DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

A Look At Our Starting Center

Good stuff. I have an a theory on Hawes that I'm pretty confident in.

Yes he's soft, but more than being soft, he's plain lazy. He's got the athleticism and skill to be an effective center in this league, but he lacks motivation. Every once in a long while something lights a fire under him and he plays like a decent center. In those games, he produces, his minutes go up and we get a glimpse at what the Sixers would look like with an actual center. The other 90% of the time, he does the bare minimum, plays the bare minimum and drags the team down.

Maybe if Collins benches him for a couple games it'll motivate him for a little while, but it won't last. The fact of the matter is that he's playing for a big payday this season. If that isn't motivation enough, nothing will be. The player you see right now is essentially the same player who came in the league. Gifted enough to stay in the league based on his natural talents alone, unwilling to do the work to get better, even more unwilling to go the extra mile within games to make a difference for his team.

I'd be thrilled if they moved on from starting Hawes. I feel like I've seen enough and I seriously doubt he'll be part of this franchise after this season. Speights is going to be here another year, at least, and maybe there's a chance he can motivated.

I think you are right. I was kinda hoping that the new environment and Collins who is supposed to be a good motivator can light a fire under him before the season began (even though i knew the odds were against it), but i am already past admitting that he simply doesn't have the desire to be a successful starting NBA center.
It really is disheartening to see that even Speights appears to "want it" more even in a non-contract year.

Speaking of Speights, i am all for him earning the starting job at the moment because we don't have a better option, but Speights cannot be a long term solution at the 5. I don't get why he doesn't get more playing time at the PF spot, since he is a pure PF IMO that needs to be couple with a big defensive oriented C. It probably has something to do with having Brand and Young at the PF spot as well.

Old School Sixer Fan reply to Xsago on Jan 18 at 6:47

True centers are rare even in the NBA. Many teams are forced to use a natural PF at the center position. Lat year, I thought the ideal combination might have been Speights and Dalembert, but they rarely played together. If I was Collins, I'd use Speights more at center for developmental reasons. Hawes seems to be too slow and weak to play center in the NBA.

This has pretty much been his story all long. Everything I read about him from Sacramento was that he was lazy and just didn't give as shit.

Really just got confirmation once he got here.

deepsixersuede on Jan 18 at 8:12

John, good work; I defended the trade and hoped against hope Collins could work his magic but I officially gave up after yesterday, when he made K.Brown look like Wilt. I glimpsed some of the Memphis game and they made a nice 2nd half run with Thabeet defending the paint; if he is available for cap room I hope they inquire about him. [Hawes,Brackins, #2 pick?]

John, you have talked about comcast not going into luxury tax territory and I agree but it will be put up or shut up time if the 6th seed is attainable, along with a possible matchup with the bulls. If Denver cleans house and Nene [28 y.o.] can be gotten for expirings and a pick can Thorn and Collins get them to bite?

I for one think Hawes physically lacks the lower body strength and quickness to ever be a quality center. He can shoot some and pass- but even if he gave the effort of Kevin Love he still would be a stiff.

From everything i've seen so far i think he has enough lower body strength and athleticism to be successful. His problem has been not using them on a consistent basis due to laziness. He was almost dominating when he looked interested and gave effort. It happened only a few times though.

The Hawes situation is tricky.

A guy who can't stay motivated in a contract year is a MAJOR red flag. The tricky part is that he's a 22 year old center, a position that trends toward later development. He's got legit C size and a good skill level, aside from consistent effort his biggest weakness (physical strength) is often one that develops with age.

Having hiim on roster next year will most likely mean that he's playing on the qualifying offer before he becomes an UFA.

I disagree that he has a good skill level and I feel that your thinking is the kind of thinking that ends up with him having a 5 year 55 million dollar contract extension.

People need to accept that just because a guy is tall doesn't mean he can play basketball well or is worth a contract

Iguodala: I wasn't berating Turner in fourth quarter of Friday's game:


Story: Redemption for Williams, Turner:


This article reminded me with one positive about Collins' recent coaching: At least he understands Hawes hurts the team.

My knock on Hawes is he doesn't have the physical strenght to play inside. He has some a nice shootung touch, can make a nice pass to a cutter, but lacks the lower body strenght to play with his back to the basket and the upper body strenght to make room to rebound.

Why does it seem like we keep getting stuck with centers who are not motivated?

Joe reply to KellyDad on Jan 18 at 9:52

I don't care if they are motivated really. I care if they are productive. Our current center is not productive. We had a decade+ stretch of productive centers, though. I miss that.

What does it say about Sammy if he's playing less than 20 mins per game for a 9 win team that gives up more than 100 points per game? It can't be his talent because defense is what he excels at. It can't be attitude because Cousins is a nut job. It has to be something.

It couldn't be the fact that he's been injured a lot this season, combined with a coach who is scrambling to save his job and the fact that there are more big men on the Kings than just demarcus cousins.

Cousins is part of their future, Sam isn't - a smart team recognizes that and plays the part of their future to try and develop him.

The sixers play spencer hawes

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 12:35

Maybe the Kings realize that Sam is not their future and simply a ticket to dumping Nocioni's longer contract?

Not every franchise is short-sighted like the Sixers to where they marginalize their talent, mistake prone youth in favor of low upside vets who have no future with the team.

Cousins is part of their future, Sam isn't - a smart team recognizes that and plays the part of their future to try and develop him.

That's why I said this part.

I really thought that the Kings would be able to parlay sam at the trade deadline but I didn't count on him being injured.

I still think sam might have some value come trade deadline - but not as much as I thought he'd have originally (back up in Orlando for instance)

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 12:45

Agree. And if the Sixers seriously thought Speights was part of their future (as a starter) then it just serves as another knock against Stefanski and his ability to do his job any better than an internet hack.

I can buy the injuries as part of the reason for his playing time but if the coach is trying to save his job he has to go with the players that give him the best chance to win games. Are you telling me Cousins, Thompson, Landry and Jackson ate better defensive bigs than Sammy?

I'm telling you that westphal has been messing with rotations all season - and that while he is trying to save his job he also has a mandate to develop the younger players.

Did you do anything besides looking at sams stats before deciding he' having a bad year (and i'd still rather have him than hawes)

The funny thing is that the exact same problems people had with Dalembert (not working on his game, not being dedicated off the court) are still there with Hawes. At least with Sam, he played hard when he was on the court and his floor was about 10 stories higher than Hawes'. When Hawes actually cares, which rarely happens, he's about what Sammy was on a below-average day.

Dalembert wanted to be included at the offensive end and tended to be less effective on "D" when that didn't happen, rather than just concentrating on his strengths -- rebounding and defending.

Hawes has a better feel on offense and is a much better passer and shooter, but opposing players don't think twice about driving the lane with him in there.

Spencer Hawes gets included on the offensive end often.

Quick - who is more efficient offensively - Sam Dalembert or Spencer Hawes?

tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 18 at 10:30

We knew this was an issue when they traded for Hawes. But some people love to swap garbage in the hopes that a change in scenery will be a wake up call.

But Sam was a guy who could have been great with the proper mind-set. While Hawes will still stink even if he plays to his potential.

Whether or not Sam could be great with a proper mind set is debatable (though I think at the point in his career when he was traded, he was what he was) I think.

Sam however was good, possibly great, at one end of the floor, and not as terrible as people liked to think at the other end of the floor.

Hawes is lucky to be average at either end of the floor, and I'm not sure he's that.

And as for 'sam was a locker room issue' that floats around so much - I think Spencer Hawes calling anyone out during a game indicates that maybe Hawes might be a problem as well since he has no grounds to call anyone out on either end of the floor.

deepsixersuede reply to tk76 on Jan 18 at 10:39

Why do you guys think our future starter, Spieghts, doesn't challenge shots anymore? Did he hurt his knee blocking a shot and it is a mental block with him or is Collins stressing positioning defensively and keeping him out of foul trouble.

I used to hope Speights was the future starter at center for the sixers, and while I"d prefer him over Hawes, I don't believe he's the answer either.

As for your question, I think Speights has some of the same laziness that Brian attributes to Hawes, and more importantly I believe that the 'excuse' Tom Moore used for Sam's effort applies double or triple to Speights.

deepsixersuede reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 10:45

I just meant starter for this year; totally agree he has backup 4/5 written all over him but who knows.

deepsixersuede reply to deepsixersuede on Jan 18 at 10:51

Looking back on Spieghts draft and the sixers options it looks like they all were headcases.

When you're drafting that low in the draft you usually are targeting the types of guys who have major flaws.

The knock on speights was motivation, and it seems to have born out. He has the natural skill but lacks the motivation to work to improve or give consistent effort at both ends of the floor (so it seems). It's only his third year and I was very hopeful when they drafted him, but my hopes are burning out quickly

Darrell Arthur, a headcase? I'm honestly asking - I never heard of it but you could be right. Anyway, he's okay now.

tk76 reply to Tray on Jan 18 at 15:37

There was a question about some undisclosed injury with Arthur.

Good question.

My take is that Speights is no longer the quality athlete he was when he was drafted. That probably is partly to due with injury, conditioning, diet, lifestyle etc.

But honestly, Speights was not much of an athlete in college or HS. He worked intensely with trainers in the run up to the draft, and was in the best condition of his life on draft day and early his rookie year. He has sort of fallen off the wagon since- made worse during his injury.

My best guess is the 8 months where Speights was actually in good shape and reasonably explosive where more the aberrational. And we won't ever see that Speights again.

deepsixersuede reply to tk76 on Jan 18 at 10:59

That sure doesn't sound like a player a team will ever invest big money in. Does he get a chance this year at a stretch of 30 minute games? I know you have said in the past if his confidence kicks in he could be something.

An important question is does he have the conditioning to have a stretch of 30 minute games where he is a positive impact?

I don't think he does

I wouldn't be surprised if the reason that Speights doesn't get more minutes has more to do with his 'conditioning' than his play at practice

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 11:05

He's probably the type of guy who would only get in shape through regular PT (like Andre Miller.) On this team I never understood why Speights did not get some regular minutes. Sure they want to motivate him through tough love... but I don't think Speights is a guy who responds to that.

Of course what do I know just watching on TV.

I think the issue is that with a guy like Speights is that when you see that offensive skill set and those flashes on defense you start thinking 'holy moley we might have something here if we can only get him to work at it', and the 'standard' for getting a guy to work at it is to ride him hard at practice and make him earn those minutes, and to be hard on him when he makes mistakes in games (like with Evan Turner) because you feel he can be much better.

Course, that's just me, I never understand why Speights doesn't play more, but I still don't understand why Hawes is the 'starter' even though I realize it's not really that important - there's something that is seen as important around the league if a guy starts.

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 11:11

It's not even that Speights is that good. But the other frontcourt options have always been feeble.

This season Brand has been deserving of minutes, but Sam is gone. In previous years Brand was out with injuries and yet Speights hardly saw the floor.

deepsixersuede reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 11:12

I would really like to see Brand/Spieghts for the rest of the year. It seems Brand operates better without Sam but does Spieghts drift outside too much or can they play block to block?

I've like what I've seen from Speights the last few games. He does provide the outside touch that allows Brand room to do his thing inside, but still battles for rebounds/putbacks, and is our best rebounder by percentage this year. He's even shown a more unselfish, playmaking side (like that sweet dish to Dre in the CHA game for a dunk/lay in when he could have easily just taken his 'money' shot from beyond the foul line). He looks lost on rotations at times and confused while setting screens, but considering he's gotten so little burn this year, I think that's something that can be improved by repetition and more consistent playing time.

Defense is still an atrocity, but he does make some good plays, is pretty clever with taking charges most of the time, and though Hawes has more size, Speights is certainly more physical and more of a presence on the inside.

We've got nothing to lose by giving Speights a good chunk of Hawes minutes. There is no good interior D on this roster, with the exception of Brand going above and beyond his limitations to handle the opposing teams' best frontcourt guy (which has its ups and downs throughout the game, mostly due to fluctuations in Brand's energy). After his dismal start to the season, Speights seems to be bouncing back and sooner or later Doug will have to realize it's time to free Mo Speezy. Hawes is a joke whose shown flashes of competency, but no consistency whatsover. Hawes won't be re-signed (unless the front office is EVEN MORE clueless than they've proven to be already), and Speights will be here another year so lets roll with that. Hawes isn't winning us any games.

Not to mention, Speights seems genuinely excited about the team (his bench cheerleading is priceless) and about the opportunity to shows he belongs in this system. I think the players have more of a rapport and chemistry with Speights (he's been here awhile) which also benefits the overall team performance.

tk76 reply to dwhite on Jan 18 at 14:18

I agree for the most part. Although I would not expect too much from Speights.

If I were running the team, I would talk to speights and tell him what the expectations are - and I'd give him a chance - and not just pull him at the first mistake (that bucks game pull STILL gnaws at me because it felt petty by Collins) but i'd review with him after each game.

Honestly - if i ran a team - i'd have so many coaches it would be nuts - and i'd expect the players to work with their individual coaches on whatever it took - a defensive coach for speights a guy to help turner with his shot (mckie?) etc...team practice and individual practice

deepsixersuede reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 11:06

Our coach often seems to mention "20 minute guy" and I thought he meant effort but you may be right, it makes sense.

Good stuff on Hawes and our center problems. I think we're past the point of turning him into a tough nosed banger on the block. Those guys either have it or they don't.

Second thought- and yes, this will be wishful thinking, but- what are the chances we could snag Steph Curry before the deadline? His minutes are down to 25 a game over his past 5, and it's because of his defense. Ellis stays on the court because he is a better defender and has been the hot hand all year. ESPN ran a little insider quip about Curry not getting minutes because of his defense. Iguodala and Speights for Curry and Biedrins?

Golden State has a lot of pieces to play with- and I understand they have Dorell Wright playing pretty well right now at SF, but who knows. Thoughts?

Don't get Brian all excited :)

Lots of rumors swaying around the Warriors this year, a franchise in flux, supposedly they even are considering moving Lee. I wouldn't mind that trade though I don't think Biedrins is that good nor worth the money he makes. I wouldn't give em Speights TOO.

I have no idea what kind of system they run in GSW under Smart or what the long term plan is there - and I'm not sure the new owners are sure yet either.

But I think trading Curry now would be a mistake by them

Curry is going to be a special offensive player (one can make a case that he already is). If we can get him i'm all for it even though i'm not sure a Jrue-Curry pairing will work as well as many of you think (it's better than a Turner - Jrue one though).

tk76 reply to ryano on Jan 18 at 11:07

I'd be absolutely shocked if they traded Curry.


With a reduced salary cap coming - less money to spend - are any of them really worth a long term deal?

I know a lot of people are excited about Young this year off the bench, but is he doing much besides scoring?

deepsixersuede reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 11:02

When I read W.Chandler mentioning [5 years for 60 million] I think Thad asks for 8 million per at least and ,to me, he gets L.Will. money at most.

Sort of highlights why this team is going nowhere the next 2-3 years. If anything they will be shedding talent to preserve the bottom line.

Unless they shake things up with a major trade, I don't expect any increase in team talent until Brand comes off the books.

deepsixersuede reply to tk76 on Jan 18 at 11:18

Totally agree, that's why talk of winning a championship with these owners seems so futile.

Jason reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 11:06

Hawes- Not worth a min contract.

Young- Worth a small contract, no more than MLE. But is it worth it for the sixers? I say no, better off cutting ties than paying a bench player MLE, he'd be better on a more complete team (I think he'd be great in Orlando, all star scorer imo.)

Speights- Yes, I think he'll be economically reasonable. I would be shocked if he gets to MLE $$$, i'd expect more like a lou deal, maybe a little bit less. I also think he has more upside than Thad.

A lot of people are pushing Thad as a dark horse 6 man candidate of the year - if that maintains I'd like to see the sixers be smart and leverage that into a sign and trade in the off season.

Of course without the new CBA who knows what's going to happen.

As for Speights and his upside - yes he has more than Thad - but I don't think he's going to come close to it.

Can you guys imagine what Speights will look like if there's a long term lock out?

deepsixersuede reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 11:15

Two words; MEL TURPIN May he rest in peace!!!

Jason reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 11:16

I don't think speights will reach his full potential. He doesn't need to in order to be an effective Player. But I'd still give him a chance, for 4-5 million why not. Bigs are hard to come by. I know you are very quick to judge a player, and imo in general a bit too quick on your judgements, but I wouldn't be shocked if Speights turned into a respectable player, I've seen enough from speights this year to think he has hope. 2-3 months ago Speights was done, but he has,to his credit and dougs, improved.

tk76 reply to Jason on Jan 18 at 11:21

The thing is when you are coaching role players its better to have a one dimensional defensive big than someone like Speights.

You can always shift the offense to your other players and benefit from a big's defense and rebounding. But the reverse is just not that valuable unless you are really an elite offensive player.

So someone like Prizbilla is much more valuable for a coach trying to win than someone like Speights or Corliss Williamson.

Jason reply to tk76 on Jan 18 at 11:25

Yes. But for 3-4 million a year, the sixers can have Speights and try and see if they can teach him Defense. He's better than Hawes. Which doesn't say much, because of how bad hawes is, but he's already our best. It's not easy to find talented young defensive bigs.

simply put, sixers are over cap, mine as well hold on to speights for the short term, i'd give him 3/12 up to 3/15, 4/16, maybe. But he's not worth a long term deal, but he is worth a short contract to see what he could potentially develop too.

tk76 reply to Jason on Jan 18 at 11:29

He's a guy you give a 2 year contract with a team option for a third year and make him earn it. And even that is risky.

But if anther team is in love with his talent then I'd be all for a trade. I'd rather the Sixers take another shot at a similar type pick where they have him on a rookie scale then start paying Speights more. But I guess it would be fine to extend him for cheap.

Jason reply to tk76 on Jan 18 at 11:32

Yep, that sounds perfect.

And where is the risk? The sixers are over teh cap the next 2 years after this, as well as Iguodalas final contract. If Speights is only making 3-4 million he can be moved.

How else do you suggest getting talented? By getting rid of our own prospects because they won't be stars?

tk76 reply to Jason on Jan 18 at 11:35

I agree that the next 2 years are financially a wash. But what happens if someone offers a Sixer RFA a 4 year deal?

Its sort of a Willie green situation. His contract was not actually so bad- but its length made no sense.

There's no reason to give anyone a contract of any length this off season regardless of (current) cap situation.

Not to mention the whole 'luxury tax' issue, which is something the sixers care about greatly (Comcast does at least) Are Hawes or young worth paying the luxury tax for? Even for two years?

Jason reply to tk76 on Jan 18 at 11:38

I'd still be willing to give him 3 years with a team option for 4 mill a year. It's not that big of a cap hit imo, and still leaves flexibility after year 2. The thing with Speights what team is offering him 4 years at MLE level?

My prediction with Speights is he signs the qualifying offer for 1 more year and hopes to get a contract in FAency.

Wouldn't be shocked if Thad ends up playing out the same way, he might feel he's worth more than MLE $$$ which i believe he will be offered by a contender. But sign the qualifying offer and try to play his way into a contract he thinks he deserves.

Sometimes I am quick to judge a player, but for a season and a half I was on Speights side, but he showed nothing to me that the worry about his dedication and work ethic weren't true.

He's an offensive focused player, the sixers had an offensive focused coach last year and he still couldn't get minutes. Think about what that says about Speights?

Lou Williams (who I also want gone) had a career year last year when he had a coach who didn't care about defense, but Speights couldn't get off the bench.

I wanted Speights to succeed, I wanted the sixers to draft him, but it's year 3 and he hasn't shown much to warrant a belief he'll grow into anything and the 'shape' he came back in after his injury is entirely disconcerting.

You have 4/5 years to decide what kind of a player a guy is or isn't in the NBA - I may have come to a conclusion 2 1/2 years on Speights, but I don't think that's quick, and if he turns it around I'll be excited, but nothing so far has shown that he's going to be a solid nba player on a contending team.

I want the sixers to be contenders for a title, for a finals appearance, not a first round bitch slapping, and when I view players on the sixers, I view them through the eye of would they be in the 8 man rotation on a seriously contending team (in the east i see that as the bulls, magic, celtics, heat).

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 11:26

I'd be afraid to extend anyone right now. The Sixers need to find a superstar before they start throwing out long term contracts for their own over-valued middling players.

Its not so much what these guys deserve- but are the Sixer as a franchise in a position where locking in big chunks of their roster with role players is a good idea.

Jason reply to tk76 on Jan 18 at 11:29

Tk said what i wanted to say, much better than I could.

You are right about thad, but for the wrong reasons. He's worth a contract for MLE, just not from the sixers. Bad teams need flexibility. Giving Thad a 5/30 or 5/25 will hurt the teams flexibility. Which is why Thad shouldn't be extended, not because he won't ever be a "starter" or star.

to both TK/GS. Making a new little comment as it has nothing to do with Thad/Speights individually.

TK you are right that the sixers can't be giving out bad contracts, I completely disagree with you though that giving out a 4/16 to speights is a bad contract. Not even close. I consider a bad contract a 5/50 million to a player. Prime Example is IGuodala. He's worth 6/84, but not on a non contender. This is partially why the NBA needs a hard cap, it will keep Iguodalas salary down and make it easier for teams to keep him as a contender currently can easily pay the luxury tax as they are locked in to their team, but a marginal team like the sixers are giving up all their cap flexibility when not being locked in.

Your argument is completely invalid when ti comes to small contracts. They are in fact the way to go. Giving out 4 million (about 1/18th of the overall cap space) to a player like speights will not kill your flexibility. Giving 6 mill to thad won't kill flexibility. But because the sixers have no flexibility, it is just putting us into an even further hole and an endless cycle of bad.

The real question will come to Jrue unfortunately. Will he be worth the 5/60 deal he's on pace to get? If not more then this. He's talented. No debate here. Jrue's my favorite sixer now, I believe he's very talented. But is he worth that flexibility? You are right about needing a star to build around, re-signing Jrue who i don't believe will be a star in this league will make that impossible form happening.

Hopefully the Hard Cap happens, which will severely cheapen the price of Jrue Holiday as Contenders that could use Jrue as a final piece and overpay without problem, won't be able to go over the cap space of a team like teh sixers. So they can't have star player max, and a bunch of other near max players.

Your argument about small contracts doesn't hold water to me for a couple reasons

1. It's not how they do it in the NBA usually - they don't give out small/short contracts - agents don't like them -a nd agents builly GM's all the time
2. You're ignoring the luxury tax - if the luxury tax continues to exist, guys like Speights and Young aren't worth paying it for the next couple years
3. If there's a hard cap 'small contracts' won't be possible either for a capped out team. No contracts will be possibe

Jason reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 12:06

Not my theory. It's more complex. I'll write something more about it later/in future threads. Don't got the motivation atm to get into it.

The big problem is not giving a 6 mill contract or a 5 mill contract to Speights. Those are still relatively flexible. How do you think gooden kept getting passed around? He had that contract.

The real problem with the talent is giving out the big contract to a young player that isn't a star, because that kills flexibility. And I believe the sixers are going to run into a situation where JRue isn't the final piece, and is the main piece, then given a contract I am not sure he'll be able to live up to as the #1 player on a team. The team would need to be a lot further along then they are now for me to think giving a big long term contract for Jrue is an easy decision.

tk76 reply to Jason on Jan 18 at 12:16

At least they have a few more years before Jrue is up for an extension. But I can see them in a similar boat to when the extended Iguodala and signed Brand.

Jrue is up for an extension the same summer Brand comes off the books. That will be a big summer for this franchise. They can't afford to mess up (again) in a way theat hoses them for another 5 years.

The CBA is going to change, that's a given, but at this point no one knows how much / how little / or if there will be a season next year at all (I don't believe there will be). It's so hard to project anything about the future as it's all just worse than spitballing without the new CBA in place.

I believe there will be some 'game changing' changes to the new CBA, be it the hard cap, non guaranteed contracts ala the NFL shorter max deals, etc...

deepsixersuede reply to GoSixers on Jan 18 at 13:02

Anything that makes it easier to have a quick turnaround is fine by me; it seems so hard to recover from a bad signing for the not paying luxury tax group of teams.

And the CBA has to be adjusted to prevent bad owners and GM's from themselves.

Maybe Owners should stop hiring bad GM's and hire more intelligent basketball people.

Why would the strong organizations with good-to-great front office personnel allow changes to be made that narrow the gap between them and the shitty organizations?

I'm not really sure what you're asking.

THe point is - no matter what the rules - the good organizations will succeed more consistently than the bad organizations that get lucky with draft picks (blake griffin) or such...

As for the changes in the CBA - it's not about competitive balance - it's about money and profit

tk76 reply to CM on Jan 18 at 13:58

Why so the rich baseball teams hand money to the cheap ones who refuse to even spend the hand-out from profit sharing>

The nba has a salary floor, right?

I'm not crazy about caps or revenue sharing or any of that crap. I think it does more to prop up the poorly run organizations than it does to create parity. Honestly, I think there should be adjustments made to the NBA CBA, but I don't think it's fatally broken or anything. As a fan, I kind of like the fact that there's this structure to trading based on the cap. It stops things like a franchise trading their best player, in his prime, for absolutely nothing. Like the Padres just did.

For me, the killer in any professional sport is fully guaranteed contracts.

tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 18 at 14:07

No minor league and players entering at age 19 does not help things either.

You have to play your young players to develop them- but its hard to get reliable play from those players unless they are absolute studs like Durant or Griffin. So if you want to develop talent you almost have to agree to be bad for a few years.

Well, Durant blew in his rookie season, Griffin stayed an extra year in college and missed his rookie year due to injury. There really haven't been many rookies who lit the world on fire at 18 or 19 after one year of college.

Derrick Rose?

I think that a second year, if not a third, gets tacked on to the current CBA. Stern has the legal might now so it's not subject to court challenge and I think the players don't really care about it just pretending it matters to them.

Rose was worse than Jrue has been this season as a rookie. That's better than most in their rookie year, though.

But dude

he started 80 games

he aveaged 16 + points and 6+ rebounds

And they made the playoffs

All because of derrick rose


Assists not rebounds

Please don't use the baseball CBA as an example, talk about a sport with some cheap ass teams that can afford to spend more (yeah you carl pohlad you multi billionaire idiiot)

Baseball is vastly different than basketball because the AMOUNT of money certain teams make off home broadcasts - they just don't compare to the NBA

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment