DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

More of the Same

I think that Sixers only play well ball game vs playoffs teams and contenders.

These late fouls on jump shooters (taking 3s is the worst) is like your closer walking the bases loaded. Except when the Sixers come to bat with the bases loaded their clean up hitter strikes out while the opponent's hitter cashes in.

The Sixers are the Bad News Bears.

Earlier in the game it looked like there was something broken about Iguodala's foul shooting. I was actually wondering if his wrist was hurt, because he seemed to fling the ball without any type of soft release.

I did not expect him to hit all 3 FT's late- but not because i thought he would bow to the pressure. More that his FT form was too broken to hope for 3 in a row.

Do you think his form has just gotten worse over the years- or is it due to injury (either his achilles strain effecting his form or something wrong with his wrist.)

He's never had a good jumper, but he used to be a decent FT shooter. Don't most players get better with FT shooting with time? He hit 82% on 500+ attempts a few years ago. And he has not cracked 74% since. And now 66% this year. Strange.

It did look like he was shooting with a stiff wrist early, sort of just chucking it up there.

The year he shot 82%, I remember them talking about how much work he put in the previous summer on his foul shot. Don't know if he stopped that, or what, but his freebie form looks broken to me at this point. Disappointing.

user-pic
TruePhan reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 12:33
+/-

He really hasn't been the same offensively ever since he added the extra muscle I believe after his second year. Speaking from experience, that really fucks with your shot and everything else. That's why he shoots like a power-forward, because he's clearly built like one as far as mass goes. He made the conscious effort not to lose any explosiveness or speed but I guess he didn't think to make sure his shot didn't get fucked up, which it clearly did. That's really his problem is that he has the mindset of an athletic, strong, dominating defender/ferocious dunker first and foremost and that's really what holds him back from being a better offensive player. Once he loses some of his athleticism and is forced to become a more offensive player, he'll be a lot better than he has been so far. He plays like a 3/4 out there instead of a G/F.

Then again, I can't say I blame him considering the fact that he's still never actually gotten a chance to run this team.

hye! i'd be mad if it wren't for the fact that gerald went to high school with me!!!! EPISCOPAL ACADEMY BABYYYYYYYYY REPRESENT

user-pic
mike reply to MW on Jan 21 at 9:53
+/-

Do you know any of the Vakils or Shafaghs?

Yeah, I always liked the Episcopal School when I was growing up, an Episcopal School with like 75% of its students being jewish always made sense to me

haha i got kicked out of EA


Having trouble getting past the debacle in Orlando.

Could that be the turning point in the season where it all heads in a downward spiral? Maybe the players and coaches never get past it either. Every time they have a close game the prior nightmares may come back to haunt them.

Idle Question: How come at the end of games when the 76ers need a hoop with the clock running down they never run a play or a motion offense. It is and always has been Lou isolated at the point or Iggy isolated on the wing with a long and/or wild jump shot always the result. Seems like I have seen the same thing a hundred times both with Collins and the disaster coach from last year (who I refuse to acknowledge by name) at the helm?

Good question about the end-of-game plays. I think the simple answer is that it's just what most teams do. There's this ideal that you have your guy, and when you absolutely need a hoop, he gets the ball and beats his man one-on-one. Call it Jordanitis or something, but for whatever reason, most teams designate that one guy. It doesn't make much sense to me, even in the extreme cases where you have a guy like Kobe, wouldn't he be better off running some kind of two-man game with Gasol than going one-on-one and taking some kind of fadeaway jumper?

In the Sixers' case, it makes even less sense, because they don't have that guy who can get a makable shot whenever he wants off isolation.

The team that I think does the best job of running offense in those situations is probably Boston. At least against the Sixers, they always seem to get good looks, and it's always someone different based on the matchups/play design. Of course, I've also seen them iso Pierce in those situations, so who knows. Maybe they just run plays against the Sixers because they don't want Pierce going one-on-one against Iguodala.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 10:28
+/-

Funny. Late in the Orlando game I was thinking they might have turned the corner (since they had previously won 2 tight games and looked to be winning a third.) I guess not :).

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 10:46
+/-

Can you add something to your name to differentiate from the "Depressed Fan" Brian?

Mine always has the photo.

Could that be the turning point in the season where it all heads in a downward spiral? Maybe the players and coaches never get past it either. Every time they have a close game the prior nightmares may come back to haunt them.

This is an interesting question to ponder, but I don't think it's true for the most part, except for the missed free throws. The flow of the NBA game (or basketball in general) is fast enough that players aren't thinking about past failures when they go up for a shot or try to make a play at the end of a game. So if the Sixers continue to come up short at the ends of games, it's a reflection of their actual talent level (or lack thereof) and the pressures of the moment, not the burdens of the past.

I do believe that performance in the clutch improves with repetition, more so in basketball than in slower sports like baseball. The Sixers' recent past is evidence of this. In 08-09, they lost several close heartbreakers early in the year (the Ray Allen game, Nowitzki buzzer beater, Parker buzzer beater), but they stayed resilient and executed better in those situations, eventually winning several close games on the way to the playoffs (Lakers, Blazers in OT, Bulls in the last Spectrum game, etc.). Iguodala in particular was terrible early in the year in clutch situations, great in the last half.

This year's team is getting its repetitions in endgame situations that matter. Some players (Iguodala, Thad), and possibly the coach, are remembering what it is like. Others (Jrue, Turner) are getting their first taste. If they are intelligent enough and have the right makeup, they will get better. And if they don't, I'll be the first to admit I was wrong.

I don't think this will be the turning point although it's hard for me to get past it. I think that they might win some share of road games in this second half. As far as the offense Collins said they run a very basic offense which your right in that it is usually as you said. They run this with the lead as well and let the shot clock run down purposely. Collins had said he is trying to keep it simple although I agree it is terrible.I have to think Thorn isn't blind to the fact they need a center. Anything is better than what they have now. Dallas traded Alexis Ajinca. Why wouldn't they take a flyer on a big man like that ?

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Jan 21 at 10:40
+/-

As I woke up this morning I think I still saw Evan Turner standing at many positions around the arc in Time Warner Cable arena with his hands in a Miss-Mary-Mack position.

Would be nice if our #2 pick could be just a smidgen of a difference maker on offense then maybe we'd win some of these close games. He just seems to be another warm body out there on the court, not really making an impact on the game in terms of helping us snare a win.

At this point it would be interesting to here your opinions on non-Turner issues...

user-pic
bebopdeluxe reply to eddies' heady's on Jan 21 at 10:57
+/-

Brian:

Just a quick question - why don't we have an "ignore" function on this forum.

It would come in REALLY handy.

You'd miss me :)

user-pic
bebopdeluxe reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 11:33
+/-

Don't flatter yourself.

;-)

And one of the reasons why is that it's not a forum, it's a blog - and there is a difference in functionality and presentation.

How can you have an ignore function when people are allowed to post without really 'signing in' and just have to give a screen name and email address.

Just learn not to look at particular screen names - i'm getting better at it. Of course the folk who think it's funny to pretend to be someone else are easiest to ignore :)

I totally agree with you Eddie. Evan and Jrue should be the players we discuss. Not Iguodalas wrist, not Lou in the fourth quarter and definetly nothing about Spencer Hawes related. If this team is going to get any better long term it starts with those two. The next 39 games should be there proving growing to see where they stand.

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to KellyDad on Jan 21 at 12:17
+/-

eh, sort of (discussion wise). Lou is the current favorite whipping boy around here. He, favorably, gets most of the negative ink. Discussing Spencer Hawes is just a waste of ink (or is it keystrokes?). I guess I gave up on discussing Andre Iguodala starting at the end of the DiLeo year and gave him enough attention last year. I said he should be traded 2 years ago, steadfastly claimed he wasn't a leader, hollered loudly he was full of ego, was way overpaid, and stated he was nothing but a hollow stat-stuffer never leading the team to respectability - just a Robin without a Batman. As you may know, the masses went into an uproar over most of those observations (different minds are a great thing aren't they?). Jrue is worth discussing and is showing signs of promise although his youth can turn you into a headbanger more often than not. He gets his fair share of air time from me. Elton doesn't interest me all that much as he's just, more or less, passing time as far as I'm concerned. A decent player though, considering. Speights has never done anything to interest me. He's just taking up space and a paycheck, wasn't really a fan of the pick when we took him. Thad is a definite conundrum, although I'm starting to come around on him as being maybe a keeper for a role. That brings us to Evan. My hopes had never been higher since the 2001 season when we lucked up on lottery night. As of now, my hopes have never been lower since the Barros and John Lucas years after seeing this guy attempt to play. It pains me to think that a player picked that high can't even make a miniscule difference in the overall makeup of our team. The post on here the day after the draft, most seemed to be in a tizzy one way or the other over the pick and I calmly stated 'Welcome' to the kid and that I looked forward to observing and analyzing his game. And that's exactly what I'm still doing. Hateful? No. Gleeful? Hardly. Jokingly to inject some levity for my sanity? Sure. Depressed? Hell yes. Why else do you think I'm here?

Sixers currently have the 10th pick in the draft. Only 2 games ahead of the 7th pick, and the clippers are most likely going to pass the sixers. the bucks are half a game behind us, and are missing Brandon Jennings. A high draft pick is still not out of the question.

That's debatable. More important, to me, is that the talent level in this draft, even if everyone declares (which is a big if), looks horrible. Completely horrible.

Yeah, but when you're picking form any group that you MUST pick from - wouldn't you rather be closer to the top so you can at least get the 'best' of the worst - especially when the sixers have so many damn holes to fill and either can't or are unwilling to go about really improving their roster any other way (i say really because most of the moves they've made in the last two years are roster neutral, or negative, to me aside from the draft picks)

If you're going to stay in the draft, then yeah, being higher is better. But to me, the difference between the #14 pick and the #8 pick in a shitty draft is really minimal. I just don't see many, if any, impact players in this draft.

Personally, I think the most value the draft pick could bring to the team is as a trade asset right now. Package the pick with your expiring contracts to improve the team, either on the court or financially, preferably both.

Well you know my views on that.

I believe there are moves that could (marginally) improve the team on the court for useless assets (the draft pick, nocioni, songaila, kapono, brackins etc...hawes/speights) but they'd slam Comcast over the luxury tax and not guarantee a first round playoff win - so it's not really a cost effective kind of thing :)

There are moves they could make w/out going over the luxury tax either this year, or next. Especially if they're willing to include a pick.

There's no moves they could make without going into the luxury tax next year because we don't know what the luxury tax is - but it's gonna be lower :)

What exactly could they do this year to make themselves better this year that doesn't increase their luxury tax level - aren't they only a million or so below?

They have essentially $18M in expiring contracts, a first round pick and a second round pick. Putting together a combination that doesn't take on more than $1M more this season shouldn't be that complicated. Worst-case, they can make up the difference in cash if they're taking back less than they're sending out.

Kapono, Songaila and a pick for Troy Murphy saves them about $500K and make the team better. That's one example.

By a pick do you mean a first round pick? there is no way i consider-even in this weak of a drat- playoff experience anywhere near as valuable as a first round pick.

No, I wouldn't include a first-round pick for Murphy. Second-round? Maybe.

I'm not sure you'd even have to. NJ is probably going to wind up buying him out.

I'd gladly give up the NOH 2nd rounder. I like murphy, and not having to see Hawes start would really increase the amount of enjoyment I get from watching this team.

Watching Murphy start over Hawes WOULD not (However) make the sixers any better against big men and they'd still get their asses handed to them in the first round.

It would make our starting rotation much better offensively. And there's no way that Murphy is a worse defender than Hawes.

We're not really talking about making moves that'll get you out of the first round. There probably isn't a single move out there that could improve the team that much.

What I'm saying is that there are moves they can make, without mortgaging the future, to make marginal improvements this season. I prefer that to a move that serves no purpose but to make the team worse, or to making no moves at all.

Well the point (i think) is that the future isn't just next year.

If Comcast would agree to pay the luxury tax they could get better taking on no contracts that expire after Iguodala expires.

I never read these contracts right, but I think Jrue is due his extension the same year Iguodala expires?

Jrue will be a restricted free agent the same year Iguodala has a player option.

Unless they extend him the previous year, which they might. Who knows.

If he's extended you hope he's earned it, but yeah, the sixers aren't going to be truly 'clean' until Iguodal is gone anyway so why not just accept it as opposed to this no mans land they live in is my theory :)

Course - they just paid all that NBC money - so now they can hijack other cable companies for more money to carry some of the most popular cable networks out there :)

What does NBC own, is it USA? They don't own TNT, right? That's Turner.

NBC Universal owns

Bravo
CNBC
MSNBC
SyFy
USA

And a couple other less significant networks

http://www.nbc.com/nbc/NBC_Universal_Cable_Networks/

It's one of the reasons I think Comcast owning NBC is ridiculous...keep in mind that the 'regular' networks are now fighting for 'broadcast fees' from the cable cmopanies that they never collected in the past.

NBC/Universal also produces television shows as well

I watch a couple shows on USA and SyFy, don't really care about the other networks.

I (if it were not evident) am a bit of a geek, also a couch potatoe and the ADHD gives me interest in a lot of different areas, so I do watch Bravo some (for the cooking shows, and when they showed west wing reruns)- I think some of the best 'original' programming on television is currently on cable - mostly USA/FX/AMC - Syfy (god i hate that name) shows some good original programming (yes i'm also a sci-fi geek) :)

To me it's just the principle of a cable provider owning cable networks - it's just an inherent conflict of interest and pretty 'monopolyish' to me.

user-pic
johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 15:39
+/-

Breaking Bad is a personal favorite.

That show is awesome. It's on AMC, right?

Since I desperately need something else to talk about, I definitely watch too much TV.

- Pretty much all the HBO shows, with varying level of excitement
- Dexter, Californication, Weeds on SHO. Caught the first couple episodes of Shameless, not sure if I'm going to stick with it
- TNT dramas - The Closer, Southland, Men of a Certain Age
- FX - sons of anarchy, always sunny, the league, can't remember the name of it, but that show about the us marshall w/ timothy oliphant.
- USA - Burn Notice
- AMC - Breaking Bad and The Walking Dead

I pretty much only watch two shows on network TV these days: the office (NBC) and modern family (ABC)

never really thought about that, but wow. Only two network TV shows.

Please

I watch too much tv

Pick a day, and there's hows i watch and record - that's just on networks (though I'm watching less network stuff) - i still support 'genre' tv because i'm a geek and when i was a kid i loved misfits of science and greatest american hero

Not to mention - using netflix to catch up on shows i liked but didn't see the whole thing (stargate SG:1 was first, now it's farscape)

I like to break it down to 3 different categories

Networks can get away with the least and have to have the broadest base appeal so their shows won't be so good

The 'fre' cable networks like USA/FX/AMC can get away with more but USA chooses not to - I watch most shows on USA - FX I love the league and sons of anarchy - i hate it's always sunny - AMC - gf hated breaking bad so didn't watch it - have to catch up - the walking dead is brilliant

There's a reason I have five different registered blog names that cover different topics (tv, food, sports, statistics, general tom foolery) - adhd is a belssing (and a curse)

:)

You ever wanna talk something else that isn't basketball - i'm down :)

but that show about the us marshall w/ timothy oliphant.

Justified

Timothy Olyphant - one of the reasons Josh Duhamel doesn't get good jobs :)

It's been going on for years w/ cablevision, with some pretty shitty consequences, too. Same with CSN in philly, right? they won't let DirecTV run their stuff.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 15:49
+/-

Yeah, Comcast has a bad track record. From blocking CSN, to freezing out the Big Ten Network, to secretly throttling peoples broadband when they use streaming services.

I have zero faith in Comcast. They will knowingly break or distort the law to use their power in anti-competetive ways. Sort of like the opposite of Googles "don't be evil" mantra.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 15:51
+/-

To be clear- I've only read about these things, so they are all "supposed" or alleged.

Believe it or not, big companies (allegedly :) have lawyers out there looking for posts like the one above in order to slap a defamation suit in order to scare anyone from discussion.

So if I'm wrong, then my apologies to the big guys who own everything :)

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 11:57
+/-

To be fair, historically the #6 or #7 team often gets a top 3 pick (Seattle/Portland were 6/7 and got Oden/Durnat.) And a top 3 pick- even in a bad year, looks a lot better than a #12 pick.

I'm not saying tank- just pointing out the facts.

To be fair - you know that history doesn't really impact the outcome of the lottery :) Each lottery is run with the same odds independent of any other lottery (assuming the number of teams is the same). Are there trends, yup there are, the worst team hardly ever gets the #1 pick (i believe cleveland was the first worst team to get it in the 14 team lottery which is why i thought it was fixed) but they also have a 75% chance of NOT getting the first pick.

The lottery is kind of broken actually, it's kind of too balanced and screws the worst teams, and most years no one is tanking.

But come on TK - you know that the history of the lottery has no impact on the lottery that given year :)

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 12:15
+/-

Statistically a 14018% chance (6 or 7) is a legit shot. While a 1-2% chance (11 or below) is negligible. So history and the actually odds are not in disagreement.

Now to say you would rather be #14 vs in the playoffs at #15 would be silly. Since a 0.02% chance at a top 3 pick should not enter the discussion.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 12:15
+/-

should read 14-18%

Last time I looked (a few years ago) no one 'below' 9 has ever jumped into the top 3 - has that changed since the "iguodala" draft (that's when I last looked ;) )

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 13:00
+/-

And that agrees with the stats. Its a double weighted lottery.

So the #7 team has 43 lottery "balls" while the #10 team has only 11.

Really, after #8 the odds get really slim. So the question is whether the Sixers are headed for a bottom 7 record or not. And right now there are 6 teams clearly worse than the Sixers. But #7 is only 2 games behind the Sixers.

user-pic
bebopdeluxe on Jan 21 at 11:06
+/-

I thought that Kate's blog about the game was pretty good...that the improvement in this team is such that their inability to close out games really DOES matter...and that - to get over the hump where their record more closely mirrors their ability - they need to LEARN how to excute at the end of the game. PArt of that has to come from Collins (in terms of end-of-game personnel and schemes that he wants to run), but part of that has to come from the players.

She also says that because most of these guys' experience in playing on winning teams has come from high school or AAU programs, they simply do not have the experience to draw on in terms of winning at higher levels - where it is not simply about raw athleticism but in playing smart and running your sets/schemes effectively. I think that there may be something to that...and if that is the case, then perhaps this team should spend less time practicing on the court and more time watching film...breaking down their mistakes as well as showing examples of how GOOD teams execute these end-of-game situations better.

Does she call out doug for the offense tending to be purely lou centric (aside from last night?)

THey can't 'learn' to win if the offense consists of 'stand around and watch lou mess it all up'

I'm waiting for Kate to stop kowtowing to the franchise and start calling out the fourth quarter moves. I'm waiting for anyone to ask Doug Collins the following question.

Coach - who is your best point guard? (Assuming he says Jrue Holiday)
Coach - a follow up - if Jrue is your best point guard, why does lou williams initiated the offense in most fourth quarter sets with jrue shunted to the corner?

These are legitimate questions that should be asked by the media and answered by the coach.

user-pic
bebopdeluxe reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 11:36
+/-

These are legitimate points - and it certainly would be nice for Kate to bring them up to Collins...although I am not sure that Collins deserves the "brace-face" treatment at post-game pressers after a tough loss just yet.

See, I disagree that it's brace face treatment. I'm not 'attacking him' or calling him out for being a terrible coach. I think these are legitimate questions. If Doug collins feels Louis Williams is the best player on the team - or even the best point guard - then he should say so publicly -and if he doesn't then he should be pressed on why he goes to lou in 'crunch' time more than he goes to the best players.

Part of Dougs job is to help the younger 'future' parts of this organization mature - they can't mature in end game situations if Doug decides to go to a less skilled point guard while putting his starting point guard in the corner (on a time out) so that lou can dribble for 20 seconds before forcing a not so good shot.

It's bad coaching in my opinion, and the presses job (used to be) is to call out a coach on bad decisioin making on behalf of the fans because the fans don't get that access. It's not just Kate - it's all of em - no one has called him out on anything yet. I'd call him out on Lou, I'd call him out on Hawes, and I'd call him out on his double standard approach to coaching that could be hindering the development of other guys.

The writers at the press conferences are the only ones with a chance to call out Collins on this. He won't appear on sports radio cause he just knows he'll get ripped (or in Mikey MIss case, it's be 45 minutes of why Iguodala sucks), but the journalists duty is to represent the public when they don't get access

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 12:21
+/-

In Collins defense...

Its also a bit complicated. Can 20-23 year olds execute plays as well as more veteran teams?

Similar to when people started complaining "no one runs plays for Thad", only to learn that Thad struggles running plays.

I'm sure the knee-jerk response is "they run plays at other times." But end of game defense (and playoff defense" is not what these guys typically face. And I'm not sure if they can execute. And I'm sure Collins would not throw them under the bus by using this excuse.

Its also a bit complicated. Can 20-23 year olds execute plays as well as more veteran teams?

If you don't put them in the situation - how do they learn?

And it's not like Louis Williams is an excellent or feared basketball player - watch 10 minutes of film on him and you know that if you double team him his most likely to force a bad shot or turn the ball over cause passing isn't in his DNA.

The sixers aren't a veteran team, they're one of the younger teams in the league - late game situations are coaching situations - if Collins can't coach Jrue Holiday to handle late game situations - then Collins shouldn't be coaching - period - it's his job to make sure that guys learn how to function in those situations. Making them stand int he corner watching lou isn't learning - it's saying 'you suck - i'd rather have lou do it all cause I don't trust you to even try'

Again, how do they learn if they aren't allowed to try (and fail)

It's not like it's going to matter in the long run - this team isn't winning anything significant this year - develop the damn players

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 12:31
+/-

Fair enough. But I think part of Collins job is to try and win close games. If not it makes it harder for him to keep the team focussed and able to learn. Players are much more responsive to instruction after a close win than a close, painful loss. It should not be the case... but it is.

I agree with you that they should do less isolation. And I think Collins is coming around. But I don't agree that they can "be like Boston" and get the best results from a play vs iso if it comes down to only 1 play to win.

Could the results be worse than what we've seen?

But I think part of Collins job is to try and win close games

I disagree. This isn't a team that's contending for a title. The playoffs really only help the income of the team. The primary part of Collins job (in my opinion) is to develop and mature the CORE of this team (and Lou ain't part of the core).

I'm fine with him trying to win close games - but it should be with the guys who you need, long term, to take steps for this team to win. Lou isn't maturing, lou is just being lou, you ain't gonna win a title like that or even contend if lou is your go to guy.

Colllins job is to TEACH the young guys how to close out games which means allowing them to fail and then teaching them AFTER THE FACT (stop pulling them after one damn mistake but leaving lou or hawes in forever you idiot), after the game. Don't make them so tense and uptight during the game that htey over think cause they don't wan to get pulled. That's not how you coach (yes, I've coached) - put em out there to succeed or fail, and then after the game, review the film, and work on it, and find the good and praise it and the bad and help them understand how to do it better next year.

Colllins shows faith in guys like hawes and lou but jrue, evan, speighs, one mistake and they're sitting, for too long, that isn't allowing guys to play comfortably

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 12:39
+/-

Lou is 24 and under contract another 3 years. You don't like him, but its a monumental stretch to say he is not part of the young core of this team.

Its not like they are running iso plays for Noce or Battie.

Don't care how 'old' he is - hoow long has he been in the league? He is what he is and it isn't going to change.

It's like people who made excuses for same 4 years into the league 'he started the game when he was 13' - that wasn't relevant, what's relevant to me regarding lou is that his game is a pale imitation of Allen Iversons, and that seems to be his role model as well.

Let me make it clear where I stand.

This Team will not win a round in the playoffs as long as they feel Lou Williams is their go to guy in end of game situations

Let alone when the team thinks he's a back up point guard, he's not a point guard, he's a short shooting guard with less interest in passing than Willie Green

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 12:54
+/-

I did not say I disagree about whether Lou should be party of the future.

I But you implied the coach should not see Lou as "part of the future." And even if we don't think he should be kept around, from Collins perspective he's young and under contract for years to come.

We are not talking Andre Miller on the last year of his contract.

Yeah, but see, I don't think Collins perspective is the best for the long term franchise health - it's best for his coaching resume - more wins than losses maybe (i mean not a winning record but you know what I mean I hope) but it's not going to help the guys who matter develop - I don't think Lou Matters. Lou is just the new willie green, fungible guy signed to a too long contract

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 13:02
+/-

Yep, that is an understandable POV. I don't completely agree. But I don't completely disagree either.

These are really good points, and I sort of touched on them in a response above.

Good performance in the clutch requires a combination of actual talent level, intelligence (basketball IQ), and repetition. Boston's players have all three of those in excess. I believe that most of the core Sixers (Jrue, Iguodala, Thad) have the first two and are simply lacking in the last. Lou has a serious deficiency in the second one that may never improve.

I guess we'll see if these Sixers improve over time, as the year goes on ...

How important is playoff experience for Jrue and ET if both are playing relatively minimal roles? Especially considering the sixers will most likely be swept in 4 games. I really don't think it's all that important for either of them.

I personally think the whole 'playoff experience' thing is vastly over rated.

In a chat yesterday - i forget exactly where - someone said a home playoff game can net anywhere from 500K to 3 million per game for a team (obviously depends on who shows up and your ticket prices and such)

Those extra dollars I believe are the motivation more than 'experience' at least for ownership - gotta work that bottom line.

I'm a big proponent of playoff experience being essential. It's really a completely different game come the playoffs. Teams defend for 48 minutes, everything is heightened. If your ultimate goal is to contend, to be able to play deep in the playoffs, the sooner you can get your young players a taste of what the game is like under those circumstances, the better.

If the ultimate goal is to grow this team into a legit contender three or four or five years down the road, and you believe Jrue and Turner and maybe another guy or two on this roster will still be here, and be part of the core of that eventual contender, you don't want them to be playoff virgins by the time the team is ready to complete. If that's the case, then you're going to waste at least a year or two of your contending window getting your younger players acclimated to the playoff atmosphere. That's my philosophy, anyway. Guys need to play in the playoffs, and probably lose a series or two, before they can recognize what it takes to win in those circumstances.

I think playoff experience is essential if your team can contend and make a series of it (ala OKC last year against the lakers in the first round)

If you're just going to get bitch slapped in 5 games - I don't think much comes out of it.

You mean like the Sixers did the last two times they went to the playoffs? They were closer to knocking off Detroit and Orlando than OKC was to knocking off the Lakers last year.

Did that playoff series improve Lou, Thad, or speights game?

Don't know, they haven't been back since. Iguodala improved a ton from he Detroit series to the Orlando series the next season.

If you say so

I didn't think the sixers had a shot either time

But at least that pistons series helped sam get 50 million right?

Not that Pistons series. The next one. When they were about 18 minutes away from taking a 3-1 lead.

Or the Orlando series, where they were a Hedo three away from a 3-1 lead.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 12:25
+/-

Hah, reminds me of this season. Sometimes a team is not as "close" as you think they are. Because when push comes to shove, the veteran team will capitalize on mistakes, and the young team will make mistakes.

Sort of like one team fouling a 3 pt shooter to lose... and the other missing foul shots when they are put in the same position by an equally weak team.

How are either of those Sixers series different from the OKC/LAL series last season that had everyone jizzing their pants?

They had youth with a lot more upside than the sixers?

They had a better coach?

A better future because they had pieces growing together? A better built roster that isn't mismatched parts?

I don't know

And neither of them made it out of the first round. And according to your logic, that series against the Lakers was useless, they would've been better served with a higher draft pick.

Interesting, for an extremely smart guy sometimes you are extremely short sighted.

Let's look beyond that playoff series that you claim the teams weren't much different.

First off - the west is a harder place to make the playoffs in - 3 teams in the east will probably make the playoffs with al losing record this year - when is the last time a losing record made it in the west.

The season after those first round losses where you say "what's the difference between the two teams":

The Thunder are currently in first place and the third seed in the west.

Whens the last time the sixers were in first place in their division after 41 games?

After their 'close' first round defeats - did they make the playoffs again next season? Were they better on the court or in the standings? Did they still have maturing growing talent at 4 positions and some cap room?

Come on brian - oklahoma city is better in their year after the that first round loss than the sixers were in either first round loss - and they have a better future.

Yes a lot of it is lottery luck - but lottery luck got the sixers Iverson (and cost the sixers Duncan)- lottery luck is important in the NBA - no doubt, but the Thunder the year after their playoff loss are so much better than the sixers were a year after their playoff loss it's not close.

And you're blinded by circumstance. In no way am I saying the Sixers are or were in better shape than OKC. And in no way do I think their first round loss to the Lakers was meaningless, that's your argument. That losing in the first round provides no value. It's not worth getting there unless you can at least win a round.

I'm saying it's not only valuable, it's crucial if some members of your team will eventually be a part of a team that is going to contend. A big part of being able to win a round in the playoffs is having guys who have been there before and learned the lessons you have to learn before you can make the next step.

My point about the OKC series vs. the Sixers series vs. ORL and DET two and three years ago is that you consistently say things like, "Get smacked in the first round." and "first-round fodder" like for some reason getting in as a low seed and losing in the first round doesn't count as playoff experience, but for some reason that only seems to apply to the Sixers. Because when it's OKC taking a team to six games, and really not playing as good of a series as the Sixers did in those two appearances, it's definitely valuable.

Actually no - my argument was that HOW you lose determines if it has value. I don't think that the sixers had a chance to win their series - you do - that's where our views differ. Being the sacrificial lamb can also delude your ownership (and fanbase) into thinking your future is better than it actually is. It can delude your gm into giving out unwarranted contracts because of a good 5 or 6 games.

I never felt the sixers were going to win those series, I felt the opponents were taking them lightly and when they stepped up they took em out.

I mean didn't the magic close out the series against the sixers in a game that dwight howard didn't play?

Losing badly in the first round of the playoffs is a double edged sword, and the sixers (to me) usually end up on the wrong side of it.

If they make the playoffs this year, I expect Hawes to wow people (because teams ignore him like they ignored sam) and get a 50 million dollar contract - cause if you think the team truly is cursed - that's what'll happen :)

The playoffs delude ownership into thinking they're better than they are - look what it did to the bucks last off season? Now they're screwed financially

OK, so you thought OKC had a chance to win that series against LAL last year. And it took Detroit and Orlando 4 games to take the Sixers seriously, ergo, OKC's experience counts and the Sixers didn't. Makes sense.

I think just looking at the number of games played is not the way to evaluate it. I think I've tried to make my point clear that it's not just making the games or playing the game or how many games it took but a combination of factors - and agian - i think the sixers making the playoffs has done the franchise more harm than good because it deludes the owners (and fans) to think the team is better than it is.

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 13:12
+/-

The "we're going uptown" delusion argument. I agree.

user-pic
TruePhan reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 13:20
+/-

I'll tell you exactly what the difference between the two teams is. The Sonics went fully into rebuilding mode when they traded Ray Allen away. They weren't stuck in between rebuilding and winning because they'd been a losing team for years. They developed their players and built around their core of Green, Durant, and then Westbrook and kept building the right way, adding small pieces in free agency/trades and drafting stud players. They moved to a place where there were no expectations and that whole organziation has a bond like no other, and most importantly so do their players. They're basically the basketball equivalent of the Rays.

Also, they aren't an expansion team so they didn't need to build the way Charlotte did. People tend to forget that simply because they moved and changed their name(not saying you did but this is why so many people/ESPN don't see them the same way they see other young, rebuilding teams). Kevin Durant is an amazing player but the fact is that he ended up in a dream situation that neither Jordan nor LeBron nor Kobe ended up in when they were that young. This is unquestionably his team and it's being stakced with some of the best young draft picks it could possibly be stacked with. Harden was an absolute beast in college and he's not even a starter. They all have roles and structure, and everybody knows it's Durant's team and doesn't try to take over.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 13:03
+/-

They had their core stars in place. While the Sixers are a patched together group that has no superstar foundation.

One team is seen as on the rise... while the other is adrift.

What he said :)

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 13:09
+/-

Once you have your superstar then you want to get to the playoffs ASAP.

If you are in the downswing between superstar (say post Barkley and pre-AI) then making the playoffs with Hornecek, Lang and Weatherspoon is irrelevant as compared to getting to the playoffs with AI.

I think sometimes you are missing the forrest for the trees. There is nothing wrong wanting this cuyrrent team to win. But big picture, all of the post AI years are wasted until they find a franchise leading superstar.

Out of curiosity, how many of these franchise-changing superstars are there in the league?

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 13:16
+/-

Very few that will get you a ring (and none on there own.)

But there are probably 8-12 guys who you can "build around" and hope for high level success.

And I'm fine with building around AI, Barkeye or Dirk instead of Duncan- because you don't really get a choice.

I'm not fine with building around Brand, Iguodala or Jrue.

That does not mean dump your good but not great players (and don't "blame" them.) But your GM has to know the score.

So 8-12 guys on what, 6 teams? The other 24 should just call it a day and try to miss the playoffs until they can get one of those 8-12 guys?

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 13:25
+/-

I did not say that. I said the GM should realize big picture something major has to be done to evolve the team into a legit/relevant team.

Some teams might already have a future stud in place. Other teams might be developing players and salary to make a big splash through trade or FA.

Not everyone (or anyone) should "tank." But they should not be blind to reality either. This is not the NFL.

Just out of curiosity, who are these 8-12, in your opinion?

Just guessing:
-LeBron
-Wade
-Kobe
-Durant
-Dwight Howard
-Duncan
-Derrick Rose?
-Chris Paul?
-Deron Williams?
-Garnett?
-Nowitzki?
-Carmelo?

user-pic
tk76 reply to Statman on Jan 21 at 13:42
+/-

Going back or forward 1-2 years I'd probably add Nash, KG, Amare, Wall and Grifiin to that list.

Also, the guys to the bottom require a much better supporting cast. But that is 18 players who you could at least try as a centerpiece. And I don't see Jrue, Iguodala or Brand being in that conversation (save Brand's career year.)

Wall, huh? He's essentially this year's Brandon Jennings. No one seems to want to talk about it, though.

Actually, that's not fair to Jennings. He made MIL better in his rookie season.

I mostly agree, but I have a lower opinion of Carmelo and higher opinion of Iguodala than you do. Carmelo had just about as much success in the playoffs with Andre Miller as his PG as Iguodala did. And I think you could try the "three top 25" route with Iguodala and do well. Say Iguodala, Josh Smith, Russell Westbrook and a Korver-type at SG with a decent defensive center.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Statman on Jan 21 at 14:26
+/-

Its hard to know when you are talking about the 15-20 guys. A lot depends on the supporting cast. For example, how good is Amare? Some thought he would flop without Nash- which is not the case. And on the flip side, Bosh is looking less and less special in hindsight.

Right, and it also depends how you define "relevant" and "flop." Amare's probably not going to get to the 2nd round this year, and he's not sniffing a Conference Finals anytime soon without Nash. Is a 45-win team relevant? I'd say it is (though I value good regular season play more than some here do), but it's probably not $90 million worth.

but it's probably not $90 million worth.

A competitive fun to watch team in New York city? That brings in fans (and local advertisers)

I bet you it's worth 90 million for a few years in terms of the profit they make.

And as far as I'm concerned Comcast cares more about the P/L than the wins and losses - i bet if they thought they could run their team like Sterling and still profit - they would - top 5 most profitable team in the NBA year in and year out - clippers :)

I bet you it's worth 90 million for a few years in terms of the profit they make.

Keep in mind that the Knicks were already selling out their arena with terrible teams. So unless they advance far in the playoffs (I think they have about as much chance of winning a round as the Sixers do), the profits will be minimal.

I'm guessing the knicks are on the upper echelon of the 500K to 3 mil per home playoff game world

So let's say they get two rounds and the minimum amount of home games (4) - that's an extra 12 another 13.3% PER YEAR from your 90 mil investment.

Yes they're giving amare 100 mil - but not right away - their payroll right now is lower than the sixers, their COMMITTED payroll for next year is pretty much what it is this year - obviously it will change but - that's the thing - if the 90 mil you pay adds 36-48 million additional dollars of revenue over the life of the contract - that's not a half bad investment...

Knicks attendance (percentage fill) is higher this year (99.6) than it has been since 2005 when they had a 101.2 percentage fill :)

user-pic
tk76 reply to Statman on Jan 21 at 15:14
+/-

Like I said- my favorite season was the '89 Sixers. That team won 53 and lost in the second round to the Bulls befoer the Bulls were invincible.

I certainly think Amare/Melo could reach that level. But they are not the players I'd prefer to be rooting for. Barkley/Oakley/Hawk/Dawk/Anderson were more fun t watch.

user-pic
Rich reply to Statman on Jan 21 at 15:19
+/-

Sounds a lot like Chicago's current team.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 13:21
+/-

And obviously I'm intentionally oversimplifying things.

There are different combos that can work. for example:

1 top 5 player and a good supporting cast
2 top 15 players
3 top 25 players
4 top 40 players

But if you don't have one of those combos then big picture you are not going anywhere.

Rondo/Jefferson/Pierce is not the recipe. KG/Allen/Pierce/Rondo is.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 13:27
+/-

Arguably, Stefanski tried to go the "4 top 40" route with a core of Miller/Brand/Iguodala/Thad. It was risky and failed.

The question is where Thorn is taking this team. Becasue a core of Iguodala/Jrue/Lou/Brand/Thad is not going anywhere.

user-pic
TruePhan reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 13:09
+/-

They should've won both those series. They showed that they could but then lost yet again due to stupid, bad basketball.

I remember after Game 1 of the Pistons series, Zumoff was freaking out and all of the Sixers were like "we shocked the world!" and shit like that, and the only one who kept things in perspective and stayed grounded was Reggie Evans, and when he was being interviewed and asked questions like "how does it feel to shock the world?" he responded by saying they hadn't done anything yet, and he played like that the entire series. People forget how good he really was in that series. He hit clutch shot after clutch shot and was actually a pretty good offensive player in the playoffs. I guess he's just one of those players who steps it up in crunch time.

Anyway, point is, that's the problem right there. It's the problem with really every Philly team, ever since 07 or so. They get wayy too much credit for doing very little aand excuses are made/praises given to the people who are the reason the teams lose. There's too much influence by moronic outsiders and either a handful of players or a coach or manager or anything else is allowed to continue to fuck things up for everybody else and get praised. Hell, listen to the love on here for Sammy when in reality he didn't do anything consistently and was a ballhog who never saw a shot he didn't like. People who have the most influence/talk the most just want entertainment, not sports played the right way.

Hey Brian, how exactly does one go about getting their picture to appear next to their name? I know that kellydad has that finger (very creative) and someone else has a picture of McNabb... how?

Please no, my favorite thing about this blog is that there is no signature, and not many avatars.

Down at the bottom, right below "Leave a comment" there's a link that says "Sign in". Click that, then you'll be taken to a sign in form. Click "Sign up" and you can create a login, add a picture, whatever.

Good read: http://bit.ly/fX7tR0

Collins says he wants to be here five years.

If he continues making the same questionable decisions with his roster and rotations - I hope he's not here past the all star break ;)

Oh, and before everyone jumps on the Clippers bandwagon. Take a look at their home/road splits.

They've played 26 games at home, and only 16 on the road so far. They're only .500 at home, and 10 games under on the road. I'll be shocked if they pass the Sixers. Not with that remaining schedule and their ineptitude away from home.

Eric Gordon
Blake Griffin
Hell even Deandre Jordan

I'd trade that threesome for Jrue and Evan Turner (and speights) in a heart beat

THAT's the bandwagon - (to me) - not a single season - but a good young core that I'd rather have over the sixers 3 young 'equivalents'

Would you trade Griffin/Jordan/Gordon for Jrue/Turner/Speights?

THat's the Bandwagon - the talent

But of course - the problem is Sterling (even though the GM has publicly said that Griffin will be a clipper for life which is asinine to say)

I was responding to the notion the clippers would definitely pass the sixers in the season.

And Sterling is going to have his first big decision this coming summer. DeAndre Jordan is a restricted free agent, and he's going to get offers. We'll see if he's willing to pony up when he's already paying Kaman.

Oh i don't think he's going to pony up - but then again the new CBA might make it easier for him to.

Talentwise the clippers are better than the sixers long term - at this moment they're also playing better than the sixers - they may not pass the sixers record wise - but both teams aren't playoff relevant - I think it's possible that in the second half of the season the clippers will be better than the sixers nd definitely in years to come if sterling ponys up

user-pic
TruePhan reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 13:29
+/-

No, I wouldn't. True point guards of Jrue's caliber do not come around often. Gordon wouldn't fit in the East anyway because he's a combo guard. Griffin is perfect for the West but in the East if he's not a shotblocking force/back to the basket player then he's not really going to work on an East team the way he does in the West. He's another potential 3/4 guy unless he . Plus, why trade for Gordon if we already have Turner? That wouldn't work.

We have a core, and it's a pretty damn good one. The problem is that it's one that only works with structure, similar to the Thunder's core actually. The only difference is the Thunder have Durant and we have Turner. They simply actually develop their players and give everybody defined roles.

user-pic
tk76 reply to TruePhan on Jan 21 at 13:32
+/-

I don't see how Turner and Durant can be comparable.

user-pic
TruePhan reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 13:36
+/-

They're the same type of player. Turner is much better defensively and Durant is much better offensively.

That's how. Durant is their future and Turner is ours. It's like comparing Tyreke Evans and Brandon Jennings. One's a point guard and one's a swingman but they're both the future of their teams and they're both players who play best when running an offense.

Mike Prada on SBN had a great article on Eric Gordon yesterday.

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/1/20/1945618/blake-griffin-eric-gordon-la-clippers

There is little doubt imo that Gordon is better than Jrue, who i think is a bit overrated as a point guard at this point. I don't know if i'd consider him a true point guard yet. Also I think his deron Williams comparison is a little bit far fetched, i don't think that he will ever be a good of a passer.


Disclaimer to jrue lovers: I like Jrue a lot and he has quickly grown into my favorite player in sports atm, so no need to attack me.

user-pic
TruePhsn reply to Jason on Jan 21 at 13:41
+/-

Ridiculous articles like that further prove that Sbnation is a joke.

You are also just being ridiculous. I've been a fan of Gordon ever since his phenom days at Indiana but he is no point guard and never will be. Seriously, he's a combo guard for starters, one who is best at one thing and that is scoring.

Jrue is in no way, shape, or form overrated as a point guard. If I were drafting a point guard right now out of the past 5 drafts, I would pick Jrue every time. I say that because what sets him apart is his size and how it allows him to guard pretty much anybody, up to smaller 3s. He's also a very offensively gifted player who has a great feel for the game and when put on the floor with other smart players makes the right play nine times our of ten. He singlehandedly got them back in games in his rookie year. Do you remember that Washington game when Lou broke his jaw? Jrue played like 10 minutes and singlehandedly tied the game up, and Lou lost it playing Lou ball.

user-pic
Jason reply to TruePhsn on Jan 21 at 13:42
+/-

OH my bad. I didn't realize you were trying to argue that Eric Gordon wasn't a point guard. To that i fully agree. But i'd still rather have him vs Jrue to build around.

user-pic
tk76 reply to TruePhsn on Jan 21 at 13:45
+/-

So you would take Jrue over Rose and Wall?

I would not.

user-pic
TruePhan reply to tk76 on Jan 22 at 13:51
+/-

Yes, I would. Jrue is a better defender than Rose and Wall will most likely never be a good point guard. Seriously, the fact that you're actually trying to put Wall up there with Rose right now is ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, he's got tons of potential if he ever grows up and realizes it but right now he's just another stat-machine who cares more about getting cute than winning, just like he did in college.

Rose is a better offensive player and a great point guard but he doesn't fit this team.

You are also just being ridiculous.

Pot kettle

Your attitude towards anyone and everyone who disagrees with even the smallest thing you say is ridiculous (and trust me I should know). Your screen name indicates that you think you're a 'better' fan than the rest of us and you seem to think that you know more about basketball than anyone else possible and that somehow we should all just bow to your knowledge...that's just as ridiculous.

Someone has an opinion different than yours about a second year player - oh my god - you both might be wrong since well - it's only his second year.

How quickly people forget the excitement about Thaddeus Young

user-pic
TruePhan reply to GoSixers on Jan 22 at 13:59
+/-

LOL. I knew it was only a matter of time before this bullshit started. Actually, you couldn't be more wrong but then again that seems to be a pattern with you. When you slander a player like that or talk out of your ass, somebody has to say something. Tough shit if you have a problem with it. I didn't insult anybody or get all personal with anybody. I simply explained something that I understand that others don't seem to. I see people constantly talking out of their asses or shitting on players who play the game the right way while praising garbage like Rondo and people without a fucking clue like that shouldn't ever talk. Jrue's not overrated. How the hell could he be? He's on nobody's radar even though he's been a damn good player and solid defender since his rookie year. He plays the game the right way and 9 times out of ten makes the right play. That's what a real point guard does. He would easily average 10+ assists if he ever got the minutes at point that his peers do, without a dumbass on the court hogging the ball.

Quit being a catty little bitch. I created that name over at philly.com because of all the fucking bandwagons since the Phillies won and people who only watched the Sixers because they brought back AI. If you fit in with people like that then that's your problem, not mine.

Tone this crap down or you're gone.

Brevity is an important aspect.

You think the sixers have a good core - I don't agree with you that it's even close to competing with either the thunder or the clippers cause one part of that 'core' (Iguodala) is much older than the other 'two' parts of the core and so far Turner hasn't shown much.

The thunder and clippers have a better core, the thunder have a better owner and possibly a better GM and both teams have a better salary situation than the sixers (not to mention, in Oklahoma City there's nothing else to do and in LA people show up for spectacle so as long as Griffin is doing what he does they'll have better home attendance than the sixers, LAST IN THE LEAGUE IN PERCENTAGE FILL - only team under 70%).

Since losing to the sixers on december 15th, Clippers are 11-5. 3-3 on the road. Beat Denver, Chicago, and the Lakers in that span.


Sixers road record is equally awful at 5-18, and since the game vs clippers are 3-6 on the road.

Sixers are cooling off while the clippers are starting to get hot. The clippers have to be favored in a 1 on 1 bet vs the sixers on who has a better finishing record.

The Clippers have 15 home games remaining, 25 on the road.

The Sixers have 22 home games remaining, 18 on the road.

Again, I'll take bets right now that the Sixers finish with a better record than the Clippers.

Yeah - but wanna take bets on who has a better record next season?

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 16:27
+/-

The Clippers, obviously. In any event, if they keep that core together, they have about 5 times the shot of winning a championship that this group does.

Sub in Blazers for Clippers in that sentence and you were making the exact same statement a couple years ago. Things change, and with Sterling owning that team, I expect them to start changing for the worse this summer.

Well gordon and griffin are still rookie deals so they won't be going anywhere
the key is davis staying healthy and behaving :)

I'm hoping someone (the Sixers) makes a Gortat-like offer to DeAndre Jordan this summer. I don't see Sterling matching. It'll be fun to see Kaman taking shots away from Griffin and Gordon next season.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 16:56
+/-

I was wondering who might go after Jordan. If the Sxiers had not taken on Nocioni's extra year, I think they would be in the race.

I'd think Minny would be a natural fit. They have money and he'd fit perfectly next to Love. Just not sure Minny we'll actually show him the money.

Didn't they just spend a decent amount of money on Darko and that Russian dude?

The Russian dude who signed with the knicks or a different russian dude?

Different one.

And I don't see the sixers making an offer :)

Again - the new CBA is going to be radically different folks - hard to speculate

Jrue is 0.1 PPG away from being the fourth guy in the NBA to lead his team in PPG and APG. Rose, LeBron, Deron Williams. Fifth if you count Jennings, but he's barely played.

So the warriors owner is making it pretty clear he's going after a "defensive stopper" with a long contract...Iguodala????

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/kawakami/2011/01/20/joe-lacob-interview-part-2-on-possibly-trading-ellis-or-curry-trying-to-trade-for-carmelo-evaluating-smart-and-more/

any chance we can get ellis or curry from them? He seems to say that he doesnt like how inept his backcourt is on D, and would be willing to move one of them...

wow. I don't think he'd be willing to move either ellis or curry. Like Logically i don't understand how that is possible, but i would in a heart beat send iggy and our first this year for one of the two.

user-pic
TruePhan reply to Jason on Jan 21 at 13:33
+/-

And tell me, exactly how would either of them help our team? Curry isn't athletic enough to guard the better PGs in the league and Ellis is incapable of guarding anybody. He's what everybody who is on Lou's dick likes to think Lou is but that's really it.

There are very few players in the West who could play in the East. It's a completely different animal. Why trade one of the best of those players for two players who would make our team worse?

The west is better than the east - it's a foolish statement you just made.

As for who they'd want to get rid of - neither Ellis nor Curry would be available in trade probably.

Biedrins has been on the market for a while and supposedly David Lee has turned into a primadonna girl and they regret signing him (I in no way want that POS on this roster)

user-pic
TruePhan reply to GoSixers on Jan 22 at 13:43
+/-

No, it's not a foolish ststement. Not even a little bit. The West is more offensive-minded and about skills the East is more defensive minded and about efficiency and fitting in to your team. There are very few players who could go from West to East with no drop-off in their play on either end. That's a big reason why Brand wasn't going to work out here even pre-injury and something I never really noticed or understood until the Sixers had so many in-between-position players.

Go ahead and look at the rosters. See how many players on the West are either too small/soft to start in the East down low or not quick enough/agile enough to start at the 3. I'll give you two to start with: Pau Gasol and Dirk. They're both 3/4s in the East and if they're starting on your team, you're not going to win the way the Lakers or Mavs have. Golden State would get absolutely trounced in the East. The Nuggets definitely would too. The West is more like a combination of the old-school basketball that was played up to the mid-90s and the hip-hop basketball that was played in the late 90s-early 2000s, whereas the East is closer to a Larry Brown league, where everybody has to have roles on defense and everybody has to fit a position.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Stu on Jan 21 at 13:29
+/-

Not sure I want the Sixers to take on a bad contract. But certainly worse discussing.

Wouldn't GSW want to keep both Curry and Ellis and try and make the Sixers take Biedrins?

user-pic
Stu reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 14:09
+/-

The owner made it clear that Curry-Ellis-DWright wasn't working since all three are bad defensively. So trading Iggy for, say, Ellis, would leave them with two scorers and one elite defender. The sixers, then, would be left with Jrue-Ellis-Turner, which means we'd have an elite scorer and two good defenders as our backcourt. Also, Lacob made clear he WOULD be willing to move one of Ellis or Curry for the aforementioned reasons.

Also, if it's relevant, curry played a lot of SG last year (http://www.82games.com/0910/09GSW3.HTM), and played it well. Maybe we could do Iggy+1st for Curry+expiring? Lacob seems to value Ellis more than Curry

Or, something like Iggy for Curry+Biedrins, to take his bad contract off their hands and free up cap space for them to use this summer (which he said is a priority)

Every time someone gives a trade idea for curry - brian gets a little over excited :)

user-pic
tk76 reply to Stu on Jan 21 at 14:15
+/-

Well Iggy for Curry + Biedrins sounds great. Where do we sign up :)

I don't think Jrue/Curry/Turner is a great paring either (not enough size) but it would be a good step in the right direction.

At least all 3 can handle the ball, rebound and switch some match-ups. But you are lessening Jrue's benefit with that combo by taking him off the ball in more situations (both offense and defense.)

The trade might still be a good idea, but neither Jrue nor Turner are good defenders right now. Jrue might be approaching bottom 5 in the league among starting point guards in opponent PER after last night's explosion by Augustin. I like Jrue, but the "good defender" label is mostly based on potential and not actual, consistent performance ...

user-pic
tk76 reply to Statman on Jan 21 at 14:18
+/-

I'm fine with banking on potential when your backcourt is 20-22-22.

I'm fine if they stink defensively for 1-2 years as they gain experience.

That trade is pointless. It might even get them to the playoffs, which is a huge waste. Why bother?

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 14:22
+/-

Yeah, clearly that is all I said above :)

Do you think a trio of Holiday/Curry/Turner could be a good building core for the future?

Lat year you would have given up your last nut (or first born) to get Curry - Does the acquisition of Turner mean you've lost interest?

Not thinking about this season - long term is where I'd be looking. Obvoiusly more moves would need to be made - but you wouldn't like that trio?

Nah, you need three superstars. I'm going to stop following the team until they get them. This is just shuffling deck chairs.

Well then this blog is gonna be kind of boring isn't it :)

Though you'll be much less depressed and upset - man you sounded positively macabre last night on the radio (that's a raising hope joke for you all) - i hope you have no sharp objects

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 14:32
+/-

Nope, but you do need at least one to be "relevant." You might disagree, but I'd say that is a minority opinion league-wide.

Like I said above. You roughly need:

1 top 5 player and a good supporting cast
2 top 15 players
3 top 25 players
4 top 40 players

And I'd prefer to go with one of the top 2 options if available.

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 14:29
+/-

Maybe all 3 could end up top 30 NBA players. If they fit well, it puts you in a position to make one more move in 3 years to get a top 35 NBA big to try and make a run.

I don't think it is a recipe for a title, but could be the beginnings of a quality long run.

Of course you could say the same for J/T/I... but its looking less like they will fit.

Nah, that never works. You need one of the top three guys in the league. trade everyone, then implode the WFC.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 14:36
+/-

I'd rather trade everyone then go on the assumption that this current team is going anywhere.

But reality is that there are not likely any good moves to make until Brand and Iguodala are closer to coming off the books.

I value each of them as players. And Iguodala is a great piece to have if you want to be a winner. So ideally you don't trade him at all...

But IMO you can't build incrementally with good but not great players. You get the great ones and build around them. And right now no one on the roster qualifies. And I don't think Jrue, Turner or Iguodala will develop into that level of player. But maybe they prove me wrong. That would be tremendous- because I am fans of all of them.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 14:39
+/-

And my favorite layers are not typically the superstars. The stars are often to egotistical. I actually was more of an Andre Miller fan than I was of Iverson (and yet I wanted Miller traded.)

But that does not change my view to how this is a star driven league.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 14:40
+/-

And with that I'll let it rest.

Probably not the day for dwelling on my beliefs about why the Sixers organizationally stink.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 14:48
+/-

And Brian- apologize for antagonizing on a down day in Sixer-land.

Sometimes its probably best not to be overly focussed on the forest. Sometimes we have to just enjoy the "trees" and remember that the team can still be enjoyable for 3.5 qtrs a game :)

I get what you're saying, but I just don't know how to react when your response to ever topic is, "how are they going to get a superstar?"

I don't fucking know. Nobody knows. I don't know what Jrue and Turner are going to turn out to be, but I refuse to just sit back and say everything is irrelevant until some miracle happens.

If you want to really be honest about it, it hasn't happened in Philly since they got Moses. Barkley never had a prayer of winning in Philly. Outside of one miracle season, the Iverson era was pointless on your scale.

This year's draft is garbage. If the Sixers lose every game between now and the end of the season and somehow miraculously get the #1 overall pick, they aren't going to get a superstar who's going to change the franchise.

If they intentionally make themselves worse than they are right now in the hopes that two, three or four years from now they'll get a lucky pick, they're going to be irrevocably closing the door on ever getting even a mid-level star through any means other than the draft, and the odds of them getting that superstar through the draft are still unbelievably low.

So what are the options here? Say fuck it and just follow the Phillies until their roster is too old to compete (2 or 3 years down the road). Or look at the tangible things the team can do with this roster, or at least parts of it. Namely, groom Jrue to be the best point guard they've had since Mo Cheeks, or possibly the best point guard they've ever had (which is within reach, whether you want to admit it or not). Figure out what they have in Turner. Hopefully develop both of those guys to Iguodala's level, or beyond, and set yourself up to have the cap flexibility to make an impact move, or two, when Brand comes off the books.

The only way this team is going to be bad enough to be "lucky" enough to continually have top draft picks is if they trade Iguodala and Jrue and Turner fall flat on their face. If that's what you're rooting for, then again, don't waste your time.

Traading Iguodala and Brand and letting Collins coach the way he's been coaching would be good enough to net a top 5 spot in the lottery easy :)

I don't think they can trade Brand, and w/out Iguodala they still aren't bottom 5.

trade Iguodala, bench Jrue and start Lou at the point and maybe you've got a shot. That would be enjoyable.

As I understand it, Lou's a 'boss'

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 15:04
+/-

I'm not against anything you are saying. I think you are over-reading into what I'm saying.

My favorite year as a fan was '89. IMO Barkey and AI were legit stars. Sixers basketball was compelling- at least when those teams were on the rise. And maybe they even could have been legit contenders with the right supporting cast (I would have loved to see AI and KG together.)

I'm not saying ignore the current roster. And I am probably too hung up on Stefanski's failings. But I desperately want to see some sign that Thorn or someone in charge realizes that "being relevant" as Collins says is more than shooting for 40 wins and maybe a 6 seed.

I do see how pointing out the problem without giving a solution helps no one.

It would probably be easier to stomach if Thorn would say something, but I'm not holding my breath.

Also, I don't think Collins' ultimate goal is 40 wins and the #6 seed. That may be his goal for this season, and it's probably an important goal for this season if relevancy is your ultimate goal. But his ultimate goal is higher, it would have to be or he wouldn't have come back.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 15:11
+/-

No doubt.

i just hope that ultimate goal is predicated on Jrue as a "top 5 NBA PG" and Lou as your "assassin/closer."

But that was probably more for public consumption.
-----

As for Thorn- I'm pretty sure he shares my "star driven league" mantra. In fact I think he would have blundered into a Melo deal if he could. So maybe its better that he has not shaken things up yet.

user-pic
Rob_STC reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 15:49
+/-

Brian,

I am with you 100% and agree with all your points. The draft is a crap shoot unless you know a Lebron James is waiting. If Portland had a crystal ball they would have taken Durant over Oden. I also want to know what Thorn's plan is. We have heard nothing from him.

user-pic
Stu reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 14:23
+/-

agreed. I'm just thinking that this type of trade isn't too unlikely given what Lacob said in the interview

Do it know!

And about the above discution of the clutch possessions, I think that Collins is on the hook because he isnĀ“t developing Jrue or Turner by giving them the ball, or winning the close game by giving the ball to Lou, Brand, Iggy or whomever he wants. I mean, I'd prefer development over result, but I'd respect if DC goes for the winning. But what he is doing make no sense...

user-pic
tk76 reply to Juan on Jan 21 at 15:44
+/-

Yeah- that was Brian's point when he said that they could not be doing worse (by giving Jrue and chance.)

We may not agree, but Collins sees Lou as a developing closer. Sort of like if Madsen was getting lit up, but hopefully it was teaching him to become the answer at closer.

We can't be sure Collins is wrong and Lou will continue to fail in that role. But most of us don't share Collin's faith in Lou in that area. No more than when EJ thought Lou could be the starting PG, because they would not need a PG.

That's right, but if Lou can be a reliable closer it would be because of his speed and ability to draw fouls going to the rim, IMO. So if you want to develop him, male him attack instead of shooting a 3pointer when you are only 1 point down... (saw the replay 2 minutes ago and it could f... go in and avoid the OT and the 2nd 4p play!)

user-pic
tk76 reply to Juan on Jan 21 at 17:50
+/-

Good point.

Lacob said he wanted an 'elite' player - it was in the context of Anthony (who he'll be fined for talking about regarding his 'geographic preference' probably - stern is an idiot) - and why the warriors couldn't get him.

They want an elite (big name) player - and Iguodala is not perceived in that category - rightly or wrongly is up to you - but guy like danny granger and gerald wallace are perceived as more elite than iguodala - sadly it's still a very points per game driven world

Oh, and for the record, I'd trade anyone on the Sixers not named Jrue for Steph Curry. Jrue and Curry at the 1/2 would be unbelievable, imo.

user-pic
Jason reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 17:36
+/-

You really value Jrue over Steph curry? Pgs seem easy to find these days.

Yes - point guards are easy to find - so are shooting guards

If you don't care how good they are

You don't value Jrue long term as a good to great point guard?

It's becoming a point guard and big man driven league

user-pic
Jason reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 17:39
+/-

"You don't value Jrue long term as a good to great point guard?"

I value him long term as a 2nd tier PG, which i don't think will be that hard to find 5 years from now. I think Steph's potential is a top tier SG. Also Steph curry has similar usage rate, and similar assist% as Jrue holiday so idk what we're losing.

I value Jrue higher. Tougher position to play, better body, and I believe he'll be an excellent two-way player.

I think Curry's out of position at the one, and too small to play the two unless he's paired up with a PG who has good size. Put them together, I think it's a killer combo. Trade Jrue for Curry and I think you're filling the scorer hole, but creating a hole at PG and on perimeter defense w/out a workable solution. Jrue's also younger.

It's not black and white, I really like Curry, but put a gun to my head right now, I'm taking Jrue. I'm sure most people will disagree w/ me.

If you think about it, the sixers basically ended up with the #2 or #3 pick in the 2009 draft based on talent. Top 3 for me would be Blake/Steph/Jrue.


Do you think that Doug Collins is the right coach for Jrue Holiday going forward? In his past he has never really had a point guard and ran the offense through a Point forward. If you look at the rosters of his previously coached teams he's never had a PG even close to as good as Jrue was.

The point of my original comment wasn't, "Jrue's better than Curry," it was that I'd give up anything on the roster and a first round pick to get Curry to play next to Jrue.

For example, if GSW is really looking to get out of the David Lee contract, I'd do this and give them our unprotected #1 this summer. http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=5thcuzy

Or if it's Biedrins, it works this way, too:
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=4kbyvsh

again with an unprotected first rounder thrown in.

There's almost nothing I wouldn't do to get the Jrue/Curry back court to build around.

SUre, NOW you want to trade for curry :)

I wouldn't do the David Lee one unless they take back brands contract letting us move Iggy for talent/cap relief and then have cap space to make a run at dwight. In fact, you've gotten me excited by the prospect of a curry/Jrue backcourt, i'd give Iggy/Brand/ET/Thad for Curry+David Lee. I don't think it's overpaying at all.

You're silly if you wouldn't do the david lee one from a pure talent base - however comcast wouldn't do it at all

How do you improve the Sixers team if you take back Lee's contract while keeping brand? Locks you into

Jrue/Curry/Iggy/Brand/Lee

Which doesn't sound bad in theory but i'm not buying that core as a contender. Only way to improve the team would be through the MLE.

Man - sixers are going to get to buy brand out come new CBA

I'd prefer to keep ET, maybe give them Thad and Speight? Would they like to get Lou as 6th man?

user-pic
johnrosz on Jan 21 at 17:40
+/-

just turned on comcast. they teased something for the 6 o clock programming. Apparently Rod Thorn had some "interesting" comments for Dei Lynam.

Surely it won't be interesting, but they suckered me in. bastards

user-pic
tk76 reply to johnrosz on Jan 21 at 17:42
+/-

Hey, let us know what he doesn't say.

Thanks.

He won't say that David Stern has waved pesky ownership rules and now allows for an owner to have one team in each conference and as of today Marc Cuban owns the Sixers.

user-pic
johnrosz reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 17:49
+/-

I'll try. I'm not a huge fan of this channel. Last time I tuned in and they were talking about the Sixers, the host asked Dei what she'd do with Iguodala. She said Loul Deng was a perfect fit, I turned it off.

user-pic
tk76 reply to johnrosz on Jan 21 at 17:52
+/-

Yeah, Deng's a great fit. In a Brand type of way :)

user-pic
johnrosz on Jan 21 at 18:05
+/-

Thorn compared Iguodala to Revis...

I don't think I can watch this if it's going to be littered with nonsensical comparisons

user-pic
johnrosz reply to johnrosz on Jan 21 at 18:09
+/-

we've got a hell of a core for a football team.

Hawes=Manning

Iggy=Revis

user-pic
tk76 reply to johnrosz on Jan 21 at 18:23
+/-

Lou = Deon Sanders

INsult to Deion

He may have been loudy and flashy but he was one of the best return men of all time - and as long as you like your corners not hitting people (and the eagles do - they love assante samuel) he was pretty good

:D

user-pic
tk76 reply to johnrosz on Jan 21 at 18:24
+/-

Speights = Bernard Williams
Brand = Trotter
Jrue = Shady

user-pic
johnrosz on Jan 21 at 18:15
+/-

what a waste of time.

he says there are 2 ways to defend the paint, 1. shotblocking 2.taking charges

"this team doesn't have enough guys willing to take charges" this is terrifying if he actually thinks this way (and just doesn't want to come out and say Hawes can't play)

Praised Iguodala. Said he's not the problem.

Compared him to Mike Schmidt and Darrel Revis in a matter of 2 minutes.

Has no idea whether or not Iggy still wants to be here because Iggy keeps to himself.

Riveting.

Has no idea whether or not Iggy still wants to be here because Iggy keeps to himself.

"Mr Thorn - Have you asked Andre Iguodala if he still wants to be here"?

When the station is owned by the same entity that owns the company it's just ridiculous

user-pic
johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 18:22
+/-

how many players on the current Sixers roster do you think Snider can name off the top of his head?

Iguodala
Brand
Nocioni

(those are the 3 biggest salaries right?)

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 21 at 18:43
+/-

Lou is on the hook for more total money- and Snyfder actually signed him.

He probably refers to Noce as "that Spansih guy."

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 18:44
+/-

Sorry. Not only did I mispell his name- but I forgot to call him Mister.

When I refer to salaries, in my head I'm only thinking yearly 'base' salary - so Lou's here longer - but he gets a smaller check than Nocioni :)

user-pic
tk76 reply to johnrosz on Jan 21 at 18:21
+/-

So we need Pete Rose.

And we need to start Speights because he takes charges. And charges apparently are the answer.

user-pic
johnrosz reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 18:48
+/-

I guess he means they need to do this to compensate for the lack of shot blocking. Still kind of bizarre to hear a supposed basketball mind like Thorn speak in such generalities. "just go out there and take some charges, that'll fix the void in the middle"

user-pic
tk76 reply to johnrosz on Jan 21 at 18:52
+/-

He didn't start the fire.

When you're on the front page - due to character limitations does it say "More of the sam" for you all too.

Yes, we could use more of the sam :)

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Jan 21 at 19:59
+/-

Brian, I would like a Turner, Curry backcourt with Iggy at the s.f spot and if Jrue had to be moved I would consider it. I am in the minority but still feel Turner will be better than Jrue.

An Iggy trade that works is for Wright, Udoh and an expiring [Gadzarich?] if Wright compliments Jrue/Turner better offensively.

Does a team really need a point guard if their 1/2/3 are all above average Ball handlers? I'm obviuosly for a jrue/steph swap.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Jason on Jan 21 at 20:10
+/-

Yea, I wouldn't say Evan or Stephen are the one or the two in that situation.

I'm kind of fed up with "well, it should sort of work." PG is the most important position in my book. The Sixers have a true point who I believe will become one of the best in the league, I really don't want to give that up. He's the untouchable guy right now. Anyone else on the roster, an unprotected first round pick, taking back a LONG contract. I'll do all of those things to get Curry to play with Jrue. Giving up Jrue to get him, though, I don't think I'd go to the same extremes in the hopes that they can get by without a real PG.

Ball handlers and playmakers*

Correct that before someone decides to pin point in on that instead of answering the main question.

Whoa, was the Utah Jazz vs Sixers game always going to be a nationally broadcasted game?

NBA tv?

It's sort of national :)

As pissed as we all are at this team and Collins, let's not forget the biggest talent downgrade this team has had this year, losing... http://www.dailynews.com/sportscolumnists/ci_17154367

You know, I never really thought she was that hot until I saw Marakovitz.

Well, Wall had another 14 assists tonight. Averaging 14 over the past 3, 11.4 for the month. Of course, high assist totals in a vacuum are not necessarily a harbinger of point guard greatness, and the rest of Wall's game has been somewhat discouraging... but then again, he's been limited by injuries for most of the season.

You love rookies who can't shoot, don't you? Wall is under 40% from the floor (and dropping) and under 30% from three (and dropping).

Oh, and DeMarcus Cousins Update!!!: Great shooting night - grading on the DeMarcus scale, obviously - 7/15 from the floor, 3/4 from the line, 4 turnovers and only 2 fouls. So 21 possessions for his 17 points. Excellent work by the big man, and there's still half a quarter left.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Jan 22 at 1:03
+/-

You love the potential of a whole team that can't shoot. Anyway, 21, 8 and 5 for Cousins tonight. That's a pretty good game...

I am thoroughly enjoying the end of the fourth quarter and overtime of the Kings/Warriors game. 25 possessions to score 21 points for Cousins. Tyreke Evans has 29 points on 36 possessions. Those two are quite the dynamic duo.

At least we know there is one team that finishes games worse than the sixers. Allow a 15-1 run by the warriors starting at the end of the 4th into overtime to end it.


These Sacto announcers crack me up. They're literally carrying Monta Ellis off the floor with 22 seconds left in overtime, "He's probably done for the game."

user-pic
Jason reply to Brian on Jan 22 at 1:33
+/-

heh, I think Ellis is carried off the court more than any other player w/o actually being hurt. Obviously he could be seriously injured. But vs the raptors he went down in the final minutes of the 4th. Monta was down for 3 minutes, eventually carried off and turned out to be just fine.

Paul Pierce holds that title.

Pedestrian game for Curry. 34 points on 28 possessions.

How bad is Sactown tho? Ellis gets 28 pts on 29 shots and finishes with a +13. Huh?

Seems to be a +10 instead, also 9 assists but 7 turnovers? I wonder why some people think he should be an all star.

user-pic
Jason reply to Chunky Soup on Jan 22 at 1:59
+/-

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/ellismo01.html


Scroll down to advanced. Very good numbers imo.

Oh my bad. I didn't realize a .114 win shares per 48, and a .09 wins produced per 48 were all star worthy. I guess over a quarter of the league will in the game then.

user-pic
Jason reply to Chunky Soup on Jan 22 at 2:16
+/-

I mean, Win shares includes defense, which he is not that good at, but that tends to get overlooked in this league if you are as good of a scorer as he is. Look at his offensive stats, Iverson never had an offensive year as good as Ellis is having this year.

Ellis isn't having a good a year as Aaron Afflalo for example. Afflalo's TS% is 63.4 and his offensive rating is 123. Ellis is at 55.6 and 110, and yet his PER is seven points higher. Translation: Ellis takes a lot more shots and misses a lot more shots.

user-pic
Jason reply to Chunky Soup on Jan 22 at 2:37
+/-

you're right Afflalo is an all star player.


After looking @ the west guards he isn't an all star player, not ahead of Manu/Gordon/Kevin Martin. But he is having a very good year.

Did anyone just see the info chart that was just shown in the LAL Denver game? Incorrectly had the Sixers 2nd in the league in team FTAs per game averaging a supposed 30.4 per game which is just wrong lol.


I am tired so maybe it read OKC and they said OKC and i somehow heard/saw Philly.

Got to love GSW fans. If you are going to adopt a west conference team it has to be the warriors imo.


Cousins making an impact in this overtime...

Impact made. Cousins with the turnover.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif