DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

A Deplorable Showing

Young nearly saves Sixers:


Tom, any talk about resting guys in the last three games from Collins after the game?

Not yet. Maybe if they lose Friday ...

Have wrong link for Young blog above. This is right:


I won't make excuses, but you do have to remember Jrue never played this many games before (last season he didn't play near this much. I think this team is fatigued. They hit the wall, unfortunately at a crucial time. Also you have Iguodala playing on one leg and Brand with the hand problems and we lost Lou as well. Too bad Hawes came up with 0 points. At least Speights got 4 in his almost 9 minutes. It's not like Hawes is shining defensively so I'd take Speights scoring if I were Collins. I think the team is flat because they have no energy at this point. Collins needs to spread out the minutes more or risk running his stars into the ground. People don't realize when teams dare a player to hit the 3 it puts pressure on that player. I see a lot of misses on 3's when guys are open than ones missed while a man is covered. That's all I can come up with for Meeks' performance. Still if you're missing from 3 I think you need to stop taking it, unfortunately he needs to be that threat too. My theory is if a player misses 3 from 3-point land stop taking the shot. The opposing players expect Meeks to take it so there should be opportunities for others if Meeks spots them he should pass off to the open man. Collins should have nobody in the doghouse. Give Speights a chance. It's not like he could have had a worse game than Hawes did.

Don't want to pick on a hobbled Iguodala- but he jacked up 5 3's? he should not put up that many in 3 games- let alone when he is in the midst of a terrible shooting slump.

As for Meeks- he has top take those shots. It was just not his night. Collins probably should have turned elsewhere.

It's uncanny how this season is playing out similarly to 07-08 (40-38 before they lost their last 4) and 08-09 (40-35 before losing 6 in a row and then squeaking out an OT win against Cleveland's 2nd team). All that's missing is the blowout loss against a terrible team (like the 29-point loss vs. the Nets in 08-09), which might come Friday vs. the Raptors. But then, if pattern holds, they will steal Game 1 on the road and win Game 3 at home ...

tk76 reply to Statman on Apr 7 at 10:31

Yeah, and like I posted before I think the parallels runs deeper.

-Poor start then roughly 45 game run of 65% winning ball then weak finish.

-No elite star, so future hopes tied to young player ready to break out: 3 years ago: A 23 year old Iguodala breaks out to average 19.9/5.5/4.8 and looks ready to take his game to a whole other level. 2 years ago Thad burst out as a surprise rookie at age 19, leading us to believe he was only a couple years from being an impact star. Now Jrue is the "future" and maybe ET. Is our optimism about those guys much different than when Iguodala and Thad were all the rage?

- And is heavily relying on a 10M 32/33 year old PG (Miller) that different than the current Brand situation?

This season isn't quite over. If they win these next three, which is very possible, they finish the season 6-3. Or 10-9 if you want to go back further.

These last three games have been terrible, but the previous three were a win at the #1 seed in the league, a commanding win over a good western conference team and a complete blowout of the nets at home.

I'm not saying you're definitely wrong, but I think you may be a bit premature.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Apr 7 at 10:34

I enjoyed watching all three of those teams. I'm more saying that big picture this team looks to be quite similar both short and long term. The biggest difference is that instead of having cap space and Iguodala as a FA they have Thad as a FA and probably no capspace for 2 years.

I'd argue that personnel-wise the team is in better shape now than in 07-08.

Rising young player: Jrue (now) vs. Iguodala (then)
Veteran stalwart: Brand (now) vs. Miller (then)
Bench scorer: Lou (now) vs. Lou (then)
Promising rookie: Turner (now) vs. Thad (then)

What's missing from the comparison is Iguodala and Thad (now) vs. Dalembert and Willie Green (then). Personnel-wise, the team seems to be in better shape now, if (big IF) Brand can maintain his play for a couple more years.

The team (to me) isn't in any better shape than it was then, just different holes.

Still don't have a starting two guard, but now lack a starting 5 as well, and Brand is probably much closer to the end of his career than Miller was a couple years ago.

No back up big men of note, two off the bench guys who score and do little else.

Also, there's no comparison to Thad's rookie year (excellent in terms of expectation) to Turners rookie year (pitiful in those same terms).

The sixers are still a pretty much capped out team with multiple holes, just different holes. People can talk about how the future with Jrue and Iguodala is great (still think their career arcs are mismatched) but the sixers are still more than a few pieces away from serious contention with tight fisted ownership and few assets to trade to plug those holes.

The details may be different but the overall outlook is the same compared to 2 years ago in my opinion. Max achievement of current roster is MAYBE a first round playoff win.

emtmess reply to GoSixers on Apr 7 at 15:27

One thing to think about it. the one year they had cap space they went out and got one of the top free agents in Brand.

Tray reply to Statman on Apr 7 at 14:03

Wait. Iguodala was a more promising young player than Jrue. Miller was arguably a better stalwart vet than Brand. On promising rookie, Thad beats Turner hands down. Lou now beats Lou then. So we're in worse shape.

The point I was trying to make (not very well, it seems) is that while the 07-08 team might have had a small advantage (or maybe "medium") in the 4 categories originally listed by tk76, the current team has a huge advantage in the remaining contributing players (Iguodala and Thad vs. Dalembert and Green). Strictly speaking personnel-wise, I think this team 1-7 is better and has better prospects than the 07-08 team. Others can weigh in on the cap situation, which I really don't pay attention to.

tk76 reply to Statman on Apr 7 at 15:37

1-9 looking at who is better: current(C) and promise(P)

Brand(C)..........Sam (Neither w/ potential)
Iguodala(26)......Iguodala(P(C)(23)based on 20/5/5 & health
Lou(C)25..........Lou(23)...equal promise
Meeks(P)..........Green.....about equal current level of play
Turner(P).........Evans (C...arguably)
Noce..............Carney... who cares

Meeks and Green are nowhere near the same level of production. Not even close. Willie had a .492 TS% that season, Meeks is at 61.2% including last night's atrocity, neither one of them contributed much else in other areas, but in their scoring roles, this isn't even close. Meeks also turned the ball over about half as much as Willie in the same amount of minutes.

Yes, I was about to mention that. If you give the (C) to Meeks, then that's 5 out of 8 to the current team. I'd argue too that in a hypothetical matchup, 10-11 Iguodala would shut down 07-08 Iguodala the same way that Prince did (actually both Iguodalas would struggle to score, but the current team isn't as reliant on his scoring).

Overall, this team is a better "team," though I agree with tk76 that all three teams were fun to watch.

tk76 reply to Statman on Apr 7 at 15:59

Yeah, I've said before that I think this current team is better. I merely wanted to point out some superficial similarities, and that at the time we saw that team along with its youth and cap space as one of great promise.

Personally I was more atomistic back then about building towards a contender than I am right now. Heck, entering the next season most of us expected 50+ wins with Brand on board and everyone else improving.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Apr 7 at 16:00

atomistic should read optomistic

Was just about to look up what "atomistic" meant ;-)

I was more optimistic entering 08-09 too, mainly because there was no negative history with the core of the team and because Brand really was a big signing at the time. But I do think this team has a good two-year window during which they can become a "contender" -- assuming a lot, though: (1) Brand continues to play at this year's level, (2) Iguodala returns to full health, (3) Collins doesn't get burnt out, (4) Jrue continues to improve.

tk76 reply to Statman on Apr 7 at 14:52

In that year Iguodala had led his team to the playoffs at age 23 putting up 19.9/5.4/4.8. I'd say he looked more promissing than Jrue right now. But he was also due for a big payday.

Thad was more promising as a rookie given his age and 3 more years under the rookie scale. At that point people figured he had a ton of growth left in his game to whee he could be an elite SF. Whereas now he is a better player, but due for a big payday, and looks to have permanent limitations as a tweener. That team also had a ton of cap space and 2 #1 picks. This current team is financially in trouble.

They didn't have two #1 picks. All they got was Speights that summer.

tk76 reply to Brian on Apr 7 at 15:26

The summer they drafted Spieghts they had a second #1 pick that came in the Korver trade. they gave up that pick in order to dump Carney on Minny to free some extra money for the Philly max.

Maybe the #2 pick was for the following year (I believe it was conditional) but it still was a trade asset that they currently do not have. Not a big deal either way, as late 1sts don't count for much and can be bought. But sometimes it is a good sweetener if you want to trade for a star.

jkay reply to tk76 on Apr 7 at 12:12

I think the only similarity is the results.
the style of play, makeup of the team and what they lean on is quite different from before.

tk76 reply to jkay on Apr 7 at 14:56

Really? That team leaned on Miller(vet), Sam(prime but overpayed) and Iguodala(23.) This team leans on Brand(vet), Iguodala(prime but overpaid) and Jrue. I agree that this current team has a better bench and overall is a better team. But that team had more potential with its cap space and #1 picks..

How, exactly, did that team have more potential in their #1 picks than this one does?

tk76 reply to Brian on Apr 7 at 15:21

That team had 2 of them...

tk76 reply to tk76 on Apr 7 at 15:23

The point is cap space + two #1's gives the front office lots of options. As compared to this summer.

They didn't have the picks and the cap space the same summer. They had already taken Thad and Jason Smith (they actually had 3 #1s) the prior season, then they got the cap space the year they drafted speights w/ their only #1 pick.

tk76 reply to Brian on Apr 7 at 15:50

Like I said above, they also had a conditional #1 from Utah in the Korver deal. They gave it away to clear cap space (Minny took Carney and a future #1 for nothing.) But you are right in that the restrictions kept them from using that pick the same year.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Apr 7 at 15:56

Its not a big deal either way. Was just listing it as an asset. One they gave up as part of acquiring Brand.

If you take a step back, this is what each teams had in terms of young, worthwhile or potentially so, players



That team had both Iguodala and Lou as restricted free agents that summer, so a decision needed to be made. This team has Thad as a restricted free agent, the other guys are all under contract (Sixers hold an option on Jodie for next season).

They've also got Iguodala still in his prime, and I'd say Iguodala now is better than Miller was then. Overall, I'd say Brand does more for this team than Sam did for that team, but it's kind of an apples-to-oranges comparison.

The important difference between this team and that team, when we're talking about the playoffs and future success, is that this team can actually play in the half court a little bit. That team could not.

tk76 reply to Brian on Apr 7 at 15:40

I'd list as "player w/ potential" the 13M cap space. That is a potentially very good player...

tk76 reply to tk76 on Apr 7 at 15:47

Basically, going off what you knew then, would you rather have:

*23 year old Iguodala (20/5/5)
*19 year old Young (super promising)
*13M in cap space (and the ability to resigne Igyy and Lou)

or what they have today:

*26 year old Iggy (on the wrong side of his contract and in some ways getting worse)
*20 year old Jrue (promissing 2nd leverl top PG)
*Turner off of bad rookie year- currently 22nd WS 22 years old
*22 year old Thad- promising tweener about to be paid
*Meeks ? starter but cheap and can shoot
*Brand on the back end of a huge deal
*38M committed to Iggy/Brand/Lou and no cap space

Depends. If you're asking about the prospects of being a competitor the next season, then you obviously want the cap space and the older core heading into the summer. If you're talking about the long-term prospects of the team, I'd rather have what we have now.

Iguodala is still in his prime, and he's not overpaid, you can't really even make that case after seeing the contracts that have been handed out since. Jrue is 20. We're talking about having a good-to-great point guard for the next decade. Meeks is a legit starter when he's playing between them. We still don't know what we have in Turner, but I'd put money on him winding up as something significantly more than what we've seen this year. I feel like we have a pretty good idea what Thad provides now, and we have a coach who knows how to utilize him. I'm more comfortable with extending him this summer than I was with extending Lou after that season, depending on price, obviously.

This team has gotten 10,79 minutes from guys 23 and under. That team got 5,562.

This team has relied on the youth a whole lot more and for the future, they're going to be in a position to use cap space when they have a group of players just entering their prime, rather than one guy entering his prime, a couple young guys, and a PG on the way out.

should read 10,899 minutes, or 57% of the team's total minutes.

If you throw out Hawes, which I wish they would, the number is still 9,261 and 48.2%.

tk76 reply to Brian on Apr 7 at 16:31

You make a reasonable arguement. But i was more upbeat 3 years ago. Maybe part of that is the subsequent emergence of "super-teams" or the frustration of the Brand and EJ situations.

This current squad certainly has more youth, I'm just not sure it has more "impact" youth. Meaning at the time I was very high on Iguodala and Thad. While right now I see Jrue as being good but not great (at least not top 5 PG great) and the rest of the young players as having ceilings from average to somewhat better than average pros.

Maybe that is harsh? But Thad will always be limited by his tweener status. Turner is arguably not top 12 for his age (22) so I doubt he will be special. And the other young players (Meeks, Hawes, Speights) are really not starter material for most teams. Sure Holiday/Meeks/Iguodala make a nice starting unit- but not a dominant one nor a core that will put them on a higher level.

mopey reply to Brian on Apr 7 at 15:42

+1 This team can score in the half court and is better defensively. Those other two teams couldn't score in the half court and had to rely on the fast break game, which disappeared in the playoffs.

Jason Smith, huh? Yeah, loads of potential there.

Game story: Sixers fail New York test:


Brand downplays hand injury, saying 'it's not an issue':


Jrue's shooting slump is incredibly frustrating. He's getting his looks, they just aren't falling. In the second half at Boston, it was downright ugly. If Jrue has even average shooting nights vs NY or MIL, the Sixers win the game. At least the rest of his game was fairly strong last night, with 8 dimes and 7 boards(my favorite part of his line). Those 8 dimes were also enough to push Jrue into the team lead for APG at 6.4, compared to 6.3 for Iggy. Career highs for both.

Jrue needs to keep creating for himself, getting good looks...eventually they will start to fall. Hopefully sooner than later...he can't sustain this

I have been saying 43 wins for a while now...it's still possible!Let's get at least 42 though, please?

Video: Collins Thursday on importance of winning at home to finish season, rather than resting guys, an update on Williams' progress and 'this is not a losing streak':


Heh, Collins called the Knicks a "very, very good defensive team."

If Meeks hits even 3 of 8 open 3's (i.e., slightly below his average percentage), the game is very different from start to finish and no one would be talking about the Knicks' defense ...

Video: Young Thursday on not starting and the importance of finishing regular season well:


Collins: Resting players for final three games isn't the best option:


Collins: Williams' injury is 'going to take a little time':


What about Iggy's defense? It was horrible yesterday. Without his defense, he is completely useless

That's an incorrect statement

While arguing whether this team is in better/worse off shape, I don't think you can underestimate that they now have a defensive-minded coach who the current roster can grow with for three years (Health permitting). Doesn't it seem like there is a better overall vision in place with the team? I just feel like we are in much better hands than 2 summers ago after the loss to the Magic, regardless of how the playoffs go.

On the court, I definitely feel better about the team's direction. In the front office, I don't know what to think. Will they re-sign Hawes? Will they only make the qualifying offer for him or sign him to a real contract? If it's the latter, I won't have any confidence.

When Stefanski made the Brand move I was pretty high on him, actually. Still don't know what to make of Thorn.

While 'not ignoring past history' - let's not ignore that Collins will more than likely be gone in 2 seasons after this one

I'm in the extreme minority, but it wouldn't bother me if it were less than two years. What a disastrous final month of the season. More and more to me, he doesn't seem to have done anything better than Cheeks and DiLeo. Just riding the post-Eddie Jordan gravy train. I get that Collins didn't have Dalembert, but Cheeks/DiLeo didn't really have Brand. That's close to a wash in my book.

Careful now, agreeing with me can get you in an awful lot of trouble :)

I never cared about record this year, I cared about player development. He marginalized Jrue too much and the whole Turner thing is a disaster, that Collins is partly responsible for as the coach.

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Apr 7 at 16:59

If I had to assign "blame" to the Turner debacle this year, it would fall mostly on Stefanski/Dilio and Turner. Collins would be a distant third.

tk76 reply to tk76 on Apr 7 at 17:03

Basically Turner is a not so great rookie who has certain strengths that are in areas that his team already has established players. Not sure how a coach makes lemon-aid out of that.

You could say he should have been given Lou's role- but I'd be hard pressed to justify taking away Lou's 22 minutes in favor of ET right now. In the future it might make perfect sense. But i this past season Lou was about as good of a bench scorer as anyone not named Jason Terry.

johnrosz reply to tk76 on Apr 7 at 17:16

Rumor out there is that Collins got into a heated argument with Stefanski/Dileo over that pick. He was supposedly much higher on Favors.

tk76 reply to johnrosz on Apr 7 at 17:54

No way to know exactly what went down. But Collins is on the record saying that the whole draft decision was up to Stefanski and DiLeo. He did not say he disagreed, just that he was new to the team and it was a FO decision.

I wouldn't blame Stefanski/DiLeo for the Turner "debacle" until Turner gets a chance to be a featured player on an offense. I'm quite confident he could've put up John Wall numbers in Washington. Collins is absolutely responsible for any Turner "debacle" this year because he's the one who chose to bury him. Whether or not burying him was the right or wrong decision is a different issue (I think it was wrong all season, and it was obviously wrong the past month, but that doesn't matter). Regardless of whether he was right or wrong, Collins is responsible for it.

tk76 reply to stoned81 on Apr 7 at 18:06

Turner was 8th in the NBA in minutes played. 23 min/game in 75 games is hardly being buried.

The question was not his minutes but his role on the floor. But how do you find time for him to be ball dominant on a team with Jrue and Iguodala both playing PG and Lou as you main reserve?

Yes, they made a mistake picking what was seemed by many as the consensus #2 pick.

I get it, you like to avoid holding Collins responsible for things that have gone wrong with the sixers this year, at all, he is only responsible for the good stuff

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Apr 7 at 18:32

I don't know if it was a mistake. I just don't see the bulk of the blame going on Collins.

What exactly is your take? ET should have been allowed to be ball dominant in his 23 minutes a game? Or do you think Collins and his staff should have been more successful in teaching him to play off the ball? Or is there something else Collins should have done- like make Lou play off the ball?

Maybe "blame" was the wrong word. Turner, as he is currently, does not address this teams needs right now. If they trade away Lou then maybe he could slot into that role.

tk76 reply to stoned81 on Apr 7 at 16:54

That argument cuts both ways. Sure Collins looks good in comparison to EJ. But Collins also had to rehabilitate all of the damage done by EJ to the players. Just looking at the 3-13 mess they started with showed how broken the pieces were. Not to mention the cumulative damage of many of these guys going through a new couch (or two) every year of their short careers.

Looking back on the season as a whole, I think the 3-13 mess was actually a fair reflection of the overall season. 10 of those 13 losses were on the road. We stunk on the road all year. Also, a bunch of those losses were terrible execution at the end of close games. That barely improved as the season went on, and has gotten worse in the past month.

Watching the last month, the end-of-game disasters are very similar to early in the season, and Iggy's body language is similar. Walking down the court, staring up at the ceiling. It all seems to have fallen apart, a bell-curve season.

tk76 reply to stoned81 on Apr 7 at 17:55

I think they became a better team when Meeks was inserted into the starting line-up.

johnrosz on Apr 7 at 17:12

Would like to start off by saying Lou isn't my type of basketball player, but when he has a bad game why isn't he afforded the number of excuses that Iguodala is?

Lou is never allowed to have a night where "his touch is off" or "he's really playing banged up"

Just want to see some fairness here.

Sometimes I think the Iguodala apologists are a little over the top, in many ways a reaction to the other side which grossly underrates him.

tk76 reply to johnrosz on Apr 7 at 18:16

The only legit apology is that he is playing hurt.

"Iguodala's touch, what little there was of it, is completely gone. The knee is clearly hampering him on the floor, and the lack of practice is making his flawed jumper flawed and rusty. Again, this wouldn't be a huge deal if he wasn't still taking a bunch of jumpers, but he is."

That qualifies as apologizing for Iguodala? I said is bad jumper is even worse now and he's shooting too many of them.

I finished watching the game now. It's suprising that no one mentioned how good of a game Carmelo Anthony had. I understand this is a Sixers blog and Melo doesn't draw much simpathy but....

Don't want to turn this into another Melo/vs/Iguodala discussion but, well, Iguodala got soundly outplayed last night. This after being torched by Pierce the night before (18 pts on 11 shots). To be fair, it's clear that the injury is affecting Ig's efficiency also defensively.

As for Meeks I disagree with Brian this time, I would blame him had he forced his shots, but I think he took all good if not great shots, it's just that he didn't hit them.

While is 100% true that the latest Hawes reminds us of the "young Greg Kite" player that started the season... let's hope he recovers, we need something from that position. Increasing Speights' minutes a bit in these last games would be wise IMO.

I blame him for taking 8 threes and making zero.

Once you're 0 for 4, stop launching threes please and pass the ball. The killer was Brand and Thad bringing us all the way back to take the lead, then suddenly Jodie decides "well it's my turn now" despite being 0 for 7 and he launches another.

The other viewpoint is surely, "he was wide open so he should take it." I strongly disagree. Of course he was wide open, the Knicks were smart and put their guys on Brand and Thad. I'd leave an 0 for 7 guy wide open too. They were begging Jodie to throw up another one, and of course he complied, feeding right into their hands and giving them the game right back, killing the Brand/Thad run.

I understand but I just disagree.
Meeks is a pure shooter and is out there to shoot jumpers, he doesn't do much else on the court. Maybe you could blame the coach for letting him in that much, not him for continuing to take (good) shots, that's exactly what they ask him to do.

Lou Will was, what?, 0/10 before knocking the three at the buzzer vs Sacto, the situation with Meeks last night was similar, both are offensive players with a scorer mentality, they don't care about the past shots, they think about the next one. This is not always a good thing obviously, but it's just the way those kind of players think.

The corner three Meeks took was a way better shot than LW buzzer beater, coming after good ball movement: he was very unlucky as the shot went in-out, it's not that he bricked it.

"I blame him for taking 8 threes and making zero"
Well, we can agree on this, lol.

Yeah, if Meeks hits that attempt from the corner wen they were up 1 then they likely win the game. The guy is out there to shoot. He has to take the shots designed within the offense.

deepsixersuede reply to tk76 on Apr 7 at 19:16

Tk, is Thad gonna be more than the tweener role you mentioned? He did well on Stoudemire last night and could become a 20 ppg. 3 or 4 if he gets his jumper consistant. How would he look next to a defensive center at either forward spot?

I'm sure they could get by if they had a defensive stud like Howard. But what are the odds they get that type of center.

I think Thad is turning into an impact player. But an impact player who you have to spot his minutes to get favorable match-ups. Who knows, maybe he'll bulk up to where he can be a starting PF, or maybe they'll find the right center. But even if he remains in his current role he's valuable and a net positive o the floor.

Do you see him as a starting PF anytime soon?

I agree that he's out there to shoot. I guess that's why I wouldn't have had him out there at all at the end.

But I think that particular shot was exactly what the Knicks wanted. They left him wide open intentionally and it worked. There was no reason to give them that in my opinion.

Fair points but the key difference between Lou's game-tying three and Meeks' missed three is that with Lou's we were down 3 and had no choice. But with Meeks last night, we were up 1. There was absolutely no reason for an 0 for 7 guy to launch a 3 in that situation. If you had asked D'Antoni to draw up the perfect defense for that play, he would've drawn "leave Meeks wide open and pray he launches another three." He got exactly what he wanted.

Court_visioN reply to stoned81 on Apr 7 at 19:38

i doubt even d'antoni's defensive strategy involves leaving a shooter wide open regardless of how he had shot earlier in the game.

A wide open corner three for Meeks is basically the best shot the sixers can ever expect to get in the half court, I don't care if he's 0/10 in that particular game, you still need to look for him and he still needs to shoot it. We should all pray he gets that exact same shot in crunch time every game because I'd bet he's better than 60% in that situation with that kind of look.

And don't be absurd, D'antoni doesn't draw up defensive plays.

tk76 reply to Brian on Apr 7 at 21:05

I agree. If you don't want Meeks taking that shot then you don't put him on the floor (which maybe should have been the decision.)

Very different than when Iguodala kicked to Hawes for a late 3 in a recent game. That is the wrong personnel taking that type of crucial shot- even though Hawes was hot that game.

Exactly, I think D'Antoni's "Best case scenario" in that situation would have been Iguodala taking a long jumper (or a Hawes' shot from anywhere around the rim, LOL)

eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Apr 7 at 23:18

Dag man, you're confusing me again. When I mentioned in the game thread last night that I would want Jodie to take a look from three, you responded as if you didn't want him taking another one b/c he was 0-fer. Now you say you'd want him to take it. ??

You were saying you wanted Jodie to come back in for Turner, I believe, to hit threes. I didn't think putting him back in the game was a good idea because he was so cold. If he's in the game, though, you have to look for him for an open three. And if he gets the ball wide open in the corner, he damned well better take it.

eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Apr 7 at 23:56

Oh Ok, it wasn't specifically for Turner, it was just coming in for anyone, because there were a few possessions where looks from three were presenting themselves. Agree on him taking that open corner three if it was as clean a look as it was, just hope it doesn't go halfway down like that next time :(

I finished watching the game now. It's suprising that no one mentioned how good of a game Carmelo Anthony had. I understand this is a Sixers blog and Melo doesn't draw much simpathy but....

Don't want to turn this into another Melo/vs/Iguodala discussion but, well, Iguodala got soundly outplayed last night. This after being torched by Pierce the night before (18 pts on 11 shots). To be fair, it's clear that the injury is affecting Ig's efficiency also defensively.

Ricky, these are good points. I would say Carmelo is one of three forwards in the NBA that Iguodala can't stop if he (Carmelo) is at the top of his game -- which Carmelo was last night: Durant because of his length (Iguodala can't really affect Durant's shot), LeBron because of his strength, and Carmelo because of his great penetration ability. Carmelo is really without parallel as far as being able to penetrate under control and get off a good shot, so if he's hitting his jumper, even elite defenders can't stop him one-on-one. If a guy makes a bunch of jumpers with a hand in his face, what can you say? All this said, Iguodala thoroughly outplayed Carmelo in their only other meeting this year (holding him to a season low), so it's one to one. He's also outplayed Pierce in two of the four meetings, so you win some and you lose some, as expected when you play against the best every game.

All good points.

And it's true Iguodala took "Game 1" vs these guys so the balance at the end of the day is not negative

Watching a little bit of this Blazers/Jazz game. If I'm betting today on which guy drafted last summer will have the best pro career, my money goes on Favors. When he fills out, he's just going to be a complete animal.

eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Apr 8 at 0:00

Good to see that you feel pretty much exactly as you did going into the draft. Haven't watched him hardly at all this year, maybe only the times we played them. I thought a big was the unquestioned way to go after lady luck fell to us on lottery night. Guess Stefanski and the braintrust didn't see it that way. Curious and interesting to imagine how we'd look if we had another one (big) this whole season, considering the near garbage we've trotted out there.

I've spent too much time thinking about that. I don't think Favors would've been a major contributor this year. Speights + Battie + Songaila + Brackins = 1,200 minutes. I think Favors probably would've gotten about half of those. Probably mostly from Speights share. Instead of going w/ zero defense when he was exasperated w/ Hawes' play, he would've gone with the defense/rebounded and unpolished offensive game.

Long term, though, I could see Collins grooming him to take over in the middle next season. And if Favors responded, maybe he would've been in the rotation by now.

Favors has really had a rough rookie season. He was stuck on a crappy team playing for a borderline insane coach, and from day one he was in every trade rumor column printed. Then he finally gets moved and he goes to another garbage team that just traded away their best player and lost their hall of fame coach. Who knows where he'd be if he was in a good situation with a good coach and limited pressure. Ugh. Hate doing this to myself.

eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Apr 8 at 0:25

Yep, if DC is cool with playing EB at the five as much as he has this year, then I'm almost positive that he would have given Favors spot minutes there throughout the season, while as you say grooming him to man that spot even more next year.

You're doing to yourself with this guy what I did last year with myself on Lawson:) (though the few and far between thoughts I've had about it this year seem much brighter just thinking about how Collins would have used and brought along Ty)

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment