DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

2-2, So Far

Oddly, Snow loves it when Meeks attempts to attack the basket. I imagine there's some delusion in the organization about what they really have with Meeks, the same way there is with much of the fanbase. How else do you explain starting a slightly above-average three-point shooter who does nothing else - literally, nothing else, he averages about one basket inside the arc a game, one rebound, and less than one assist - over Turner, who at least has a vastly better floor game than him, and who can defend?

As for Lawson vs. Jrue, I'd pick Jrue myself, but this was one of Jrue's best games all year and one of Lawson's worst. On the season, Lawson's continuing his over-50% shooting from the field, which you thought was unsustainable a few months into last season, and overall playing pretty well, especially in his starts in Billups's absence. I think he'll have a nice career as a starting point guard for some team, likely Denver. I don't think he's quite as talented as Collison, but he may end up being the better player, simply because he has a really accurate shot and turns the ball over much less.

Joe reply to Tray on Dec 27 at 12:12

My thoughts exactly on both points.

Jrue has clearly passed Iguodala as the teams best perimeter player. He can do everything Iguodala can do at the age of 20. Once he masters how to handle the double-team consistently he will play at an all-star level.

I also believe that Turner can give you the same productivity as Iguodala given the same minutes. Turner has even shown the effort to play tough defense and he rebounds good for a perimeter player. All he needs is his confidence.

All that being said, Iguodala needs to be traded to make minutes for Turner and to let Jrue grow as a leader.

bebopdeluxe reply to KellyDad on Dec 27 at 8:40

+1...if you can get SOMETHING of value for him.

I do think that with Iguodala's minutes, Turner will develop into a player who may not be Iggy's defensive equal, but will give you WAY more offense (hopefully including guts-of-the-game offense). This team isn't going anywhere this season - give Turner the minutes and just get on with it.

I just don't know if the Sixers FO is ready to give Iguodala away for cap relief, long-shot youth (we've already got enough youth on this team to begin with) and roster development.

tk76 reply to bebopdeluxe on Dec 27 at 9:37

Agree. We really need to see a Stackhouse/Montross for Ratliff/Mckie type trade.

Stackhouse = Iguodala
Montross = Hawes

Ratliff = Ibaka type

Old School Sixer Fan reply to bebopdeluxe on Dec 27 at 11:15

Why do you believe Turner will be able to do more than AI9 on offense? So far the only thing he does better is shoot fouls. Right now his jump shot is actually worse and he doesn't have the strength or athleticism to finish at the rim like Iguodala. Are we wishing & hoping?

I thought the best aspect of Turner's game last night was his ease and comfort in running the offense. He was communicating more with his teammates, signaling for screens, directing plays and made some nice passes. Fell off in the second half when he was running with Iguodala and Holiday (I think), but still a promising run.

It was refreshing to see him get Lou Williams' minutes and take advantage of it. He fell off in the second half but I thought his first half was as comfortable and effective as Turner's been all season.

New nickname or you're banned on Dec 27 at 10:32

I would love to hear from the people who honor Igoudala what they think about his stank free throw shooting? I mean he did shoot over 80 percent as a rookie so why does he suck at it now?

Old School Sixer Fan reply to New nickname or you're banned on Dec 27 at 11:31

I usually defend Iguodala, but his foul shooting is indefensible.

People really need to calm down a little bit about Turner. Yes, it was more than we've seen from him recently, but that's only because we haven't seen anything from him recently. He had Lawson on him for the majority of his minutes and still couldn't score efficiently. I'd hate to see what would happen at this point in his career if they moved iguodala and all of a sudden teams are putting legit defenders with size and athleticism on him.

Keep him in this role, extend his minutes against second units. Let him actually succeed in that controlled environment (which he hasn't done yet) before you start talking about trading iguodala to make room for turner. It's just silly to say he could give you what ai9 does right now. He hasn't even given the team what Lou does to this point.

There's a group of people who want Iguodala traded no matter what, so it's not surprising that they would speak up after the slightest glimmer of a good game from Turner.

What most people probably missed last night was that the Sixers' 4th-quarter comeback started almost precisely when Iguodala subbed for Turner (and Turner was a big part of the reason they got behind by 12, with his poor defense on Billups).

Trading Iguodala to create room for Turner is a good way to tank (but some people want that).

I don't think people want Iguodala gone at any cost but we've seen him at his best and it seems he can be nothing more that a very good second option. At his best he couldn't get his team above .500. So far this season it seems his game has regressed. Where does he go from here? I thought he would flourish under Collins but I haven't seem any proof of that do far.

Can you equate Iverson being traded and Iguodala being labelled as "The Man" to Iguodala possibly being traded to see if Jrue or Turner can fill that role?

I'm not exactly sure why you can't have Jrue or Turner or someone else assume that role with Iguodala on the team. He has never used a ton of possessions, in fact he's always taken less shots when someone else on the team has stepped up to carry the scoring load.

Old School Sixer Fan reply to Brian on Dec 27 at 11:38

I don't understand why Collins doesn't limit Iguodala's offense to post-ups, catch & shoot 3 pointers, and dunks on the break. Also, never make him the first option in the end game situations. He'd score about the same number of points and continue to contribute in all the other ways he normally does.

Yes, let's make lou the last shot option

I don't see the problem with him being a second (or even third) option. Is that really a reason to trade him? The only good reason to trade him IMO is my belief that his stock will probably never be as high (maybe as an expiring if that means anything under the new CBA). And the only reason you would even consider trading him is because it really doesn't look like JTI will ever work (i really want them to succeed and prove me wrong, but i am not an optimist). Defensively they are/will be great, but offensively you gotta have a guy running off screens, settling for catch and shoot jump shots. They may all become decent off the ball (one could say Iguodala and Jrue already are) players but it still won't be enough for the flow of the offense to reach contender limits. Their talents will be much better utilized and the team will be in a much better position long term if one of them gets traded for a legitimate big man. It doesn't necessarily have to be Iguodala, but he seems like the best option at the moment.

You DO NOT trade him for expirings, and low first rounders though. The team simply cannot afford to make that mistake. You either get a legitimate player/pick out of it or you don't trade him at all.

Your rational and reasoning is why the sixers won't rade him and will be stuck in mediocrity

Trading him for crap won't get us out of mediocrity. Especially not in the wake of quite possibly the worst draft in history...

Old School Sixer Fan reply to Xsago on Dec 27 at 12:03

What does this year's draft look like? Are there many great prospects?

I think it's worse than last year's, plus some guys may not declare due to a possible lockout.

A lot of players not declaring is beyond a legitimate concern. It's inevitable.

Short sighted thinking only looks at the next draft and doesn't see the bigger picture. Kind of like when Billy King was the GM and he kept making those (terrible) quick fix moves after the rat left ship instead of seeing the long term iceberg heading out the sixers.

People who retort that 'can't trade iguodala cause this years draft sucks' are not people who see the big picture of the impending disaster that is the perpetual mediocrity of the sixers.

And how exactly trading Iguodala for nothing THIS YEAR will improve us in the long term?

I also think that playing in a winning atmosphere is more important(and helpful) to player development than getting plenty of playing time

And getting bitch slapped in the playoffs in the first round supposedly gives teams 'playoff experience' that's more important than quality draft positioning.

The sixers are going nowhere special during the lenght of Iguodala's contract, and he's at the prime of his value. Trading him now maximizes his value.

You build a quality team LONG TERM by obtaining assets, and you get assets by selling high if you're team has no where to go but the middle.

Plus, selfishly, I'd rather see Iguodala go somewhere he's appreciated even though it's contrary to my standard trade thought processes. Fortunately though, ANY team he gets traded to will be more appreciative than Philadelphia fans are

Your whole rant started because someone said they didn't want to trade iguodala for cap space and shitty draft picks, you said it was that attitude that stops the sixers from moving him, now you've essentially said the exact same thing. Which is it? Should they just get rid of him for whatever package they can get because he makes them mediocre, or are they better off waiting for a package that brings back some young talent?

That's not what I said. We have no ideas what the offers for Iguodala truly are, but during their 8-3 run reports were that the sixers had decided not to trade him cause they were so excited (my words) to be beating up on sub 500 teams :)

Make the best deal possible. There are 29 possible teams to trade him too - and all 29 are legitimate destinations. Take the best offer from whatever team it is be they in the same conference or same division.

But he won't be trded, and Thad and probably Hawes will get long term contracts, so that's good

That's exactly what you said. just read my comment (and yours again). I'm all for trading Iguodala now if you can get something of real value. I even stated my reason why. I wouldn't trade him for nothing though, which is what you would be happy with if nothing is the best proposal they get a month and a half before the trade deadline.

I don't believe the best proposal WOULD be nothing, I believe the best proposal this year will be better than the best proposal next year, or in the off season.

It's' going to be Iverson all over again. The sixers will hold onto him too long and then when they do decide to move him get squat (no andre miller was not quality for Iverson and besides, the sixers didn't convert him into anything but not paying the luxury tax)

The best proposal i've heard so far is Przybilla and Batum. That's not nothing but it's nothing spectacular either. If i were Thorn i have a month and a half to try and pry away Fernandez and a first round pick from the Blazers too.

And you know why the Iverson trade was a disaster? Because he got traded in December instead of waiting for teams to become desperate and offer more closer to the trade deadline. That and keeping him past his prime, which Iguodala is just entering...

Old School Sixer Fan reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 12:26

What would you need to get in return for Iguodala to n=make a trade worthwhile? Would you want a big or a scorer/shooter?

As far as I'm concerned, long term (if you're trading Iguodala) the sixers have 3 holes in the starting line up to fill (Because Brand won't last forever, and I'm hoping he's playing his way back to tradability) so I don't think it really matters to me as long as they are guys who will be starters in the future.

The teams that need an Iguodala are the teams that want to contend now and should be willing to give up the pieces to do so. I don't want a guy in the same age/talent bracket as Iguodala cause it just creates the same problem.

I have no idea what's going on with Batum this season but I have a feeling that Brandon Roy's public outbursts against Andre Miller aren't the first time he's voiced selfish displeasure with other players, just the first public one, and that maybe Roy is a problem with development of the younger guys

So far this season it seems his game has regressed. Where does he go from here? I thought he would flourish under Collins but I haven't seem any proof of that do far.

I disagree that his game has regressed this year. He's not getting as many easy baskets because he's lost some explosion due to his injury, but in several other ways he's improved:
* He's taking fewer and better 3's, resulting in a decent percentage (for him).
* He's dropped his turnovers significantly while maintaining his assist rate, such that his assist-to-turnover ratio is top 10 in the league (currently tied for 9th with Deron Williams). The critics tend to complain loudly about his fastbreak forays that lead to turnovers, but he's almost completely eliminated those turnovers this year.
* He's playing the best defense of his career. See Brian's "Iguodala List" post a few days ago.

The problem is that the ways in which his game has improved tend not to be noticed unless one is watching carefully.

Joe reply to Statman on Dec 27 at 12:20

The problem is that the ways in which his game has improved tend not to be noticed unless one is watching carefully.

The problem is he isn't scoring enough for the typical NBA fan. Don't overthink things.

He never has scored enough for the 'typical' NBA fans.

Sadly most of the heads who work for the sixers and the major outlets (ESPN, NBATV) don't exceed the typical NBA fan in term of comprehension of why Iguodala is a quality player.

Sadly perception of value in the NBA seems as important as actual value when trading a player (which always seems odd to me)

Rich reply to Statman on Dec 27 at 13:21

Thank you Statman, very well said.

It seems like teams are aways shorthanded during the Ice Capades trip.

This year so far:

Orlando: Missing 4+ rotation players
Chicago: Missing Noah
Boston: Missing Rondo
Denver: Missing Melo
GS: ? Missing Ellis, Biedrins, Gadzuric, B.Wright

tk76 reply to tk76 on Dec 27 at 10:44

Maybe all teams are banged up this time of year?

Is GSW really missing all those guys? Has Curry played yet after the ankle injury?

Nah, they're healthy

Curry has played, but he was awful :)

Every team has injuries, especially this time of the year. I think stating injuries as an "excuse" for the winning is overblown. Iguodala missed a some games too, but noone seems to talk about that...

I don't believe it is

And Orlando wasn't injuries, it was integration, and integration on a team that just took out the two hottest teams in the league

Does orlando's win over Boston really count? I mean Rondo didn't play.

It 'counts' just as much as the sixers win over orlando OR Denver - how's that sound :)

I thought I left this post an hour ago but I must not have sent it. I am not sure why there seems to be an asterisk next to every win with the Sixers. Regardless of who is injured or out winning a game is the ultimate objective. Let's give them some credit. It is not easy to win on the road especially on the West Coast against teams that like to play at a fast pace. Denver won their last 58 games at home when leading after 3 quarters. This was a very encouraging win.

Yup, very encouraging to beat a team coming off a game on Christmas in Oklahoma City missing its best player.

The fully rested sixers played a flawless game

As I said the genius/bloggers out there who know it all and have nothing invested except time on their hands continue to disparage a team supposedly they are fans of. I don't get. Some of them love to get the last word. So here goes I am done.

THis is a team that less than a week ago was bitchslapped by the Chicago Bulls. If you can't see them for what they are - stop whining and assaulting other people to try and take the 'high road'. The sixers are bad. They have a losing record. The only reason they are in the playoff hunt in the east is because the bottom half of the east sucks.

They have no real shooting guard, they have no big men who can defend, they are holding their breaths that Elton Brand doesn't get hurt again and their bench players combined only have one skill.

Their #2 draft pick seems like a bust to the entire league and the coach won't play him.

Oh yeah the 'big man' of the future, Speights, is in such a big dog house that he's gettin DNP-CD left and right.

The GM is too paralyzed with fear to make a trade and the ownership behaves in a way that indicates their primary concern is the luxury tax annd everything else is secondary (including winning)

But, you know what, you're right, the sixers are perfect, there's nothing wrong with them, and fans should only say good things.

Why is their worst game the only legitimate barometer for you?

You just called Thorn paralyzed with fear to pull the trigger on a trade. Seriously? Have you even glimpsed at his track record?
The only reason why we don't see any big trades is because there are no good trade offers out there at this time of the year. Things will change as we get closer to the trade deadline.

You have no idea what's available right now.

Neither do you... And it's not just who is available, but who makes sense for the team and wants to come to Philly.

"Wants to come to Philly"

Carmelo was never a real option, aside from him (and Kobe) very few players have a say where they get traded to.

The sixers have 4 wins (I think it is 4) against teams with a better than 500 record

So? 4 wins vs. good teams is exactly what you might expect from a 41 win team (which i predicted before the season and as it appears is where they are headed). Noone is arguing that they are anything close to a contender. That doesn't mean that they are horrible either.

I will say this again. Playing for the draft this year would be a disaster, because there will be nothing worth drafting. Especially not a big man.

30 games into the season they are a 400 team

To be a 500 team by the end of the season they need to go 29-23 (557) over the last 52 games.

I'm glad you think they are a 500 team, I don't.

Turtle Bay reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 13:29

Well then you know nothing about statistics. Oh, unless you think the first games of the season are the true barometer for how they'll play the rest of the way. And you're right, with a team as young as the Sixers it makes total sense to panic and trade our best player (who is still young) for whatever "the best option out there" is. There's no chance that Jrue, Turner, Thad, etc. will continue to improve the way that at least Jrue and Thad have been. When you constantly disagree just to disagree you get trapped into contradicting yourself as Brian has pointed out, and you ruin discussion.

It's not - they're mediocre. I'm just saying - that less than a week ago they got bitchslapped by the bulls and because they beat the tired meloless Nuggets everything isn't better.

They had a nice 8-3 stretch, most of those wins against bad teams.

They're a bad team, I've though they were a bad team since day one. A team AT BEST that can't win in the first round of the playoffs (if they make them), and nothing that's happened this reason that makes me think they're better than a sub 500 team that loses in the first round of the playoffs. I'm not sure why last nights game should change that perception any more than the loss against Chicago or the win against Orlando. They're bad. I've felt that they were bad since day one, and if radical changes are made they've got not future beyond first round playoff exist

Telling people, however, how to be a 'good fan' is always bothersome when people tend to forget what fan is short for.

Old School Sixer Fan reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 12:51

I usually appreciate your posts, but today your run-away pessimism with no real suggestion of a rational plan is just disappointing and depressing. Can;t we talk about potential concrete steps - who might be acquired for whom, what positions are the priority, what players might best fit, who in college might help most. Just railing on about mediocrity doesn't do anything but depress us.

I'm sorry if the fact that the sixers are mediocre depresses you. I don't let the performance of a sports team affect my mental state.

As for 'who is available' - I don't play that game, because most of the reports out there about who is available (aside from Carmelo Anthony) are based in vapor as much as duke nukem forever is. It's not my job to come up with a 'plan' to get better, that's why they have Thorn right.

What I see is a team headed nowhere - who at best is going to get bitch slapped in the playoffs in the first round, over and over, until Brand and Iguodalas contracts run out. I see ownership worried more about the luxury tax than putting the best team on the floor (miller free agency, asinine dalembert trade). I see the best player hated by the majority of the fan base and there are still folks out there who would have preferred ty lawson to jrue holiday even :)

The sixers are bad, and I don't see the current roster getting much better in the long term, it's still the island of mismatched toys in my opinion, but worse since now there's no defensive big man in the middle whatsoever.

Besides, the only move I could come up with that would make (in my opinion) this roster better was impossible under the cap because of BYC complications. :)

I'm really having a hard time following your logic here. If you're saying they should move Iguodala for younger player(s) who can help this team in the future, I'm not sure anyone here is arguing with you. But the whole "this team will always be mediocre as long as he's here" line of ranting flies in the face of that logic. I mean you're saying they're fucking up by keeping him, then creating some narrative for why they haven't made this miracle trade (which hasn't even been rumored) but at the same time you're making the argument that having him on the team is damaging the precious draft positioning, and how the relative weakness of this year's draft class is meaningless, which makes it seem like it's more important to you that they seriously downgrade the roster to the point where they're very bad for several years, which brings us right back to just giving iguodala away for crap.

If you're saying they need to get rid of him asap so they can get on with sucking, but you're also saying they must fill one of the three holes you say they have in the trade, then you're the one with unrealistic expectations here. Probably more unrealistic than people who think they need to get equal value. It's either imperative that they move him immediately because he's doing so much damage by helping the team win these games that don't really count as wins in your book, or it's imperative that they accomplish something tangible by moving him, but demanding that both happen is just silly.

It's not just him - this roster as currently constructed maxes out as a first round playoff victim, for the next 3 seasons - as I see it. There's just too many holes and not enough 'spare' assets to move them to plug the holes. They're a bad team, poorly constructed, and Iguodala (and possibly Brand) are the only pieces available to plug the numerous holes. Yes trading them creates more holes, but smart moves (which is what Thorn is for) can make it easier to plug the holes in the future.

It's not Igudodala's fault the sixers are mediocre at best - they're better (at this moment) when he plays versus when he doesn't - but they still aren't good enough (nor will they be in my opinion) to threaten anyone serious in a 7 game series. If losing in the first round is good enough for the front office, or some fans, that's great, but I'd rather feel like the team was headed somewhere, I don't feel like this team is headed anywhere like the secon round. sometimes you gotta take a couple steps backwards to find the right path, I think this roster is the wrong path.

You see this is what i don't understand in your reasoning. I do agree with your assessment that the team is poorly constructed and is a first round playoff victim. What i don't get is how Thorn can possibly make smart moves if he should rush trading their 2 best players for expiring contracts and borderline talent, which is exactly wht you are advocating

Actually it's not what I'm advocating, you think that's the best deal they can get, I don't (and I don't think Brand is the second best payer on the team, I just think he's tradeable now when before he wasn't.

However, I'm not stupid enough to ignore how the NBA works and that contract length can weaken a players on court value and both Brand and Iguodala are on what is seen as unfavorable contracts, but right now I feel their value as players is at its highest (at least for what its been recently) in comparison to the negatives of their contracts.

The NBA is a business, and ignoring a players contract and its perceived 'value' around the league, under or over paid, is a mistake when thinking about the overall value of a player. Especially headed into a lock out, I just think after the lock out the contracts will look even worse.

The lockout is a serious issue i agree, and their contracts are not good. That still doesn't mean you need to trade them now, instead of trying to find better offers until the trade deadline and if they can get a decent package it is then that you pull the trigger not now.

Just a short list of trades in the first 2 months of the season (off the top of my head):

Iverson for A.Miller
Billups for Iverson
R.Lewis for Arenas
Carter to the Nets

I think you get the picture...

Interestingly you include Arenas to the Magic as a 'bad' deal (is it really?) and ignore the Phoenix deal.

How's Orlando playing since they got all the players in that deal on to their roster and active (including Arenas, who is playing well and seems to embrace his bench role on a team that doesn't suck)

I just posted some bad trades out there on a subjective basis. The Phoenix trade balanced their roster out and cannot argue against that one at this point (although it's not an overwhelmingly good one either). The Arenas trade was horrible from a contract standpoint. This will bite them hard in a year or two, when they are in financial hell.

However, the magic don't have the luxury of long term financial contract hell to worry about because they have more pressing issues. They need to make Dwight Howard happy or in 2012 he (and Chris Paul probably) will be Lebron James / Carmelo Anthony. Were they smart financial moves? Probably not. Were they good basketball moves? Well, Lewis has fallen off a cliff and Vince Carter wasn't working out. We won't really know until playoff time I think.

And the wizards took advantage if that Dwight Howard Desperation (seriously, we need a name for this team syndrome if it's going to keep continuing). Everyone knew they wanted Arenas gone, they got rid of him, saved money and obtained a guy who won't whine when John Wall plays more (assuming Walls foot ever gets fully healthy)

They better win a title by 2012 cause they are going to be in serious trouble if they don't. Even with Howard being one of the more likely stars to resign with their own club (along with Durant and Duncan).

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 12:44

Nah. He's probably right. I don't think I'm as much a Sixer fan anymore as a critic. I'm a fan of basketball, but the Sixers have not given back enough over the past 20 years to keep me as a rah rah type of fan.

It's much easier to be a "fan" of the Eagles, Philles, Flyers and Nittany Lions over the past 5 years. I watch those teams just for the entertainment value. While the Sixers I approach with a more critical eye- and I think deservedly so.

That's you - that's the kind of fan YOU are, we're all different fans, I'm still critical of when the phillies do something stupid (you know like ibanez, or no right handed bats or the series of bad mediocre third baseman since Rolen) or the eagles when DeSean Jackson demonstrates, even while winning, that he's still an immature little twat whose going to get himself beaten (and possible cause the NFL to change excessive celebration rules to count DURING plays as well). As for the flyers, meh, never cared about them and hate the Nittany Lions in everything :)

Point is, I like when the teams are good, and criticize them even when they're good for bad moves (as I perceive them). No sports team is perfect.

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 13:14

would you like them to cut Desean Jackson?

Iguodala has been just as demonstrative as Jackson in the past (I recall him carrying his imaginary ball sack around the court after a go ahead jumper against Boston)Don't hear you calling him an immature twat when he sulks his way around the court and bickers with teammates/referees.

I like how you can make judgments about the kind of person he is by the way he plays football. What he did was legal, just a gross overreaction by the league. But if anyone ever infers anything negative about Iguodala from his actions on the court they're an idiot. I see.

would you like them to cut Desean Jackson?

Is that what I said. I'd like Desean Jackson to mature as much as the kings would like Demarcus Cousins to mature. Desean Jackson is headed down a Terell Owens like path, and how'd that work out for about half his career?

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 13:32

I don't think he's as bat shit crazy as TO. TO has no filter whatsoever, which has always been his undoing. For the most part, Desean has said the right things up to this point. He'll always do some things that make you shake your head, but I think the good far outweighs the bad. I guess there's no telling what happens to that ego once he gets paid, but for now its manageable.

We are all "fan-atics" but you just said a bunch of putting words in my mouth. I just said it was a good win. I didn't say it was basketball heaven for the Sixers. If you disagree that it was a "good win" that's fine.

I did disagree, and I said why, and your response was some sort of rant against people who aren't fans in the way you want them to be.

And is using reply so very hard?

Rob_STC reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 13:01

Please expiain in you expert opinion how a win on the road is a bad thing ? Ind beat LA, Clev beat Boston, Mil beat LA. DO you think the fans and coaches of those teams think thry were not good wins ?

I never claimed to be an expert, I just believe in my opinion, you however want to throw the term around like one of the 3 witches, go right ahead.

I think irrational fans blow those things out of proportion. (I don't care what the coaches think, and besides, what they say publicly is spin usually). It's one game out of 82, it's a mismatch in terms of rest and Denver missing their best player.

People always talk about how it's 'unfair' when the sixers have to play the second half of a back to back against a rested team - and yet when the sixers beat a team that is dealing with that unfairness (and missing their best player) it's a good win.

It's a win, it ain't a good win. The sixers won the game in the 4th quarter, when Denver was probably pretty tired. Wouldn't you be?

tk76 reply to Rob_STC on Dec 27 at 13:29

Do you think the fans of Ind and Mil think there teams are good?

The peaks and valleys do dot define a team.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Dec 27 at 13:30

Their/there gets me again.

Ahhh...the inevitable Carch-Jem swordfight that plagues every Sixers site on the goddamn internet


Rob is carch?

All we need is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IocHM0n75DI and we'll have a real smack down.

You're a sick sick man (and honestly, I didn't know he was carch, wow, that makes a lot of sense though now) :)

Interesting thread here so far, a lot of talk about where the team really is. My two cents is that I don't know if this team is playoff caliber yet. They seem to be pretty damn competitive though, which is a good sign. I just want to see more games like last night, Turner plays 25 minutes, Jrue has the ball in his hands down the stretch, Nocioni relatively on the bench, and the young guys playing (minus Brand, who isn't blocking anyone).

As regards to the Iguodala is this a concern in anyone's mind: If the Sixers trade Iguodala, they will become significantly worse. Is this a reason to want him to leave so that the team will be stuck in the lottery for a few years? Go even beyond what you are getting back, is their something to be said for getting what you can now and starting to rebuild? It's a dilemma I'm torn on every day.

What I believe (and have believed for the past two seasons) is that this is a team of 'misfit toys', headed down the wrong path. They need to take a few steps backwards to get to the fork in the road to take a new path. I don't 'want' them to get worse, I want them to be contenders for an finals apperance and I don't think this roster, with contracts and the current CBA taken into consideration, is going to get there any time soon before guys like Brand and Iguodala have their contracts run out and probably leave anyway because they aren't appreciated, don't want to be here, or the team decides only to offer them a one year deal to avoid the luxury tax (if it still exists, and I believe it will, the players probably won't agree to a hard cap).

Iguodala has been my favorite sixers since the night they drafted him (and I screamed out when the raptors drafted Araujo and scared the neighbors), and I'd love for him to finish his career as a sixer, but I'd love it more if the sixers became a championship contender. I think not trading him is tantamount to keeping Iverson past the 2002 season and making patchwork deals that didn't work but Iversons value kept decreasing.

I don't think the sixers would be better this year, or next year even but I think if they made smart moves they'd be headed in the right direction.

Rich reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 13:45

OK, let's say you are Thorn now and have decided to blow up the team by trading Iguodala (because in actuality, starting over is really just getting rid of his deal). There are two questions I think you have to look at:

1. Will Iguodala's trade value ever be higher?
2. If not, what's the best deal that's been supposedly offered? The Pryz/Batum one for Portland was it for my money.

The first one is an interesting question, as his stock around the league is pretty high after the World Championships this summer. Can he do anything in a Sixers uniform to improve it or can it improve artificially as teams start to panic around the trade deadline?

I don't think his trade value can get higher (again because I think in the NBA more so than other leagues, perception is a huge factor in a players value versus what you get when you look past the glossy hype)

Pryzbilly/Batum seems to be the best deal that people have made public, doesn't mean it was even a real deal.

Would I prefer the sixers get better and KEEP Iguodala by the way? Sure I would. I just don't see how they can get better if they don't trade Iguodala/Turner/Holiday, that's all.

I think the Blazers are the 2002 sixers, headed towards that iceberg, now the question is will they be able to avoid it and what teams can take advantage, if any, of Rich CHo

My answer would be the following:

1. Yes, closer to the trade deadline
2. That deal is the best so far, but can get better if Thorn and Stefanski do their job well.

1. Yes, closer to the trade deadline

There's no guarantee to that.

What if teams who need Iguodala now call the sixers, get rebuffed, and go make other deals? What if teams that think they are contenders now cause the lakers look weak don't feel like contenders in february because the lakers rip off a 12-3 run or something like that (I'm not saying likely but it could happen).

Closer to the deadline makes more players valuable as well, and puts you closer to the lock out, I think his value could easily decline between now and February. There's no guarantee it's going up or that the offers will be better.

History suggests otherwise. Besides successful businessmen take gambles and know how to get the most of them. Without risking and trying to up the price on your players you will always get burned in trades...

Anyway everything i've heard so far suggests trading him for expiring contracts or trade exceptions. I cannot state just how horrible that would be if it happened.

What would be a good value deal for Iguodala in your opinion. Doesn't have to be a rumor we heard, just a trade that would make you think a good value.

If you think comcast doesn't care about the money - you're fooling yourself.

Keep in mind that every time there's a good deal for one team, it's a bad deal for another team, and the sixers don't seem to be on the side of the 'good deal' recently (though THorn hasn't really made a move of significance yet)

A top 5 pick, a legitimate starter on a rookie (or very reasonable) contract, multiple talented, but largely unproven young players... Batum + Fernandez + a low first rounder for example... That's the kind of deals that i am looking for and i don't think that is asking for too much...

The problem is I can't tell what you're saying in regards to what a good deall is. Are all those pieces (top 5 pick, rookie deal, etc...) what you want, or is it a mix and match.

I think your portland deal over reached.

They are separate deals...

Not many NBA players get traded for a lottery pick without massive protections.

No good team has become a contender without pulling a good trade that others thought they won't be able to pull...


Chicago, drafted smartly, created cap space and then signed a free agent to plug a big hole (they still have holes, but don't tell me free agency didn't work for them)

Oklahoma City, drafted smartly (but not completely) and most of their positive assets are due to draft picks obtained because they were willing to admit their direction and give up their pieces when they had value if the team wasn't going to win.

Old School Sixer Fan reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 14:40

Chicago and OKC both were fortunate in the draft with Rose and Durrant, respectively. That covers a multitude of sins. If ET had come in here and set the world on fire like Durrant, we wouldn't be having any of this conversation. It's all about how deep the draft is or luck in the draft.

Yes, but would CHicago be a playoff threat without Boozer? Would they scare anyone headed into the playoffs.

I was contradicting a specific point though - about how 'great' teams are only built through really imbalanced trades.

The Lakers best player was traded for on draft night because they had a prescient GM

Old School Sixer Fan reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 14:35

I guess I'm fooling myself about the money. Comcast seems to me to care very little about the money. They signed Brand and Iguodala to large contracts taking the team well above the cap. We constantly complain about those contracts. We can't have it both ways. They have either spent money or not. We can argue later whether or not it was wisely spent. They didn't sign Miller, but would a three year committment to Miller have been a good basketball decision? They have not used the MLE, but who could they have signed that was worth paying the luxury tax?

The losses the Sixers run up are a pittance compared to revenues and earnings for Comcast. I just wish the Roberts' had more of a personal interest in the success of the team to the point of bringing in the best front office people money can buy to lead the team. Actually, I don't know that Thorn isn't that guy.

The Sixers are NOT a small market team.

The Dalembert Trade was about the luxury tax - no matter how they spin it - the sixers got worse - but they got under the luxury tax (for this season) at the time. They're under for next season by now too I think but at the time they weren't because Nocioni's two year deal.

They made a one year offer to Andre MIller - two would have had bad tax implications. Andre Miller is a pretty good player (though I've never been a fan) and no matter what Brandon Roy says, the Blazers are better when he's on the floor. The issue with Miller wasn't just his free agency it was not using him as a trade asset when you had the chance if you didn't want to re-sign him - why not? (Saving money makes sense)

Old School Sixer Fan reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 14:46

As I recall, the majority of posters here wanted SD gone because of his low BB IQ and poor work habits. I liked SD, but would have been OK with that trade if Whiteside had been thrown in. Almost everyone agreed SD was not part of the long-term future of this team. Now that Hawes has not played well at all we try to rewrite history on what we wanted. As I recall, Brian was out there by himself on defending SD and speaking against the trade.

I didn't want Dalembert gone, I wanted him signed to a reasonable extension in the off season (and I hated Dalembert for eyars, look it up). Hawes is worse than Dalembert on both ends of the floor. As for the folks who loved that trade when it happened, most of them I don't agree with on almost anything. The peoples whose opinions I respect mostly were against it for basketball reasons. It was a bad trade

Old School Sixer Fan reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 15:38

Then we agree on that. From a basketball standpoint it was a terrible trade.

Yes, and there are still those (including Kate Fagan) who will tell you that it wasn't so bad cause Hawes is better offensively than Dalembert :)

Agree. They spend money, just not wisely. In the past they have been willing to go over the tax if they are viewed as a good team.

Rich reply to Xsago on Dec 27 at 14:06

Trading him for trade exceptions and expirings will free up cap space for the team to get better though. There probably isn't a point in trying to get a 'young player' just for the sake of getting a young player. They can pick their own players with cap space eventually. If the player looks promising like a Batum, yeah, but he's gonna come with an expiring to match the money up.

Going for cap space and free agency makes me sick. It's the absolute worst thing that could happen. As i've stated numerous times before, free agency only leads to over-payed players, and the only teams that do get the best players available are the big market teams (which the Sixers unfortunately are not)

Philadlephia is one of the largest tv markets in the NBA
It's one of the most historic franchies
It has one of the richest owners (if they would admit it)

I'm confused as to why you think the sixers are a 'small market' - is this one of those myths like the phillies being 'cheap'?

And technically all NBA players are probably over paid - but who got over paid this off season? Lebron and Bosh and Wade took less than Max money. Was Boozer over paid? I guess you could argue Amare was but at least for this year he wasn't.

Philadelphia is not a small market though.

Big market IMO are only LA, NY, Miami, Chicago, Boston and Houston. Cities like Dallas, Philadelphia and Phoenix come next.

I might be wrong though about this since i'm not from the US...

I guess it depends on how you see it - but Miami is not a big City


Tv Markets, Philadlelphia 4th (Miami 16th)

Dallas is bigger than Miami as well.

Philadlephia (and its surrounding area) also probably has a higher population density as well

Not to mention, historically, if you win, people show up. Not just first round playoff games, title contention. Miami doesn't exactly show up even when teams win (see the marlins but that might be stadium related)

Old School Sixer Fan reply to Xsago on Dec 27 at 14:47

Philly is a bigger market than Miami and Houston.

Miami has different appeals to athletes: Weather, Party Scene, Taxes.

Rich reply to tk76 on Dec 27 at 15:00

In hoops, cities like LA, Chicago, New York, and Miami seem to be "destination cities" for the appeal (can't find a better word than 'culture') of those cities.

New York hasn't really been a destination city for years. They just seem to want people to think it is. They didn't want Amare, they settled (and over paid possibly) for Amare. Carmelo seems to be the only one anxious to go to New York :)

Taxes are too high, media is too nosey...

Rich reply to Xsago on Dec 27 at 14:20

It's tricky no doubt. Philly is a 'big market' and in terms of our other three sports (especially baseball and hockey, football seems a little more like the NBA) this equates to 'free agent destination.' It isn't that way in basketball though, as I think you were trying to point out.

I totally hear your point about free agency, it is a tricky business. Anyway, I think we've exhausted this subject, guys.

One thing I learn everyday is that trading Iguodala involves about a million factors.

Rich reply to Xsago on Dec 27 at 13:58

Alright, taking it further, what do you mean by better. The beauty of the supposed Batum/Pryz trade is that you got: A guy that looks like he can be a rotation/starter type going forward and an expiring deal in Pryzbilla. Do you want a pick for Iguodala included too?

My take is that with Iguodala's salary, there is going to have to be some sort of expiring if the criteria is to get a young piece back.

I don't watch a lot of Blazers games, but has Batum really shown through this year or is Portland just in chaos?

Rich reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 14:14

Yeah, that's a legitimate point. I think he's a little better than what he showed this year, they are in chaos. That certainly is up for debate though. He's probably at best a strong wing defender (who ironically, would be perfect with Iguodala) who also makes threes at a tick above the league average (I would hope as he gets older, his shots start falling with him settling into a comfortable role). Basically, he's Thabo Sefalosha with a jumper.

It is worth noting that he would be (if the trade offer was true), the best 'young piece' for Iguodala. He looks like a nice player, but in this case, he doesn't really blow me away.

tk76 reply to Rich on Dec 27 at 14:38

Yeah. IMO Batum is a defender who can hit an open shot- which is different from a "shooter" or even "scorer." A nice player to have, but he's not an All Star ready to break out.

Ideally I'd like someone like Ibaka- a big who is just starting to break out. But I doubt a player like that is gettable, unless you can scout out the right player before his potential is apparent.

The basis of the Przybila/Batum offer is ok IMO. But as i said in an earlier comment if i was Thorn i would push the Blazers hard up until the trade deadline to get Fernandez and a first rounder included in the deal as well...

Besides i'm not even sure this is an actual offer. The Blazers appear to be headed in completely the opposite direction...

Ric Bucher claims that Pryzbilla Batum was a legitimate order before the season started I belive, before Oden got hurt (again) and Roy's knee fully gave out (or whatever it is.

So what you're saying is that in addition to a guy who had big upside before the season started (Batum) and Pryzbilla you wanted Rudy Fernandez (who no one has been able to pry loose from the blazers even though he seems to hate being in the NBA) and a first round pick (albeit, before the season started it projected for a low teeens high 20s pick)

the Blazers had a huge asking price for Fernandez. that's not the case anymore. Batum has underperformed so far this season. And an early 20s pick isn't worth all that much really... Teams have been even selling those for money... Brackins is an early 20s pick what do you think of him? We got him for Willy Green...

The point is that the trade offer wasn't made now - it was made then - and you have too look at it with 'then' value. The Blazers had rebuffed numerous offers for Batum. They might still. Who knows, the Blazers are a mess and Roy is turning into a prima donna as his career arc changes course

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 14:29

well stated

All I know is "GoSixers" ruins this blog for me on a consistent basis. Really sucks cause otherwise it's great.

Now that's unnecessary. He has both good and bad arguments, just like any other poster here...

No he's right. I'm the worst poster in the entire interwebz.

I have to say, I'm identifying a lot more with Rob in this conversation. I mean, we spend so much time talking about how bad this team is, and how poorly the pieces fit and what trades need to be made.

Last night, they came back from a 12-point deficit in the fourth quarter, on the road, against a playoff team. They did it with sick defense and on the scoring of their 20-year-old point guard who bounced back within the game to carry the team to a close win (something they haven't done all year). Can't we just enjoy that for like 24 hours?

This team has more than three holes. They aren't anything more than first-round fodder, but somehow they're playing elite defense on most nights. For once, I'd like to focus on that rather than the doom and gloom of the super teams, the haves and the have-nots, the fans' hatred of Iguodala. There will be plenty of misery to wallow in, we don't need to generate our own. Not when they win a tough game, and the young guy(s) play a big part in it. Whether you believe Iguodala is part of the problem or the solution, the guy who pretty much won that game for us last night is going to be here for a long time.

Last night, they came back from a 12-point deficit in the fourth quarter, on the road, against a playoff team.

On the second half of a back to back missing their best player.

Is the roster the Nuggets put on the floor last night (sans Anthony) a playoff calibre team in the west?

So are we using defensive efficiency to call the sixers an elite defense? If so, Indiana is an elite defense as well.

Yes, I'd say that team is better than Portland and good enough to get the 8th seed in the west.

And Indiana is 8th in the league in DFR, which is pretty close to elite if not elite already. I also said the Sixers play elite defense most nights. Like they did against the full-strength Lakers a week or so ago (101.89). But I'm sure there's some reason that performance doesn't count as well.

Wow, someones bitter today, I never said either performance didn't count, but they don't count more (or less) than a 45 point drubbing just less than a week ago.

They didn't beat a fully rested fully whole Nuggets roster. If Carmelo was playing, they might have won or they might not have, but we don't now. It's not a huge win, it's just a win.

Tonights a game they should win, rested or not, but I don't think they will.

So minus their 6th man, on the second night of a back-to-back against one of the fastest teams in the league, that's a game the Sixers should win. So if they win, big deal. If they lose, "See, they suck." Got it.

Wow - joining the putting their words in my mouth club - real nice.

PS - I think the sixers are better when Louis Williams is unavailable.

Just said I don't think they'll win, wouldn't think they'd win if both teams were rested and lou was available (in fact I think they hae a better chance to win this game without Lou because Doug would want lou in there cause he thinks he matches up well with the offensive fire power of the Warriors). I think it's a bad match up. I think that the sixers aren't good enough defensively to force their will upon a team that plays a much different kind of pace, especially two nights in a row.


Please show me where I said they suck.

THEY ARE A MEDIOCRE TEAM AT BEST - I've said it repeatedly - they have a 400 fucking win percentage over a quarter of the way past the season - THATS NOT A GOOD RECORD

It's one win out of 12, it's not their best win or their signature win.

Out of curiosity, what would you call their signature win of the 40% of total games they've played that they won.

They're a bad team, bad teams sometime win games they shouldn't (and lose games they shouldn't). They're a 400 team.

That's all they are

Hadn't really thought about a signature win. Probably the New Orleans game, though I'm sure you have an excuse for the Hornets lined up for that one.

I'm not really overly concerned with wins and losses, to be honest. I'm encouraged that this team is able to play very, very good defensive against the better teams in the league. LAL, ATL, BOS, POR, NOH, DEN, IND, NYK... all playoff teams, all really locked down by the Sixers. That tells me there might be something to work with on this roster and there might be something to this system.

eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Dec 27 at 15:03

thank you for this interjection

It's like all of us diehards don't already know we are not an elite team, or even an above average one, but to stunt the conversing of the growth happening before our very eyes or lambasting the progression of some of the guys individually, but more importantly, collectively, is in misery loves company territory it seems.

tk76 reply to Brian on Dec 27 at 15:03

"For once, I'd like to focus on that rather than the doom and gloom of the super teams, the haves and the have-nots, the fans' hatred of Iguodala. There will be plenty of misery to wallow in, we don't need to generate our own. "

Maybe for 24 hours you can change the blog to something like "Happy Pill Fan."

tk76 reply to tk76 on Dec 27 at 15:06

Sort of like when Michael Jordan was on SNL in the Stuart Smalley Skit.

I guess a more fair question would be:

What do you want to see from this team?

Ignore the front office/trades. What would satisfy you in terms of what the coach and players? Obviously this is not a top level team. We can split hairs between calling them bad or average, but that sort of misses the point.

I'd say I'd like to see their key future starters (Turner and Jrue) show increasing effectiveness and consistency. Show that they are learning from their mistakes and starting to maximize their effectiveness on the floor.

From the current and future role players (Thad, Lou, Hawes, Speights, Meeks and Brakins) I'd like to se them put in positions where they can maximize their positives while hiding there weaknesses. I don't need to see Lou or Thad become a more complete player- but I want them to get better at their positives and avoid playing outside their games.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Dec 27 at 15:17

And I did not say a word about wins or losses or even playing close games. That is all sort of secondary this year imo. and should flow naturally based on the talents of the players on the floor. I'd be fine with 40 wins or 60 losses- as long as the players are being used properly and developing.

eddies' heady's reply to tk76 on Dec 27 at 16:02

Nothing personal - but this mindset is killing me. What to do if there is no development left in some of these guys? I mean, at some point/age a player is what he is. He doesn't have anymore expansion in his game, he's just those things he's always been.

I, personally, just can't get down with this "developing players" mentality as far as my fandom is concerned. I want to see wins no matter how they are obtained.

While I know the talent levels aren't comparable, I never remember saying "....gee, I hope they develop and give Clem Johnson some minutes and court time... or ...gee, sure would like to see Clint Richardson on the floor more..."

While I respect it, it just pains me to think that if I take on others' mindset of wanting to see player X or player Y "get minutes", deserved or not, instead of rooting for wins at any costs, I would never enjoy the here and now as life trickles away. Always worrying about 2 to 3 years away just sets you up to repeat yourself after those 2 to 3 years and say 2 to 3 years away again doesn't it, particularly if you never get another star ala AI?

Different teams are at different stages.

If you are Boston, LA or Dallas you sacrifice the future to maximize today's shot at a title. If you are OKC, Miami or Portland you look to align you good young players for a sustained run at success.

If you are Sac, NJ, or GSW you try and build long term around your young core pieces. And if you are Minny, Memphis or Philly you try to maximize your decent young talent with an eye out to make an impact move to either draft or trade for a legit star franchise player.

You can't be like last years's Bobcat team- trying to eek out a few extra wins with decent vets to get you to 44 wins and no future.

eddies' heady's reply to tk76 on Dec 27 at 16:55

Ok, but you still didn't address if there's nothing left to maximize out of your 'decent young talent'.??

Not that you said this but - just because players are young and highly touted by fans doesn't always equate with talented. After reaching a certain age or number of years in the league, they are what they are, no?

As for the Bobcats reference: We salvaged our immediate future the days we gave inflated contracts to Andre and Elton. So with those two hampering our future payroll-wise, why not just deal with the here and now and enjoy each win? I just can't program myself to do any different.

Yeah, the current Sixers have a lot of youth but not much high end talent. So you play the young guys like Speights or Lou to pad their stats and then trade them for better pieces.

But if you bury a young guy on the bench they go from having some value to having zero.

eddies' heady's reply to tk76 on Dec 27 at 17:24

I agree on a guy having minimal value to then having none by sitting them on the bench. But the same can be true if you flip it and put a guy out there and he gets exposed too. Which is what I think is the case with Speights.

I actually don't think Speights has been "exposed" when he has gotten PT. He rebounds at a decent rate and can score. he even shows some flashes of other skills.

But what has "exposed" Speights has been a number of coaches that have put him in the doghouse for his lousy work habits. The book is pretty much out that the kid lacks the discipline and dedication to develop into anything. And that's why he has no value.

If they kept mum and gave him heavy minutes he'd have been a relatively valuable trading asset. But the Sixers aren't exactly crafty in that regard.

Well see, they take cues from the top - and how crafty can a franchise be with an owner who goes on national tv and mentions that their 'star' will never play a game for them again :)

Collins calling him out and saying 'i don't trust him' - that's just par for the course - maybe collins thinks that's motivationl - maybe collins understands todays nba player as much as Paul Wetphal does (I'm not longing for the old days, I'm just saying the days have changed folks, be it collins, or westphal or mike singletary costing himself his job in SF, you gotta learn to deal with the times)

How do you hide the weaknesses of your role players when they're all primarily the same weakness - they stink at defense.

I'd like to see player development matter. I'd like to see Nocioni inactive, forever, and I'd like to see some more effort put into developing speights.

I need to see Thad become a more complete player cause he's going to be demanding 'copmlete player' money this off season.

I'd like to see Lou playing for someone else :)

Old School Sixer Fan reply to GoSixers on Dec 27 at 15:53

Agree on some of your opinions on player development. I still think Speights has potential to be a nearly complete player. Thad obviously needs to rebound and defend better and develop his three point shot. I'm OK with Lou as an instant offense player, but if they can get a developmental big for Lou, then I'd love to make that move.

I see no reason for Nocioni, Songalia or Kopono to play at all.

I was holding this for the weekly update but you mentioned Thad and threes so I thought I'd drop this here for now.


I think the only thing holding Speights back is Speights, but who can get to him?

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment