DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

Turner's Gradual Adjustment

It reminds me of Jrue last season. He just got better and better towards the end of the season.

By the time we get to next season we should get a pretty good Evan Turner out there.

I know i'm probably the only one here at Depressed Fan that thinks this, but i am actually much higher on Turner now than i was before the draft. Back then i was extremely worried about his durability, attitude, defensive ability and age as well as the questions how will his game translate because of suspicious athleticism (since he wasn't a good shooter).

Now, however, i get the feeling that he has elite handle for a wing, is a very good passer when given the chance to create, can drive to the basket against NBA defense (is sufficiently athletic) as long as they don't play too much off him. And most importantly i think he has the attitude and hardworking mind set of a winner.

There are really only two missing ingredients for him to be truly successful: shooting and confidence. Shooting isn't really all about three pointers. I am really encouraged with his mid range game and i think he can become an elite mid range shooter both off the ball and off the dribble. And as soon as he becomes that defenders will have to play him close which will open the lanes for his slashing. As for confidence i think it'll take time but he'll get it eventually.

All that being said, i don't really expect all that to happen overnight. He will continue to improve this season, but not really that much. I expect large improvement next season when he will show flashes of ability to dominate games on both ends and especially 2 years from now when i expect some sort of consistency.

The main issue going forward is going to be the chance he will be given to show what he's got. I am worried about Jrue, Turner and Iguodala in the backcourt. Not because they can't coexist (they can), but because they sort of minimize their talents when they are together. All three really need the ball in their hands to be at their best and are basically playmakers (whether is creating shots of the drubble, creating for others...). Now of course that is a luxury to have three guys like that in your lineup, but is not really necessary and it sort of minimizes their ability and especially their trade value.

My reasoning is going forward one of them will have to be traded (probably along with draft picks, other young players and expirings) for a star big who will sort of complete the team. Will Turner be given the chance to show that he belongs here before that is the real question....

I'm also very high on him, and think they can co-exist with each other, but the problem is that we need a big and to get a young, good one, we'll need to trade one of them.
ET really remind me a lot a young Ginobili (playing in Italy), not going to beat you with atletism, but with basketball IQ. If he can develop the middle range shooting he will be fine. Also, you'd think that both Parker and Ginobili need the ball in their hands, but Pop accomplished to manage their touches.

You can find touches for two players, but i'm not sure you can find enough for three players...

And yes i completely agree that in the future one of JTI will have to be packaged with draft picks and other youngsters in order to get a legit big. If that happens i think the Sixers have a chance to be a realistic contender.

I think you can, such as San Antonio Parker, Ginobili and Duncan, but the problem is that Philly needs that big, so it would be JTI + big.
And then, who do you trade? Assuming you cant land this cuality big another way. I trade Iggy, not because "he wont lead to a final" or "he show he can't be a leader" but because one of them would have to go, IMO.

Great post. I'd just like to make an observation about Turner's handle/dribbling. When he dribbles, it's like he pushes the ball a few feet in front of him and then bounds after it, covering enormous ground in a short amount of time. You'd think it would lead to turnovers, but he's got such good control and it's a thing of beauty, especially when he's running the break. He's already one of the best on the team at getting separation off the dribble, penetrating and getting room for a shot. It reminds me of what I've seen of his college days and bodes well for the future.

That's an excellent observation, hadn't thought of that.

A few more key stats from http://www.hoopdata.com/splits.aspx?player=Evan%20Turner

These are monthly splits, but there is a "last 10 game" split that roughly covers the time since Iguodala returned. A surprise is that his "midrange game" has been actually getting worse- but overall he has compensated by taking better shots (at higher percentages.)

Key stats:

1. FG% last 10 games 45.7% up from being about 40% each of the previous 3 months.
-despite shooting worse from 16-23 ft (28%) his overall FG% is up because he has doubled his attempts/game at the rim and tripled his attempts from 10-15 feet.

