DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

Brand's Hot Start

Agree completely. It is great to see him playing at this level. After his purgatory last year he must feel he made it to heaven. As far as some of the previous trading conversations. I'd target the Clippers or Kings. Both can use small forward help( we have an excess) and have young bigs who would be welcome additions(Jordon/Thompson).

user-pic
The Greek on Nov 1 at 7:30
+/-

If we trade Brand then we go from being the worst interior defensive team in the league to the worst of all time.

Don't stop there. Get rid of everyone except Jrue and Turner. Damn that Favors looks nasty.

Great to see Brand playing well. I'm not going to think too much about it for a couple weeks, though.

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Nov 1 at 8:47
+/-

If he continues to play well, is there any trade now that gets more value than letting him become a huge expiring contract and moving him than? Will a huge expiring's value be lowered by the new C.B.A. and its new rules? Will there be an amnesty for him?

user-pic
khouse reply to deepsixersuede on Nov 1 at 9:35
+/-

I agree that this might be the best scenario given Brand's age which is likely to impact any team's interest in him! Also, I would add Brackin's name to the list of those that need development as well to see what he bring's to the team's future nucleus as well! I know though he's been designated by Collins as a "red-shirt freshman" this year which IMO is a huge mistake! I mean, if we had better depth, fine but since we aren't the Celtics & given the play of both Speights & Hawes, this kid's time needs to be now!

No, no team will want him just because he's kind of good again. There have to be much cheaper ways to get rebounding.

user-pic
Joe reply to Tray on Nov 1 at 9:43
+/-

He isn't rebounding well really. He is doing several things much better actually.

9 rebounds in 35 minutes isn't something to write home about. Sammy was rebounding 50% more last year per minute than Brand is right now.

14% reb% vs. 21%

user-pic
smh1980 on Nov 1 at 9:25
+/-

I think Houston could be a good trade partner for the sixers. Good thing we have Rod Thorn to exploit this when the time is right.

16M, 17M, 18M.

No way any team touches that salary unless we take back similar long term garbage. Your best hope would be to do what the Kings did with CWebbs toxic contract- trade it for 3 smaller but equally toxic deals and hope to eventually unload at least some of them. But CWebb was NBA reigning Western Conference player of the month before he was traded. Brand is is merely the most serviceable player in the leagues worst frontcourt. He would be hard to trade if he was on the books for half his salary.

Ignoring his salary, Brand is playing fine. But mostly through taking advantage of the void created by Sam's departure and Speights' psuedo-departure.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Nov 1 at 9:34
+/-

Or as Collins would put it:

C'Mon now.... we are talking a lot of money here.

user-pic
khouse reply to tk76 on Nov 1 at 9:45
+/-

Great post but IMO, Speights's game has been "psuedo" for awhile now...showing up one game...then disappearing the next! Which, again, makes the fact that we picked up his option for next year so early a real head-scratcher to say the least!

Ignoring his salary, Brand is playing fine. But mostly through taking advantage of the void created by Sam's departure and Speights' psuedo-departure.

Eh, you have to give the guy some credit. He's dealing with defensive mismatches on a nightly basis, and being guarded by the opposing team's best big. I think it's a little more than just filling the Sammy void. He's playing well.

user-pic
ELF reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 12:20
+/-

Brian, if melo goes to NY, could you see NJ get a little antsy about win now and trade favors for iggy ? I think iggy should only be traded for a guy like favors or ibaka.. And how about Deandre jordan, could the 76ers get him for thad + speights + hawes + future 1st rounder (next year lotery protected).. maybe Lou instead one of them..

Why would new jersey get antsy since they just drafted favors? They don't expect to win soon, and the knicks will have to dumpe whatever 'assets' they currently have to get carmelo. They'll have two guys who score but do nothing else and nothing else behind that.

I'm not sure why people think the Knicks getting Carmelo makes them scary come playoff time.

Brian, I find Hawes' OFR just shocking -- are you sure that's not a misprint? Anything below 100 is already bad, below 95 is terrible. But 61??? If all they did was shoot long two's and hit 1 out of every 3 shots (the worst possible offense imaginable), that would still be a higher OFR of 66.7. If they have to play Hawes, maybe they should abandon the strategy of going to him 3 straight times to start the third quarter ...

user-pic
Joe reply to Statman on Nov 1 at 10:07
+/-

Speights is a 41 and Kapono is a 46. Jrue? 79. Battie? 69.

Gotta play Speights or Hawes for some minutes right?

"Rumor mill

-- The rumors are true that teams are inquiring about the availability of Cavs center Anderson Varejao. He plays his butt off and is a talented big man. Not a lot of players around the league play as hard as he does. There's no plan right now to trade him unless the Cavs get blown away."

http://news-herald.com/articles/2010/10/31/sports/nh3229254.txt?viewmode=fullstory

You have to figure that one of those teams is the Sixers.

Not a fan of Sideshow Bob. Even less a fan of his 5 yr contract.

Ugh, really? There's no way I like a trade for that dude, cause it'll cost more than it's worth.

A move for Varejao would fit the "make moves based on your gut feeling instead of logical thought" mold that I'm worried about. When, "that guy really gets after it," is more important than the overall player and/or salary attached to him, teams get in trouble.

I'm not convinced Collins and Thorn are these type of guys, but I am a little concerned.

Varejao is a good player, I think he'd be a good fit here and actually make a big difference in the short term, but he's not exactly young (28) and he's signed for a lot of dollars, a lot of years.

Just to play devil's advocate to myself: Varejao, (a motivated) Brand, Iguodala, Turner, Holiday has the makings of an excellent defensive lineup. They'd struggle to score, but that's a potential top-ten defense among starters.

You know what else is a potential top 10 defense among starters?

Holiday
Turner
Iguodala
Brand
Dalembert

Heh. That one's even better. Maybe they'll sign Sammy as a FA next summer :)

The problem with a side show bob deal is that it's a 'tinkering' - it's a , oh god we can make the playoffs if we just had some semblance of defense at center move.

And he's grossly over valued, you ain't getting him for table scraps

Depends on how delusional Cleveland is. If they think they're a playoff team, they won't move him. If they realize they need to completely blow that mess up, then they'd be looking for expiring deals. Kapono + Thad or Lou probably gets it done.

They're going to win a title before the heat, remember?

I like that line-up a lot better then the Varajao line-up.

He is a pest, but his only elite skill is taking charges. Statistically he is an average rebounder (dreb% 20%) and below average shot blocker. His on the ball defense is fine, but mostly he is just a flopper.

I think I would do Kapono + Young for Varejao. I would like a piece that fills a void rather than one that doesn't and is due to an extension that won't be that far away from the contract Varejao has now. He will be 31 by the end of his deal, his last year is a team option. I think it would help develope Turner and Holiday.

Holiday - Iguodala - Nocioni - Brand - Varejao
with Lou - Turner and Speights off the bench sound a lot better than the current version of the team. Put Turner in instead of Nocioni and you would have a solid team with the chance to develope together. As long as Brand is on this team, we won't go anywhere, so why not help Holiday and Turner with a reliable defender in the post and a good rebounder too.

The con is that with Varejao you may be just good enough to preclude yourself from a top pick in the next couple of years.

Yeah, just take your medicine and add some high level lottery talent. No real reason to strive for 42 wins.

I posted this at real GM. It illustrates how you typically have to be bad in order to get real good...

Just look at the top teams last year. Aside from the Lakers:
-Boston: Lost 58 game before acquiring the big 3 (using their high pick and prev #1 picks from mediocre seasons.)
-Cleveland: Lost 60+ games to get Lebron
-Magic: Lost 60+ games to get Dwight Howard
-Hawks: Lost 60+ games many years to build current roster
-Heat: Lost 57 to get DWade
-Mavs: Lost 62 games to get (by swapping picks) Dirk
-Utah:: Lost 56 game to get Deron Williams
-Portland: Lost 61 games to get Roy
-Suns: Lost 53 games before Amare emerged
-Spurs: Lost 62 games to get Duncan
-Rockets: Lost 60+ games to get Yao
-Hornets: Lost 60+ games to get Chris Paul

All of these teams have prospered through high draft picks... after losing a ton of games.

Losing does not mean you will be good... just look at the Clippers. But it is wrong to assume that the current top teams got there without the benefit of lousy seasons and high draft picks.

It was BK and Stefanski who wanted to short shrift the process. Instead of bottoming out after the AI trade and stockpiling top lottery picks they added Miller and Brand with the hope of becoming good without ever taking their medicine.

So basically the best run franchises have been able to bottom out quickly and reload. Look at Utah and San Antonio. They were horrible the year before they drafted their superstar (Duncan and Deron) but somehow hit it big in that one down year. Some of that was luck. But some of it was knowing how to change gears quickly, instead of a slow fade like the Sixers during AI's last 5 seasons.

Look at Utah's roster the year they lost 56 and drafted Deron:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/UTA/2005.html

That team was brutally bad. But it also was full of short contracts that allowed them to sign Boozer and pull off the rare quick turn-around. But imagine if the Hawks at #2 took Deron and Utah took Marvin Williams...

Look at San Antonio in 1997: http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/1997.html
Not horrible, but now imagine instead of the Spurs winning the lottery (Duncan) instead they got the #2 pick (Van Horn.) Even with Robinson returning the next year (at 32) that team would not have had nearly the success...

So basically the best run franchises have been able to bottom out quickly and reload. Look at Utah and San Antonio. They were horrible the year before they drafted their superstar (Duncan and Deron) but somehow hit it big in that one down year. Some of that was luck. But some of it was knowing how to change gears quickly, instead of a slow fade like the Sixers during AI's last 5 seasons.

Look at Utah's roster the year they lost 56 and drafted Deron:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/UTA/2005.html

That team was brutally bad. But it also was full of short contracts that allowed them to sign Boozer and pull off the rare quick turn-around. But imagine if the Hawks at #2 took Deron and Utah took Marvin Williams...

Look at San Antonio in 1997:
Not horrible, but now imagine instead of the Spurs winning the lottery (Duncan) instead they got the #2 pick (Van Horn.) Even with Robinson returning the next year (at 32) that team would not have had nearly the success...

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to tk76 on Nov 1 at 14:00
+/-

If that is the way to go it is time to trade Iggy for an expiring and a draft pick and bottom out. What worries me is if they are too impatient. I just finished watching the Pacer game and Turner looked real good getting all good shots but a forced 3. I really believe this team could turn it on quick if Jrue and Turner click and Elton keeps playing like he is.

I don't know if it makes sense to trade Iguodala or not. He is just 26.)

But they can't make band-aid type moves like Varajao (who would be fine if he wasn't making 8-9M/yr.) They are a flawed team. They should try and win. Try and trade for [promising young bigs. But if they lose a bunch of games based on merit, then they should grin and bear it... and hopefully add talent through the draft.

user-pic
Rob_STC reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 13:28
+/-

I don't think Rod Thorn was brought he to go into blowup mode right away. The Sixers have lost their fan base (except fools like me) of STH. Another season like last year and I don't know how they will win them back. I have to think Rod is looking for a Center right now or to try to make a move to get one in a trade. I like the idea of using Kapono who is a good shooter and expiring contract and another piece to get them something decent.

I'm not the surprised with Brand's start. Maybe a little with what we saw in the preseason but I'm still not overly surprised. Let's just see where he is physically around mid-season. If he's still playing at this level then I'll be totally shocked.

The thing I've noticed is that he's the only player playing with any urgency when things start going bad. That's what you expect from your veteran players. Maybe he can be a role model for Iguodala also.

user-pic
Court_visioN on Nov 1 at 14:13
+/-

so apparently we're the worst team in the league.
http://www.nba.com/2010/news/powerrankings/11/01/week1/index.html

user-pic
Jason reply to Court_visioN on Nov 1 at 14:21
+/-

Surprised that writers figured it out this quickly, they usually give sixers a curve for some reason.

That doesn't seem fair to me, considering their schedule so far. The Pistons have been worse, imo.

"Bonus" points for leading a game by 20 at the half? Even if they lost?

user-pic
JAson reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 14:51
+/-

How do you figure the pistons are worse?

How do you figure they're not?

user-pic
Joe reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 15:03
+/-

They have a better efficiency differential, which isn't too bad of an argument.

I think the Sixers belong somewhere between 25 and 29. With 30 being the Wizards who are just pathetic.

Arenas might play tomorrow. Should be interesting.

user-pic
Joe reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 15:25
+/-

Yep. Interesting is the safest word to use there.

I am banking on Arenas not being the player he was from 05-07. If he is, the team might win 20-25. instead of 15.

user-pic
Jason reply to Joe on Nov 1 at 15:29
+/-

You really think the Sixers end up with better record than wizards? I haven't seen them play but are they really that bad? They look like they have a talented roster.

user-pic
Tray reply to Jason on Nov 1 at 15:47
+/-

Pseudo-talent. Defenseless soft gunners.

I'd take McGee and Even blatche over spawes

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 15:54
+/-

Of course, Hawes won't be in the league a few years from now. McGee and Blatche have skills... but you're not going to win games with them, not with Blatche at least. McGee is redeemable.

user-pic
Joe reply to Tray on Nov 1 at 16:01
+/-

This is where I stand pretty much.

user-pic
Joe reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 15:55
+/-

There aren't many players I wouldn't take over those 2.

Blatche is one though due to his contract.

user-pic
Joe reply to Jason on Nov 1 at 15:53
+/-

Well, I tend to look at production and not talent. Production wins games. And the Wiz don't have any of that.

I think they don't have 1 single average player. Hinrich has the best chance to reach that distinction I guess.

I'm not your average fan though. I made my predictions known in Brian's threads and I said the Wizards are the worst. I also said GS had an outside chance at 50 wins, so take my opinion for all it is. So far the Wizards have been the worst by the numbers, so I'm not looking to change that prediction any time soon.

Blowing leads, losing to the Nets. Looking at their roster. Minny is up there too. We're really splitting hairs, though. All these teams are terrible.

Yeah. The Sixers are misfit enough to be a bottom 5 team. But considering their 2 most promising players are 20 and 22, that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Question: Can you build a "winning culture", play hard and develop talent the right way... all while losing 55+ games?

user-pic
Jason reply to tk76 on Nov 1 at 15:37
+/-

"develop talent the right way"


Lost me here, no way Sixers are developing ET the right way. Makes no sense for him and Jrue not to be playing together in the starting line up.

user-pic
holeplug reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 16:33
+/-

well if they actually played Kevin Love....

user-pic
smh1980 on Nov 1 at 14:15
+/-

I know it is early but are there any dominant bigs to draft this year? Nobody comes to mind.

I give Brian credit for being the leading Hawes detractor. So far Hawes is underperforming even his outlier expectation.

user-pic
Rick reply to izimbra on Nov 1 at 17:51
+/-

I agree.

I admit I disagreed with Brian, and thought Hawes would at least be a useful big that can shoot. (I saw a bunch of Sacramento games last year. He could pick and pop, and even hit some threes.) But so far this season he's been crap, and he really does look a bit out of shape as well.

Jason Smith has been playing solid basketball for New Orleans of the bench. I'm just saying!

user-pic
Joe reply to KellyDad on Nov 1 at 15:02
+/-

Smith has been horrible...


Willie has been good though.

Lol @ Ode to the mullet. That is so funny. C'Mon now... He's been decent so far, but somehow I don't think Sixers fans will miss his all around veteran fiestyness when he is hopefully shipped out before the trade deadline. I'm sure we can all get along just fine without the twenty minutes of hell, thank you.

user-pic
Jason reply to Chunky Soup on Nov 1 at 15:13
+/-

I don't mind him, i just wish he was playing a reasonable amount of minutes per game (10-15). Him starting is awful.

He wasn't very good in the last game, he was good in the first two. I just find it hilarious that people are drooling over him and his bulldog tattoo.

user-pic
Joe reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 15:28
+/-

Yeah 2 games as the 2005-06 verison of Nocioni followed by 1 as the 2009-10 version. What version will he be?

Guess only time will tell.

user-pic
johnrosz on Nov 1 at 16:13
+/-

I don't think Brand's contract is tradeable until he has maybe 1.5 years remaining.

Probably not. Definitely not for any kind of value in return. Best case, right now you may be able to move him for an equally bad contract (or a group of them) that are longer than his.

What I'm hoping is that he proves himself capable over the next 30 games or so, and some contender thinks they have a legit shot, but they need an extra big to match up with someone. In that scenario, I could see something happening.

user-pic
johnrosz on Nov 1 at 16:23
+/-

I think Dallas came reasonably close to biting the bullet on the Brand contract in order to acquire Iguodala last season.

Question for everyone...

Is it better to use Iguodala's trade value to try and rid the franchise of Brand's contract in any trade?

or...

Is it better to just sit on Brand's contract for another year and a half, and use Iguodala in a separate trade in the near future to acquire young talent?

Not that my opinion means much but I believe riding out brand and maximizing the return in an iguodala trade is better for the future of this franchise

It's all contigent on a new CBA not changing much

user-pic
johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 16:31
+/-

I completely agree.

Even if trading both of them at once affords this team incredible cap flexibility, what player in their right mind would want to come to a bare bones roster like this one?

I'm still holding out hope for an amnesty clause in the new CBA...

user-pic
Tom Moore on Nov 1 at 16:27
+/-

Collins and Turner talked a lot about Tuesday's matchup with Wall and the Wizards (No. 1 pick vs. No. 2 pick).

Turner downplayed it and Collins said he didn't want it to become "a pissing contest" between the two.

Turner, asked if his future is as a 1 or 2) "If I could choose, I’d give myself the ball 100 times a game," he said smiling.

"I'll do whatever the team needs me to do to win." Is the correct answer to that question.

user-pic
Tom Moore reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 16:34
+/-

He did say something like that afterward. Question was if his future was at the 1 or 2.

user-pic
Jason reply to Tom Moore on Nov 1 at 16:31
+/-

Any mention of changes to the starting lineup?

thanks for the quotes, really liked ETs answer of wanting the ball.

user-pic
Tom Moore reply to Jason on Nov 1 at 16:33
+/-

Sure. Looks like the same 5 -- they were out there together during the little we saw of practice drills.

I'd think about starting Battie to see if you can get something from your center.

user-pic
Tom Moore on Nov 1 at 16:36
+/-

Turner on glaring at LeBron in opener after LeBron clipped his leg while in air after dunk) My only thing was last year I fell off the rim (and hurt my back). That was a scary thing. I kind of get nervous when I get in that situation. I understand, me being a rookie, people are going to pick on me. It’s about coming and playing and not backing down.

(expect Collins to take you out) I thought he was going to kill me (laughs). It wasn’t a smart play on my part. I learned from it.

user-pic
Tom Moore on Nov 1 at 16:51
+/-

Link to Monday post-practice interview with Turner (also Nocioni and Collins and blog) on facing No. 1 pick John Wall and the Wizards on Tuesday:

http://www.phillyburbs.com/opinions/blogs/intell_blogs/tom_moore.html

user-pic
Tom Moore on Nov 1 at 17:18
+/-

Collins on Wall: "He’s an exciting player. You get him in transition and he’s as good as there is in the league. He’s got strength, he’s got speed and he’s a winner. That’s one thing I love about him and Evan. He’s got a lot of charisma out there on the court and his teammates really believe in him. Our team now believes in Evan, so it’s nice."

Is there a gap between the two? "It’s different. John Wall is playing 35 minutes (a night) and he’s got the ball in his hands right now and Evan is coming off the bench for us playing a certain role. I don’t see anything in who’s the better player or whatever. Evan’s giving us a lot of good stuff. John Wall is doing great stuff for Washington."

"Our team now believes in Evan, so it’s nice."

If only his coach shared that belief in Evan.

user-pic
Jason reply to Tom Moore on Nov 1 at 17:28
+/-

"coming off the bench for us playing a certain role."


Could someone fill me in on the role he's playing off the bench?

Nominal point guard who watches Lou Williams dominate the ball, I believe.

The latest on DeMarcus Cousins, from Chad Ford:

"Sources close to the Kings tell me that Cousins has earned his reputation for being difficult. Several players on the team have complained privately about his attitude and he's already butted heads with assistant coaches in practice."

There also some speculation in there that the Hawks may be looking to move Josh Smith after tying up $60M in Horford. I think that's highly unlikely, unless they fall on extremely hard times prior to the deadline. If you could put together a package of expiring contracts, a future first and Lou for Josh Smith, would you do it? If you had to include Turner to make it happen, would you? If they kept Turner, this could be the lineup:

Jrue
Turner
Iguodala
Smith
Brand

Possibly the most-exciting, worst-shooting team in the league.

Sure I'd do it if I didn't have to give up Turner or a draft pick. That would be crazy to have Brand and then the guy we should have signed instead of Brand. What do you think about the Horford contract? He got a pretty good deal, no? He got more money than Noah I believe. I like him as a player but was it worth it to lock him up now instead of letting the market play out?

Horford's a good player, and we couldn't have signed Josh Smith. Atlanta matched.

Oh yeah you're right, someone else signed him to an offer sheet, maybe memphis I believe. So there goes another player the Sixers can't do a sign and trade for in Horford. Maybe it's for the best cause our coach might want to include Turner in the trade package for a veteran frontcourt player. It seems he's not really the biggest fan of Evan right now. :(

You get to keep one, horford or smith

Who do you keep?

I keep Smith, but he's more my style of player. Horford is very, very good. Wonder what he could do if he didn't have to play as an undersized five all the time.

Horford, easily.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 19:41
+/-

Your notions of excitement... I mean, there are about one and a half exciting players on that team.

user-pic
johnrosz reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 20:02
+/-

I'd think they could get more for Smith than Lou Williams and expirings

If signing Horford means they 'have' to get rid of Smith and they hadn't planned to before signing Horford then, um, signing Horford is just asinine.

user-pic
Joe reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 19:29
+/-

Signing Horford to that contract isn't asinine.

Signing Joe Johnson to his contract was asinine.

Not planning ahead for Horford was asinine.

It helps when you read what I say.

If they signed Horford and now suddenly think they have to trade Joe Smith, that's silly. You choose Smith over Horford, so to me, anyone who thinks that signing horford now means they 'have' to trade Smith doesn't give the Hawks credit for common sense. If they didn't feel they could afford them both they shouldn't have extended Horford. Johnson isn't part of the equation.

Signing Johnson was stupid, insanely asinine, but signing horford to an extension and then suddenly realizig they can't keep joe smith, that's borderline gump like in its planning.

user-pic
Joe reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 21:26
+/-

I'm trying to understand your posts and the point to them.

If they signed Horford and now suddenly think they have to trade Joe Smith, that's silly.

Josh Smith, but I get this.

You choose Smith over Horford, so to me, anyone who thinks that signing horford now means they 'have' to trade Smith doesn't give the Hawks credit for common sense.

Choose or chose? Choosing Smith over Horford would seem like a crazy thought to me and not something to just casually say as fact. Horford is overall a much superior player. if you are syaing they already chose Smith over Horford, I disagree.

If they didn't feel they could afford them both they shouldn't have extended Horford.

Why? Horford is one of the best up and coming bigs in the NBA. They just got him for pennies. Teams would be falling over themselves to get Horford for that price. Horford went safe because of the upcoming CBS and long-term financial stability... kudos to him. The Hawks got a heck of a player on the cheap, though.

Johnson isn't part of the equation.

Yeah he is. It was obvious they were digging a hole that may cost them Horford when they signed him.

Signing Johnson was stupid, insanely asinine, but signing horford to an extension and then suddenly realizig they can't keep joe smith, that's borderline gump like in its planning.

So now you are saying that if they didn't realize they couldn't afford Smith until after the ink dried with Horford? If that is your argument, of course that would be insanely crazy, but the actual contract was still great and totally worth it.

The only argument I see against it is if someone wanted to argue that players will be making significantly less next offseason due to tightened caps, etc, I'm not getting into that argument because I don't know enough about the likely cap.

Sorry, josh smith, not joe smith, aside from that you're just being intentionally dense.

The original comment was
There also some speculation in there that the Hawks may be looking to move Josh Smith after tying up $60M in Horford.

To me, Josh Smith is the better player. So why would you sign Al Horford to an extension if it forces you to trade Josh Smith. If your plan was always to sign Horford to a Smith trade inducing extension, should have moved him in the off season probably would have gotten more value.

Now - I'll make it simple for you

Josh Smith > Al Horford
Signing Horford to an extension that forces you to trade Josh Smith - Asinine

Joe Johnson is a whole other idiocy, but that's not relevant at this point cause it's done.

user-pic
bebopdeluxe reply to GoSixers on Nov 2 at 8:58
+/-

If you polled 30 NBA GM's and asked them which of these two players would you want on your team, you are saying that a majority of them would pick Josh Smith over Al Horford?

Is that what you are saying?

Accordin to basketball-reference.com, Horford finished 9th in the NBA in 2009-10 in win shares at 10.9 (Smith was at 9.3). At 82games.com, Horford had and on-court/off-court rating of 10.9 (versus 7.1 for Smith), and ANY analysis of PER shows a truly MASSIVE advantage for Horford as well. In virtually every statistical analysis I could find, Horford is simply more valuable than Smith - forgetting the more subjective decision of picking a TRUE 4/5 in Horford as opposed to a swing big like Smith.

But you believe that the majority of NBA GM's - if given the choice - would choose Smith over Horford....right?

Could you please substantiate that position with statistical analysis? Thanks.

I'd rather keep Brand. How are you going to replace his production? If he averages 15 and 8 this year, that's sufficient for his contract. OK, so the team isn't going to win the championship this year, but I don't think the roster is totally hopeless. I still see a playoff team when I look at the lineup, and even if it's not this year, certainly next year. Brand still has 2 seasons after this one to contribute, I'd like to have him around, especially since the alternative to his 15 and 8 is basically a bunch of bums who might be able to give you 4 and 3.

THere's no way it's sufficient for brands contract - if it is lots of people are grossly under paid in the NBA

Brand is old, broken down, and useless to the future of this franchise

user-pic
johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 20:00
+/-

Growing sentiment of Brand apologists for some reason. I don't see why everyone is patting the guy on the back for being serviceable on an 80 million dollar deal

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to johnrosz on Nov 1 at 20:22
+/-

Stefanski deserves our wrath, he paid him; Elton seems to give effort and have a good rep but if he was a knucklehead it would get me pissed at him.

I'm sure he's a nice guy, he went to Duke and all, but that doesn't mean he's giving 'ok' production. Kobe Bryant is a huge douche bag tool, an embarrassment to my high school, but an amazing basketeball player.

I'm sure Elton Brand is a nice guy, but that doesn't mean he's suddenly playing up to his contract

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Nov 1 at 20:26
+/-

Did you guys see Mo Lucas passed; I was at the game when the fight broke out and wasn't a fan of his back then but he had his players backs.

user-pic
Tom Moore reply to deepsixersuede on Nov 1 at 21:09
+/-

The dude was the prototypical enforcer of his era. You drove the lane against Portland and you ended up on the floor.

user-pic
johnrosz reply to Tom Moore on Nov 1 at 21:17
+/-

Spencer Hawes?

So a propos of nothing, is it just me or is the league even more a league of four legit teams and a couple dozen also-rans than usual? In the West, it's pretty clear that absolutely nobody has a shot at LA. You can forget about Dallas, Phoenix and San Antonio being relevant again until the next rebuild. Obviously Utah isn't getting over the hump with Jefferson; they need to let Millsap be Millsap and get some kind of a wing scorer. Portland and OKC aren't turning into contenders anytime soon. Then over here there are three teams. And that's it. Chicago isn't breaking into that echelon.

Hey, you stole my jump to conclusions mat. Give it back

user-pic
johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 20:47
+/-

Michael Bolton: You think the pet rock was a really great idea?

Tom Smykowski: Sure it was, the guy made a million dollars! You know, I had an idea like that once, a long time ago...

....

Peter Gibbons: Really, what was it, Tom?

I've totally got a case of the mondays

user-pic
johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 21:02
+/-

Me too. Coming to the realization that the World Series is going to be won by a team batting Cody Ross 4th isn't helping

Don't you know that "pitching is 95% of baseball"? I could bat 4th on that team.

The Giants are the best team in baseball.

No, they aren't.

If they were they would have had the best record over 162 games

They won the world series, that's not always the best team, just the team that got hot at the right time.

Just getting hot at the right time isn't really a fair way to put it. It has a lot to do with whether a team is built for series, and how top-heavy they are. How good your fifth starter is doesn't matter. Beyond your three best relievers, the bullpen doesn't matter. Having a bat or two off the bench is probably needed, but a really deep bench isn't much of an advantage. There are plenty of ways to excel over 162 games that don't necessarily translate into winning in the playoffs.

Rule number one seems to be don't sell your soul for Cliff Lee at the deadline if you want to win the series. He'll only get you to the series, he can't bring it home :)

Well I'm sure you and your evil empire fans will enjoy watching him supplant 20 cc's of insulin as the front line pitcher in the rotation (as you continue not to have a 3 or 4 and are dependent on the Hut to not suck)

The playoffs, at most, are like 21 games, about 1/8 of the season.

When the Giatns won the super bowl over the undefeated patriots, they weren't the best team, they were the best team on that day, but play that game 10 times, you think the patriots don't win at least half? I Do

I'm not really sure what your point is here. If the giants and pats played a best of seven, the pats would've won. The Phils and Giants did play a best of seven, the Giants won, yet you're still making the case that the Giants aren't the better team. What would satisfy you, a 162-game series between the two teams?

They were the better team for a week.

It's a weeks worth of games, compared to 162 game season.

Do you think over 162 game season that Cody Ross would continue to hit at a rate well above his career?

Or that the phillies bats would continue to slumber like they did.

Point is that automatically saing the team that won the world series is the 'best' team is foolish and I've always thought so whether the phillies win or lose.

The best team - top to bottom - was in the AL East this year...they just had a bad week against the Rangers

The best team had three front-line starters, an unconscious closer and a cobbled-together lineup that scratched out just enough runs. It's sour grapes and pointless to try to take something away from them now that they have the rings. The Phils bats didn't fall asleep, they were put to sleep by those pitchers.

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 21:02
+/-

You wouldn't take a ten to one odds bet on the field beating the Lakers in the Western Conference Finals. You wouldn't take a fifty to one bet on a team other than Miami, Boston or Orlando coming out of the East. You'd be crazy to.

And those were the odds before the season started as well, that doesn't excuse the fact that after 3 games you're saying moves other teams made just didn't work.

It's foolish to think you can definitively say anything about a new roster after 3 games.

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 22:02
+/-

Maybe I haven't thought about the league much until the season started and this didn't occur to me until now. I'm not saying that three games prove anything. It's just kind of obvious now that I watch the games, though, that LA is in a different league than everybody else out there, that Atlanta's not going to become a contender just because Joe Johnson gets paid like he's a superstar, etc. And it's hard to see Boozer putting Chicago over the top, they're just too mediocre without him to be great with him.

ALl off season it's pretty much been Los ANgeles, Orlando, Boston, Miami and everyone else.

No one else really has a shot of making/winning the finals, assuming guys stay healthy.

If Bynum can stay healthy when he gets back and the rest of the lakers can too, they'll just steam roll

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Nov 1 at 22:45
+/-

I'm not arguing with you, I just (a) wasn't paying attention this offseason, and (b) saying that you don't really see until the season starts how utterly toothless teams like Phoenix, Dallas, SA, OKC, etc. really are. In past years the Lakers were a favorite to come out of their conference, but there were always at least contenders. Now it really feels like the ship has sailed for a lot of franchises.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Tray on Nov 1 at 20:50
+/-

After watching Splitter guard Odom at the world games I don't count S.A. out. And James Anderson is contributing already, something I didn't expect. One injury can change everything to .

Milsap stepped out and hit a few jumpers last night, which surprised me. And G.Hayward looked right at home running off of screens. It must be nice to get drafted into a system tailormade for you.

I agree, except I can see OKC & Chicago being contenders this year - contenders with no shot at a championship, however. (Is that even possible?) The league has so many teams with no future that even Stern has shown a willingness to discuss contraction (though it's probably just a negotiating ploy, crying poverty and all that). I don't sense a lot of excitement. On top of that, you have teams like SA & Boston openly saying that the regular season doesn't matter. What a sport. Your team can win 7 or 8 in a row, beat Boston or LA, and you know it doesn't even matter.

user-pic
Joe reply to Tray on Nov 2 at 10:25
+/-

I'd argue Portland is right there out west.

Time will tell, but they have 3 legit NBA bigs who can dominate the glass and block shots. Then they have some really good wings off the bench or playing in support roles in Batum, Wesley and possibly Rudy.

Then they have 2 guys who can score in Roy and Aldridge. Roy, in addition to scoring, has shown an all around game at times. Their PG is great in Miller and they have a promising young PG they seemed to stumble onto... can't remember his name.

Portland is probably the #2 team in the West and isn't a bye.

When all those folks make it through a season healthy, then I'll believe Portland as a threat. Portland is always an injure about to happen

Slightly improbable scoring battle between Aldridge (22 at the half) and Luol (20). Both taking very few shots to get there. Which is a big improvement for Aldridge, who's averaging a point per shot so far this season.

Reggie Evans has 10 boards in the first quarter. In the past two games he averaged 15. His foul shot looks really improved. Otherwise his offensive game is as much of a mess as ever. He had this postup where he was fumbling around with the ball, got trapped, somehow bumbled his way out to the three-point line in some kind of psychotic game of keepaway, and then demolished Francisco Garcia's face with his meaty elbow. They called a foul on Garcia.

Heh. Much better offense than Hawes is providing right now.

I picked up evans the other day cause i was in desperate need of rebounds :)

Cousins can't stay on the floor, huh? 6 minutes, 2 fouls tonight. Bargnani having his way against the Kings.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Nov 1 at 23:52
+/-

Bad game for Cousins, definitely. The Spurs-Clippers game, though, has been one of the most fun to watch all year. Eric Gordon had one dunk that will get replayed all season and another that will get replayed all week, Griffin's been phenomenal, Eric Bledsoe's had a really nice debut, looks like a way more useful version of Nate Robinson who can actually play point, Splitter got his first minutes, the Spurs' rookies, James Anderson and Gary Neal, both are impressive (Neal can really shoot, Anderson looks like he should've been in the lottery) - but back to Gordon, who's done way more than dunk, he might be the most underrated smaller guard in the league. Not much that he can't do offensively.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Nov 2 at 0:34
+/-

And as it turns out, Cousins, in spite of his awful first half (you must not have seen when Bargnani did a 180 dunk on his head), ended up playing a pretty instrumental role in the Kings comeback. 16 points, including a very tough post move with fifty seconds left to put them up six. DeRozan's been really good today.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif