DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

Indy Never Had a Chance

Here's video of Jrue's block on McRoberts, which was maybe the defensive play of the year for the Sixers. Watch this a couple times:


Just fyi, Jodie Meeks leads the NBA in fourth quarter free throw percentage at 97.6 percent.

(Saw this as a stat-box as I watched the last few seconds of Houston-Phoenix tonight. Obviously was to show Steve Nash's "clutchness" in the fourth before he missed one and allowed the Rockets to cover the spread by one! whooo)

I'm going to disagree on Thad for POTG. He was great (#1A if you like) but he also contributed to Hansbrough's career high. Iguodala excelled on both ends of the floor, started the game shooting confidently (which was important), and shut down the Pacers' leading scorer (I'm sure getting outscored 27-1 by Granger the last time didn't sit well with Iguodala). That's 127 assists and 34 turnovers in 16 games for Iguodala at PF, where the Sixers are 12-4. And the Pacers are a top-12 defensive team this year (though they haven't been recently).

Other thoughts:
* For a long period of time in the 4th quarter, Granger wasn't even looking for his shot and seemed to want no part of going at Iguodala. This is one aspect of defense that can't be captured that well, reducing the shot attempts of an opposing player (although, since PER is correlated somewhat with shot frequency, opponent PER does capture this effect to some degree).
* I'm really looking forward to seeing what Iguodala can do vs. Durant. Tony Allen "held" Durant to 23 points on 8-20 shooting (but 4 three's) on Monday.
* As I said earlier this week, it wouldn't surprise me at all if the Sixers caught the Hawks, who really are not a deep team. The #5 seed is closer than anyone could have imagined back in December, and this scenario is exactly why the Sixers were not foolish to play to win back in December and January, contrary to those who confidently asserted the Sixers had zero chance of winning a first-round playoff series.
* While Thad struggled to defend Hansbrough, he made a number of great hustle plays. Typical of his night was the sequence at the end of the first half, where Thad rebounded Lou's blocked three-pointer, passed the ball back to Lou (open from 6 feet), then was in position to tip in Lou's missed lay-up (Speights got there first). This kind of play makes me think twice about what the right number is to pay Thad. I also wonder if he would take a small discount to stay with Collins.
* Other than the turnovers, Jrue had a solid game. I thought he did well defensively on Collison, and his steal when the Pacers were down 7 late in the 4th was key. He also had some excellent drives for scores. I do think Jrue needs to figure out when to pass the ball to someone else late in games when he's double-teamed, because I'm sure the book on him is that he'll often try to dribble through it.

Big game tomorrow night, should be fun ...

Yeah, it was a tough call. I had to go with Thad because I think he made five or six plays just like that one you just described. Another one that stands out was when he was on the floor diving after an offensive board with the team up by 20 in the third quarter. I'm a sucker for stuff like that.

And I'm also inching dangerously close to just re-sign him territory.

I'm in that territory. How can you let Thad go? He's an integral part of the team. He's a 22-year old super-talented big man. There's no way we could get that on the free agent market, so what good is any cap space saved by not re-signing him? The cap space will be used for a less-talented, older player. Gots to keep Thaddeus.

tk76 reply to stoned81 on Mar 9 at 10:00

Yeah, I've been 100% on board with re-signing Thad since day 1. He will be signed under the new CBA. It will hurt to have to give him a big number, but he's the type of player who will continue to work on his game. He does not strike me as a guty playing for a contract.

Barring injury, he'll be easy to trade if needed throughout his next contract, since I don't think his value will go down. Even 4 years from now he will be 26 and in his prime. I don't think he will be thrown offers based on "potential" as much as the damage he can already do. And any improvement will be gravy.

Not for 11 million dollars.

Not for a guy who has his best year when he's in the contract drive after TWO down seasons following a good rookie campaign (even if you 'dismiss' the jordan year, he was bad his second year)

Not for a guy shooting obscenely high 'at the rim' (at the top of the league) that he might not be able to continue/maintain for his career

Not for a guy with that 'shot' when he's not driving to the basket.

He's not worth the money he asked for before he had a good season.

If the new CBA makes it reasonable to sign him or his agent gets reasonable fine, but 5 years, 11 million, no f'in way

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 10:11

I'd be surprised if any rookies make 11M per under the new CBA.

But as for your other points, I just disagree. He is a kid who is just now fully tapping into his incredible athletic potential (his pre-draft measurements where insanely good.) He was over-rated as a rookie because he really only made hustle plays and hand almost zero skill in terms of dribbling, shooting and post moves (he only shot left hooks in the post.)

His 2nd season he tried to add to his game, and was dominant the last 20+ games of the season. In that stretch before his ankle injury he averaged 20+pts/5+reb on 55% FG% and 37% 3pt% leading the team on a big run to secure a playoff spot. He really looked ready to take off, getting an invuite that summer with the National Team.

Then last season was an absolute disaster. Sure Thad has to take some of the blame for that- but he equally gets credit for getting back on track this year. And if the consistent reports about his character/personality are correct, then he will not let up when he gets paid.

zami reply to Statman on Mar 9 at 1:18

"I also wonder if he would take a small discount to stay with Collins."

This made we wonder how much a player like Thad (unlike Lebron or Melo for example) has a say about such money related issues. Will his agent “let” him give 5 or 10 mil just to play under Collins? Who makes the decision where to sign?

Well, I mean no agent wants his guy to take less money, but the agent doesn't make the decision. If he tries to stop you, you fire him.

zami reply to Brian on Mar 9 at 1:32

Even when you’re a 23 years old kid?

I don’t say you’re wrong, I really have no clue about how these things work. Still, with so much money involved everything gets more complicated, and I have no idea to what extend the players are involved with the negotiations.

Thad does whatever he wants and it's the agents job to get thad what he wants.

If Thad gives the agent the control and says 'just get me the most money' - I don't want him here anyway because that lends credence (to me) that all this effort is just about maximizing his contract value

Almost every player tells his agent to get him the most money. If he weren't worried about money and was only interested in staying with the Sixers, he wouldn't need an agent. Not a reflection of his character imo.

tk76 reply to stoned81 on Mar 9 at 11:03

Some players say "I want to re-sign" but make sure they pay me as close to market value as possible. This is what happens when QB's re-sign with teams.

I feel what you just said is completely and totally wrong.

A. Contracts are complicated, most basketball players haven't been to law school, so you probably want someone who understands contracts to read them and make sure you aren't being screwed.

B. Lebron Wade and Bosh all wanted to go to the same place, for less money, and yet they needed agents.

I understand people think it's all about greed (and then when guys DO take less money they make it about something else just because they want to hate on certain players), but it's slightly more complicated than that. An agents job is to do the best for his client, and the client should decide what's best for him.

Thaddeus Young is a bench player having a good season in his contract drive year, and this has happened before the numerous teams who then regret signing the contract extension and yet for some reason 'this time' it's different.

A guy with no jump shot and weak defense who doesn't have a position and only excels when a team 'goes small' really isn't a long term investment I want a team to make that I root for when you have limited assets and bigger problems.

Going Small won't beat the Lakers, it won't beat the spurs, or the mavericks (or the god damn grizzlies). It won't win a title, it might not even win the east.

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 11:22

Looking back a 23 year old FA's who come off a really good season and don't have red flags... How many end up having negative trade values after they sign?

Players age 23-26 with talent enough to get a big deal are almost always trade-able. The closest I can think of is Bobby Simmons, who was signed for 8M at age 25 coming off a promising season and ended up a bum with a terrible contract.

How many end up having negative trade values after they sign?

Actually, this part of your argument is the part I dislike the most. Let's sign him long term, cause if he doesn't pan out, they can still trade him.

Worked out for Sam right? How long did it take to trade him, and he was actually excellent at two things (and weak at a bunch else)

Like Jrue and Dre shutting it down tonight; let's hope that can limit the highest scoring duo in the NBA tomorrow.

I have been moved to the "try your best to re-sign Thad" camp. Its pretty rare to have a player who on any night can give you points as a clean-up opportunistic scorer or as an isolation go-to guy.
Plus he's not getting lost on pick and rolls and rotating beautifully.

For the first time in a while, I am very excited for this Sixers team. And I am positive tomorrow's game will be no letdown, because apparently we're not that kinda team anymore. who would have thought?

Iguodala gets dunk of the night on ESPN and Jrue's block of McRoberts is the #2 play of the night.

Those were from NBA 2night, or whatever their NBA show is called.

Then on the lead-in to sportscenter, 2 separate shots of Iguodala from tonight's game in the intro montage. The first was the bicep flex he did after that three-point play, the other was the sick drive/dunk where he left Granger out at the three-point line with his dick in his hands.

johnrosz reply to Brian on Mar 9 at 1:29

think a signature win tomorrow or friday finally gets them some more national attention?

I've been in the resign Young for a very long time and it would be a disaster if we won't re-sign him. Right now he represents the identity of the Sixers more than anyone and is only going to get better he is just 22.

Also he is not completely responsible for Hansbroughs big night. I saw Hawes defending him on a number of possessions (why is another question). Anyway Hansbrough has been playing well for a while now...

Young for a very long time and it would be a disaster if we won't re-sign him. Right now he represents the identity of the Sixers more than anyone and is only going to get better he is just 22.

No - Iguodala has represented the identity of the sixers (good and bad) for a few years now.

No it wouldn't be a disaster not to re-sign him, and that's when you end up giving guys bad contracts.

Great win!!! Great post!!! One thing I haven't heard much about is the fact that this team seems to be one of the most "professional" teams I can remember in the NBA. A) There is never any drama from their locker room or the street. B) they always say the right thing to the media. C) They seems to stay above the playground antics on the court. For instance, Hansborough and D. Jones were looking to get a rise out of a few of our guys all night and all we did is continue to execute like true professions! This is the most likable group of individuals I've seen on one team in a very long time.

It seems as though ownership has two main goals with the current/future Sixers; don't spend too much and get only high character guys in here. My ten year old daughter actually got me thinking about this. She pointed out that the Sixers most have the least tattoos per team in the NBA. I personally don't mind the ink, but it is rare to see so many guys on an NBA team without any visible tats! My daughter also pointed out the fact that while most other teams spend a lot of time arguing calls with the refs, the Sixers let Doug do the talking.

These are just some observations from a 10 year old, but they speak volumes for how this team is constructed and what the future looks like for Philly hoops!

You've got a smart daughter Timx :). Those are some great observations.

The problem of course is that good character does not equal championship. Professionalism however, goes a long way towards the goal and they are on the right track while being extremely young. It is very rare to see this kind of attitude from such a young group. Collins as well as Brand and Iguodala must get some credit for this.

bebopdeluxe on Mar 9 at 9:09

I really think that - to make this recent stretch of good basketball REALLY mean something (both within the locker room as well as to outside observers) - they need to win one of the next two games. Period.

No "good efforts". No "we were right there".


bebopdeluxe reply to bebopdeluxe on Mar 9 at 9:16

What I meant to say was "at LEAST one of the next two games"...


Tom Moore on Mar 9 at 9:10

Sixers hoping to steal Oklahoma City's Thunder:


Yes, the 5 seed is awesome cause then they can still lose to the Heat or the Magic

A weak east does not make the sixers a better team

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 10:22

I'd say getting to the 5 seed would confirm the Sixers have more talent then we thought they had. Because to get the #5 seed they will need to probably continue their 75% winning down the stretch (against some good teams.) Personally, I don't think they will be able to get to the 46 wins they oprobably will need to overtake NY and ATL.

If ATL goes 9W9L down the stretch they finish with 46 wins. They have 10- tough games and 8 easy ones.

If the Sixers get 46 it would mean they closed out the year 29-8. Which I don't think they are capable of. But if they pull it off I will have to re-assess how good the players really are. And when you are talking such a young group, we are still not 100% sure about how good these guys are.

Yes a very young group, except at, you know, power forward, which is a strong position for them this year, they have no young power forwards of any note (Brackins can't even get into games) and they still start a scrub center, and a scrube shooting guard.

How will a cost conscious team sign a bench player (cause that's what Thad is) to the long term contract everyone seems to want the scoring machine to be signed to and add to the numerous gaping holes in their roster when there's less money allowed to be spent before paying a luxury tax (or even worse, under a hard cap)

There isn't enough talent on the roster now to contend and one of the best players is likely about to start the downslope of his career.

If they get the 5 seed, yippee, they got the five seed, because the hawks tanked and the knicks made a dumb trade. Still doesn't mean they're more talented than they actually are.

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 10:30

I agree that big picture the team has major issues- and are not a contender.

But if they end up playing 65% ball for nearly 70 games you'd have to say they must have some serious talent. Because that can't be a "streak" or smoke and mirrors. And if the league takes notice, then all of the sudden you can get serious value in trades and reshape the roster a whole lot easier than how things stood entering the year- where asside from Jrue no one had any trade value.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Mar 9 at 10:31

By league I mean other GM's. The ESPN thing is irrelevant when making trades (unless you are talking a high profile name that puts fans in the seats.)

I still think this years performance is over valued because of last years. Aren't you the one who pulled out the numbers to show similar 'good streaks' of a substantial amount of games in the 07/08 and 08/09 seasons?

Sixers had a great february, beating up on sub 500 teams. So far this march they are 3-1, 3 against sub 500 teams 1 against a good team (in a winnable game they couldn't win, showing how far they really have to go in my opinion)

If there's a GM out there blinded by Thad this year who wants to give him 5 years 50 million (or whatever), work out a sign & trade and get better assets than giving a bench guy 10 mil per year.

Do not repeat the Dalembert mistake

"1 against a good team (in a winnable game they couldn't win, showing how far they really have to go in my opinion)"

Dallas is 20-3 in their last 23 games. I love how losing to them is this great sign of how bad the Sixers are.

That's not what I said. They had a winnable game at home against a good team and they made bad mistakes (like those missed free throws) that could have kept them in the game. I said it showed how far they had to go. I didn't say it made them a bad team, it just indicates they aren't a great team yet, they're a mediocre team, and they've been a mediocre team all season, when they were 3-13 to start or 12-3 in february.

All games count, all games go into determining whether they're good bad or mediocre. They could have won the Dallas game but didn't execute at the end of the game. The very next game against a craptacular team - in a close game - they did execute at the end of the game.

I didn't say they were bad, I said they were mediocre, and I've said they were mediocre all damn season.

Losses are just as (if not more) instructive than wins

Don't you ever get tired of arguing how bad or mediocre or doomed this franchise is? I mean, there's seriously nothing they can do to get you to say one positive word about them.

If they do somehow get the #5 seed, it'll be because of bad things other teams have done, nothing positive on the sixers side. If they get the #5 seed and beat Orlando in the first round, it'll be because Orlando traded for Gilbert, not because of anything positive the Sixers did. It just gets so old at some point.

The Dallas loss was so fucking meaningful. But beating San Antonio was meaningless.

tk76 reply to Brian on Mar 9 at 11:02

If you have a chance to win in most of your losses then with some improvement those "close losses" can turn to wins. Don't people look to baseball teams that lose close one year as ones that might surprise you by winning a lot the next?

If they are being consistently outclassed in their losses to quality teams then it is a different story. So yes, the losses tell you a lot about a team.

Also, the team has been winning the types of games that were losses 2-3 months ago.

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 10:59

But if you consistently beat team you should, and occasionally beat "good teams" then you are a 50 win team.

How many "good teams" has Miami beaten this year? How many have the Laker beaten? And yet both are on track for 55-60 wins by mostly beating up on teams they should.

Also, how many games have the Sixers been beaten soundly this year? Less than 5?

How are the Heat and the Lakers in the same class.

The Lakers are probably going to the finals, the heat might not get out of the first round depending on who they match up with and they're imploding.

Well the Heat have superstars and according to most of the posters here that's all a championship team needs. the Lakers have superstars too.

The Heat situation is a perfect example that having good players is only half of the equation. The system and the chemistry between the players is the other, possibly more important half. And by chemistry first and foremost i mean how well they fit on the court. The Sixers have had huge "fit" problems in the past too and still do, although to a lesser extent now.

Sweeping Generalizations are kind of foolish. "Most" of the posters here agree on very little. I don't think anyone said that's all you need, but if you need to warp what people said to make your point fine.

The Lakers and Heat are not in the same class for a variety of reasons...

BTW, after their 3 'super stars', the heat don't have many good players and they've been missing one of the few 'other' good players for a while now (most people have forgotten Udonis Haslem)

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 11:28

I was responding to your statement that despite the Sixers winning games:

"Losses are just as (if not more) instructive than wins."

I'm pointing out that some very good teams have struggled against the other "good teams" and yet win a ton by taking care of business. I think beating team's you are supposed to is extremely important if you ever want to be a "good team" that rises above mediocrity. In fact, during the regular season it is probably the most important thing.

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 10:48

That's why I prefaced by saying I doubt they finish as strong as they have been recently. I think playing 60% (50 win/82) ball for a 1/2 a season is one thing.

But if they win 46 games that would mean playing 65% ball for 66 games (53+ wins/82) and 29-11(miscounted before) to close the season on a 73% run for their last 40 games. That is beyond a "streak" IMO.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Mar 9 at 10:53

Basically, I think 66 games is a big enough sample size- especially when the last 40 of which they win 73%. If they really can do that I think they are a legit 50 win team next year (which would be a step down from how they have played the last 3/4 of a season.) And if they are a 50 win team with 8 rotation guys 24 and under, I think they are"

1. Only 1 superstar from being a contender.
2. Have the assets in terms of redundant young pieces and future picks to potential trade for a superstar.

Again, I need to see them close out this season at least 13-6 to warrant such praise. It does not apply if they cannot continue what they have started these last 47 games. If not then they are probably still "2 stars away" which is not a good place to be.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Mar 9 at 10:55

I say this knowing the team has flaws- because all of the contenders in the NBA have flaws.

So its up to the Sixers to prove that this past 47 games is more than a streak. They have to finish strong.

bebopdeluxe reply to tk76 on Mar 9 at 11:49

Which is why is not simply good enough to play well these next two games...they need to win at least one of them - because that is what good teams do...beat other good teams on their home court.

Simply put, i disagree.

1. They have a PF. He's name is Thadeus Young. I don't understand why Young can't be a starter. His only real weakness is rebounding, and Jrue, Turner and Iguodala can more than make up for his lack of rebounding. And if you pair him with a legit C that can rebound at a high rate there will be absolutely no reason to worry about that. Even with Hawes at C they are an above average rebounding team. They are actually 7th in defensive rebound rate.

Defensively Young has improved tremendously this year and i think he is officially underrated in that department right now, because he was bad for a long time. And his frame allows him to add even more bulk which will help him battling the bigger PFs (whose number is shrinking by the day).

And additionally he can play SF equally well, just not on this team, because he needs shooters at both the PG and SG spots to be able to play SF.

2. Why do you keep assuming that all of those young guys can't get better? They all will, the question is by how much and that will be determined by their work ethic first and foremost. And how do you quantify their talent? The facts are that after establishing a rotation and getting used to the new coach the team is 30 - 17 over the last 47 games, while having one of the youngest rotations in the league. Take the Thunder for comparison. They've only made the playoffs once (and lost in the first round) and are 29-18 over the same stretch. What makes them a legit contender and the Sixers mediocre? The fact that Durant and Westbrook can score 30 each in a given game? That's shortsighted.

And i absolutely love the Thunder btw...

Lol so many comments since i started writing the post :).

His only real weakness is rebounding?

Sure, why should that be a problem for your starting power forward huh.

Thaddeus Young is a tweener, he has no position. He's going to get killed by real power forwards in a defensive match up. His wing span is 6'11.5 (elton brands is 7.5'5).

Thads wing span is only a half inch more than Iguodalas. Do you think Iguodala should defend starting power forwards in the NBA.

He's not a power forward, though I'm sorry when you have no center and you say your power forwards only weakness is rebounding is like saying lou williams only weakness as a starting point guard is passing

Not having a legit C now, doesn't mean they won't have one in the future. Assume for a second that you have a C that can rebound as well as Dalambert at the C spot. Do you still think the team will struggle in the rebounding department? And by the way they are playing Young at PF for 2/3 of the game right now and are an above average rebounding team in spite of that. He doesn't have to outrebound the opposing PF. The team as a whole need to outrebound the opposing team.

So now we're making up hypotheticals that the sixers will somehow get better at center and that makes it ok to start a woefully undersized powerforward.

Elton Brand is an undersized powerforward, with a great wing span. Thad is shorter than him, has a wing span only half an inch longer than Iguodalas, and his body isn't exactly immovable. Brand is a petty big boy.

This is ignoring the fact that thad only has one move - to the basket- and teams will learn how to stop him - and force him to shoot from beyond 5 feet (from which he's not very good). His basketball IQ is low.

I don't see any cogent argument that says Thaddeus Young is a starting power forward on an NBA contending team that doesn't involve having one of the best all time at both center and at least one other position to cover up the numerous weakness and defeiciencies he has that makes him NOT a power forward.

Seriously, if Thad is a starting power forward, than Lou Williams is a starting point guard and willie green is a starting shooting guard on a contending team.

You lost me at comparing Thad with Green...

Is his BB IQ as low as we used to think it is? I've heard a ton of great BB IQ related comments from him all year long and he's played smart basketball for a long time now.

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 11:48

You are right in the fact that Thad is not a good defensive PF... but wrong in your reasoning. Thad's wingspan is fine.


Average standing reach for a PF is 6'10.6"

Thad measured out as 6'10 (prior to turning 19, so it could be better now.)

Some PF's with within 1/2" or less standing reach:


All of those guys are legit PF's. Mostl;y because they are bulkier and more aggressive on the boards. Thad also has better no-step verticals than all of thses guys by at least 2" (even Blake Griffin.)

Thad's no step vertical reach was equal or higher than Horford, Bosh, Lopez, Whiteside, Love, Noah, Amare, Bogut, Kaman, Griffin...

So his length is fine. His no step vertical gets him as high or higher than just about anyone in the league asides from Dwight, Oden and Favors. He has the raw athletasism to play the post.

But Thad does not have the defensive instincts to ever be an above average rebounder, defender or shot blocker. But I do think he will continue to bulk up to where size/length is hardly an issue. But you do have to put an intimidator next to him at center.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Mar 9 at 11:50

Sorry about the typo, meant 8'10. The rest of the stats are all correct.

Iguodala standing reach 8'9.5
Elton Brand standing reach 9'2

Iguodala has freakish arms?

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 12:02

Brand has the longest arms for a guy his height... just aboutever.

So what is your point? Iguodala's reach and wingspan are about typical for an NBA PF but he is only 6'6. Brand's reach and wingspan are more typical of a 7 footer but he is only 6'9.

Iguodala is better than Thaddeus Young, at pretty much everything, by a long shot.

The sixers would be better starting Iguodala at PF than Thaddeus Young.

That's my point.

Young isn't a starting power forward on a team that wants to win a title...

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 12:10

Defensively Iguodala could probably play PF. He is another athletic freak and has great defensive instincts- even in the post.

But on the offensive end Iguodala can't come anywhere clsoe to what Thad can do (at 22) in post and 16 foot iso setting. Nor does Iguodala have Thad's touch, balance or ability around the basket.

they are 2 elite athletes with very different strengths and weaknesses. At SF/PF they complement each other tremendously well.

At SF/PF yes, at SG/SF no. That's why they couldn't play together in the past.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Mar 9 at 12:07

Physically, I see Thad as growing into Lebron size/athleticism- which is pretty rarified air. Lebron could easily play PF put has PG skills/handle.

Thad clearly will never have Lebron's skill set. But if he can carry another 15-20 lbs of muscle without slowing much he will have a similar level of freakish athletic dominance matched with other slower post players. And Thad has already displayed the skills/balance/touch to take advantage of it.

Sorry, can't take you seriously any more on the thad debate if you even bring lebron into the picture.

Basketball IQ alone, Lebron bitch slaps Thad.

Court_visioN reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 12:41

the only comparison tk76 btwn Thad and LeBron was the size and athleticism... where does bball IQ factor into this?? Come on man, now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing! =P

ANd you're just butting your nose in for the sake of butting your nose in?

Lebron James is one of the most chiseled athletes in the NBA - he could line up in the NFL at tight end.

To think that Thad could come CLOSE to that is ridiculous and beyond silly. It removes all credibility.

Lebron is bigger than Iguodala and I haven't seen much from thad that indicates building muscle is something he cares about.

And it might not be a good idea either as the one true strength in his game is his speed in getting to the basket. He has no touch from outside, he has no post up game. So if he gets bigger, maybe he loses that speed and is just worse than he is now

Court_visioN reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 14:59

what can i say, i'm nosy.

Lebron is bigger than Iguodala and I haven't seen much from thad that indicates building muscle is something he cares about

I have.

Interesting, thanks for that, I hadn't noticed it the way it's noticeable with Andre.

I think that has to do w/ the frame argument TK was making. Iguodala's muscles kind of look overdeveloped on his frame, Thad's got a wide frame that's just sort of filling out each year w/ more muscle. LeBron has that frame, but it's overdeveloped like Iguodala's.

I don't think Thad's ever going to get to LeBron's level, but he does still have room to grow and we could be talking about like 250-260 lbs w/out losing his quickness, which would be pretty unstoppable.

Yes, the 5 seed is awesome cause then they can still lose to the Heat or the Magic

As I recall, you were at the forefront of the "trade Iguodala/blow it up/build around Jrue" movement in December (correct me if I'm wrong). This argument was built around the notion that the Sixers had zero chance of winning a playoff series against the Celtics/Bulls/Heat. So now the Sixers have a realistic shot at the #5 seed and the Magic in the first round. While the Magic would still be favored in such a matchup, I would give the Sixers at least a 45% shot at winning that series. Is that still a worthless proposition?

I have always been at the forefront of player development is more important than wins or losses, have for the last two seasons. If you can get good value for Iguodala then yes you trade him.

I care about winning the eastern conference, I don't give a shit about losing in the first round of the playoffs. I comprehend that a step back may be necessary to take two steps forward, especially with restrictive ownership and questionable contracts.

I said trade Iguodala if you could get value for him I didn't say dispose of him (I also started saying trade Iverson in 2002 and was told that's a bad idea as well, thank god the sixers held on for him so long right?)

First round playoff losses is the TOP of this roster as currently constructed. I've said that for a couple years now, and see nothing that tells me otherwise

2002 is a good example. In 02-03, the Sixers went 48-34 and were 2 games out of the #1 seed in the East. They won a round and came close to winning another round, losing to the team that eventually made the Finals. Given the way the 02-03 season played out, would you still have traded Iverson in 2002?

Finals or bust is an iffy proposition, makes one perpetually unhappy ...

Building towards something is not the same as finals or bust - and I'm not sure who you think is unhappy - but then again - who cares.

I might have the timing off.

The moment Larry Brown jumped ship, the sixers should have traded Allen Iverson, I said it then and it panned out pretty darn like they should have.

Instead they held on to him way too long to placate a mostly uninterested fanbase. Iverson was an attendance draw for a couple more years, sure, but the sixers just wasted time in rebuilding and reloading.

The sixers are a poorly run franchise in my estimation which starts with an ownership owned by a corporation answerable to stockholders as opposed to an individual answerable only to his own desire to win.

The sixers made a series of disastorous moves in an attempt to 'recapture' the Iverson magic, and by the time they traded him they got pennies on the dollar compared to what they could have if they had smart basketball people running the organization as opposed to Billy King (who also should have been fired the moment the rat left)

I didn't mean to say you are perpetually unhappy as a person, but I think it's fair to say that you are perpetually unhappy with the Sixers (gauging solely by the ratio of negative-to-positive comments about the team). If that's wrong, then pardon the misinterpretation.

Larry Brown left after the aforementioned 02-03 season. If you were advocating that Iverson should be traded right after a season where the Sixers were literally one or two plays away from the Eastern Conference Finals, then you were more prescient than most. It would have been like timing the top of the market perfectly.

Per usual, the ability of someone to deteremine my emotional state fails.

I'm not unhappy with the sixers, I just am not doing a jig about a team I think tops out (long term) at a first round playoff loss and an ownership seemingly more worried about the profit and loss than wins and losses, and then there are folk who think that it's vital to sign a tweener who is a bench player like it's life or death to the future of the sixers.

Don't confuse vehement disagreement with what I think are foolish ideas as unhappiness. My posting style hardly ever reflects my mood ;)

Tom Moore on Mar 9 at 11:34

Sixers have available roster spot and aren't likely to use it on a big man soon:


So I'm still wondering about this Kapono buy out thing as he wasn't even active last night

Wow, lots of debate after a nice win...

Thad Young- It's simple...Let's see how he does in the playoffs. Somebody mentioned that his trade value will be higher this summer. It's basically a no-brainer to lock up young talent, so even if he may not be what we need to win a championship, letting him walk would be foolish if he emerges in the playoffs- someone might just give up a strong defensive center for a guy like him.

Let's see how he does in the playoffs.

I hope you judge whether or not a guy should get an extension based on more than 5 or 6 games Mr King.

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 11:53

Thad and Sam are similar in that both had a ton of raw talent at the time of their extension. But their personalities and approach to basketball were 180 degrees different. Everyone knew Sam did not care to work on his game. While multiple front office types have said Thad has the best intangibles they have ever seen.

I know that.. I think we all know that. But his trade value can skyrocket in the playoffs or it can be revealed that he is a true tweener. If he can rebound consistently in that atmosphere, teams will take notice.

I'm with you on signing him being a risk, he most likely doesn't fit a championship team... but it would be a bad idea to let a guy with high value walk.

There's just a lot contingent on the new CBA. I get that there are still GM's overly impressed by a 5-6 games (see draft lottery picks who skyrocket due to good march madeness games), but in a sign and trade the sixers will have to take salary back, depending on the team, and the new CBA.

Not saying Thad isn't a good piece, he's a fine bench player and should be paid as such, but I don't think he's a 'absolutely have to sign' type player that many seem to think he is.

Especially if the cap is going down - hard cap coming.

Yeah I agree, think we need to wait as well to see what the new rules are going to be with the cap before the team says we have to have Thad back no matter what. If it's a hard cap, then the Sixers are going to have to make sure they have enough room budgeted in the next couple years to bring in a legit center. Can't just rely on the draft to get a new one, and I think a true big man is more important than resigning Thad. As good as he's been it would be great to have both but might not be possible, gotta be smart about the money.

tk76 reply to Chunky Soup on Mar 9 at 12:20

You keep your valuable assets and plan on making a trade for a center. The team has enough redundant young pieces to where they can make a move for a center when the right one hits the market.

You don't over pay your 'valuable' assets (probably you are referring to Thad as such) at which point they lose value (again sam Dalembert and his contract come to mind)

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 12:28

And again, Sam's value on;y plummeted because he was a tool. And this was known before his extension.

Had Sam actually cared about being a good player he would have been a valuable asset- both for the team and in the trade market throughout his contract.

Yeah sure I agree with you if there are exceptions where you can go over the number to resign your own players like the rules say currently. But if they change them to the point where you can only go to a certain number no matter what, then each team that's near the cap will have to make decisions on which player to keep and which to let go, and the Sixers would have to fit any center they trade for under the cap cause I'm assuming he ain't gonna come cheap. :)

Continuing the Thad debate...

The whole thing about "tweeners" is that they are a limitation when they are average, but can be an asset if they become great.

Barkley and AI were both tweeners. Sure I'd rather have had purer positional players like Duncan and Kobe, but that does not diminish how good those guys were in there prime. If you are dominant and don't fit a natural position then you end up winning a mismatch every night.

Now Thad is not and will never be at that level. I was using an extreme example. But Thad is approaching the point where he wins his match-up both against the opponents bench and starter on most nights. And if that is the case in his prime then his "tweener" status is not hurting the team. In fact it is creating a winning match-up you can go to every game- and will throw the opponent off their game.

That's more or less my reasoning too. And even more important is how a "tweener" fits within the team. And if the Sixers can acquire a legit C in the next 2-3 seasons (which i think they can, because they have plenty of assets) Thads' strengths will suddenly be maximized and weaknesses minimized. And by a legit C i mean a guy in the Okafor/Gortat/Varejao range, not a superstar C.

What 'plenty of assets' do the sixers have to obtain one of the hardest things to find in the NBA?

I'm curios to see what you think makes up plenty of assets that you'd actually trade away to get a 'quality' center that you think other teams would take on.

Is it Speights and his lack of focus, or lou williams weak contract and inability to pass?

I don't think there are any untouchables in the team. All of the 9 man rotation are assets (some more than others). They can all be packaged in a variety of ways along with draft picks to get a C and/or a superstar.

And besides you can get a good C sometimes just by willing to take a big contract. For example if Paul leaves New Orleans, the Hornets would probably give up Okafor for expirings only let alone, actual talent.

tk76 reply to Xsago on Mar 9 at 13:00

Exactly. And someone like Bogut could also become available for similar reasons. Bogut is a quality (underrated) defender.

So now we're just going to throw random names out there that the sixers possibly could get if teams give up and the sixers are willing to take on massive bloated contracts to justify Thaddeus Young as a starting power forward?

That's beneath you dude.

This is not about random names. And we need a guy like that no matter who our starting PF is. Things change fast in the NBA. We can't just look at the roster right now and say these are the guys who will be on the team in 3-4-5 years when the team realistically will be ready to contend. Which is why you make you moves according to a "big picture" plan targeting conceptual ideas sometimes represented by "names".

The whole point is you need developing high wuality young talent to make trades that will round up your roster. The Sixers have that IMO already and there is no legitimate reason to tank.

And what makes you think the sixers are willing to take on long term salaries for expiring contracts?

You're making a lot of presumptions based on extremely hypothetical situations.

Not only are you presuming about the CBA now you are presuming about the Hornets ownership situation which I believe will resolve itself sooner rather than later, when Stern finally gives up on the 'keep them in New Orleans' thing. The city has no support for the team. he has to let go of that dream which opens up ownership opportunities. Reportedly the NBA has many offers for the Hornets, none from local owners, none willing to keep the team there. Kansas City seems to be hot for a team, have an NBA ready arena, (supposedly fan support) and owners willing to spend.

The new CBA will have significant changes compared to the current one. There's no guarantee that the Hornets will even have Okafor on their roster after the 11/12 season (which has about a 75% chance (in my opinion) of not happening)

As i said in the previous post, it's all about conceptual ideas not the actual player. There will always be guys like that no matter who they are, or on which team they play at.

I hate as much as anyone when a mediocre, vet laden team maxes out to 45 wins without any future (say the Bobcats last season.)

But the Sixers have 8 rotation players 24 and under and are getting better as the season progresses. Many, if not all of their young core will improve over the next 2-3 years. Some even have the chance to really raise their games to a high level.

I'm all for losing when you throw your young players out their and they lack to ability to win (like the 1st 16 games.) But once they start learning to win you have to build from their. Its past the point where you can take a step back. Its to the point where they maximize their current players, with the hope that their increasing value and ability can lead to moves that make you a contender.

There are 8 players TOTAL on the sixers roster who are 24 and under

7 of them are in the rotation (Brackins is not) and grouping them all together is foolish and they aren't all improving.

Hawes stinks - he just stinks - he needs to go

Lou needs to go

Meeks could become a solid bench player - but he's no starter.

Speights - I still have hope he'll come around - but a couple games doesn't change my mind just yet.

Young - points already beaten to death

Jrue/Evan - yes please

Don't group them all together like that, they all have different upsides and two your 'improving' players are Hawes and Young

Sorry, that should be hawes and williams at the bottom.

Just to play devil's advocate, in a year or two, can the Sixers put together a better package of players out of the group you just listed than what the Nets gave up for Derron Williams?

Since NBA Gm's over value height - that depends on the development of Mareese Speights, I would think.

I haven't seen enough of Favors this year to get all this love for him, but he was the key to that deal. I'm a fan of Devin Harris cause he's a badger, but ever since he left Dallas he's been ick.

BTW - for all you 'let's get a center there are plenty to get' folk

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=18192 (list of free agents this off season)

Who says we should get a C form free agency? I for one am completely against cap space crap and free agency signings. trades are the way to go as evidenced by the trade deadline. Smart GMs can get much better value with trades than free agency.

Oh right, you seem to think the sixers have a plethora of trade assets that they could use without hurting the core of the team. I forgot.

Your theory is bogus, and broken, you don't focus on one or the oother, you focus on both, and do it smartly. You keep throwing random names out.

You know what center is reportedly available - Chris Kaman - you know what the clippers want for him - PLAYERS - they aren't giving CHRIS KAMAN away...

SMART GMs make good trades AND good free agent signings. Yo don't ignore one for the sake of the other.

Of course, I bet the sixers could get Hasheem Thabeet cheap.

I'm not trying to say that you should ignore one thing or the other. But i get the feeling that all people talk about these days on how to improve the team is free agency and that makes me sick, because free agency in most cases results in a disaster.

I for one am completely against cap space crap and free agency signings.

Smart Free Agency doesn't result in a disaster. It's just ignored so people can focus on the failures.

Was the Amare deal a disaster (I think long term it is - most peple seem to think the knicks did ok)

How about Carlos Boozer?

There are smart GM's who make smart moves in free agency but the big contract bombs are the focus

Our media thrives on reporting failure and ignoring successes. If the Heat were the #1 seed in the east, would there be so much reporting? Just look at Charlie Sheen having a psychotic brak via the media and everyone loving the reporting.

There are many good to great free agent signings, short and long term, they're just ignored because the disasters are more fun to report because as a socity Americans love to revel in the failures of the rich

Court_visioN reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 15:21

I hate to keep bringing this up, but what are your plans w/ Thad? Let's just say he asks for 9-10 mil/year. Do you let him walk? I feel like that's a huge loss of talent. At the same time, according to what you're saying, we can't sign-and-trade him either because no centers worth getting are attainable with our "young assets"

Which leaves us stuck between a rock and a hard place. So what can the Sixers possibly do in this situation?

I could see the Sixers bringing back Hawes, I can see it in my nightmares. I don't have trust that this organization is ready to move on from him, I don't know that they pay attention to the important stats. I mean they keep starting him game after game when they could just put Brand at center, for all we know they like Hawes and think he's an improving young center with ball skills.

If Billy King were still the GM i'd be more worried, but is there any history of Thorn being that stupid?

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Mar 9 at 12:54

Look what he paid RJ

Richard Jefferson was / is a better player at his position than Spencer Hawes is at his.

Trying to find a good timeline of Thorn at NJ can't find it - but did find that he traded the rights of Eddie Griffin for Jefferson on draft night, that wasn't half bad.

I have more faith in Thorn than I did in Stefanski. I had more faith in Stefanski than I did in King.

Well he gave Travis Outlaw 35 million which is difficult to believe, a player who is about as bad as Hawes. I am very happy it's not Eddie S. making the call though.

Outlaws contract was signed on the 8th of July 2010 and reports started surfacing as early as June 26th that Thorn was stepping down in Jersey. And rumors have circulated that he felt the new owner was much too intrusive from day one. Is it possible that Outlaw wasn't his idea?

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment