with an 8 pick/Jrue/Thad package. Lakers didn't give up that much talent to get Gasol. Teams that decide they have o rebuild, that they need to get worse before getting better may make such a deal. I'm not saying its likely, but it can happen, and I do think our young players and DP have a lot of value to a rebuilding team. And, I think with Brand/Iggy/Sam, if we can get the right couple of pieces and the right coach, it may make sense for us to do it

Biggest guy I am down on this list and was coming into the year was Spreights. Didn't understand why people ripped DiLeo last year for not using Spreights in the Orlando series. DiLeo rightly knew that even Gorat would have ripped him a new on the glass.

It is hard to judge his progress this year because of his injury and the awkward way in which he has been handled. Brought back too quickly & used too much only to be a bench fixture the last month or so. I can understand why Spreights is a bit confused/angry.

Doesn't excuse the fact though that I get from Spreights (and several comments this year) that he thinks he should be getting major minutes/even starting. For a guy who plays no defense, doesn't rebound well, and doesn't bring much to the passing game, that is a unwarranted position. He should be a bench guy at this point.

Maybe Spreights takes this offseason as a chance to work on his game by doing the little things and putting on a little more muscle. My bet is that he doesn't and leaves town pretty much as soon as the season is over. Just doesn't strike me as a hard worker or a guy who really wants to work for things. I would put Williams in the same bucket too. He could become a better defender or shooter. Just doesn't bother and at this point in his career I doubt Williams will improve much in either area. Not like he is just a 2nd or 3rd year player anymore.

Everybody screams about Jordan being the biggest problem (and he leaves alot to be deserved as a coach) but I didn't see coming into the season all of this 'young talent' that were going to be key building blocks. I thought Thad might evolve into a starter but Williams should be a backup SG that can provide you with an offensive punch off the bench and Spreights is a big man who does the same with about 12-15 minutes/night. Neither is a starter nor somebody you can really build around. Secondary players at best.

Great questions, Brian. As mentioned already, our biggest issue is the setback of coach Jordan this year. This year has been a big waste and will hurt us for years to come.

In deciding on who and when to build, I wonder if Jrue could become a superstar in this league? He has alot of tools and great passing (ie, Paul, Nash, Wade)? If he does, then I think Brand will be our biggest setback.

I personally think Speights has a higher ceiling than Thad and if coached right, as the rest of the team, could become quite a player. Thad is special and believe it will just be a $$ issue at his resigning. Definitely not a $10K+/yr signing.

I remember reading several exampl;es of players who logged heavy injury-free minutes early in there careers who essentially broke down right around age 30.

IMO if Iguodala remains healthy and at a high level form age 31-34 it will make him more the exception than the rule. Although he is an exceptionally well conditioned athlete and does not take the same pounding as a big man.

So Iguodala definitely has another 4-5 years in his prime. But projecting beyond that given all his minutes is a crapshoot.

i say stay put and keep rebuilding slowly. its not the best way to do it but seeing Brand's contract; it is the only way to do it. draft a SG or sign a young gunner like Morrow (who by the way, is not really starter material IMO, but then is better than anything we have had). keep playing. Sammy, Willie Green and Kapono come off the books. next year's draft; pick a stud big man to replace Sammy. keep playing. release or trade Thad Young and keep Speights, or the reverse if you prefer. next year Brand becomes an expiring contract. SHOW TIME!!

slow but true. its the only way we are set up to do it. if along the way we can get rid of Brand even if it means Iguodala, Speights/Young have to go too, then it becomes an automatically accelerated development plan. Somewhere along the line, hope you can find a superstar or just a plain star to mesh with Iguodala. if not keep proceeding with the donkey pace. painful for the fans but safest way to get out of this.

to ensure you make no mistakes; SIGN ZERO LONG TERM CONTRACTS.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to jkay on Feb 26 at 11:19
+/-

No long term contracts?

So you let thad go after next season?

To rebuild you need talent and draft picks and maneuverability

The sixers have some talent but like I said earlier I only see one of them developing at a high level, they are a mediocre team (if they make no moves) so they'll hve medioce draft picks - and no maneuverability.

Your theory is the Ed Stefanski theory - doing nothing is what happened at the deadline - that weill leave the team in mediocrity forever (but at least they won't over pay thad.

user-pic
jkay reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 11:29
+/-

my point is; DO WE REALLY HAVE ANY OTHER OPTION?
if so pls. let me know.

what trade could Stefanski have pulled at the deadline? in any deal, there's no way he's getting back talent. only expiring contracts and/or draft picks. Some people advocate tossing our most attractive players away, sucking and then getting lottery picks. i dont think the draft is a guarantee of anything better (see the Atlanta Hawks) than what we would have lost. so this is how I see it. I'm sorry if it irritates you. This is the definition of being screwed.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to jkay on Feb 26 at 11:36
+/-

You're right - doing nothing made the roster much better for the long term.

The sixers have BAD contracts, no cap space, mediocre talent at the moment and pick in a mediocre place in the lottery.

I think people had unrealistic expectations of the vlaue of the sixers players around the league.

One player with a 'solid sized' contract has value - Iguodala - Sam still doesn't have value cause he has one full year and that trade kicker left - so when you trade Iguodala with Sam the value you'll get back is decreased because of Sam's contract (and no one wants brands contract)

The rockets deal was probably the BEST offer the sixers were going to get

To think that the sixers were going to fix all their problems with one move was delusional, it's a multi step process and you have to make some painful moves to get into a position to make good moves. Right now you have a roster that doesn't fit that isn't going to be any better than 500 for how many more years? Big deal, 500 is a first round playoff loss - WHOOPEE

The problem is the perception that there is more on this roster than there actually is, regardless of who the coach is - Larry Brown doesn't get more than a 500 record out of this roster (without his 'changes') and a first round playoff loss - who cares?

user-pic
jkay reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 11:48
+/-

perhaps you are misunderstanding me. i dont think Iguodala & Co. can do that much better than what they have done in the past. best case scenario they end up like the Hawks. but i dont believe in rebuilding if Brand is not gone.

people make it sound so simple to get a 20 ppg shooting guard. there arent that many. kobe, wade, ellis (if you count him as an SG), joe johnson, and steven jackson. are we going to get any of them? most likely captain jack, and does that make anyone that happy. kevin martin was our best option and that ship just sailed. not sure why we could offer lou, thad or speights, smith and done that trade ourselves. salary works and i think sacto gets more in that deal.
so unless you are going to old overpaid player route such as rip hamilton or jamal crawford, you might be shit out of luck in terms of a 20 ppg shooting guard. we could always try to take on redd's acls if you want his salary.
i dont think there are any sgs in this draft (very pf and sf heavy) that can step in and give you that many points. in reality, iggy is your best option at sg. technically right now he is in the top ten in scoring for sgs. so unless you think we can sign and trade for joe johnson (dalembert,lou,thad?) then we may need to find a new plan.

user-pic
nova fan reply to yepp on Feb 26 at 11:34
+/-

is there any way sammy's expiring + thad+ the number 10 pick in this years draft can get us any one of those top sg? its not a bad package.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to nova fan on Feb 26 at 11:42
+/-

Sams contract has a trade kicker
Thad is having his worst season
and the #10 pick in a 'mediocre' draft isn't exactly a great asset

Wade isn't leaving Miami
Kobe - come on folks - get serious - he isn't levaing LA and has a FNTC
Ellis - dear god - why would you want monta ellis?

user-pic
jkay reply to yepp on Feb 26 at 11:41
+/-

Martin was as sure as they come. but not for that price. his contract mirror's that of Iguodala and his team gave him up for some long term savings. kinda makes me feel less hesitant about trading Iguodala.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to jkay on Feb 26 at 11:44
+/-

Martin and his injury prone frail body is as 'sure' as they come - so why was Sacramento so desperate to give him away after the small sample size of the Martin/Evans era...

user-pic
jkay reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 11:53
+/-

what we look for in a SG: young, great size, athleticism, good outside shooting, range, handles, ability to get to the line, decent basketball IQ. its what we wish for here every time. you got them all in Martin.

injury history is a different story entirely.

i never said we should get him. I just think he is the kind of player we need. hence the 'sure'

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to jkay on Feb 26 at 11:54
+/-

Injury history matters in a player - or people would slobber over T-Mac

Martin is over rated in my opinion - not as bad as Ellis - but we'll see how he works on a real team in Houston

Why isn't more hate being thrown at Thad?

Just look at the per 36 stats.

I loved Thad as a rookie. I thought he had tons of promise. He worked hard, everyone raved about his work ethic, and he truly was a major reason why the Sixers improved after Korver was traded. I bought his damn jersey.

I'm sorry, but Thad's production level is absolutely pathetic. I could come up with plenty of reasons myself for why this is... he is a 3, the coach is dumb, he plays away from the basket more now, etc. None of these change the fact that he has been unproductive and all indications are that not a lot here is going to change any time soon.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Joe on Feb 26 at 11:50
+/-

Because he doesn't make as much money as Iguodala
And he isn't as controversial a pick as Jrue Holiday was

He's just terrible

I give him a "pass" even though I said multiple times during the season that he's been playing horribly) because I think a 21 year old can bounce back from a subpar season, and unlike Williams and Speights, I don't see effort being a problem.

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Feb 26 at 11:55
+/-

Really good thought provoking piece here.

Do I sense a realization finally creeping in that there really isn't so-called 'talent' here? :) (and IMO, a correct realization)

As someone mentioned yesterday, look at the last few picks that we all seem to become overjoyed with to the nth degree.

I mean, remember all the chatter last year of how Thad was going to become this 20+ ppg scorer? And how Marreese was going to be this go-to option and should probably start over EB at the four? Now this year, some (not me :)) think Jrue is going to turn into this near All-Star level point guard.

It may not have been anything that much better after where these guys were picked in those particular years (very debateable, btw), but DiLeo getting credit for making supposedly 'good picks' is nothing but a farce.

Thad was unproven with the 'potential' tag. But he really isn't anything close to 'special', no matter how old and matured he continues to get. (ask yourself, would it really have mattered if the much debated Al Thornton over Thad pick and the age vs upside were in fact reversed? Probably not, to me, seeing what Thad really is now)

Jason Smith was the most questionable one as he came in as a 'project' with the who-knows-what tag. This was a downright bad pick when considering this was from the Iverson trade and turned into basically nothing. I mean, Iverson had to be worth more than Miller right? (who we ended up getting NOTHING for)

Speights was unproven also with the 'potential' tag. Potential meaning he hasn't done anything of note yet. He doesn't possess that wow-you athleticism and doesn't appear to have the desired heart or dedication to become a successful and useful player that constitutes a team. He has a nice stroke for a big man but so what? Big men that can shoot appear to be easier to find in this day and age of AAU ball.

Jrue also is more in the project mold while possessing the dreaded 'potential' and 'upside' tag. The jury is still out on him. He seems to have the right mindframe and should get better but how many unproven youths can a team stand to take on and have?

This a heedless method to building a team and the NBA has become watered down over the years because of it. It has turned into what can a player be and give you in 3 years, instead of what this player is and can offer now while still having a window of improvement with coaching.

And that's basically what the Sixers have become - a look-see and training grounds of hope that a player or players will emerge from years long tryouts. And THAT is not what I want from what I long for to be a championship level team once again.

Ahhhh, the life of a Sixers fan! In the immortal words of tk, you're always 3-5 years away from being 3-5 years away...

hehe i think most fans know in the back of their minds that are players are not all we hype 'em up to be. but you cant sell it short when you project what you HOPE for them to become. Thad, Speights, Lou are all cool. just not starter material. Jrue is just touching the ground. probably the same could be said for Sp8 still.

problem is our front office has the same deluded views that we share, APPARENTLY. the rest of the league is not that in love with their young players. Al Thornton that you rave about (small exaggeration) just got sent to the Wizards for some spare parts. Honestly I dont want any drastic changes yet but Sixers brass needs to be more businesslike.

user-pic
Duracorr reply to eddies' heady's on Feb 26 at 12:15
+/-

And on that depressing note, I think I'll go shovel out my driveway and forget about the Sixers for while.

I still think Speights and Young have 20 ppg potential in them down the road.

Now, 20 ppg with no defense or passing from a big doesn't win you anything, and Young may not have a position on the team if he and Iguodala can't play together on the perimeter (because he isn't a 4), but I do still think they both have that level of potential offensively.

The problem is who do you draft when you always have picks between 12-17? You choices are low upside role players or high upside prospects.

Its an NBA systemic problem, where it is better to be horrible than mediocre.

Rember, the last top 10 pick the Sixers had was Iguodala 6 years ago. The last top 5 pick was Iverson 13 years ago.

Both of those were good value picks. But what can you do if you never have top picks?

user-pic
johnrosz on Feb 26 at 12:16
+/-

Speights is kinda fat and doesn't seem to care about anything but scoring. He's quickly falling out of favor with me. I can do without him and Lou, i don't see either of them as part of a contending future in Philly. At least I know that Thad and Jrue want to be great.

I can totally see Brian wearing a smoking jacket, throwing down a few glasses of whiskey, puffing on a cuban and finally concluding... "There is no hope."

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to Shawn on Feb 26 at 12:47
+/-

While I sit beside him and say,....

"Pass that to me..!"

user-pic
The Greek reply to Shawn on Feb 26 at 12:48
+/-

Being a fan of the Sixers is like being stuck on that Island thats on Lost. I think Brian's pic from the other day got subliminally got to me.

in the spirit of the mood of the discussion now I have prepared a list of our highest paid players and a player to whom their production is comparable to and the salary equivalents of both sides;

Andre Iguodala $14M could realistically be replaced by Hedo Turkoglu at $10.6M. savings = $3.4M a year

Elton Brand $16M could be replaced by Luis Scola at $3M (projected raise will equal $6M max) average savings = $10M a year

Samuel Dalembert $12M could be upgraded by Marcus Camby at $9M. savings = $3M

Jason Kapono $6M could be easily replaced by Matt Carrol $4M (and thats being generous really) savings = $2M

Louis Williams $5m could be quickly substituted by Eddie House $3M savings of $2M

Willie Green $$3.6M could be swapped for Royal Ivey $1.05M (making a point here) savings = $2.5M

TOTAL SAVINGS = $22.4M

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to jkay on Feb 26 at 12:49
+/-

Is this based on any sort of factual analysis or just your opinion?

user-pic
jkay reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 12:53
+/-

have some fun will ya...
didnt have time to find realistic evaluation for each of them at best i tried to find a player similar in position, build.
just a what-if.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to jkay on Feb 26 at 12:54
+/-

Flights of fancy with no basis in reality aren't 'fun' to me...

Mo Cheek (3M) and Eddie Jordan (3M) are both being paid to coach the Sixers and could easily be replaced by...

user-pic
jkay reply to tk76 on Feb 26 at 13:02
+/-

had almost forgotten than Mo Cheek's bill was still on the tab.
Resolved, that Comcast will not want to pay the salaries of 2 or more coaches ever again. We just may be looking at the return of Joran next year.

user-pic
JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 12:56
+/-

Lawrence Frank
Eric Snow (who cares at this point about experience)
Mckie
Any number of assistants
any number of college coaches at second tier schools
Mark Jackson
Patrick Ewing

For less or equal money :)

I don't think Scott or Johnson would take less money

How much does Stefanski make? At this point he could be replaced by the rally monkey

How can you be so sure about Jrue ? Yes he's only 19 and plays OK for a 19 year old rookie but it's questionable if he can be Nash or Kidd or at least a player you can build a team around.It's a wait-and-see situation,not a John Wall situation.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Levent on Feb 26 at 12:59
+/-

He's shown more in his first year - especially on the dfensive end and court vision aspects with such a terrible coach than Speights or Thaddeus Young have shown yet

I am as big of a jrue fan as anyone here...

But I don't think he has exuded star quality since H.S. But sometime you never know.

Trying to remember how guys like J.O. and TMac looked in there first few seasons. I don't think they put up good numbers, but I do think they showed signs of becoming stars. Not sure I see this in Jrue.

I am hopeful he can be a winning player for the Sixers for a long time- just not expecting a superstar.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Feb 26 at 13:11
+/-

Well since high school:

1. He played one year at UCLA - he was brought in to replace Darren Collison who didn't opt out - and instead of playing back up PG he was played at his unnatural position

2. He's played 3/4 of a season in the NBA with a coach who seems to hate him and only really started playing him when called out publicly by his GM, and really only gives him major minutes cause guys like Willie Green and Allen Iverson are unavailable.

He's still a better defender than Speights and Young - he's still the youngest player in the league - he's still playing for an idiot coach who will pull a guy just cause he isn't shooting enough.

He's also got better 'recommendations' in terms of work ethic and upside than Speights at least (i've never read anything about Thad's work ethic or b=ball iq, but this season brings both in to question)

Paul Hewitt constantly raves about Young's work ethic, as did his high school coaches.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/5768/a-conversation-with-paul-hewitt

"TH: Thaddeus Young. He almost seems like he was born for the pro game.

Hewitt: He's gotten off to a great start. Every time I run into people from Philadelphia they have nothing but great things to say about him. He's got a great work ethic. He converted from being a 4/5 in high school to a 3 with us. Now when they play him at the 4, it's somewhat natural to him. But he's continued to evolve and develop. He did a lot of good work with Mark Price in the off-season. Mark worked him out last summer at the Sewanee Sports Academy and Thad tells me all the time that really helped him speed up the process of becoming a 3 man in the NBA.

TH: He's really learned how to move off the ball to fill space...

Hewitt: That's right...Particularly for a guy who played around the basket as much as he did in high school. If you look at Thad's last ten games his freshman year, he averaged something like 19 or 20 points a game. He really started to get it. He started shooting the three well, attacking the basket. He still couldn't go right [laughs]. That's something we always teased him about, but he's gotten better with that. But you could see it coming along. I think had he decided to come back for a second year -- and it was a close decision; he decided to make the move at the last minute -- he easily would've been a Player of the Year candidate, an All-American candidate."

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Derek Bodner on Feb 26 at 14:36
+/-

Is that from Jan 2009 or 10 - the link didn't give a year

Just wondering if that was this season or last season

I'm pretty sure that was last season.

Not that I would really expect a college coaches opinion on his work ethic to change.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Derek Bodner on Feb 26 at 14:46
+/-

It would be interesting to hear from those guys this year though to see if they have an explanation.

Sometimes when a guy takes a step back he goes back to where he had success, talks to his high school coach, his college coach, to get some perspective or a 'rejuvenation' - i wonder if Thad has talked to anyone this year not directly affiliated with the sixers about his step back - have they gone over what's causing it - is it just this idiotic coach and the idiotic system and his idiotic shooting coach who 'fixed' Thad?

I did not say Jrue was going to be a superstar BUT that he COULD become a superstar like Nash,Wade,etc... And, IF he did, we could build a good team.

If I was the GM, I would DEFINITELY get either a shooter by draft or trade and trade Willie Green (just because he plays too many minutes).

As far as I'm concerned, as long as we never sign Charlie Villanueva or Ramon Sessions, I'd say we're doing just fine.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Shawn on Feb 26 at 13:12
+/-

Ramon Sessions would be an upgrade over every 'point guard' on the sixers roster but Holiday

Some other free agent kryptonite:

Keyon Dooling
Chase Budinger
Jose Calderon
Turkoglu
Wilson Chandler
Paul Millsap
Antwan Jamison
Caron Butler
Anyone on the Warriors except curry

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Shawn on Feb 26 at 13:21
+/-

Chase Budinger

ON a rookie deal (so not really a free agent)

Shooting 36.5% from the 3 this year.

Not sure how one 'qualifies' - but over 80 3 point attempts on the sixers this year the leader is 36.6 (It's holiday - did you know that?)

Volume 3 takers
Lou - 158 - 34.8%
Thaddeus Young - 119 - 33.6
ANdre Iguodala - 227 - 31.3

Chase Budginer on a rookie deal off the bench becomes the best 3 point threat the sixers have - and for all you folk who miss reggie evans he tries real hard

user-pic
Shawn reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 13:24
+/-

I might be wrong about Budinger, he is pretty good I agree.

What I mean is, he's going to be a free agent one day, and some crazy gm will over pay for him. Then you get a decent 3pt shooter with size

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Shawn on Feb 26 at 13:27
+/-

I think you're probably wrong about Paul Milsap as well, Boozer screwed the Jazz by not opting out - they aren't going to keep Boozer - they prefer Milsap - but Boozer not opting out screwed their on court plans (no matter what they say) and led to a move like trading ronnie brewer for nothing (which all the players on the Jazz seem to hate)

I won't disagree that the wizards free agent deals stink - but that's because the GM is a putz - i don't think any other team would have over paid Jamison or Arenas

user-pic
Shawn reply to JohnEMagee on Feb 26 at 13:46
+/-

I'm with you on why he's not effective this year, but I have a problem in general with undersized big men. For whatever reason, they flame out and don't have as much of a presence in the paint as someone with longer arms would.

Rudy Gay
Joe Johnson
Amare Stoudemire
Brandon Bass
Luke Ridnour
Barabosa

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Shawn on Feb 26 at 13:47
+/-

I'm confused about that list of names - half of them aren't 'big men'

Here's probably the best comp I can come up with for Jrue right now, when you take his age and position into account.

The reason I think he's going to be very good, possibly a star or whatever you want to call him, a guy at or above Iguodala's level, is his work on the defensive end, his excellent size for the position and his natural PG skills.


Does anyone think Thad could be a SG? I don't think he will beat out Iggy next year for the 3 so maybe Thad could work out this offseason as a 2. Thoughts?

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to smh1980 on Feb 26 at 13:30
+/-

There are reasons Andre Iguodala 'can't' be a SG (I don't buy them but like those sixerbeat fellas, i've just given up)

Does Thad have those skills that Iguodala lacks to be a SG on BOTH ends of the ball?

Iguodala at the 2, Thad at the 3. Thad at the 2, Iguodala at the 3. What's the difference?

The opponent's still going to guard them with whichever perimeter defender they feel works best, and their roles aren't going to change just because you change the two letters next to their name on the boxscore.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Derek Bodner on Feb 26 at 14:30
+/-

That's kind of how I want to look at it but I don't know for sure that it's the right way to look at it :)

i hate that these long discussions are about how the sixers fucked up and how they are going to fix it so they can be good again...it's really depressing.

i say keep thad depending on how much he is asking for after his rookie deal is up. The last two seasons under normal head coaches he showed real potential for someone his age and one bad year under an absolutey horrible coach (2 if you count ayers messing with his game) shouldn't make people want to get rid of him so fast, although i agree his play this year does bring up some questions.

Speights, i'm not so sure about. His defense is terrible and his offense slowed down from last year, but again i feel like it's hard to totally define a player, especially one that young, by one season under horrible coaching and sporadic minutes.

Get rid of Lou unless he ups both his defense and shooting ability because like brian said $5 million a year is too much for someone we can easily replace for less.

Sam, Elton, J. Smith, should all be gone by the time we're 'contending' or whatever. If Brand isn't gone (i doubt we will be able to get rid of him) it's not that big a deal because he will still be somewhat effective by then, probably not as a starter though. I like carney , but he's probably easy to replace too and meeks i just don't know about because obviously he's a rookie and i've seen him play about 2 minutes this season.

Jrue and Iguodala are the peices we should build around if we want to be good in 2011. I feel like if we add enough help by then (through the draft and/or trades) and get rid of contracts we need to get rid of, jrue will be good enough to run a team that can contend in the playoffs and iguodala will still be effective enough.

I hope Jrue becomes the next Gary Payton but he is most likely going to be the next Sam Cassel (which isnt bad). If I were the Sixers I would look to get rid of Lou Williams and Thaddeus Young while their "potential" and value are still high. Maybe they can package them to trade up from number 10 to number 2 and pick up Evan Turner. Thad needs to be traded becuase he has no future at the 4 and Andre is the clearly the better player at the 3.

It would be interesting if we got Turner, but I think Stefanski has his eyes set on that 7 ft PF from Europe.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Stan on Feb 26 at 14:44
+/-

With Lou's contract and play I don't thik his potential or value are still high.

I think he's a scoring sixth man off the bench and that most teams know that.

And he's my predicted - dumped to save the luxury tax with a ppick- target for this summer :)

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Stan on Feb 26 at 14:45
+/-

It would be interesting if we got Turner, but I think Stefanski has his eyes set on that 7 ft PF from Europe.

i see no evidence that DiLeo has decided on ANYONE to pick yet and it's shooting in the dark to presume that the sixers have already decided who they're picking.

My pick would be to suck for a long time and continue to make stupid decisions.

Why did they give up our second round pick for nothing? Why isn't the team tanking for Turner/Wall?

Go Phillies.

user-pic
Tom Moore on Feb 26 at 18:57
+/-

I think it's common for management/fans to overvalue their own players. Young and Speights are two of the most recent examples.

Young is very good in transition, but not an especially good half-court offensive player or rebounder. Like Iguodala, he needs to improve his jumper. He's also a 3 1/2.

Speights isn't shy in coming off the bench shooting and can score from 19 feet and in, but there are questions about his basketball IQ, if he really "gets it" or not and his work ethic. Defense and rebounding must be better.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif