DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

Pressing Questions - August 13

Isn't it obvious? Sixers fans won't give Iguodala a break until he averages at least over 20 ppg. That's what fans care about, for better or worse. And although Sixers fans might be harsher, the average NBA fan would feel the same way no matter what team Iguodala was on.

The real question is why is Ed Snider trying to duplicate the Nets circa 2003? It's like all those trades for Mutombo, Webber, etc. Building around old guys who never won an NBA title. Ed Snider has to be the most apathetic owner in the league

user-pic
AaronMcKie4MVP reply to Jesse on Aug 13 at 7:02
+/-

this is the typical johnmagee response. its not ppg. i think its the lack of any ability to get things done when it counts. spare me the b/s stats about 4th qtr shooting % inside 2 minutes. i watch the games , i cringe when he has the ball in the 4th.

iguodala obviously has his strengths in other areas. but fans want top tier players to be heroic. thats just not his game.

Let me summarize your response...

"Iguodala doesn't score enough."

user-pic
MylesKong reply to AaronMcKie4MVP on Aug 13 at 9:14
+/-

What's odd to me is that here Iggy receives no criticism. I just don't get it. Did he win a championship that I'm not aware of and he's above criticism? When someone does criticize him here they get villainized for sharing their opinion which gets marginalized as nonsense.

Iggy himself has said that he needs to focus on doing what he does well. That's what I think most of the critcs believe. But, whatever...

user-pic
Jeff reply to MylesKong on Aug 13 at 19:23
+/-

He gets criticized on here a lot, actually. The thing is, no one really makes a good argument or a valid claim when criticizing him. It's these weak arguments that get bashed, not the people making them.

I have yet to meet a sixer fan that keeps up with the team not like Iguodala.

Granted I don't know any sixers fans irl (don't live in philly). But all the ones i've seen on the internet seem to like him.


I don't think Thorn will trade any significant player until 2011 comes. I think he'll see how this team fits in after all the changes that have happened this off-season.

user-pic
Joe reply to Jason on Aug 13 at 7:30
+/-

Stay away from forums where Iguodala is in the title. It can be pretty brutal.

My biggest issue isn!t about where Thorn is from but the lack of going after a young president and a young coach who can grow with this franchise and be here for the long haul. Maybe Collins is needed here before a young coach can be trusted but if he and Thorn are gone in 3 years what than?

As far as Iggy, maybe this helps him reach the status most of us feel he is capable of; the perception of our team has changed drastically in the preceding 2 years with 2 great drafts and REAL basketball people being added and hopefully the icing on the cake will be winning more games and the possibility of putting our owners in the position to spend more money because of that.

I am very excited !!!

What are you talking about going after a young coach? Doug Collins isn't going to retire or die in the next 10 years. He's an experienced, proven winner. What would you rather, another young coach like, say, Mo Cheeks or Eddie Jordan?

"What's it going to take for Sixers fans to realize this guy can really play?"

The ability to win games.

I'm not a huge Iggy fan myself. It's not that I don't think he can play, but he doesn't deserve to be in the elite status. It's one thing to look good on FREAKIN TEAM USA, and it's another to be able to carry your team to the playoffs. That's what I want. He did it 2 years ago. What the hell happened last year? Losing Miller obviously was a huge factor, but is Iggy really that dependant on a PG? If so, than that's the answer your looking for. Here's the list of players that can single-handedly take their team to the playoffs, simply by winning games:

Kobe
Lebron
Wade
Dirk
Roy
Durant
Dwight

I may be missing a few. But these are the type of players who if you trade straight up for Iggy, we would be playoff bound. Iggy is good sure, but not in this category. And a player in this category is what it takes to win in today's NBA.

user-pic
Joe reply to zdiddy on Aug 13 at 8:36
+/-

How quickly people forget the Lakers between Shaq and Gasol... They did miss the playoffs one year(Kobe played 66 games) and they did lose in the 1st round the other 2 as 7 seeds.

Not trying to start a Kobe flame war.

Iguodala can't be blames for management doing a really bad job of putting decent players around him. I mean even KG didn't make the playoffs some years as a top 5 NBA player.(and probably the best at certain times)

So if he's not one of those guys he's not good?

How exactly is it Iguodala's fault that this team lacks that type of of star player? And if we had one, wouldn't Iguodala be the perfect complement?

Sorry, but Roy doesn't belong on that list. If you're judging by some ridiculous playoff scale, at least limit it to guys who have won a round in the playoffs. Durant being the exception to that rule.

Roy and Iguodala are on the same level IMO. In fact Iguodala would have thrived the last few seasons in Portland.

Roy????

I liked Thorn as a player. Tough as nails. We now have the structure of a professional basketball organization. Got to give props to Snyder and company for going out and filling a position of need with a well respected basketball administrator. Hopefully, Thorn has a Pat Gillick type affect on this Sixer's organization. The roster as constituted is interesting with a couple pieces of value. With a tweak here or there and some luck who knows.

user-pic
MylesKong reply to sfw on Aug 13 at 9:07
+/-

Spot on! Thorn as the Sixer's Pat Gillick is a great comparison. I was just thinking he replaces LB's old input, but yours is better.

I really like Iguodala's game. I think why casual fans don't is a.) they think he's making too much money, and b.) that he's not a 20ppg scorer. If he gets his average above 20, which is pretty arbitrary in basketball terms, but is a psychologically significant benchmark, we'll get Iguodala fans pouring out of the woodwork.

(As an aside, all the kudos he's getting on the USA team ought to raise his trade value significantly. Not that I'd like to trade him, unless we could somehow get a serious big out of the deal.)

Thorn took over decision making of the Nets in June 2000 IIRC. It wasn't until June 2001 (Jason Kidd trade) that he made a significant trade, IIRC.

I think I'd actually prefer a similar timeline here. Unless he can find something smart to do with the expiring contracts at the deadline.

Unless a young superstar becomes available (like CP3) then there really is no urgency to pull off a trade. Most of the pieces on the roster have minimal or negative trade value right now. No reason to take anther step back just for the sake of saying you made a move.

The Iguodala like/hate comes down to some simple principles:

1: When the team is struggling is it the best players fault, or is it because the other players/management are lousy? (Again, the Kobe winning/struggling comparison. He's suddenly a whole lot more popular nationally since Pau joined the team. while people where piling on a few years earlier.)

2: Do you only like a player if they are a top 20 superstar? How about if they are not, but are the best player your team has?

Wilt, Schmidt, Barkley, AI, McNabb have all taken a ton of heat whenever their team's struggled to contend. And Iguodala is not nearly the star that those guys were. Ultimately it comes down to Iguodala needs to be used properly. he is an elite complementary player. A Pippen-lite, glue guy. But when a GM tries to build a franchise around him and make him the offensive focal point then they are destined to come up short. And I blame the management, and not the player for that.

This cracks me up.

Team USA put on a scrimmage at Radio City Music Hall Thursday night. During the event several NBA players not on the squad were interviewed. Those players included Amar'e Stoudemire, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Paul and Dwyane Wade.
LeBron James was also there, but was not interviewed because the organizers didn't want him to be booed.

Here's the link.

user-pic
MylesKong on Aug 13 at 10:16
+/-

ESPN has a worst additions list. There's only one rook to make the list. Guess who?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=SummerForecast10-WorstNewcomer

Makes me wonder about the Thorn hiring. The Sixers tend to hold on to young players, and don't seem to no when to move them while their value's at the highest. Maybe, Thorn is here just in case Turner doesn't pan out. Thorn might have those "instincts" to know when a guys not going to pan out in enough time to get good value in a trade. He did trade away a potential beast in young late Eddie Griffin and had the balls to let Martin go.

Seems like a stretch to me to think they brought in a president just in case their #2 draft pick doesn't pan out before he's even played a game.

Luukko said they hired Thorn "because he became available" and they were not actively pursuing a new Pres.

I guess this is likely true. Otherwise why would you let Stefanski pick your new coach and #2 pick if you were planning on replacing him.

user-pic
MylesKong reply to Brian on Aug 13 at 10:36
+/-

Yeah, but we do have other player for which decisions need to be made in Thad and Speights. I think this because they said even after his tenure as prez is over they have already agreed that Thorn will stay on as a consultant. That seems really odd to me.

If Turner is a bust the organization is screwed and losing money for that much longer. It's unusual for this organization but a proactive approach to mitigate any damages would be very smart, espcially when you look at our recent history with top 5 picks not named Iverson.

Recent history? You mean 10 years ago?

user-pic
MylesKong reply to tk76 on Aug 13 at 10:48
+/-

Since Snider has been the owner.

Yeah, they had some lousy results with top 5 picks in the 90's. Problem was many of those years were slim picking. Like when they had #2 the year Duncan was #1. I don't think any of the other top 10 picks that year had success with the team that drafted them.

, Turner struggled in summer league and is stuck behind a glut of wings on the Sixers' roster.

That's ESPN's analysis. You know how they do it? They look at the roster, look at years played and position and presume that Turner is blocked by these 'veteran' players like willie green, louis williams, and jodie meeks for instance.

None of whom actually block Turner at this point cause they're all bench players.

ESPN's analysis makes sense if you think Iguodala will play a lot of SG and Young SF... which per Collins he won't.

ESPN's "analysis" doesn't make sense, period. They're just filling space.

user-pic
MylesKong reply to GoSixers on Aug 13 at 11:03
+/-

I don't give too much credence to ESPN's opinion. It just made me think, there are some that believe Turner won't be good. As an owner you have to have a contigency when so much of your success($$$) are tied so closely to one player's success. I was really trying to understand why they made the hire. If they weren't looking, why did they hire this guy? I always tie questions like that to how does it help them make money. And this is the best I've come up with so far. I'd love to hear the answer if someone asked them that question directly.

If it made you think at all, you give it too much credence, and there have been people questioning turner for months now, more so since the summer league.

Well see, they weren't looking cause Thorn wasn't available, then he had the falling out with the new nets crazy russian and he was available so they were looking. And you should ALWAYS be looking for ways to improve your franchise. I'm just disappointed that they didn't look to other available candidates as well (as far as we know) like a KP.

Actually what you seem to do a lot is take 2, add 2, and come up with turnips.

user-pic
MylesKong reply to GoSixers on Aug 13 at 11:15
+/-

Thanks. You have great insight.

I can't think of any ulterior motive beyond what Luukko stated...

Snider was unsettled with how Stefanski was doing, but not enough to fire him. I guess they feel more comfortable with Stefanski in a somewhat diminished role.

The whole "future consultant" thing makes me think Thorn is getting close to retirement and wants to be more hands off. More of a Joe Paterno type organizational leader who gets final say on the big decisions, but leaves most of the day to day workings to his proteges. Makes sense given Thorn's former underling is already in place, while in NJ Thorn would have to battle with more pro-active ownership and a more abrasive coach.

And Cousins & Favors were right behind Turner with 2 votes each. This might be the most ridiculous ESPN list I've seen yet, and that's saying a lot. They should stick to NFL training camp updates and leave the NBA to the pros.

Did anyone else hear that the Sixers are going to be charging more for opening night and the game against the Lakers? I know this is a fairly common practice but for the sixers to do this now after last season seems like another real bad move by them.

It's funny that you have to pay more to see the Sixers get their asses handed to them by those two teams :)

The sixers didn't charge more for single game tickets for event teams (Lakers, Cavs type) last season? That's surprising to me, and stupid marketing. Casual fans show up to see the stars, charging a little extra helps the bottom line.

It's probably only 3 games max, but charging more for single tickets when the Lakers and now the Heat come to town just makes sense. I'm surprised they hadn't done it sooner, maybe the Celtics, but I don't really think they have the star power any more and the rivalry is non existent

They had tiered pricing for group tickets last year. I remember they wanted like twice as much for a Sixers/Bulls game late in the season as we paid for the field trip against the Clippers. I laughed at the ticket sales rep and asked him if he realized he was trying to charge me a premium to see two sub-.500 teams go at it.

Like I said, I could see it justified for the Lakers, the Heat, maybe with the ascension of Durant, their once a year trip to Philly might be a premium, but aside from that I don't see a lot of 'name' players attracting casual fans to justify an added premium for those games.

It makes sense financially but is it really the smart thing to do when the Sixers are a very distant 4th in the minds of most Philly sports fans? I mean they have been in the news a lot this summer for mostly positive things (Lottery, Doug Collins, Evan Turner) and now they are alienating any good will they might have built up with this dumb move.

user-pic
MylesKong reply to Chodeburger on Aug 13 at 11:34
+/-

And the ruination of the league by the Super Heat begins...

The more 'super teams' there are, the better the NBA as a whole does...you're the one trying to connect it to money up there...if you think the heat 'ruins' the NBA you don't see that the primary purpose of the NBA is to make money and a new super team helps the NBA make more money. It gives them another 'cache' team to increase the casual fan tv ratings.

The NBA is hoping and praying and wishing for a Lakers Heat final - to go 7 games - to be close every game. That's Sterns wet dream right now

I think Stern was against the whole Heat thing. Sure it can lead to higher Finals ratings... but at what cost over the course of the season. he wants 5-6 compelling contenders, not just 2 or 3. If 80% of the teams fans feel they have no shot for years to come they will lose their fan bases. Look at what happened to the Sixers.

Casual fans, the fans who only show up when a team is competetive, aren't part of the fan base (in my opinion). They are the extras you get what you win.

Boston
Orlando
Miami
Lakers
Heat
Portland
Thunder

There are more than two compelling contenders.

And the Lakers have been the only serious contender in the west for 3 straight seasons pretty much, doesn't seem to hur ttoo much.

We will see. A lot of people are thinking Miami won't be a cut above. But I'm expecting a 90's Bulls type situation where you have Miami and whomever is hot that year.

I think the heat are going to be a lot like Lebrons cavs, regular season good playoffs not so good, but I still think there's more competitors in the east than there are in the west.

I know they're 'newer', but the Lakers have more superstars and talent and better coaching than the heat, and have for a few years now and while people hate the lakers I don't see anyone saying the Lakers are destroying the NBA. It's the short sighted knee jerk reaction that's driving me nuts. The lakers spend tons more money than the heat

user-pic
speekeasy reply to GoSixers on Aug 17 at 3:06
+/-

the lakers have more superstars than the Heat? Maybe the Showtime Lakers but Artest, Odom, and Bynum aren't anywhere near superstars. At best its a tie with Lebron and D-Wade vs. Kobe and Pau

Barring an injury to Wade, I think this is probably most likely. It'd be fun to see who can shrink more in the playoffs between LeBitch and Bosh if Wade gets hurt.

I think the Heat make it to the Finals most if not all years (unless the Magic can add CP3), but I could see the Heat losing in the Finals, unlike the Bulls who always won.

But the number of truly elite teams any given season will be much like the 90's. You will have the Heat and then maybe 1-2 other teams emerge as legit contenders any given season (like the Suns, Utah, Portland, Houson did over the years.) And if you don't have multiple superstars (top 10) then you really have no shot as a franchise.

So you think the Lakers are done?

I think by the All Star break there will be 1-2 other legit contenders aside from the Heat. One of those teams will likely be the Lakers next year. But they are less likely to be contenders in 3 years. And by then the Heat may be in a league of their own.

At this point, the NBA 'power' rankings to me, right now start out like this:

1. Lakers
2. Heat

Now I believe Kobe's finger issue is a bigger long term deal than is yet being reported (I don't know if people know this but reports in LA are that even if he had surgery on his finger, he couldn't correct the issues, it's a permanent thing now), but assuming both teams are fully healthy, I believe the Lakers are just better, deeper, more talented and more experienced together. I think the Heat have a lot of guys on their last legs they are hoping performs in ways unlikely.

Could be right. But the Heat stars are 25-28. MJ and company won all their rings ages 28-35. I expect the Heat to dramatically improve their supporting cast in 1-2 years to where it will take another "super-team" to compete. Sort of how the Suns traded for Barkley to make a "super-team."

I expect the Heat to dramatically improve their supporting cast in 1-2 years

If Stern gets what he wants in the new CBA in terms of a harder cap and a lower Cap percentage, I don't see how they'll do it. If he gets to eliminate his MLE and Bi Annual exception, all the heat will have left is minimum deals to sign guys to?

Its possible. But if there are any loopholes, then Miami will be the beneficiary because players and agents will want the ancillary benefits.

LeBron James career playoff PER is 27.1. Career regular season is 26.1. WS/48 0.229 for playoffs, 0.224 for regular season.

Yeah, he struggled at times against Boston, but this is being drastically overstated.

I don't have an issue w/ a guy struggling in a playoff series. That happens to everyone. I have an issue with a guy flat out quitting in a playoff series, and that's what I saw LeBron do in the last two games of the Celts/Cavs playoff series last year.

As far as I'm concerned, he's in Miami now because he wants/needs Wade to be the guy to carry the scoring load in important playoff games, which is fine. I'm just interested to see what'll happen if Wade gets hurt and he's back in the same situation where teams are gearing up to stop him exclusively and get the ball out of his hands in the playoffs.

Do we know how badly Lebron's elbow was hurt?

He's a guy who got his team to the finals at a young age while playing magnificently. I think you're definitely reading too much into two games he may have been legitimately hurt in.

I don't have a problem with him wanting to play with Bosh/Wade, actually. You don't get bonus points for playing by yourself. Magic didn't lose cred because he played with Worthy/Kareem, neither did MJ because he played with Pippen. Just because it's the Heat doesn't automatically make it "Wade's team" just because Wade was there first. I just have a problem with how LeBron carried himself through the whole debacle.

If Magic Johnson had left the Lakers to go play with the celtics (or the sixers) would he have lost credibility?

If Jordan left Chicago to go play in Houston or Portland, would he have lost credibility?

I don't think the comparisons you made are as valid, because of the whole playing with the team that drafted you think.

Whether it's good or bad, I believe going to Miami, to somone elses 'team' already does say something about who Lebron James is, the amount of 'responsibility' he's willing to shoulder. I don't know if it's a good or bad thing, but I do think it says something about who he is compared to a guy like Jordan or Magic or Bird and I don't know if it means anything about his game though

How Lebron is viewed will be based on how many titles he wins.

Look how different the perception around Kobe is now compared to 3-4 years ago when his non-Shaq teams were struggling and he was universally hated.

Completely different NBA. What free agency has morphed into has completely changed the landscape. Magic had extreme talent around him that allowed him to be the player he was. It would be darned near impossible for LeBron to have accumulated that talent in Cleveland with their salary structure. Why should he have stuck around ?

user-pic
speekeasy reply to Brian on Aug 17 at 3:14
+/-

as trendy as it is to shit on LBJ right now (and rightfully so after he semi-gave up in the Celtics series) lets not forget he's the same guy who at 22 beat the Pistons single-handedly and carried a pretty weak Cavs team to the finals. just sayin

I disagree I know a lot of real fans myself included who don't go to a lot of Sixers games because the money spent at a game isn't worth the product on the court. Just because you don't want to spend $100 to see the Sixers get their asses kicked doesn't mean your not a serious fan.

I'm not talking about serious fans, I'm talking about casual fans, and by posting on a blog, you disqualify yourself from being a casual fan. Casual fans are the reason the sixers up the ticket prices for teams like the heat and the lakers. Casual fans who maybe get to one or two games a year but love to show up when the sixers are winning because it's a nice bandwagon. You aren't one of those fans by virtue of posting on a blog. Fans like that don't post on blogs :) At least that's the point i'm trying to make. It's the folks who loved to see Jordan play but didn't really care that much about a specific NBA team.

I agree about the bandwagon fans but with all the other options out there to see basketball in the area I think the Sixers should do a better job of making themselves more accesible. How much money are they really going to make off of this? 1 million? 5 million? Does anyone honestly think this is going towards the Sixers? I believe there was a story in the inquirer the other day about comcast spending millions to try and get their acquisition of NBC approved.

I'm not surprised getting FCC approval of the NBC purchase is running into problems, the inherent conflicts in one of the biggest cable providers owning numerous cable networks just reeks of violations.

comcast is an enormous money making machine, no doubt, but money making machines never stop getting hungry, and the sixers are probably a loss on the books now, so 1 million, 5 million, whatever extra they can pick up, the pick up.

And no offense to St Joes, Drexel, Temple, Penn, LaSalle and all the real philly schools, the NBA is a better product and guys like Kobe and Lebron are bigger pulls than if Duke is coming to town for an ACC A-10 challenge (do they even do one of those?)

I absolutely agree that the NBA is better basketball but do you think a Sixers game at $100 is that much better a product than a Big 5 game at say $25?

$100 gets you seats almost on the floor for the Sixers, these days. I'm pretty sure they have plenty of seats under $20 for most games.

You can get season ticket plans at something like $10/game

(granted, you'll pay $17 to park, but that's a different story ... )

Yea I was more factoring in everything (parking, food, drinks) not just a ticket. Even so a crappy seat at the Palestra or Liacorous is better than the nose bleeds at the Wells Fargo or whatever it is called today.

user-pic
MylesKong reply to GoSixers on Aug 13 at 12:03
+/-

Again, stellar insight. The way you tied in the "money" connection was brilliant. I love that. It's like you're in my head. I was just thinking, the Sixers increasing revenues from winning totally ties in to them charging more for the Miami Heat game. Just thinking that!

Maybe if you understood what I was saying you'd get it. David Stern doesn't care about the health of one team as much as the health of his LEAGUE. The Entire League.

The Spurs are a good basketball team, but the NBA hates them in the finals. You know why? Cause they are boring and while Tim Duncan is one of the best of all time, he's not a charismatic personality, he doesn't draw the fans. The NBA wants StORYLINES to hype, they want NAMES that people who don't normally follow the NBA want to watch play, that's why they love the heat, they love the lakers, and that's the finals they want. Because the ratings will be better.

There's this thing called revenue sharing, the more money the league makes the more money the sixers probably make.

user-pic
MylesKong reply to GoSixers on Aug 13 at 12:43
+/-

Oh I get it Ed Snider wouldn't make a move to protect a valuable asset because he'll probably make more money if the Heat and Lakers meet in the playoffs. I don't know how he has time to do anything. Probably still counting the money he reaped from the 2 LA-Boston showdowns over the last two years. I guess that's why they didn't care about getting any fans in the building to watch his team. As long as the other NBA teams do well, who cares?

That's not what I said either.

It's possible to have a bad team with minimal payroll and still be profitable.

Do you know which NBA team usually makes the most money year in and year out?

user-pic
MylesKong reply to GoSixers on Aug 13 at 12:55
+/-

Sorry, I can be such a troglodyte sometimes. I'm sure you have the answer though.

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Aug 13 at 13:19
+/-

Clippers I think.

Spot on :)

user-pic
Steve reply to GoSixers on Aug 13 at 18:23
+/-

the most money? come on, it has to be the Lakers

Well see, when I say making money, I mean profits, after all over head expenses, etc, what I'm talking about is net profit, not just revenue

I'm getting tired with arguing about people about Iguodala. He has his faults (mainly his shooting), which prevent him from being a superstar. If people don't want to realize how good he is, then that's their fault. I actually think a lot of people here at least respect his abilities, which is enough for me.

It is funny that the US team (all the players along Coach K and Colangelo) are refuting a lot of the Philly stereotypes of Iguodala, like:

He's not a good teammate and he makes other uncomfortable: Durant called him a 'great teammate.'

He's a tough guy to build a team with: This one is the most absurd to me, but Coach K and the team has talked about his versatility and how he's easy to play with.

His ego forces him to take shots: He has said how happy he is the whole time with not shooting that much, and everyone focuses on his defense.

And so on, so I feel vindicated defending this guy, although it's time to stop focusing on him, at least for me.

I cannot think of another NBA team where Iguodala would not be a starter and key piece (and fit well.) That is high praise.

The Lakers is the only team I could think of he wouldn't start on. If only to soothe Artests ego

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Aug 13 at 18:25
+/-

I can't see Igoudala starting over Peirce or Allen

Just to play Devil's advocate but do you think he would be a good fit on Orlando? I figure SVG would change his strategy a little if they had Igoudala but with the way they spread the floor around Howard I don't know if his outside shooting would fit.

Yeah, he'd be a very good fit there. They get enough shooting from the 4,2 and 1 positions.

As I understand it, the Magic system requires shooters at all 4 positions, no?

If it does, how did Matt Barnes play 2,100 minutes in the system last year?

user-pic
Rich reply to Brian on Aug 13 at 18:10
+/-

They made Courtney Lee into a good shooter there too. Iggy's three point percentage would be much higher there. People don't give the Magic enough credit for the defense they play. They know their strengths and execute well. He would fit nicely there.

Agree that Orlando would be a tougher fit. That said, Iguodala would be better than VC at this stage of their careers. And given how many dunks Iguodala created for Sam- imagine how he could pair with DH12.

Not to take anything away from Igoudala but pretty much anyone would be a better fit than VC. Orlando would have been better off not making that trade.

Iguodala is not a franchise player. That is all. He is a very very very good complimentary player.

But he cannot thrive in alpha dog role. It's not in his skill set.

That is why people criticize him. He's being forced to play a role he can't. If Turner can become that go to scorer and we do keep Iggy, everyone will be happy to have him around.

user-pic
Jason reply to Mike P on Aug 13 at 18:02
+/-

"Iguodala is not a franchise player."

Not many players are in this league. How many players do you think are better than iguodala currently?

user-pic
Mike P reply to Jason on Aug 13 at 18:06
+/-

Like 10 or so. I don't feel like making a list.

He is in the Pau Gasol tier.

Probably like the 3 or 4th best SF.

Bron/Durant, Melo, Iggy, etc. He's a Gasol complementary type.

user-pic
Stan reply to Mike P on Aug 13 at 18:41
+/-

That's too high

Players I would take over Iguodala without hesitation

Deron Williams
Chris Paul
Derrick Rose
Kobe Bryant
Dwayne Wade
Lebron James
Kevin Durant
Carmelo Anthony
Dwight Howard
Dirk Nowitski
Josh Smith
LaMarcus Aldridge
Tim Duncan
John Wall
Stephen Curry
Russell Westbrook
Rajon Rondo
Andrea Bargnani


Players I would consider
Paul Peirce
David West
Amare Stoudemire
Chris Bosh
Brook Lopez
Brandon Roy
Danny Granger
Rudy Gay
Gerald Wallace
David West
Joe Johnson
Tyreke Evans
Manu Ginobili
Ray Allen
Chauncey Billups
Carlos Boozer

user-pic
Mike P reply to Stan on Aug 13 at 18:49
+/-

Still sticking to the 10ish range. Rondo is pretty much the cut off.

LMA is a nancy. Smith is the post defense version of Iggy.

Deron Williams
Chris Paul
Derrick Rose
Kobe Bryant
Dwayne Wade
Lebron James
Kevin Durant
Carmelo Anthony
Dwight Howard
Dirk
Rajon Rondo

Those are the franchise guys right now. The next tier is the great players who aren't quite franchise guys due to lack of skills or age. Those guys go hand in hand with the complementary players. Iggy is right near the top of the complementary player pack.

Below that Bosh and Roy tier.

Bargnani. That's funny.

user-pic
Jeff reply to Brian on Aug 14 at 10:24
+/-

and Aldridge, without hesitation.

I actually did a player ranking for fun a few weeks ago. I had Iguodala as the 4th best SF behind Lebron, Durant, Carmello, and Pierce. I had him as the 27th best player overall, which was higher then I thought he would be. Heres my list:

1. Kobe Bryant
2. Lebron James
3. Dwyane Wade
4. Kevin Durant
5. Dwight Howard
6. Dirk Nowitzki
7. Carmello Anthony
8. Deron Williams
9. Chris Paul
10. Pau Gasol
11. Rajon Rondo
12. Amare Stoudemire
13. Chris Bosh
14. Steve Nash
15. Brandon Roy
16. Paul Pierce
17. Tim Duncan
18. Carlos Boozer
19. Joe Johnson
20. Derrick Rose
21. Russell Westbrook
22. Chauncey Billups
23. Andrew Bogut
24. Josh Smith
25. Manu Ginobili
26. David Lee
27. Andre Iguodala

user-pic
Jason reply to DonH on Aug 14 at 16:25
+/-

How is Rondo a top 15 player?

Also David lee and Manu? really?

I don't think the gap b/w IGuodala and the people in the top 15-30 is substantial.

Did you watch the playoffs this year? How is Rondo NOT a top 15 player. Before you point out the obvious, please consider the rest of his game, it more then makes up for it.

Pau Gasol is a franchise player, he just happens to play with one of the better ones in the NBA.

You mentioned 10 franchise playes, 5 of them are on the cavs and the lakers probably, so that only leaves 5 guys left to distribute between 28 teams.


And the other thing, per usual, who here said Iguodala was a franchise player (and no he's not making franchise player money)

user-pic
Mike P reply to GoSixers on Aug 14 at 19:30
+/-

The franchise did. When they paid him all that money to get us to a .500 record every year.

Duh.

And Pau is not a franchise player. He is an amazing second banana. Just like Iggy.

And yeah, there are only like 10 franchise guys. Why do you think only 5 or so teams have a real LEGIT chance to win a title every year?

Miami, Orlando, Boston, LA, Denver, or Dallas (and maybe JUST maybe OKC, and SA might have one more run) will win the title next year. Try to tell me otherwise without sounding retarded.

That is 6-7 teams out of 30.

Note, I never said Iggy wasn't a good player. He is very talented. He just isn't the guy you build your entire team around AKA a franchise.

The thing that people need to realize is that the NBA is better and deeper now than it was when guys like Magic, Larry, and even Jordan played.

The idea of the Heat being a Super Team would be even more impressive today with all of the smart people who run franchises around the league. When Magic and Bird played, they basically were playing against each other. Sure, throw the Sixers in the conversation in the early part of the 80s and the Pistons in the later part of the decade, but there wasn't much competition at the top.

It's not like that anymore. Arguably the best PF of all time is only 34 and his team has and will always be well-run, yet they aren't considered serious title contenders. That's saying something. The main point is that people who kill LeBron as a bad playoff player also have to take into account that the league is better. There are more obstacles, and owners aren't selling #1 picks for Gail Goodrich anymore. Yeah, LeBron isn't Jordan, but nobody is going to win like Jordan in today's game. The way he left Cleveland was bad, but his decision is sound in the way the NBA works. I would have liked for him to stay with Cleveland, but he knows better than anyone how elusive winning is in the NBA.

He looked at it this way: Of all of his suitors, none really provided a chance for him to assemble talent and be 'the man' except maybe Chicago. Miami gives him the best chance to have sustained excellence in the NBA. You can't do it by yourself anymore.

The biggest compliment I can give Iggy is in every statement being made about him during the U.S.A. basketball tryouts the name Pippen could be inserted and it would be a perfect fit.

random question: When do we get to use that pick from the giricek/korver trade? or have we already used it?

user-pic
JAson reply to rchap13 on Aug 13 at 23:24
+/-

We gave it to minny so we could free up cap space for Elton Brand :).

Ended up being the 23rd pick this year.

user-pic
Alvin reply to JAson on Aug 15 at 3:46
+/-

We could have gotten Daniel Orton/Hassan Whiteside with that pick?!?!

God damn!!!

"Andre Iguodala has basically locked down a starting spot on Team USA. The coaches have been heaping praise on him. He was the player of the game in leading his squad to another win in last night's scrimmage. What's it going to take for Sixers fans to realize this guy can really play?"

Responses:

1) I think real Sixers' fans know he can play at a high level. I'm not surprised he is doing well for Team USA. He is an optimal all around contributor on a team with other stars. What he is not particularly well suited for is being the #1 scoring option on a mediocre team. I think many Sixers' fans blame him for assuming that role but this assumption is most likely attributable to suboptimal team dynamics and only secondly to his own choices.

2) He plays for a Philadelphia team and Philly fans are notorious for being unkind to their stars. They're a little kinder to supporting players but not all that much. I don't think Ig will ever hear as many boos as Mike Schmidt did during his career. Philly fans do seem to treat their stars with fiery, heart-on-their-sleeves personalities (e.g., Iverson or Barkley) a little better.

user-pic
turtlebay on Aug 14 at 17:12
+/-

Who wouldn't want Iguodala on our team? Especially at the price we're paying (not that much). It's ridiculous that people want to trade away our only proven solid player.

user-pic
Tom Moore on Aug 15 at 12:07
+/-

Am at USA Basketball exhibition game vs. France in NYC.

Jeff Green and JaVale McGee were just cut, trimming roster to 13.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif