DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

Buy, Sell or Hold?

I'd like to see moves that will improve the team long term. If by rebuild you mean trading your veterans for a young guy that has a very good chance to become at least as good or better in his prime, than you go the rebuild way. Unfortunately right now that is impossible. If by rebuild you mean gutting the team for expirings and imaginary "young talent" so that we can have cap space that is the worst possible path we can take.

I voted improve the team, but right now i only view that as trading away guys like Lou, Speights, Hawes, Nocioni and the expirings. I agree with Thorn that the core has to stay simply because it doesn't look like there are teams willing to give up a significant asset for our best players. You don't trade away your best players just for the sake of making a trade.

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Jan 26 at 7:12
+/-

Looking at draft express last night and the pickings are slim at where we are picking and it will be worse come lockout time so I put our #1 plus Hawes out there and target a player to compliment Mo Spieghts at the 5 spot. Three players I target are R.Lopez, Thabeet and Mozgov, all athletic defensive bigs that Collins may turn into 20 mpg. players at least.

Collins has kept saying how hard these players work so I don't believe he blows this up and I feel their ceiling is higher than most because in the last week Jrue, at the head of our defense, has shown an ability to lock up premier p.g.'s and a date with D.Rose is becoming a possibility.

We have 2 weak spots now and Turner's evolution will solve one of them so address the other without moving a main piece.

I don't think I'd classify Mozgov or Thabeet as athletic, in the least. Maybe Robin Lopez is available, it looks like Gortat could take the starting job from him in PHO, but he's also on a rookie deal and starting for them. Not sure why they'd give him up.

user-pic
CM reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 10:29
+/-

Maybe PHO bites on Speights for Lopez.

Change of scenery for 2 guys who have had their issues.

So they can suck for new teams?

Can Robin rebound even as well as his brother is this year?

Trading a soft big man for a soft big man accomplishes what?

Stand pat. Way too far into this season to blow it up without demoralizing the young players.


I'd personally stand pat, no way i'd give up anything more than ECs (minus thad), and a 2nd to try and improve this team for the short term.

Odds are, this is exactly what's going to happen. I'm just not sure there's a good deal out there to be made.

I'd be open to make a couple different types of deals:

1) I'd exchange expirings for expirings to get peices that could help for guys like Kapono or Songalia - maybe for a big like Jeff Foster.

2) I'd move Lou Williams, maybe even for less value, in order to put Turner in his role and give Holiday more endgame responsibility.

3) I wouldn't hesitate to move the 2011 #1 combined with anything to get a valuable piece - the 2011 draft sucks and this team is young enough as is.

I agree with this reasoning, especially 1) and 3). Lou should be the prime trade bait IMO, but i think he actually has value (at least in the eyes of opposing front offices).
How about Lou + Meeks (+ expiring if needed) for a decent big man?

user-pic
CM reply to CM on Jan 26 at 10:34
+/-

What about Kapono and Songalia for Troy Murphy?

Money is a wash and Murphy would give you more than you're getting now from the 5 spot - he won't help the interior D, but he'll spread the floor and hit the glass.
He's the odd man out in NJ with Favors there and Avery Johnson's mancrush on Kris Humphries.

Yeah, this is a move I mentioned last week. I'd definitely do it. Murphy's a really good rebounder and the added benefit would be having him at the four to spread the floor would open things up for Turner to slide in at the two, you wouldn't "need" to have Meeks in there as a threat from three.

user-pic
azteck2 on Jan 26 at 8:53
+/-

I say get rid of the garbage! Hawes, Kapono, Speights, and Nocioni. Trade them with picks for someone who might help our center situation. The core we have now is very good and needs time to grow into a contender. It makes no sense to trade our best players for someone who might be better later. Teams like Boston and Spurs have older players that are still capable of winning a championship, why we assume guys like Iggy will stop producing in a few years when our young players are in their "Primes" makes no sense!

The counter argument to this is that Iguodala's game is based largely on his elite athleticism. Take that away, and I'm not sure if he'll be able to compensate with a more finesse style. So while a guy like Pierce can use guile to keep his effectiveness up into his 30's, Iguodala will really have to develop a game based more on skills than athleticism. It's possible, but far from a sure thing.

Of course, his 30s are still a little more than 3 years away, and there's nothing that says his athleticism is going to abandon him the minute he turns 30. The achilles injury had me a little bit worried, but overall he's been exceptionally healthy, and he obviously keeps himself in tip top shape.

How have other 'athletic based' players aged in the NBA? I know each is different but there's still a history to look to see what goes and what doesn't first.

Better to trade too early than too late (if you aren't contending anyway) - just look at Iverson

Eh, Iverson's price wasn't driven down by his athletic decline, it was driven down by circumstance (and an owner telling everyone in the world that they were going to trade him).

Iverson was an example of selling too late than selling too early - of a team treading water for a few years making pointless 'one player away' moves when they should have conceded the run was over around 2003.

Wasn't referring to his athleticism - wires crossed - just the whole better a year early than a year late.

(Like the patriots tend to do)

I have no problem making moves to improve the team - I have no problem trading players to build for the future.

Unless we know the frameworks of the deal it's hard to say.

The cavs wanna use their TPE - but if reports are true -a ll they wanna do is absorb the salary - trading Iguodala just for salary relief (or brand) with nothing else in return would not be a good move.

The roster is still mismatched pieces that isn't going to win anything significant in my opinion. If the young guys are 'demoralized' if a trade is made to build for the future and hand the leadership reins to them then they might want to look for work in a field that isn't so gosh darned hard.

Make the best move that positions the sixers to someday contend for a finals appearance

That's what I say

It sounds like most of us on the same page. I particularly agree with Xsago's take in the 1st reply. Everyone wants to build towards a long term winner- but giving up good players for nothing but salary relief does not get them closer. There are not worthy FA's or great players in the draft this summer. And the CBA BS is hanging over team's head, and really drives down the value of Iguodala (or at least that is the sense I get.)

Probably last year was the time to try and really blow things up by moving Iguodala and Brand. Last summer had lots of player movement and FA's, and the team had the trade chip/value of the #2 pick. But at this point Brand is way more valuable to the team for 1-2 more years, given that they would not be able to due much with the cap space now that the cap will be going down. And they may get to void his cap hit anyway- depending on the new CBA.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 26 at 11:00
+/-

I'm also not opposed to trying to win a bit in the next 2 years- as long as the plan is to have lots of flexibility once Brand and Lou's cotracts expire. So if the team was willing to take on guys with 1-2 more years like Camby, Nene or Kaman then I'm all for it. There is not a current Sixer big who they would be blocking in terms of long term development. And I don't see them acquiring a young, long term option at C this year.

The problem is Comcast is unlikely to take on those 2 years of salary.

Injury Prone, Injury Prone, and wants a big fat extension (and injury prone)

Those are the options?

I'd rather comcast show some balls and offer a full MLE to deandre jordan, or work out a S&T Front loaded contract that makes the clippers spit

Actually, I'm not so sure about that. I think Thorn could talk ownership into taking on money at this point for a significant move.

I actually think this is a good time for them to look at making a big move that sort of takes advantage of the looming CBA mess. There are teams out there with contracts they want to rid themselves of, and I think it might be worth taking on a bad contract to get a valuable asset, in certain circumstances.

I'm sure no one is surprised, but the team I'd look at is GSW. They have two big men, with bigger contracts. I'm sure they'd love to move one of them. Now, would they be willing to part with Steph Curry just to make that happen? I doubt it, but I'd make the phone call.

I'd absorb Biedrins or David Lee to get Curry, and the Sixers could offer serious monetary savings, a young asset on a rookie contract and an unprotected first round pick (or two).

This deal, plus an unprotected first, would wind up saving Golden State almost $60M. You could also work it for Biedrins, their other bad contract.

Of course, I firmly believe a trio of Jrue, Curry, Iguodala would be insane, and I might be in the minority there.

Of course, this is sort of an all-in bet. The Sixers would have $68M on the books next season (not including Thad's possible extension), and $70M on the books the following season (not including possible extensions for Thad and Speights). Then when Brand comes off the books, they'd drop down to $41M, but both Curry and Jrue would be due extensions. The following season, Iguodala comes off the books. So you might be left with Jrue and Curry on big deals, and nothing else, in 2014.

I admire your belief that Thorn can persuade Comcast to spend more money. I don't buy it.

I think Thorn is here cause he got pushed out in Jersey and his old friend Ed helped him out (and got screwed in the process) and didn't want to move too far.

I think Thorns better days are behind him in terms of owner influence, and I don't think Comcast is going to take on an extra 60 million

I don't know. BK was able to convince them to pay the luxury tax for a team that had no chance. I could see Thorn having enough rope to make a deal taking on serious money if Collins was behind him and it brought back (a) a marketable star, which I think Curry is and (b) a consistent playoff team, with the possibility of advancing a round or two.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 11:26
+/-

If I were Comcast- I'd be really scarred after the whole Brand debacle.

But see - that's the point

They paid the luxury tax - and got squat, bubkis, nothing, and many moves they've made recently (one year offer to miller, the dalembert trade) were more about the tax than on the court.

I'm from a family of 3 kids - i'm in the middle

My sister - she got away with so much - she screwed it for me - i got much harsher restrictions because she was out of control - then my younger sister - it was easier for her.

I think the sixers are going to work out the same way

BK done screwed it up for the next set
Ed and Rod are the next set together (ed wasn't in place long enough)
He who comes next will have more flexibility - but right now comcast is shifting 'far opposite' what billy king did because paying the luxury tax (after the rat left) did nothing but cost them more money.

On the 'plus' side - attendance couldn't get much worse if they did decide to blow it up could it?

Yeah, i get your middle child metaphor, but I don't think Rod/Stefanski are considered one in the same. Stefanski is the middle child, Rod is the baby.

We'll see. I don't think Ed was in office enough time to suffer all the middle child 'backlash' - and that him still being here puts the stench on Rod too.

I think the new CBA might be a tipping point but I think it's going to tip comcast to being more bottom line first on the court second

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 11:23
+/-

I don't like getting on the hook for Less's escalating 6 years salary. It ties the team down past the 2-3 year mark. And I'm wanting to identify a franchise player befoer locking the team to big deals.

I guess if you decide that Jrue/Curry/Iguodala is you "core" then you can go all in on a deal like that. But I'm not ready to do that. And I don't like asking Jrue to guard SG's the rest of his career. Its a partial waste of his talent.

Even Biendrin's goes a bit long. he has a option year, just like Iguodala.

And I don't like asking Jrue to guard SG's the rest of his career. Its a partial waste of his talent.

I think you're overstating that. When a team has two good/great scoring wings, yes you're going to have to move Jrue off the ball on defense, but for most teams, you can get by with Curry guarding the lesser wing and keep Jrue on the ball.

Defensively, Lee would be more of a concern than Curry, imo.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 11:37
+/-

Are you sure about that? How many "lesser wings" can Curry cover? Especially on good teams. I know we looked at it a few months back. Maybe my gut is wrong.

Iguodala and Jrue can certainly handle the 2 best 1/2/3. I'm just not sure if Curry has the size to guard the guy left over.

If you've got a team running offense through their third-best wing player, isn't that a win?

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 11:43
+/-

If Jrue stays on the PG then I'm fine with it. I'm just not sure that will happen.

Take OKC as an example. Do you think Jrue guards Westbrook or Harden? And I mean Harden in 2 years when he is a solid player?

Westbrook, no doubt in my mind. And against Boston, he'd guard Rondo.

It goes against my beliefs, but I think the offensive advantages make up for the defensive problems, by a large margin, with a Jrue, Curry, Iguodala perimeter three. I also think Curry would be even better as a true SG on the offensive end, especially with Jrue and Iguodala setting him up.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 11:59
+/-

It would definitely be entertaining. And maybe even enough to make the team "relevant." Not sure about that frontcout :)

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 12:02
+/-

The new owner recently announced that Curry is tradeable, but Ellis is not.

And the sixers GM announced that Iguodala and Brand aren't on the market

And the Nets GM said 'they're out' of the Carmelo deal

And yet the Warriors GM is more 'believable'

They're all lying, it's all spin.

No one is untradeable - they're just untradeable until the right deal shows up.

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 12:14
+/-

Um.. what's clearly not a lie, though, is that Curry IS tradeable. But I imagine they'd want more than what we could give them.

Everyone is tradeable.

In the same interview he said they wanted a defensive upgrad, or a star (they were talking about Carmelo)

No where in the interview did he say we'd trade curry and a bad contract for flotsam and a disappointing (so far) #2 pick.

I think they regret the Smart hiring and trading Ellis or Curry before they get their 'real' coach is a mistake

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 12:38
+/-

Yes, as I said, I don't think we have the assets it would take to land him. You have this habit of reflexively disagreeing with comments that, if you read more closely, actually say exactly what you're saying.

Really Tray Do I?

The new owner recently announced that Curry is tradeable, but Ellis is not.

That's all you said, and that's what I replied to. If I was replying to your original comment, I would have now wouldn't I?

As for your comments towards my 'habits' - inaccurate (as you usually are) as they are - I'll refrain from the laughable habits you have that make me take you as seriously as I take Sarah Palin

user-pic
Francis reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 13:19
+/-

You are a child. Grow up.

Settle down Francis

I think Golden State might rather be interested in Iguodala, because they need a good defensive wing in the worst way. Would you do just Iguodala for Curry and Biedrins? I think that could work for both teams, especially since there would not be a big money difference long term?

What does Biedrins give you that Hawes and Speights already don't give you?

Is it worth the minimal savings over the life of Iguodalas contract to get Curry?

The Way Biedrins is playing the past couple years, it really feels like Iguodala for Curry with Biedrins in the trade to make the deal work financially. He's just so bad right now

You're right he's pretty bad on offense but he doesn't use posessions, but he's a better option on defense and his rebounding percentage is good. Overall not great but serviceable. I was just looking for a trade that I think both teams might do, that's all, just trying to fill a glaring need for both rosters. :)

Why is he so bad at Free throws - getting them or making them? I mean it's atrocious isn't it?

His FT rate reminds me of willie green early in his career who seemed allergic to drawing fouls

Yeah he's got a terrible free throw motion, hard to watch, and his percentage is awful, it's a real detriment. As far as his rate, I'm not sure he ever gets the ball passed to him.

Yes, I would do Iguodala for Curry and Biedrins.

I don't think it makes the team nearly as good as if you kept Iguodala and moved Turner, but it would align the ages of your core better, and financially, you'd be in no worse shape than you are right now.

I'm torn on the darn thing. I don't think it's enough for Iguodala but at the same time it may be the best you can get around the league.

PS in case you didn't know - it works on the trade machine and according to the trade machine - both teams get worse :)

Oh man and here I thought it might help both teams! It's a good thing I'm not in charge, I'd end up on the terrible GMs roundtable or whatever it's called. :(

I always find the 'change' part of the trade machine kind of laughable.

According to ESPN both teams lose 'wins' in the deal, one 7 and one 5 - it was just odd :)

I think if Lacob was serious about a defensive upgrade - then Andre is a perfect fit. I think Andre fits well in Golden State cause they like to run and they have a lot of scorers so he wouldn't have to score a lot.

Its' a trade that makes tons of sense from one point of view as long as you think you can't do better for Iguodala.

It makes too much sense to get done :)

I like your plan with either Nene or Camby, I'd like to see the Sixers play with either of those guys. And put Brand at the 4 more often. What kind of trade would those teams be interested in? I'm thinking you probably have to put Thad in the deal to get it done. Would not having to worry about his extention be enough for this team to absorb 11 or 12 million for just one more year you think?

Nothing gets done on NeNe before they deal with Carmelo. He's second on their list of priorities and until Carmelo is cleared up - they don't know what they'll do about Nene. Though he is popping off about wanting an extension and probably demanding one from whomever he's traded to (he's also older than Iguodala)

I think people are over valuing Thaddeus Young, he's in the last year of his 'rookie' deal basically and is going to require a contract extension to be worthwhile to a team. That's not exactly a huge trade value.

Portland needs bigmen - they're a friggin mess - they have no healthy ones (and isn't camby the one who said he'd retire if he was traded except maybe to houston?)

I on't know what those teams want/need. But at least one of them will jump at serious salary relief if you can meet their other needs.

The Sixers actually have a fair amount of assets in terms of expirings and young players.

The Sixers actually have a fair amount of assets in terms of expirings and young players.

So do a lot of other teams :)


All those TPE's and expiring contracts out there this year, lots of em floating around.

Young players?
Thad - last year of rookie deal
Speights - not exactly appealing
Hawes - lat year of rookie deal and not appealing
Lou - under long term contract already
Brackins - worth much?

Am I missing someone that the sixers would trade?

Point is - i don't think the sixers have the 'value' in youth that others think they have (after jrue and evan) and that there are a lot of teams with expiring deals / tpe's out there (and a tpe is much better of course)

I think the 'best' deal they could make is one like the deal for Rip that is all expirings. I don't feel the youth allows the sixers to obtain a higher value player than that.

Maybe Kaman but his injury issues scare the hell out of me (not to mention HE scares the hell out of me - boy could be the ugliest nba player ever - 82 games of that might scar me)

Yeah I would stay far away from Kaman, he was decent a few years ago, but now is completely washed up. His numbers the last time he played when healthy are really bad, I think the only value he might have is next year as an expiring.

There are not worthy FA's or great players in the draft this summer.

But being prepared for opportunities that present themselves unexpectedly is what might matter.

being able to trade for a pau gasol when he suddenly appears on the market
or a KG
or a Ray Allen

People keep saying 'well there's no good free agents and there's no good draft picks' liek the future is set in stone and all will come about exactly as predict.

That's great, there's no good free agents and no good draft picks - if you say so

The sixers aren't a good team as is - they aren't winning a round in the playoffs - they aren't going to get home court in the playoffs for either one round.

So standing pat does nothing either

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 11:04
+/-

If there is a labor dispute, I expect zero moves this summer.

Yes - that's great
But the NBA will exist past this summer - and contract situations will be the same (or even worse possibly) once the new CBA is agreed to.

If there are moves that improve your teams ability to compete - you make em - the GM's and owners know so much better than us what Stern 'really' wants and what he says he wants, and they probably even know how it's going to end up (at least a framework) they can plan around that.

They can't screw it up any more than they already are as long as they keep Jrue and Evan (and maybe thad). Lou should be traded to any team that wants him willing to offer a shorter contract and even a marginal young piece, since he does nothing (to me) to help the sixers become serious contenders but provide a crutch to coaches to avoid letting the important folk learn how to finish games.

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 11:15
+/-

Sure, you try and make moves.

I'm just past "trade Iguodalal/Brand" or bust mode. That train sort of left the station.

IMO they should have moved Iguodala right after they decided to trade Sam. But at this point are "assets" are devalued in the current climate. And I hope/expect them to start improving their value after there is a new CBA. Brand, at very least, will only get more valuable.

If reports are to be believed, they decided to move sam 18 months before he was actually moved :)

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 26 at 11:03
+/-

And I realize that there probably wre no takers for Iguodala + Brand last year.

Sometime there is no easy "right answer." But there are always plenty or wrong ways to go :)

I'd bet there are takers for Brand this year - if you're willing to take on an equally long contract of a worse player - you might get a future pick and/or young talent on a team that thinks that Brands production (which is good this year) helps them out.

Not saying he has great value - but he's got more than last year

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 11:06
+/-

But at this stage does that get the Sixers any closer to turning the corner or landing a star?

Isn't Brand going to get more valuable each year from here on in? And why not wait to see if they get a "get out of jail free" card with his deal.

I'm not saying you should trade him (i'm not saying the sixer should or shouldn't do anything without knowing the offers).

Depends on the offer. What does the offer contain aside from the bad contract. One thing many people (me included) seem to still have faith in is the sixers ability to scout young talent and find diamonds in the rought where others miss em. Maybe they see a guy or two rotting on a bench somewhere that they feel can be an above average player. If he can be 'swiped' in a Brand trade - go right ahead.

Just saying, (again) that the roster to me is so fracked up no move is going to pay immediate dividends - but sadly we are an instant gratification society.

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 11:12
+/-

I'd be more eager to move Brand for other peoples garbage if I thought the Sixers had a quality big who needed more PT. Or if I thought they could trade for a promising big.

But the time to get a prospect big was later in last year's draft. I'm really not expecting any bigs with potential to suddenly materialize in the next 8 months. It will be a boring deadline and a boring summer IMO.

Maybe you can get a "throw in" young big in a deal where the Sixers absorb contract in exchange for an expiring. But that's not Comcast's style, is it?

Well if we're taking comcast's style into account what's the point :)

Nothing will even be considered until the new CBA is in place and they can figure out a way to maximize dollars while fielding a 'competitive' team. (competing to lose in the first round)


user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 11:08
+/-

Brand is the only decent big they have. I just don't see them acquiring 2 quality young bigs anytime soon. Their draft position screams "developmental big" and I don't see De'Andre Kordan or Ibaka suddenly hitting the trade market.

So if you are going to be stuck with an overpaid bifg, I'd prefer it be Brand. At least you know what you are getting and he will be an asset in 2 years.

I think DeAndre Jordan will be gettable come free agency (whenever it happens, however it happens) based on Clipper History.

However, based on sixer history - they won't make an offer because of luxury tax (if it exists) concerns more than on the court talent.

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 11:17
+/-

I've always been on the D'Andre Jordan bandwagon. But I was a whole lot more enthused back when he was an undervalued unknown.

He has a good chance of becoming the next Sam, in terms of someone throwing crazy money at him based on physical gifts and a few good games.

Who knows what players make under the new CBA, but I expect his salary to be surprisingly high as compared to the new normal.

Here's what I expect from the new CBA - at the least

  • the 61% (I think) of BRI is coming down - closer to 50% (it's insane that it's that high in the first place in my opinion, yes players have the talent, but owners bear all the costs and risk - players get guaranteed contracts)

  • Shorter Max Length contracts

  • Some sort of voidability in contract portions can't void an entire contract but maybe you can void a contract for a percentage that decreases year after year based on the time left?

  • Continuation of the soft cap (and luxury tax) principles

  • Elimination of one exception (probably the biannual)

  • age limit raised by a year or changed to not be age but 'years since high school graduation' like in the NFL
  • The last one is just thrown in there cause I think it happens.

    I think the league will push for more to try and break the unioion - but i think they know a hard cap is untenable, they know completely voidable contracts are untenable - but they start high and work their way down - maybe they get to 55% but that's a compromise from the idealized 50.

    I don't know how the contracts existing will be forced to adjust or if there's one magical 'buyout' like there was before.

    I feel confident that's how this thing will shake out

    I also think an entire year will be shut down

    user-pic
    tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 11:28
    +/-

    "I also think an entire year will be shut down"

    Another reason to hold onto Brand.

    -I actually hope/believe there will be some basketball next year.

    I have no idea how a year long shut down affects contracts but how will a year not playing competitive basketball affect Elton Brand?

    Does anyonoe here care about the NHL - did player contracts just extend another season or was that year of the contracts just lost?

    I really don't think the league can afford a lost season. They aren't that strong nationally. Anecdotally, I don't really know a single basketball fan in my day-to-day life, and most of those guys follow baseball and football religiously.

    Well the harris poll has em at least fifth behind both nascar and college football.

    And the reasons you state are exactly why I think they will have a lost season. They need to control their escalating costs because of their lack of popularity. Plus, there's just something about the NBA - i think a lost season will hurt the players more than in the NFL MLB or even NHL and that the players will be broken.

    I think Stern wants to crush the union under his short pudgy bootheels

    I think the owners just want to save as much money as possible (and sacramento wants to move to vegas)

    Well, if they lose a full year I'm going to start getting even more shit than I already do for following hoops, let alone blogging about the Sixers :)

    user-pic
    tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 11:45
    +/-

    That poll was BS. It only looked at "favorite sport."

    By that measure I'm not a football fan if I rank them #2.

    user-pic
    tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 26 at 11:47
    +/-

    It just means the NBA is rarely the top dog in most cities. But they have plenty of fans. In NY the Knicks might be the #3 or #4 favorite team of many... but they have millions of fans.

    I'm not so sure about this. I mean, there are probably millions of people who if you asked them, "are you a knicks fan," they'd say yes. But they don't watch games, they don't go to games, they can probably name Gallinari and Amare, but no one else on the team.

    The Knicks sell out because investment banks, celebrities and law firms get season tickets then give them to first and second year employees unless LeBron is in town.

    You walk around this city, interact w/ the people, I'd say one in fifty is a legit Knicks fan and really cares about the team. Ask the same 50 people about the Jets/Giants/Yankees/Mets and about 40 of them are legit fans who spend time/money on the team.

    user-pic
    tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 12:03
    +/-

    And out of those fifty... Nascar?

    It was brought up in the article that Nascar has a lot of "orphan fans" who don't follow other sports. Where comparatively, a lot of people follow basketball, but it is not their favorite. But if you follow Nasacar its either #1 or #2 for you.

    I'd bet a lot of those Nascar fans do follow college football (they both seem to have massive 'southern' appeal).

    I enjoy watching NASCAR sometimes - i've never watched an entire race but i'll tune it for some laps in and out of races - it's actually pretty cool to see some of the driving they do cause i'd enjoy driving at 180 and cutting people off :)

    If you ever want a real hoot - read some of the nascar chats at ESPN - they're insane.

    The thing that 'matters' isn't how popular the sport is when folks are asked - it isn't even who attends - it's how much money they can make for tv networks (ratings) and how much they can get for those ratings.

    The NFL TV deal is obscene - and there's always fighting for it - ESPN suddenly had monday night football nbc was back in the game with sunday night football (i'm sure it was NBC"s idea and they paid a large some) - when fox got the NFC they sort of came out of nowhere.

    Who wants Major League Baseball? I mean fox shows one game a week and waits how long? Baseball is such a ratings loser compared to where it used to be that you got playoff games on TBS and FX for gods sakes...

    THE NHL has a versus contract and some sunday games (and some playoffs) on NBC but you know NBC didn't pay much for it say compared to how much they paid to air Notre Dame Home games I bet. Sure ESPN will TALK about the NHL - but they air womens basketball - and not the NHL

    The NBA does have increased ratings on their national games this year (and it's not just Lebron, ratings are up across the board but yes ratings when the heat are on are up more so expect more national heat games, not less, in the future). But you still got ABC sitting on its proverbial ass until christmas day and still - even then - they are too afraid of the NFL playoffs to air a game on sunday (and why not a saturday afternoon national game). ABC/ESPN knows that while the NBA may be a tv draw, it's a much better draw when there aren't options :)


    I don't know a single person that watches NASCAR. I always thought that was a southern/midwest thing, to put it kindly.

    It mostly is, but they have races in nevada, california, pocono, i think new hampshire - and those races sell pretty well as well.

    Nascar was growing for a time (the economy killed that) and expanding in popularity while the NBA was at best holding steady.

    NASCAR ratings are still pretty good I think.

    user-pic
    johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 14:10
    +/-

    isn't that whole culture more about getting absolutely hammered and hoping for a horrific crash rather than marveling at the skills of the drivers/engineering behind the whole sport?

    No, it's really really not.

    Is it a messed up 'subculture' - sure - but more so because there's a higher percentage of red neck racist fans than in most other sports - but they have their favorites and they want them to win.

    What's funny is WHY people are their favorites. The most vocal (and defensive) NASCAR fanbase seems to be the 'jr' contingent - Dale Earnhardt Jr is the most popular Nascar driver in terms of marketing and defense, purely probably because of his father, but he's not a good driver - he's maybe in the top 10 of drivers in the thing but he's not one of the best drivers, but his fans will make more excuses for him than some people will make for demarcus cousins :)

    On the other hand, one of the most hated racers is probably one of the better racers not named jimmy johnson on raw talent but he has a temper issue. I saw one documentary on him on ESPN and was amazed about it.

    One thing NASCAR gets more than any other 'sports' - is fan friendliness - the amount of crap the drivers have to put up with all week is insane - no professional sports player in any other league would do that - iamagine having to do 2 hours of 'pressing the flesh' before every NBA game :)

    NASCAR also has the advantage of 'rabidness' in its fan base - if people love a driver - they'll buy everything the driver has their name on - including manufacturer of car - sane or not there's probably a ton more money in NASCAR licensing and commercials than most other sports due to the devotion of the fanbase.

    NASCAR is unique - it's not a league - it's not a union - one family owns nascar - one family makes the rules. I'm not a hard core fan - i wouldn't go to a race (well maybe if something in my future pans out like I hope) but it's not a bad watch on a sunday if nothing else is on - except bowling on ESPN.

    Ok - that's enough NASCAR for now - though - one more thing - there are two types of people - those who know "If you're not first, you're last" and those who don't. I don'w want to know those who don't :)

    user-pic
    tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 11:40
    +/-

    After next year Brand is a huge expiring contract. That was my point about the lost year.

    user-pic
    Tray reply to tk76 on Jan 26 at 11:59
    +/-

    My sense is that Jordan has a somewhat better feel for the game than Dalembert, though offensively he's even rawer. His rebounding is a little lower than one would think it should be, but that may come from playing alongside a dominant rebounder in Griffin. On this team he'd do more.

    Story: Young is giving the Sixers production off the bench:

    http://ow.ly/3KDo8

    Great quote from that article:

    "I was telling Jodie (Meeks), 'Look, when I catch the ball on the elbow, your man is going to turn his back and try to take the ball away from me. Once he does that, just slide to the corner. You're going to have a wide-open shot every time.' ''

    Thanks, Brian.

    Young isn't a very good ball-handler -- like to see him abide by the "three-dribble rule" -- but he could help quite a bit if he finds the open man on double teams.

    I just find it encouraging that he's thinking about how the team as a whole can move around him when he gets the ball in certain spots. It would be huge for that second team if teams had to double him, and he was capable of making them pay with passes out of the double.

    Stand pat. Iggy's trade value is way too low considering his injury, his contract, and the overhanging CBA issues. We'd get hosed on a deal. Keep him, even for his defense alone. Plus, he seems to be fitting better into the offense (taking mostly high-percentage shots) since his return from injury. Brand is obviously a keeper, he leads the team in points, rebounds, and blocks.

    The only guy I would trade is LouWill, in fact I'd trade LouWill plus millions in cash in return for nothing, just to never have to see him blow a lead with mind-numbing isolations again. Of course, Louis is here to stay thanks to Doug C.'s bizarre infatuation with the man.

    I guess I'd make a move to rebuild the team. The move I have in mind is trading Thad. If I'm Thorn, I have a tough time justifying the full MLE or (much) more deal he is looking at with no CBA changes.

    What is Thad alone really going to get you though? He's about to become a restricted free agent and he doesn't make a lot of money. You make him available, you basically tell teams you aren't going to match him if they make him a solid contract offer. Where's the incentive a team has to trade for him? His maybe some nice 'incentive' to take on another contract, but not much, and I feel alone - it's just not worth trading him for what you'd get in return.

    I think the value teams would see in Thad is in the role he's playing right now. There are teams out there that could really use an offensive mismatch off their bench to boost their second units, especially teams looking to make a run in he playoffs.

    Now, what would they be willing to trade for something like that? And since we're talking about contending teams, what do they really have that's appealing? I don't have an answer for either of those questions.

    But if you're talking about a bad team that sees Thad as a long term solution, then yeah, why not just wait?

    Teams looking for offensive output off the bench (yes i'm ignoring the mismatch thing cause it works against the sixers in a trade :) - let's trade them LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOU

    I'd give Lou to Cleveland for their TPE :)

    user-pic
    Joe reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 12:57
    +/-

    Yeah maybe teams would just wait.

    I'm not sure that means the Sixers shouldn't be shopping him anyway. If they are waiting anyway, they would probably be more interested in just bidding on him in RFA than dealing with a sign and trade, so either way I think you shop him hard.

    From the Sixers' perspective, I can't see them having Iguodala and Thad on long term deals.

    The Thad extension, or lack thereof, is really the biggest looming thing imo. There's no way you can give him $12M/year, I don't care what the new CBA is like. I also think there's a decent chance someone makes a big offer for him as an RFA, Portland seems to love making poison pill type of offers. I wonder if they'll have the discipline to let him walk if Thad gets a big offer.

    I think we should try to upgrade thinking in the future. Don't see theres's gonna be big moves from anyone, so keep Iggy.
    I'll trade Kapono and Songaila for Troy Murphy, and use Lou and Thad to get a young big, including a pick if needed.

    Still love that Murphy trade, but you're going to have to give a little something to NJ, otherwise why do they make an expiring for expiring deal? They could just buy him out to save some cash in the short term.

    user-pic
    CM reply to Brian on Jan 26 at 20:35
    +/-

    He's been somewhat of a pain in the ass in NJ - getting rid of a headache might be enough incentive.

    Then just by him out.

    He's been a 'pain in the ass' because they don't play him and he'd make them better if he played.

    If you're gonna play the game, boy
    You gotta learn to play it right

    Every gambler knows
    That the secret to survivin'
    Is knowin' what to throw away
    And knowin' what to keep
    'Cause every hand's a winner
    And every hand's a loser...

    ----

    You've got to know when to hold 'em
    (When to hold 'em)
    Know when to fold 'em
    (When to fold 'em)
    Know when to walk away
    And know when to run

    user-pic
    tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 26 at 15:13
    +/-

    The Thorn's memoirs

    -my years as a gambler in the NBA

    Come on - at least quote the Wyclef version :)

    user-pic
    tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jan 26 at 15:51
    +/-

    Hey, at east I own up to being old.

    Ever eat at Jenny Rogers Roasters (before they closed?)

    user-pic
    tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 26 at 15:52
    +/-

    "east" should read "least"

    Hey who isn't owning up to being old? I do it all the time.

    No - we had a kenny rogers roasters out here for a while - became a dennys - never went

    but i'm constantly fascinated that jack in the box still exists on the west coast

    He shoulda thrown away the hair hat. It's not fooling anyone.

    user-pic
    TruePhan on Jan 27 at 23:04
    +/-

    I'd showcase Lou and Nocioni since they are the only two expensive, overpaid salaries here after this season and trade them for anything but a player who will be here after this season unless it's another Meeks or Brackins kind of thing. Lou's been the problem since last year and Nocioni sure as hell doesn't help matters. They are both severely stunting the development of Thad, Jrue, Meeks, and Turner. You could say the same about Hawes stunting the growth of Brackins and Speights but he's off the books after this season.

    That's 11 million off the cap(not including the expirings) next season. Throw in the expirings and that's 24 million dollars off of the cap after this season. That's of course not after extending Thad but still, that would be huge to move that much useless salary. We'd be at least 10 million under the cap(and probably more) before we extended Thad.


    Expand/Contract all comments

    Leave a comment


    back-to-story.gif