2. In these same last 10 his FG% at the rim and 10-15 feet have both dramatically improved )80% and 63%) with these increased attempts.

3. His 3pt shooting was terrible his first 18 games as a pro. But since Dec 1st (last 25 games) his 3 pt% is 37%.

4. His FTA/gm have been up and down. Good in November (1 per 10 min), bad in Dec (1 per 20 min) and good again this last month (back to 1/10min.)

---

So overall, his improved scoring efficiency has been due to increasing his attempts and percentage at the rim and 10-15 feet (short game), while dramatically improving his 3pt%. Overall he remains lousy at 16-23ft jumpers ("midrange shots".) Maybe that will be the last part of his game to arrive.

So overall his improved scoring effeciency

user-pic
mgfields on Jan 28 at 9:12
+/-

The thing that cannot be underestimated is Turner's desire. Whatever his ceiling his he will hit and then try to bust through it.

He is already a better defender and rebounder than I thought he would be in the NBA at this point. He turned the ball over a lot at Ohio State, but so far with the Sixers, especially lately, he has that under control. He will only get better.

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to mgfields on Jan 28 at 10:24
+/-

Not too sure he has his turnovers under control as much as Doug isn't giving him the freedom to control the rock, instead playing him at the SF spot way more than he did earlier in the year.

He's scoring more and turning the ball over less. So I don't think this jibes with your take.

If anything, Collins has him picking his spots better.

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to tk76 on Jan 28 at 11:07
+/-

How does it not jibe? You're telling me that if Doug played him more minutes as the backup point that his turnover numbers aren't going to go up? That's normal for anyone who is given primary care of the ball.

Turner is playing more efficiently. If it simply was "Collins taking his freedom away" wouldn't you expect less scoring and less assists (assuming he just stood around did not attack.) To me it seems like he's attacking more, but doing so more smartly.

Since he is scoring more, I don't think his TO's are down because he is less active. I don't think it makes a huge difference whether he plays SF or SG in terms of TO's (it more greatly impacts defense.) But playing PG would lead to both more assists and more TO's.

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to tk76 on Jan 28 at 11:26
+/-

Ok, exactly, which is what I said initially about his turnovers being under control is not of his doing. And your comprehension must be off, as I said 'freedom to control the rock' not 'taking his freedom away'. But you came with some mess about it doesn't 'jibe', then you turn around and admit the same thing in your last sentence above....??

I think I did not understand your first post. I guess you are saying he plays less PG. If this is your point, then I agree. Although his assists are not down.

Even when he was supposedly PG before, it was next to Lou. And in reality, Lou was playing PG.

Turner is handling the ball a lot, and has had a lot of opportunities for turnovers (driving, dribbling around, sometimes taking the ball up the court). He simply hasn't turned it over. Maybe you were watching an Evan Turner in some other league?

Sixers going for fourth straight win:

http://ow.ly/3LVSc

Collins on Turner: "Evan's personality is starting to come out. I see it in the locker room - I see it in the interaction with the guys."

Turner: "I'm just picking my spots. He wants me to be more consistent, instead of hitting home runs."

For more, see story on bench getting Sixers' offense going:

http://ow.ly/3LW1E

I did a bit of research, and it looks like Turner is in good shape to make the Rookie Challenge, and Jrue is a near-lock for the Sophomore team. There are 9 players for each "class"; among rookies, Turner ranks 6th in combined points/rebounds/assists. Here's how I would rank the rookie class in order of making the game:

1.BGriffin, LAC (23/13/3.5, 52/60/62)
2.Wall, WAS (15-4-9, 40/30/79)
3.Cousins, SAC (13/7.5/2, 43/22/66)
4.LFields, NYK (10-7-2, 52/39/77)
5.WesJohnson, MIN (9/3/2, 44/39/67)
6.GNeal, SAS (9/2.5/1, 42/40/83)
7.ETurner, PHI (7/4.5/2, 40/29/80)
8.GMonroe (6.5/6/1, 50/0/56)
9.Favors (6.5/5/0.5, 55/0/61)
10.EDavis (6/6/0.5, 56/0/55)
11.Aminu, LAC (6.5/3.5/1, 42/38/72)
12.Bledsoe, LAC (6/3/2, 38/36/81)
13.GForbes, DEN (5/1.5/0, 46/36/64)
14.PGeorge, IND (7/3/1, 47/31/85, 21 games)

Among the sophomores, Jrue is 1st in assists, 6th in scoring, tied for 7th in rebounding. Here's how I would rank the sophomores, who are guard-heavy:

1.SCurry, GS (19/3.5/6, 47/41/93)
2.TyEvans, SAC (18/5/5.5, 40/29/75)
BrJennings, MIL (18/4/5.5, 39/37/76, 25 games)
3.Holiday (14/4/6.5, 44/35/80)
4.WMatthews (16/3/2, 44/38/84)
5.Ibaka (10/7/0, 57/0/76)
6.DCollison, IND (14/3/4.5, 45/33/89)
7.TGibson, CHI (7.5/6/1, 43/14/68)
8.DeRozan (16/3.5/2, 47/8/79)
9.DBlair (7.5/7/1, 48/0/68)
10.Lawson (11/2/4, 50/36/74)
11.Harden (10/3/2, 41/38/84)
12.Casspi (9/4.5/1, 40/40/72)
13.TDouglas (9/3/2, 39/35/82)
14.RegWilliams (9.5/2.5/1.5, 45/39/75)
15.Meeks (9/1.5/1, 39/39/88)
16.Hansbrough (7/4/0.5, 47/0/81)
17.Budinger (8/3.5/1.5, 42/32/83)
18.MThornton (7.5/3/1, 40/37/79)
19.JHill (6.5/4.5/0.5, 47/0/74)
20.Daye, DET (6.5/3/1, 41/43/77)

So the Sixers look good for getting two players into the Rookie Challenge for the first time since 2005 (Korver-Iguodala) ...

user-pic
tk76 reply to Statman on Jan 28 at 9:59
+/-

Its a good thing Jrue can play SG :)

Starting fives should be:

Rooks

PG: Wall
SG: Fields
SF: Turner or Wes Johnson?
PF: Griffin
C: Monroe

Sophs

PG: Jrue
SG: Curry
SF: Evans/Wes Matthews
PF: Taj Gibson?
C: Ibaka

The rookie vs sophomore game is largely dependent on name recognition and i wouldn't be surprised if one of them won't make it to the game.

The media has created a huge bust vibe around Turner, that may lead to a snub (even though he completely deserves to be there).

As for Jrue, he is still a bit of an unknown around the league. He fully deserves to be in the game (he's a top 3 player in his class IMO), but i'm guessing he will be put in the same conversation as Collison and Lawson for the last guard spot.

Of course Jennings is injured so that bodes well for Jrue :)

I was doing the list in a hurry, Sophs should probably have Blair over Gibson at PF starting, and DeRozan is actually very close to Matthews (and arguably playing better recently). Turner should get significant minutes at backup PG in addition to whatever SF/SG minutes he gets.

Collins had a great quote, said partly in jest: maybe Jrue and Turner will get to guard each other, then the score will be about 160-152.

Turner also could work on his pitch control

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RD_0JCaC7Iw&feature=related

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Jan 28 at 10:20
+/-

Interesting post. I'd be curious to know what the "w/o AI9" numbers would look like if you take the @PHX game out of the equation and also the since AI9 return column without the PHX home game?

It still pains me to think we're possibly becoming hopeful about relative improvement/adjustment in a supposedly NBA ready #2 pick that is *maybe* turning into just an efficient scorer off the bench. Pessimism says, "Damn, that's sad" - Optimism says, "That's all?".

I didn't realize the good games shouldn't count. My bad.

user-pic
mgfields reply to Brian on Jan 28 at 10:35
+/-

Go ahead and take the Detroit game out also.

Hah, at the very least he should have asked to take out the best and the worst games, which is a statistically valid technique. Just removing the best games is cherry picking the (negative) data.

Taking out outliers is a statistically valid technique, taking out the high and low numbers just 'because' isn't valid at all

Somewhat agreed. But Turner's worst games are far bigger outliers than his best games...

Additionally his best games sort of give you an idea of what he can become in the future if he improves in the next few years.

Well until you run the numbers you can't really tell what the outliers are or aren't - you can guess if you wanna look at a stem plot, educated guesses, but until you run the numbers and figure out the deviations, tossing any scores isn't really 'good analysis'

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 28 at 10:56
+/-

You know, his bad games have been statistically much worse than his good ones.

You never cease to amaze, kudos.

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to Shawn on Jan 28 at 11:21
+/-

Well, well, what do you know.....the pseudonym gang was let out of the toddler class for recess.....expected, though. Nothing like trying to have civil convo and end up with fifty hundred replies much ado about nothing but perceived persona of anonymity.

Better yet, the Keyboard Toughy gang (or is that few?)....lol.....you guys are a hoot sometimes. Thanks for contributing to my grinning pleasure.


Back to my pleasant civil nature - the question was posed b/c it's no different than when the rest of you say ..."well, if you take out the Bulls game on the road when the Sixers lost by 45, then....blah, blah, blah" It's the outlier(s), that's all, against one specific opponent that has an atrocious defense and play's a frenetic style.

Now tell me, what's the difference in the outlier examples? (besides the heady's hate)

I just don't get enough opportunities to use that gif. It was in jest.

I agree that the turnover number is one of the most encouraging. For a guy who dribbles as much as he does that's pretty impressive... If the passing lanes are becoming more readable to him, soon the angles to getting to the basket/creating space will follow suit.

For all the Kobe lovers and Anthony haters out there read that "On Kobe in crunch time" article in the reading list. Especially the table that compares all players that have over 30 crunch time shots attempts since 1997.

hint: Anthony and Paul are head and shoulders above the rest over a 13 year span.

user-pic
Joe reply to Xsago on Jan 28 at 11:41
+/-

I like the article.

Just looking at shots is cool and all and has its place.

I prefer the whole picture where one can see who is getting steals, blocks, rebounds, etc. as well. And I think Lebron typically runs away with that one.

Yeah, I feel better about Turner. I guess I can't see him becoming an elite scorer, but he seems like he's going to be a smart and productive player. Whether he makes sense alongside Jrue and Iguodala will, however, be a concern until he gets some range on that really flat jump shot.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Tray on Jan 28 at 13:42
+/-

I feel a bit better in that over the past 6 wks he has been 8 for 20 from 3pts. I feel even better if he comes back next year with an improved jumper.

There certainly are areas where Jrue/Iguodala/Turner complement each other. The are a good combo defensively, rebounding and on the break. Iguodala is the best finisher, Jrue the best ball handler and Turner the best at creating looks for himself off the dribble. If Jrue and Turner develop reliable jumpers then it can work. But certainly there is some redundancy.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 28 at 13:44
+/-

For example, Kidd, VC and RJ had similar redundancy. But as Thorn would say, their talent level allowed them to work it out.

I disagree. Kidd and Carter have similarities with JTI in terms of needing the ball to create but RJ is nothing like any of them.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Xsago on Jan 28 at 14:12
+/-

Really? I see RJ as an athlete/slash. He has a nice jumper, but he is not a "pure shooter." To me he is sort of like Iguodala, just not as good a pass and a bit better shooter.

What separates Iguodala and Turner from other wings is their ability to create for others. They all need to use that ability to maximize their talents IMO. That's what makes them special IMO.

user-pic
Rich reply to Tray on Jan 28 at 13:46
+/-

Collins is going to tell him on his exit interview this year: You were talented enough to start from Day One, but there's one thing that's holding you back, that jumper. Work on the mechanics, work on the touch, and you'll start every game next year. You have to get up around 700 shots a day though and work with a shooting coach.

He's made some more threes recently even with that flat jumper too. All we need to see is progress.

user-pic
TruePhan reply to Tray on Jan 29 at 0:41
+/-

I'm aware of the fact that this is late but I'd like to point out a few things:

1. Turner's jumper isn't flat. Come to think of it, I see that mentioned a lot about this guy or that guy's jumper being "flat" and really it doesn't make any sense. By the time a player gets to the NBA, unless he's a raw player(which Turner clearly isn't), his jumper is already established as how it's going to be. Players like Turner grow up shooting the exact same way from the time they are kids. Maybe they make an adjustment as they grow and get bigger but the kind of player he is is one who has established his game by the time he's in midle school or high school. That's pretty obvious by the way he shoots and the way he dribbles, which is basically the way kids are taught to shoot in middle school and younger. Even his defense is textbook league defense. He'll make a few improvements here and there defensively and he'll add a few wrinkles to his offensive repertoire but he's always going to do things exactly how he was taught. That's the kind of player he is because that's most likely the kind of person he is, one who does everything exactly how he was taught to. He's the one player on the team's core(Thad, Dre, Jrue, Meeks, Speights, Brackins) who isn't going to change at all, because he doesn't have to. You don't tend to see players like him make it past college because usually they tend to be too slow or too small or just not physically able to play at the next level for whatever reason.

Curious question. If Turner turns into a solid NBA starter (I'll go with a guy like Jason Richardson, with a different skill set), are we all reasonably satisfied with the pick?

user-pic
tk76 reply to Rich on Jan 28 at 14:00
+/-

Sort of depends if anyone else taken #3-#7 turns into a superstar.

I'm very satisfied with the pick. Turner to me still looks like a no-brainer. Favors will be good but is not as talented as Turner and thus won't have the long-term impact. Also, he'll develop later and by then might not even be with his first team (whereas Turner will only improve in the next few months and will give us great production next year, in my opinion). Wes Johnson is not looking so hot. Cousins is good but got thrown out of practice as a rookie? No thanks. Nobody picked after Cousins has any ability.

user-pic
Jess Sayan on Jan 28 at 13:58
+/-

I check in here from time to time and wanted to share some thoughts on the team. I been hating on Williams for about three months, but it seems like he's coming around. It's been bandied about the internet that both Lou and Thad should be moved because they have the highest values on the team. Here are my thoughts on this:
Thad should stay. Collins is getting great production out of him. Despite all my Lou Will hate, he is 2nd in bench scoring followed by Thad at third(Thad is top 10 in FG% though). So getting rid of both of them is probably a bad idea. I'd rather give up Lou but I think I'm coming to terms that we won't make any moves this season, or maybe I'm bracing myself for a letdown. I really like how we are performing as a team though. I really don't want to upset it unless for a stud 5(ok, solid 5).

I also believe, given the time, Collins will work the quirks out of our players games. We've already seen the effect on the younger players and Brand. Now it seems like Iggy is falling into place. And I think once Jrue and Turner, especially Turner, are where Collins wants them he'll have a recourse when Lou starts taking those ill-advise half-cocked jumpshots. Right now he can't punish Lou by sitting him because he's still using him to take time away from Jrue and Turner in teaching moments.

I also think thats the case for Speights vs. Hawes. Doug has to be super-rigid with Speights in order to get the most out of him down the line. So when Hawes is effing up and playing small he can't use Speights coming in for him as hiis punishment. This is because Collins is using floor time as the motivator for Speights. And if he's blowing where do you go? Thad has earned the 6th man spot. So...?

I don't think our rotation pattern will remain this way all season. Once certain players become more disciplined I think we will see what Collins really has planned for this roster. I think come playoff time we will be a much better team across the board. And will have a legitimate shot at shocking a big boy squad.

Oh and for the tanker camp, the difference between making the playoffs now and when we did a few years ago: We have a coach teaching our players how to be successful NBA players. Before our guys were just told to go out and play hard. There was no deliberate player development.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Jess Sayan on Jan 28 at 14:08
+/-

I agree that Collins has helped maximize the play of a number of the current players. He certainly seems to be able to put them in spots where they can succeed (except maybe some late game ISO's.)

But after you have finished polishing everyones games, are we left with gems or just a bunch of shiny rocks.

user-pic
Jess Sayan reply to tk76 on Jan 28 at 14:23
+/-

Feels like a waste of a post, but....
We'll see. And finally we should have a clear view.

Question: Can anyone give me a successful PG/SG/SF lineup in which all 3 players were basically playmakers and needed the ball to succeed?

I'm not saying it can't happen (actually i think all great teams are unique in their own way, that's what makes them great) but it's weird that i can't remember of a single similar situation.

So we're still stuck on the premise that a guy like Iguodala can't be 'successful' without the ball?

Sigh

I'm not saying that he can't succeed without the ball at all. On the contrary he can be a very good player without the ball, but his talents won't be maximized that way.

Most quality players talents aren't maximized without the ball in their hands since scoring is impossible without the ball.

I'm tired of the 'he can't succeed' without the ball argument - it's the kind of thing that Iguodala haters use when they point out - well he doesn't get 20 ppg so he must not be very good

It's been assumed (repeatedlY) that the trio can't work without enough minutes together to see if it can actually work. Maybe it will but maybe it won't but yet still don't know. Iguodala can play without the ball very well I believe, but the assumption that he can't continues.

See, I think this is where you have to adjust what you're looking for. It's not about maximizing Iguodala's talents, or Jrue's talents, or Turner's talents. It's about maximizing the team's production. Igoudala can make plays for other people, that doesn't mean he has to be doing that to be a useful player. And it doesn't mean that he's necessarily the best guy to be making plays on the roster. I'm not saying if he is or isn't.

The point here is that Jrue, Iguodala and hopefully Turner all have extremely versatile games. That's the commonality here, that they're all versatile. None of them is one-dimensional. That's an asset. That versatility could/should cover up for a lot of holes in the other spots on the roster, and even in the games of those three guys in particular.

I fully agree that having three versatile players is a huge asset. I also agree that the goal should be maximizing the team's production not their own play. What i am not certain however is whether the team's success will be maximized by keeping all three of them or by trading one of them for a legitimate big man somewhere down the line in the future. Right now i think the latter is more promising.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Xsago on Jan 28 at 15:04
+/-

And that might be true.

But no one wants to trade Jrue.

No one wants to give the Sxiers back a quality young big for Iguodala.

And trading Turner right now likely would be selling low.

So ultimately they might need to move one of them in the next 2 years. But its looking like this year is not the time to make that move. Unless somehow teams decide to start offering someone like Ibaka for Iguodala instead of just expiring contracts or other wings.

There is no hurry. They don't need to make that trade now but at some point in the next 3 years...

user-pic
tk76 reply to Xsago on Jan 28 at 15:14
+/-

I think a lot has to do with how Jrue and Turner develop. If either surprises us and becomes a top 15 NBA type star, then you probably want to shape the supporting cast around them with more one dimensional shooters.

But if both end up good but not great (say Iguodala top 35 NBA level) then it might be that they balance each other. Jrue may never learn to be a true PG- and having Turner might help cover for that. While Jrue's jumper will help cover for Turner and Iguodala. Also, I expect Iguodala will slowly morph into a better complimentary role as Jrue and Turner prove they can run things.

user-pic
bebopdeluxe reply to tk76 on Jan 28 at 16:47
+/-

Great post, tk.

The keys will be 1) Turner becoming a better midrange shooter (he doesn't have to be Ray allen or Rip Hamilton...just NBA SG average); 2) Jrue becoming a 38-40% shooter on open looks from 3; and 3) Turner replacing Lou as our iso closer in the guts of the game.

In this scenario, Iguodala can be the elite "glue guy" that I think many of us believe is his highest value...and more importantly, he will buy into being that guy.

I think all that does is get us to a 50-win, 2nd-round-loss kind of team. We still need at least one impact big (preferably on the defensive side of the ball) to have a shot at being a "final four" kind of team.

I would just be shocked if JTI + this non-superstar impact big turned us into a team with a real shot of winning the Finals. I feel like lots of teams have comparable pieces and go nowhere. What makes Paul/West/Okafor, and the league's 3rd defense, substantially worse than JTI, in their prime, plus a good defensive big? I don't give NO any kind of serious chance.

What teams do have a serious chance, in your mind?

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 28 at 17:59
+/-

Maybe J/T/I and a guy like Duncan in his prime would work.

It can't be a brute force big like Howard because he would need better shooters. But a big who can be dominant within the flow of a good motion offense might be the right fit to contend. A Duncan or CWebb type.

But that is asking a lot, both from the big and J/T/I's development. Either way, if J/T/I are all good players then at last you have assets for trades. Because right now it does not sound like any of them have the right trade value for what they need.

user-pic
Tray reply to tk76 on Jan 28 at 18:14
+/-

Okay, maybe the greatest power forward of all time would work with JTI. Yeah, I definitely agree with that. A somewhat mismatched supporting cast, but certainly enough for Duncan.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Jan 28 at 18:23
+/-

Boston, Miami, San Antonio, certainly the Lakers... and I think Orlando has a really bad chance of coming out of the East but if they did I think they could play with the Western finalist. The Bulls, I think, are offensively way too lousy. As are the Hornets. Basically I think the top 5 teams in point differential have chances, and that #5 has a very slim chance. #6 and #7, Chicago and New Orleans, I give no chance if their rosters stay about the same, as neither team can score. Finally, maybe Denver has a 2% chance. Making the Conference Finals, at least, is pretty conceivable. Second best offense in the league, decent big men when healthy. I don't think OKC goes anywhere until they get another big piece.

user-pic
jsmoove reply to bebopdeluxe on Jan 28 at 17:45
+/-

huh? so if Turner learns how to knock them down consistently, and Jrue's near deadly from deep, and Turner also takes all the important end of quarter and end of game shots, then we morph into a 50 win team with 2nd round capabilities?

wake up from the dream you're in, those aren't likely to happen. if they do- then what have you really accomplished if you're playing near .500 teams in the weak Eastern Conference playoffs?

That's right. I'll try to bring some supporting cast now, if avaliable. Like trading expiring for some big, hopefully no that expensive, and maybe look for a vet pg who can shoot the 3. What's up with Jason Williams?

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Jan 28 at 16:44
+/-

Well in order to maximize a team's production... wouldn't you want to maximize its individual players' production? You know, compose a team of players who don't have to scale their games back a lot? That's why great teams tend to be combinations of very good guards and very good big men, rather than trios of wings or post scoring duos.

The closest thing i can think of is actually what the Heat have this year with James/Wade/Miller. They haven't really played them together for significant stretches and Miller is not at the JTI level and can succeed as a catch and shoot three point specialist.

user-pic
Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 28 at 16:47
+/-

And even there there's a sense that James and Wade are holding each other back a bit, and that you're not really getting James + Wade so much as you're getting 80% James + 80% Wade, or worse yet, this system where they just take turns scoring the ball and there's no real synergy created by having both of them on the court.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Xsago on Jan 28 at 14:27
+/-

Magic-Norm Nixon-Jamaal Wilkes

Kidd-JET-Josh Howard

Fazier-Monroe-Bradley

MJ-Harper-Pippen

KJ-Hornecek-Ceballos (Ced was a slash, so needed the ball to succeed.)

Stockton-Hornecek-Russell were similar.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 28 at 14:32
+/-

Havlocek, Bryant, Siegfried :)

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 28 at 14:35
+/-

Payton-McMillan-Schremf
Kobe-Fisher-Ariza

Nice, great info. Im glad I came across this site..keep up the good work. http://tinyurl.com/4kjk5tf


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif