DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

How Deep Is the Top of the Draft?

user-pic
JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 12:05
+/-

I don't agree with trading down - even if the last tier is all potential after the top 5 - you have a better chance when you have more optiions...picking sixth is better than picking 12th unless of course you have someone desperate to get up to six

Is the draft deeper than 5 players, maybe, maybe not, tony dileo knows more than we do, but drafting sixth gives him a better chance of picking the right player than 12th

So unless you're trading brand - it's idiotic to trade down because you just lessen the available pool of the 'questionable' prospects you have to choose from.

I agree with it if you accomplish something else to make the team better. A future first-rounder. Trading Lou. Trading Brand. Upgrading a current spot. You have to get something in return. My point here is that no one in the 6-12 range really does anything for me, but there are guys who could make us a better team (at a lower salary as well) if we trade down into the late teens, early twenties. They'd all be reaches where we're picking, so I'd be fine w/ moving down, getting something in return and drafting one of them instead of the guys in our range.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Brian on Mar 26 at 12:13
+/-

I believe lou is eminently tradeable and shouldn't require giving up a top 7 pick in this draft...in fact giving lou to most teams should net you a pick and or cap space (a second round pick but ap ick none the less) he's a very good sixth / seventh man off the bench when you need scoring on a 'reasonable' deal.

If he is for some reason packaged with a top 7 pick he better return more than a lower pick in the first round and some future pick with so many protections it'll never be better than 14th.

If someone takes brand and the #7 - that's different - for instance if the mavs (stupidly) offered up Dampiers non guaranteed contract and 7 for TK's least favorite NBA contract then you consider it.

But you don't trade down because you don't think there are enough 'stars' in the draft after 5 or 6 - yur team can't afford to be that god damn picky

If we're sitting there at 6 I'm not sure Udoh won't be a better player than Monroe. If Udoh's my guy and I'm fairly confident he'll be there at 11 and 12, and I can trade down and get Bradley essentially for free, I'm fine doing that.

I actually pretty much fully agree with Brian, from his rankings in the top 4, to his "willing to take a risk on cousins at 5", to post-5 thoughts.

My Big Board:
http://www.libertyballers.com/2010/3/16/1376282/libertyballers-big-board-v1

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Derek Bodner on Mar 26 at 12:17
+/-

I don't disagree with his top 5 - but i disagree with playing roulette with your pick if you know the guy you want - it's a risk - if you trade down because you think monreo and udoh are the same and then both are gone - well than you're fracked...so like i said (and will say again) you don't just trade down for the sake of trading down unless of course you shed something huge (and right now the only two 'problem' contracts really are Elton and Iguodala, and I believe Iguodala will be moved this off season, but trading him shouldn't require the #7 pick unless it nets a top 3 pick in this years draft)

user-pic
JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 12:11
+/-

PS - it's awesome to draft a guy who you think is a rotational player right away if you're close to contending, but the sixers aren't close to contending, no matter who the coach is, take the pick, draft the guy you feel has the best combination of potential and work ethic to maximize it - don't trade down for a rotational player when you have so many holes in your roster swiss cheese thinks you have a lot of holes

The sixers have two players under contract past the 2011 season who will probably be worthy of NBA starter title in the 2011/2012 season, not to mention a bunch of one dimensional back ups and some giant absences in that as well (though less important when you only have 2 guys worthy of starting)

It's silly to say 'oh look there's a guy who will never be anything more than a bench guy' when you have that many issues.

The sixers are capped out
have very few trade assets
and contrary to what they publicly say - an ownership who sees the luxury tax as a firm no cross line

How exactly do you suggest they get much better by trading down to get scrawny (6'3 180) rotational players who probably shouldn't come out this year?

"How exactly do you suggest they get much better by trading down to get scrawny (6'3 180) rotational players who probably shouldn't come out this year?"

Again, if Udoh is your guy, and you think he'll be as good if not better than Monroe, but you think people are overvaluing Monroe/Aldrich/Aminu, etc, and Udoh will be there at 12, how is trading down to get Bradley for free and still get the guy you have pegged as the best player at 6 a bad thing?

(Just using the names as an example based on their current projected draft slot).

(btw, my preference would be to trade up in the top 5, with being willing to give up virtually anything to get into the top 3, I'm just playing devils advocate if that doesn't happen).

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Derek Bodner on Mar 26 at 12:20
+/-

And, again, depending on what the deal is it's a calculated risk that can backfire in your face.

So like i said, unless the haul in the trade is irresistable - you draft the guy you like best and move on from there...the farther down you move the less opportunity you have to make the pick you want / the more likely it is the guy (or guys) you are targeting are gone.

It's also still premature to start thinking who is and isn't seen ass a top 10 pick because GM's and scouts often put a lot more emphasis on camps and individual work outs.


It's a calculated risk, but you kind of made the case for it. This team has a ton of holes, you've got one pick and a limited group of players outside of the top five. So what makes more sense, taking a guy you're not in love with or using the asset you have (a top-ten pick) to bring back either (a) salary relief in some form (b) a future pick (c) an upgrade in the form of trading for a player AND you drop down in the draft with a list of guys you've targeted who can contribute as well.

What I'm saying is that beyond the top five, there is no magic bullet in this draft, so you can either take a big risk with a pretty pricey rookie contract on a guy who you really don't believe is going to turn into anything, or you can drop down, take your chances that you can find a guy who will contribute and get something else in return.

I'm not even sure anyone would be interested in trading into the #6 pick. Maybe Minnesota would be willing to trade the #17, #24 and future considerations to move up if they have their eye on another big who can't defend, or another PG.

My main point is, if I'm the one making the decisions based on my own evaluations, the players available at #6-#12 aren't markedly better than the players who will be available in the late teens,so I'd see if I could drop down, get some kind of asset, and a player who I believe is of equal or greater likelihood to be a contributor in the league. The alternative is just to draft the guy you like better at #6 and be done with it. If your main concern is that by dropping down you're decreasing your odds of getting the guy you have targeted.

Ugh, my head hurts and I have to go to the DMV now.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Brian on Mar 26 at 12:34
+/-

Enjoy the DMV - one nice thing about the po dunk town i live in - i never wait more than 10 15 mintues at the dmv :)

As for the argument...aside from someone taking brand off the sixers hands I see no 'asset' traded that would REQUIRE includng the #7 pick.

Green, Dalembert expire next year, and dalemberts trade kicker gets smaller with every game played.

Iguodala - like i said - if traded - #7 is only included if the sixers are moving up

So aside from Brand, I see no relief worth moving #7 and if 6-12 is so 'middling' - no team is going to release an asset the sixers want to move up to #7.

I said Bradley is a rotational player right now, based on his defense. Never said that was his ceiling. He's a guy I could envision starting between Jrue and Iguodala down the road, depending on how his jumper comes along.

To be honest with you, I think the odds of him being a starter and really good player in the league for the next decade are much higher than a guy like Ed Davis and a couple other guys who are pegged in the 6-12 range. If DiLeo loves one of those guys, fine. What I'm saying is that I think drafting any of those guys that high is effectively overpaying for them. So do what you can to get good value, both in the form of the player you draft (if it's an undervalued guy who has slipped) and any ancillary parts of the trade to move down.

How much do you weigh Wesley Johnson's last game in the loss to Butler? Did we learn anything about him from yesterday?

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Shawn on Mar 26 at 12:39
+/-

One game shouldn't change how you feel about a player much one way or another - i really think the tournament and importance of it is blown out of proportion unless it's a guy that people don't really pay attention to but you should still go back and look at all their film.

Johnson has been on radar for a while now - anyone who has their opinion swayed by one game as opposed to his whole body of work is questionable in evaluation anyway.

My concern about johnson is his height :) He's 6'7 (and a stick, he's 195?) - so he's another SF on this team...and while I favor BPA - if BPA is equal, take a guy who doesn't play SF please

I agree with the general premise of Brian's post, and most of the details as well.

It a shame that it is so difficult to trade up. But unfortunately, most teams feel this is a 5 man draft, and will demand to much in order to trade up.

The worst part is that if the Sixer can't get a top 5 player they likely will need to stink it up net year in order to upgrade their talent level. That probably means an Iguodala trade this summer- which might mean cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Really, instead of any one step fix (aside from winning the lottery) they need a new GM, who will acquire multiple picks and dump big contracts over then next few seasons. this is a long term process, and they need a new boss and to start and have some stability and vision.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Mar 26 at 12:48
+/-

Really, instead of any one step fix (aside from winning the lottery) they need a new GM, who will acquire multiple picks and dump big contracts over then next few seasons. this is a long term process, and they need a new boss and to start and have some stability and vision.

And they need to find a GM of another team stupid enough to take Brand without raping the sixers in the proces...I get it - you hate his contract - but it's also pretty untradeable at this point.

What the sixers need is a new CBA miracle - because that's the only way to get out from under brand in any reasonable amount of time - unless you wanna give up Jrue Holiday and possibly speights to go with him.

A new GM doesn't make Brands contract more palatable - you want to trade a horrible contract AND acquire multiple picks - while clearing cap space.

I want to have sex with Lucy Liu - that seems as likely.

All the hate towards stefanski is nice - but he's made one mistake - major as it were - but one mistake - hindsight is awesome - but few people questioned the brand signing at the time - aside from his coach hire - he's been better than Billy King was...

If you judge based on results of his moves... he has made more than one mistake.

If you judge based on whether you agreed with his moves at the time... then you are using the wrong criteria evaluating a GM.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Mar 26 at 12:57
+/-

Well then - based on your theory - you probably get sued for malpractice more often than you should - cause if you do the right medical procedure but it doesn't work out - it's your fault - right?

I like your little fantasy posts where you think another GM is going to make Elton Brands contract more palatable...it's a shitty contract - one of the worst in the league - no one wants it.

And since you think nothing can improve until that contract is moved - i guess nothing will improve for a while - no matter what happens

No, malpractice is based on negligence and harm. I never said ES has been negligent. But he has made huge mistakes. And not just signing EJ.

In fact his biggest mistake is his philosophy of buiolding a winning team through a bunch of good but not great pieces. While GM's like Pritchard and Presti work to unload bad deals (is Brand worse than Zach Randolph was?) and acquire multiple #1 picks. or you look to make a wholesale trade for a star like Ainge was able to pull off. Stefanski would have been in a similar position had he not buried our cap.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Mar 26 at 13:07
+/-

My mother was an OB/GYN - turst me I know all about malpractice and what patients will sue based on - hindsight is awesome cause it's never wrong...

(is Brand worse than Zach Randolph was?)

is Isiah Thomas still employed?

Those guys were good players with attitude issues - those guys are easier to trade then a broken down under sized powerforward with 4 years left on his contract...for the same reason demarcus cousins is still in the top 5 regardless of numerous red flags - gms ignore attitude if they think a guy can still play.

Ah yes - the great and powerful sam presti

How much better would the thunder be if they didn't get lottery luck - which has nothing to do with a GM - if pritchard had for some reason drafted durant i doubt anyone would notice oklahoma city on the map - you don't give presti credit for getting durant any more than the guy who won the lottery for the cavs gets credit for lebron james.

Sam Presti's chops will be tested NOW - when his team is on the cusp - has cap room and he has to make smart moves in free agency AND persuade someone to move to freaking oklahoma city - where COLLEGE sports are more popular than the NBA

I said Presti has accumulated multiple first round picks (often using open cap space to get them for free.) he has traded away or let go high paid vets. he did not try and "win now" until he foound a superstar.

Any of these things incorrect? Because that is what I want the Sixers GM to do. Not to try and take midling talent from 35 to 40 wins and then try and go "uptown."

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Mar 26 at 13:17
+/-

Presti had Ray Allen and the celtics willing to mortgage much of their future for a 3-4 year window...that's pretty much closed in my opinoin.

Elton brand doesn't have that value - even at the top of his game -b ecause he was never viewed in that upper echelon - rightly or wrongly - after two years of injuries, this down year and his god awful contract.

The sixers are in a crap hole - and your optimism pointing towards the thunder aside - it's a horrible comarison because the sixers don't have a valued player like Ray Allen (except andre iguodala who doesn't seem to have as high value and no one seems interested in trading him at all unless of course they violate the other team doing the trading)

And for the record... they do not HAVE to move Brand to have a winner. Plenty of good teams win despite having a horrible contract on the books.

But they do need a superstar. Back when they were a .500 team the only way to getting a superstar was a trade- and Brand and Iguodala's big contracts would make that type of trade nearly impossible due to cap reasons.

However, now they are a bottom dweller, so on the bright side they could possibly get a superstar through the draft. Sort of how Utah overcame AK47's bad cobtract by drafting Deron Williams. The same thing could happen to the Sixers if they get WTF-cuz.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Mar 26 at 13:00
+/-

Really, instead of any one step fix (aside from winning the lottery) they need a new GM, who will acquire multiple picks and dump big contracts over then next few seasons. this is a long term process, and they need a new boss and to start and have some stability and vision.

This is what you said, not what I said, and it's well known that you hate Elton Brands contract with the silly nickname you've given it and feel that no other players should be moved UNLESS his contract is moved.

The sixers really only currently have two 'big' contracts - Iguodala and Brand - so which one were you referring to that needs to be dumped that doesn't expire next season already (sam and willie) or actaully has some possible value on the market (lou williams) and could be moved even by stefanski?

I was against devaluing Iguodala by moving him with Sam this past deadline. I saw this as short-sighted.

I'm not opposed to moving Iguodala and/or Lou this summer. Or keeping much of the roster if they get Wall.

I agree, I was very focussed on Brand's deal (not sure I gave it a nickname), back when they were treading water at .500 with no way to upgrade their talent due to cap issues. And I will have the same concern if they improve back to .500 with a new coach.

But if you look back to my old posts, my stated goal was to try and be out from under Brand's deal in 18 months. And now that it looks like the 2011 year will be lost to a lock-out, maybe that timetable can even be pushed back.

My feelings about what needs to be done evolve as circumstances change. I don't see anything wrong with that.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Mar 26 at 13:21
+/-

You're not the one who came up with 'phillymax' - for brands contract? Maybe you just use it the most so i believed you came up with it - cause it's an irritating little phrase.

No one wants Elton Brand - Elton Brands deal is viewed as one of the worst in the league - to trade it you will have to take back shit or include lots of assets to get someone else willing to take it on without screwing you in return...combine that with his injury history that seems to be an ongoing problem and a belief that his game is on the down side and he'll have trade value in the last year of his deal (barring a CBA miracle)

Your 'changing view' of the team lends credence to the fact at one point that you were delusional about the make up of the team one way or another.

My view of the team is pretty much the same - it's a 500 team - at best - a first round playoff loser perenially - with no cap room, minimal trade assets and a poorly built roster of mismatched toys (based on career arcs)

So yeah, I would have traded Iguodala and Sam for cap room and a pick because standing still won't do shit - and with this ownership - standing still is what's going to happen - though lou probably will be moved for cap relief and a second round pick this off season - unless someone wants willie instead just cause of his shorter contract

"You're not the one who came up with 'phillymax' - for brands contract? "

Ed Stefanski came up with the term "Philly Max" to describe Elton Brand's contract.

Yes. Back when Brand was signed Brand and Stefanski talked about how Brand took less money to go to Philly. Philly was not able to offer him the max, but they could offer him the...

Sort of telling that the three teams competing for Brand's services were the Sixers, Clippers and Warriors. Three teams with no clue of how to build a long term winner.

I agree that the Sixers are in a huge hole. I hope we get a GM who realizes this, and does not try another quick fix.

user-pic
JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 12:45
+/-
user-pic
JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 12:50
+/-

Hey look - the clippers beat the rockets last night - a little help

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Mar 26 at 13:32
+/-

A hypothetical situation on draft night; we pick ahead of both Det. and Wash., they both want Aldrich and we don!t but act like we do. We get a young player [ Jerebko ?] and our intended pick by trading down slightly. That would be best case if we fall out of the top 5.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to deepsixersuede on Mar 26 at 13:35
+/-

Well you'd need two very gullible GMs to believe the sixers would be drafting Aldrich in the top 3 - because the way the standings are now - that's really the only way the sixers draft ahed of EITHER washington and detroit - let alone both of them

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Mar 26 at 13:55
+/-

Is our new coach hired before the draft? It would be nice for him to have some input.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to deepsixersuede on Mar 26 at 13:57
+/-

Why?

I'm not worried about having a new coach in place that soon. But we should have a new GM in place. But it will be hard to hire a new architect of the franchise merely weeks before the draft. It would have been nice had they been here the last few months to evaluate the players first hand.

i guess if they chose DiLeo to take over... but I'd prefer a new voice.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Mar 26 at 14:08
+/-

DiLeo is the voice that makes the draft picks - i don't think Stefanski being fired or not makes a different - DiLeo is the drafter as far as I can tell - it's the only thing the sixers seem to be marginally good at

DeLio is the "drafter" but he is not in a position to trade up or down. I doubt they will be able to trade up without giving away too much, but I'd prefer a new GM make that decision- unless they are planning on keeping ES long term.

Sort of like how I though having a lame duck BK making draft decisions was a bad idea.

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Mar 26 at 14:06
+/-

Because if he wants to play a certain style or be a defensive team, being involved in the workouts of possible picks may be important. Thibadoux, through coaching experience may see something in a Whiteside, for example, that Deleo may not.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to deepsixersuede on Mar 26 at 14:07
+/-

Drafting players to fit a system when a coach's primary goal is short term turn around so he doesn't get fired sounds like a good way to shaft yourself...and you're example is doubly bad since if the sixers hire that guy i'll be bummed, if he's such a 'great' coaching prospect why hasn't he gotten a job yet the past two seasons when he was the hot name candidate.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 14:11
+/-

He is just an example. But for a team to succeed our g.m., scouting director and coach should have the same vision, don!t you think?

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to deepsixersuede on Mar 26 at 14:15
+/-

I think the right coach can coach the roster - i like coaches who coach a roster and not coaches who have a preconceived system and try to force the roster to fit it - cause then you end up like this 2009/2010 sixers...

Whether or not the coach is hired isn't important to me in terms of who to draft because i have faith in Tony DiLeo who can scout a whole lot more than any coach can

user-pic
cusekilledmybracket on Mar 26 at 14:08
+/-

i think the best case scenario (and fairly possible) is if we can someone lose a few more games (wonder how that could happen) and slide into the 4/5 spot in the draft and get cousins. Then we find a team who has about a 19-25 pick in the draft, trade lou and speights/thad for their first round pick and a smaller contract such as glenn davis (wont cripple any future plans, can play some minutes) and draft xavier henry. his draft stock has fallen and he's not really a lottery pick anymore, but I think as a 6'5'' shooting guard that can shoot 40% from the three,
youre getting value. And maybe some of those teams (boston, atlanta, or minnesota and memphis with multiple 1st round picks) would rather get someone who can contribute sooner. Lou could be a backup pg that the celts need as well as giving them a young power forward to replace glenn davis and build for the future.

this leaves you with a young core of jrue, henry, iggy,/speights/thad/whatever, and cousins. That still doesn't have that star player we all want, but its a very good defensive team and has many players that can put up 16-20 points in this league. You have sammy starting for a year so cousins doesnt have to be thrown in right away, but someone who can replace his rebounding and interior defense in the future.

I don't think getting those two players is two farfetched. We could definitely get a 4th/5th pick in the draft, and there are generally picks around the early 20's that can be gotten for a package of lou and thad/speights. It seems reasonable, and I thin it puts us in a better place adding two young pieces like that. Gives at least some hope for the future.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to cusekilledmybracket on Mar 26 at 14:17
+/-

Then we find a team who has about a 19-25 pick in the draft, trade lou and speights/thad for their first round pick and a smaller contract such as glenn davis (wont cripple any future plans, can play some minutes) and draft xavier henry

So the sixers give away a alonger deal, get back a shorter deal, and in doing so someone ALSO gives up a draft pick for them?

Sounds likely

user-pic
cusekilledmybracket reply to JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 14:46
+/-

I'm asking for a mid to late first rounder and a contract of a player you dont really care about, for a 15 ppg scorer off the bench who can get to the line and a young prospect such as speights. I feel like this is perfectly reasonable. boston needs another guard that can score, and needs a young power forward not named glenn davis.

we may not be big fans of lou here, but he does have value around the league. a contract that is about 4-5 million for 4 years for a 23 year old pg who can score? that valuable in this league. The reason we dont like him is because he cant shoot. But other teams that have shooters on their roster see value in someone that can get the to line. the reason lou doesnt work for us is because his skill is redundant with this roster.

I think that trade would make perfect sense for a team that has an early 20s pick, which means theyre in the playoffs but need another piece. Strengthening their bench with lou and speights will probably help more than a late first round rookie.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to cusekilledmybracket on Mar 26 at 14:49
+/-

Louis WIlliams is not a unique or hard to find quantity in the NBA - and he has a long term deal - he has value - but I don't think it's as high as you do

And Speights prospect value (as well as youngs) are probably pretty low at this time (for different reasons)

I doubt they get a #4 or #5 pick. But they could win a top 3 pick, which would be WTF.

Thad probably could get you a mid 1st rounder.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to tk76 on Mar 26 at 14:34
+/-

I would not advocate trading thaddeus young as due to his 'down' season he's most likely at the nadir of his trade value - if you believe this season was a 'blip' and that a new coach and a smarter shot doctor (MckIe) can make him a better player, hold on to him even if only to increase trade value.

Its hard to know how to interpret the seasons these guys have had. But they will have to make some tough decisions.

For example, how confident are we that Thad can turn into an above average SF if they trade away Iguodala for value this Summer? Because that is a big question.

By the way, at what point do you begin to question our drafting? Thad was this hugely touted prospect going into college, at Ga. Tech he floats on the perimeter and doesn't rebound much, drops. We grab him, he has a really great rookie season, Hollinger has him up at the top of PER, and nowadays he floats and doesn't rebound. Speights is a big-time athlete, drops well below where he could've been due to work ethic concerns, we draft him. Great rookie season, Hollinger says he's something like the 3rd most efficient player in the NBA, and you know what happens next. Of course Stefanski's own picks include guys like Sean Williams (huge talent, out of the league due to huge behavior problems), Marcus Williams (big talent, part-time head case, not exactly thriving), Josh Boone (big-time athlete at his size, perennial underachiever on every level), and Hassan Adams. Holiday's a similar sort of pick, except Holiday's college struggles were more a function of playing time than a lack of effort, so at least we can hope he won't regress. But in general I don't know how smart a way this is to draft.

You probably start questioning it when we get an underperformer for where we've drafted. I don't really think we have. And you're mixing comparisons here, if you're doubting how the Sixers (DiLeo drafts), then the Thad draft is relevant. If you're doubting Stefanski as the guy making the final decision (which he wasn't in NJ), he wasn't even here for the Thad draft.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Tray on Mar 26 at 14:47
+/-

Speights - the call on him was that he had talent but no work ethic - and he was a risk but at 16 he was worth the risk - so far his no work ethic thing seems to have panned out - it's 2 years in - maybe he'll turn it around - right now he's a big man who can score (and do little else) but at #16 it's not exactly guaranteed stardom

As TK said earlier - hard to judge progression on Young because this is a lost season for the whole franchise - i'm anxious to see how he does in the off season to fix what's broken.

Both were mid teens picks - projecting (or expecting) stardom is a bad idea on picks this low - plus they still are under rookie deals and can turn it around - thad has had one off year - Speights is a bigger concern to me cause these were concerns - but he was worth the risk at 16

user-pic
AaronMcKie4MVP reply to Tray on Mar 26 at 14:51
+/-

if the 09 draft happened today, Jrue would be a top 5 pick. im not going to complain the job we have done drafting. i still think thad is a pretty good player.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to AaronMcKie4MVP on Mar 26 at 14:55
+/-

Yeah, you keep saying that, and I think you're wrong.

Top 10 - sure - but not top 5

Griffin
Thabeet
Harden
Evans
Rubio
Flynn
Curry
Hill
De Rozan
Jennings

I think curry and jennings would move up if the draft were 're held' and the only one of the top 5 who would fall out would be thabeet.


I

user-pic
AaronMcKie4MVP reply to JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 15:09
+/-

this is the first time i ever said that about Jrue. you mkust confuse me with someone else. top 10, top 5 no matter. the main point is that it was one hell of a pick.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to AaronMcKie4MVP on Mar 26 at 15:15
+/-

After the first year and a half of thad's career 'redrafting' had him in the top 5-10

Let's learn from history and moderate our expectations

user-pic
AaronMcKie4MVP reply to JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 15:23
+/-

gotta be excited about something in this town.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to AaronMcKie4MVP on Mar 26 at 16:39
+/-

The phillies and trading donovan mcnabb?

user-pic
The Greek reply to JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 17:49
+/-

1 griffin
2 evans
3 harden
4 jrue
5 curry


The eagles will be challenging the sixers for biggest losers in town once mcnab is gone. Good luck to the phillies though, I hate those mets.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to The Greek on Mar 26 at 17:52
+/-

Yeah, I disagree with your reranking (obviously since i said he wasn't top 5)

HEY BRIAN

WOuld you now prefer steph curry over jrue holiday?

Holiday played plenty in college. His struggles in college were more positional/role than playing time.

Thad at GA Tech was trying to develop his perimeter skills. One of the reasons he went to Tech was because Hewitt would allow him to play SF. Proving he could play, or at least had the potential to play, on the perimeter was an absolute key in his draft stock. IMO he plays inside enough, in fact I'd say his greatest strength offensively is inside. 58% of his half-court field goal attempts are around the rim. That's a very high percentage. Cy comparison, Iguodala's about 25%.

Now his rebounding? That's an obvious problem. But, offensively, I don't think going inside is his problem.

Speights was a risk, but a worthwhile one because of how late in the draft it was. If Speights didn't have his problems he's a top 8 pick. Also, Speights value didn't drop. He wasn't a top 50 recruit coming out of high school, and he was a bit player on the championship team.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Derek Bodner on Mar 26 at 15:01
+/-

His brother can get after it defensively also, very athletic.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Tray on Mar 26 at 14:56
+/-

When drafting 19 y.o.!s it is time to resign them before they can reach their potential, a tough dilemma. If we are going to blow it up and start over, how do you sell that to coaching candidates? Maybe Deleo should just coach over the next couple years, if he trusts his scouts enough.

They have to see if they win a top 3 pick. that would make the roster more appealing to attract a good new coach/GM.

user-pic
smh19980 on Mar 26 at 15:18
+/-

From Philly.com

Rare to open Sports Illustrated and see something on the Sixers, but it's there this week. On the "Inside the NBA" page, Chris Mannix has a small item in which he quotes an unnamed Western Conference scout talking about the Sixers. Here it is:

"They are having dunk contests before games; they are running plays sloppily or not all the way through; and they aren't listening to (coach) Eddie Jordan. They have quit. They know Eddie is gone (after the season) and they think they don't have to listen anymore. The thing is, they are making themselves look like a-------. These guys think that just because Eddie is gone they will be back (next year). But nobody wants guys who give up when things go bad. Eddie's offense was a bad fit for this roster - they have to find a way to play more up-tempo - but these guys are embarrassing themselves. And everyone around the league knows it."

There you have it. Thoughts?

user-pic
sfw reply to smh19980 on Mar 26 at 15:41
+/-

That in addition to the lack of interest in the team will be the reason to tear this down somewhat(Iggy, Lou, ? - outahere) rather than add to what they already have.

user-pic
sfw reply to sfw on Mar 26 at 15:56
+/-

Let's just say make significant changes to the leadership on this roster besides the obvious(the coach). Sammy may also have good value at seasons end.

FYI, if anyone wants ESPN Insider for cheap:

http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1938450

At the point Sp8ghts seems to be playing his own game offensively out there and his 'D' is lousy. Needs a coach who emphasizes defense first and minimizes his role on offense. Then we'll see if he gets it. If not, get rid of him.

I used to think DiLeo was a somewhat good drafter and then I went back and and looked at the 2007 draft when we had four picks and jesus he completely botched it.

We could have had Rodney Stuckey, Wilson Chandler, Carl Landry, and Marc Gasol.

Our team wasn't even that good then. This is what happens when you constantly pick 12th and think you are a contender every year.

Expect it to continue.

user-pic
Mike P. reply to Mike P. on Mar 26 at 17:31
+/-

Then we took Speights over Ibaka and Batum.

That is depressing, and it made me realize our team doesn't have any international players. Our scouting staff is garbage. :*(

Most people didn't think Ibaka was coming over anytime soon.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Mike P. on Mar 26 at 17:38
+/-

Your 2007 draft list doesn't exactly excite me - Gasol was an unknown in europe and just the kind of players the sixers don't draft

user-pic
Mike P. reply to JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 17:44
+/-

Which is why the Sixers are awful and no one cares about them.

Would you rather have Thaddeus "I can't rebound" Young or those four guys?

If you say Young you should be banned from ever talking about basketball on the internet with people you don't know for eternity.

Rodney Stuckey's been awful. I'd definitely rather have Young.

Complaining about Young's rebounding and listing Landry is a little bit hypocritical.

Nobody expect Marc Gasol to be this good. It wasn't just the Sixers who missed out on him.

Chandler's a full 2 years older than Young.

If those are the guys you're complaining that the Sixers missed out on, it's not very bad. There isn't one team in the league you can't look back in hindsight and find somebody they missed.

user-pic
Mike P. reply to Derek Bodner on Mar 26 at 18:11
+/-

Yeah but we had four picks and have arguably missed on all of them in one of the more talented recent drafts.

I mean Petterni Koppenin? Jason Smith?

Looking back that draft was horrible.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Mike P. on Mar 26 at 18:13
+/-

Yeah but the names you mentioned (aside from gasol) are shit as well

none of them has more upside than Young - and until this season young had out played most of them (again except Gasol)

Your lamentations seem false because 3/4 of the names you used as 'better options' aren't exactly awesome

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 18:18
+/-

I actually liked Kaponen and Fesenko and would take a flyer on Fesenko this summer if he is out there.Could be a serviceable backup and we gave him up for H. Hill I believe.

user-pic
Mike P. reply to JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 18:24
+/-

Now see, you say that, but we could have had Young AND Landry, Gasol, and Aaron Brooks/Chandler.

Are you saying you won't want Landry and Brooks on our bench?

Awful draft, even with Young on our team. 3 picks just botched. The guys we got in trades for those shitty picks we made aren't even in the league. Also you have to think about how Young plays the same damn position as our best player.

This makes me very sad about the future of our franchise in anyway. Can't get better via the draft, can't get better in FA because no one wants to come here. :*(

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Mike P. on Mar 26 at 18:58
+/-

Hind sight is awesome isn't it

Could you show me where on draft night you (or anyone) thought the sixers made drastic mistakes?

K thx bye

user-pic
Mike P. reply to JohnEMagee on Mar 26 at 21:22
+/-

When they didn't tank enough to get Oden or Durant.

Just like how we didn't tank enough to get Wall this year.

HEEELLLOOOOOO COLE ALDRICH!

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to sfw on Mar 26 at 17:53
+/-

Impossible to be great since it was from Simmons

And the subject matter makes it more so

Nonsense to 'judge' any player by 2-6 games

He really needs to fact check a little better. Earlier today he had Chris Paul playing at Georgia Tech and UCLA not making the tournament last year. I believe he's corrected both.

user-pic
JohnEMagee reply to Derek Bodner on Mar 26 at 17:59
+/-

To me simmons is a columnist, a guy who is writing for humor and yucks and mostly opinion...him being given weight as an 'analyst' by many is one of the greatest evils ESPN has perpetrated upon the nation (i mean it's not skip bayless evil, but it's close)

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Derek Bodner on Mar 26 at 18:08
+/-

What is your opinion of L.Sanders? Could he be a Chris Anderson type of role player or is there more there. If he could be more would you give up Spieghts this early?

In terms of potential shot blocking bigs, he would be about 4th on my list.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif