DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

The Owners' Latest Proposal

that's a very realistic and steep price to pay for the best big man in the NBA. Turk is bad enough but Arenas too? What do you do? bench them?
all this just to get a chance to pair him and Jrue.
ok after the math is done ===>
starting lineup: Holiday, Arenas, Turk, Brand, Howard.
bench: Lou, Hawes, Thad, Meeks
not bad, I still don't think they get stronger where it counts; defense. Aside of the dynamic duo, I count 4 open doors, 1 sieve and 2 average defenders.

But then I guess once the contracts expire, you're really good.

jkay reply to jkay on May 13 at 1:14

forgive me, I suck at math.

won't the amnesty provision you are banking on, be available to Orlando too? guess it's all speculation anyway.

after reading about the numerous possibilities and the enormous impact it's gonna have on teams and players, I definitely think there will be a lockout. A position like must sound so radical to the salary-happy players union. It's going to be tough to reconcile so much distance.

Brand is in the deal. My starting lineup coming off that trade would probably look like this


With Lou, Hawes and Arenas coming off the bench. You'd have to pray for the amnesty provision. On the bright side, you'd be the one that had that supreme leverage when Dwight hit free agency.

As bare as the cupboards would be, I'd do it. Orlando wouldn't, though. They'd be better off holding onto Howard w/ the leverage and praying for the amnesty provision to rid themselves of Arenas.

Since Brand is in the trade the remaining rotation would be:

Let me start with i would do that trade in a nanosecond. And i have no problem with the remaining squad (except for Arenas of course). Young is a good fit next to Howard as a PF. That's a core that can dominate for the next decade and they would even have a few of the role players set (Meeks,Williams, maybe Hawes)

They'd need a wing defender in the worst way.

Agreed, but he doesn't have to be much more than a role player...

jkay reply to Brian on May 13 at 15:29

also a shooter to spread the floor while Howard operates in the half court.

jkay Brand would be gone in that deal. We'd have to get a new starting PF. Unless if Orlando used the amnesty on Brand and we got him back for cheap. I think there needs to be an amnesty once every 5 years or so. It's been way too long and we always seem to be stuck with 1-2 overpriced contracts for years.

I want to test some Iggy haters here. If you have this 1-time amnesty and could use it on a player to rid the contract from counting against the team's salary cap will you still pick Iggy to go or go with the higher cap-saving contract by cutting Brand instead? What's more important to you - getting rid of AI2 or clearing the highest salary from the cap?

It's ridiculous to even consider cutting Iguodala. Of course you will choose Brand's contract...

deepsixersuede reply to Xsago on May 13 at 7:25

I don't think it is that simple. Iggy's replacement may be here already or there at #16, where as Brand has a shorter deal and more of a position of need. Collins would hate to give up either, in my opinion.

There's no indication yet that Evan Turner is Iguodalas replacement, it's highly unlikely that #16 this year is his replacement.

Iguodala is younger, and has more trade value, than the older slower Brand.

It's foolish to cut anyone other than Brand.

The contract still counts against the cap - it just doesn't count against the luxury tax. So - who is making more money each year - brand or iguodala. Oh wait it's elton brand making 4 million more than iguodala most years (which means an extra 8 million more on a luxury tax payment if it exists)

Yes Iguodala has one more year than brand but comcast functions year to year it seems (remember the sam trade) - so to think they'd look 3 years out is insane, plus Iguodala has much more trade value.

It's nonsense to advocate cutting Iguodala over Brand on or off the court unless you just hate Iguodala

The last amnesty provision only counted against the luxury tax, but I'm pretty sure this time the number would be dropped from the cap. At least that's what I took away from the reports.

Ah, I misunderstood but still think the principle holds.

Brand is older, slower, and more likely to break down sooner, AND MAKES MORE MONEY

The sixers have no one to replace either of them, but one of them probably has more trade value than the other (and I don't think it's brand)

Even if it's off the cap as well - I don't see any rational reason for cutting Iguodala over Brand. It saves money off the court and Iguodala is more likely to perform at a higher level than brand over the last years of his contract.

PS - just in general

How is it Andre Iguodala makes less per year than Elton Brand and yet Andre Iguodala is over paid - and Brand who basically missed two seasons isn't over paid?

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on May 13 at 14:34

Hey, don't look at me...I try to remind everyone semi-regularly of the albatross contract of Sir Elton. His rep as a great guy has really gone a long way in deflecting major criticism/borderline abuse in this town. That's the only explanation I can come up with at least.

Rich reply to Joe Huber on May 13 at 14:50

There are so many Iguodala haters in the fan base, I get that. On this board though, he is treated very fairly IMO, even maybe getting too much leeway at times. There are very few people on this board (I doubt any) that I would classify as people who hate Iguodala.

I think it would be very foolish to cut anyone but Brand, especially considering Iguodala's deal is just one year longer. That isn't even a choice really.

By some he's treated fairly, but others he's treated as a whipping boy...again, there really isn't a shared opinion about any one player on this team (even that hawes sucks)

Rich reply to GoSixers on May 14 at 0:18

I don't know, the regular people are pretty fair on this board towards him. He deserves his criticism at times too.

HendrikDB on May 13 at 3:33

Trading Turner is a total nay for me.

Howard would never want to come to a sixers team with a guard that is worse than Nelson and the same effort-less players he had to play with this year. Not to forget Jodie is worse than JJ. This doesn't make sense at all for Dwight who needs to be happy in order to stay in Philly.

Orlando gets a nice prospect with Turner (but this will totally ruin his career), AI is always nice (but why bother him if you have JRich) and Brand (an aging PF who actually needs to be with a championship team). Orlando will suck even harder after the trade with no good center. They won't be able to sign a good one since almost every team is looking for one...even Miami who'll sign the best available.

If they deal Howard I agree they'll ship Turk and Arenas as well but any trade will have to include a great center. I see absolutely no way to get a decent C after that trade. Nelson and Dwight are the heart of that franchise, the key building blocks. The orlando mamagement knows they messed up big time, not Dwight. If they want to lose fans (which I'm sure they don't) they trade Dwight.

HendrikDB reply to HendrikDB on May 13 at 3:35

I forgot: eventhough giving up Turner would make me facepalm and lose interest in the Sixers for a couple of days it totally makes sense for the Sixers to make that trade for Dwight. (Just not for Orlando)

deepsixersuede on May 13 at 7:28

Does this new possible landscape make Iggy less tradeable? And is that a bad thing?

Here's my question for the one-time amnesty provision.

What player on another team would get cut that we should target and hopefully sign to a relatively cheaper deal?

Amir Johnson, Anderson Varejao, Brendan Haywood.

Steve V reply to Scott on May 13 at 9:08

Andres Biedrins, Tyrus Thomas, Al Jefferson ( not sure he would be the one because Utah likes him but he's their worst contract), Emeka Okafor is my top choice, Nick Collison.

I am skeptical that teams will buy out players with 40 million left on their contract. I don't think franchises will want to have to pay that bill when they can still get production from okafor and jefferson. Also don't think Ty thomas gets bought out.

Steve V reply to Jason on May 13 at 9:30

Yeah just throwing out the possibilities and guys with the worst contracts on their teams that would be a fit for the Sixers.

Steve V reply to Jason on May 13 at 9:31

Yeah just throwing out the possibilities and guys with the worst contracts on their teams that would be a fit for the Sixers.

None of the listed players will be cut IMO. Maybe Biedrins, but the others aren't getting cut.

Interesting post. I think I disagree with all of it, but that's what a blog is about, right? Especially for a Hawes fan :)

I don't like the idea of cutting Brand at all, because he only has two years remaining and we can't replace him at PF. So we drop a few dollars on the salary cap, big deal. What free agent are we going to get with that cap space to replace Brand? A PF who puts up 16 & 8 averages is going to command the same money as Brand, but for longer years. I don't see how that helps us.

I also disagree that it's likely. I see no way at all the Sixers pay Brand $35M to NOT play. I'd be shocked if the Sixers used the amnesty clause on anyone but Nocioni. We're paying him to not play anyways, so may as well cut him from the cap.

Re: the Howard trade, I similarly don't like this at all. Howard is unhappy in Orlando right now, with warm weather and no state income taxes. Put him in a cold, dull city with high taxes and an even worse team? I'd be surprised if he'd even report to the Sixers, let alone sign a contract extension. This trade kills us for years, in my opinion.

I feel like this amnesty only helps big spenders like Dallas. I'm not sure what it does for the Sixers, unless a lower cap forces them to use it (to the team's detriment.) If the cap/tax is lowered to where the Sixers feel forced to use amnesty, then they will lose a player and not replace them.

If you are under the tax (like the Sixers), why would you want to use amnesty, where you still pay Brand, lose him as a player, and then go out and pay his replacement? How does that save you money or make you a better team?

I can see how it helps the Cubans of the world. You can cut ties with an over-paid player, and then use the new cap space to sign someone else's amnesty casualty on the cheap. Cuban would end up spending more, but he's willing to do that. I'm not seeing the Sixers in that light.


emtmess on May 13 at 9:44

Going with the framework stated above I think it will make sense to go after some big changes. As the system is now I would never say trade Jrue but with a proposed system like the one above it might. If we could trade Jrue for 5 of equal value. Draft someone to play D on the other teams point gaurd but is more of a outside shooting threat on offense. You could have a line up like this.

1 #16 pick
2 Evan
3 Andre
4 Brand
5 5 rec. in the Jrue trade

Thad if resigned

We would match up pretty well with most teams we might meet in the playoffs.

Basically, teams would have the ability to offer one player a "star" contract.

Will Bob Costas be given credit for this idea, since he suggested it more than a decade ago when suggesting how to manage baseballs salary inequities?

It's funny because Broussard/Sheridan reported that the owners made a much weaker proposal just last week (57% guarantee reduction a few other tweaks but major the same) and now Stein says they're back at the beginning (with no indication of the age limit)?

Here's the thing, you can't use the ESPN trade machine any more under this proposal. If there is a hard cap - 25% doesn't work any more. What if you go over the hard cap level with the 25% leeway. With a hard cap (as far as I'm concerned) any trade would be allowed AS LONG AS both teams are still under the heard cap number. Keep in mind, the NFL has a hard cap (but non guaranteed contracts) and players hardly ever get moved. Hard Caps seem to limit player movement.

The NBA will look closely at the various stipulations in the hard cap so that you can't work around them like some of the ridiculous contracts handed out in the NHL recently.

I don't believe they'll get a hard cap - I believe they'll get non guaranteed contracts, maybe a lower BRI percentage and shorter max's. I think the franchise tag makes a little more sense because in the NFL the franchise tag restricts how much money you can pay a guy. Give it some sort of leeway in that. Will the 'star' contract only be allowed to use once a year, or at one time. If you have Deron Williams under the 'star' contract in 2011, do you get to keep dwight howard (if he's on your roster) in 2012? If so, then doesn't that even make luck (the draft lottery) even more important, not less. You won't be able to get stars as easily.

Then again, under the 'star system' Bosh, Wade and Lebron still join up - so it doesn't solve the supposed 'problem' with what they did in Miami (and it's not a problem, because if it was a problem then it was a problem when Boston traded for KG and Ray Allen - end result is 3 super stars joining together on one team - not sure why when the GM does it it's ok but when the players do it - it's not - there's hypocrisy there)

I've thought Stern wanted to put the hammer down on the players the entire time. If Sterns reort is accurate, it doesn't change my theories on it. The owners can weather a lock out better than the players, they have more money and tend to be better at saving money. They'll just wait until players start missing paychecks, and the players will negotiate quickly.

I'm thinking another shortened season in 2011/12 if they even ahve one.

Transparency in the finances and an agreement on HOW the numbers are calculated is just as important as how the money is distributed, and no leagues seem to be talkinga bout that

I'm not so sure about LeBron and Bosh. Yes, they took less money to go to Miami, but they still got a whole lot more via the sign-and-trades than they would have if the S&T had not been available. Their starting point was lower, but the % increases and the # of years pumped up the value of those contracts in a big way. If there was no S&T, they would've been leaving a ton of money on the table by just signing with Miami.

Well they left money on the table anyway - if they really were about winning the rings - then they would have left more on the table (and as far as lebron is concerned, I'm betting his nba salary is insignificant compared to other incomes)

If guys really move because they want to win instead of the money - the star thing does nothing really. (And people will find a way to circumvent it)

I'd love to see a breakdown of exactly how much money LeBron and Bosh actually left on the table when you factor in taxes. I don't think it's really all that much.

Well Bosh wasn't being paid in real money - so he probably got a raise.

If you got rid of the sign & trade the raise would be 8% vs. 10.5%.

-Bosh and Lebron both start at 14.5M
-Joe Johnson starts at 16.3M (I assume this would have been the max for Lebron or Bosh.)

1. JJ will make 6yrs/123.5M
2. Lebron will make 6yrs/110M (but he can opt out after 4 yrs)

So Lebron and Bosh gave up 13.5M of salary.

Had he not been allowed to get the sign&trade, it would have been a 5 yr deal with 8% raises. Meaning: 5yrs/85M

So he would have left 38.5M on the table (25M in the 6th year alone) and the average salary would have dropped:

JJ: 20.6M/yr
Lebron now: 18.3M/yr
Lebron without S&T: 17M/yr but 1 less contract year.

Do you really think that would have made a big enough difference to keep Lebron in Cleveland?

BTW, Lebron is not getting 10% raises each year.

He's getting 10.5% in the second year, then a bit less after that. 9.5% in year three, 8.6% in year four, 7.9% in year five, 7.4% in year six. Odd.

My guess is that the lower raises at the end of the contract were what he had to give up to get the two player options at the end.

The most-recent tax rate I could find for the state of Ohio (2009) was 5.925%.

So factor that in, and LeBron left a whopping $6,493,847 on the table over the length of the contract.

Had it not been a sign and trade, he would've left $31,265,633 on the table, including the taxes. That's a pretty big difference and I don't think you can automatically say he would've done it.

I think the key thing here is that they're talking about making the monetary gap between staying and leaving wider, both in terms of money and years.

That 31M difference is not really accurate. 25M was the 6th year. And he likely will get a ton of money for a 6th year somewhere. And even if he had a career ending injury, I would think maybe he takes out insurance as he gets closer to the end of his deal?

How much is a ton, considering the new CBA and lower maxes?

Depends, metric tons or regular tons?

African or European swallow? And is it unladen?

I don't know

If this amnesty thing really becomes part of the new CBA, i guess cutting Nocioni will make the most sense. Even in case of hard cap i don't expect it to be significantly lower than the current one, if at all. With that in mind just subtracting Nocioni and Hawes frees up 10 milion in addition to the 10 million or so freed up by not resigning Kapono and Songaila. They will be very close to having enough money in free agency to get a decent big man. All this depends on what they do with Young though...

On another note, the more i read comments and interviews from our front office the more i think there won't be any truly significant moves. Iguodala might get traded, but i think the Sixers are setting themselves to be in a position to acquire a star in a year or two, when Brand will be an expiring or expiries altogether.

So you don't think trading Iguodala is significant?

I do, but i don't think an Iguodala trade would result into a significant change of direction, mostly because i don't think he will bring back a player that will require changing the direction.

If it were up to me I wouldn't make the contracts guaranteed. It would make the game so much better, no more having to keep guys like Noc or Willie Green on the roster. You would be able to renegotiate contracts with veteran players and you would be able to add more talent. This is why the NFL is so successful. Also I feel as though basketball players have more options than players from any of the other 3 major sports. They are plenty leagues in Europe and Asia that would take cut players from NBA teams.

The NFL is successful for a lot of reasons, they were successful before the new CBA.

Once a week, appealing to our baser primal need for violence in an 'acceptable' form as opposed to the gladitorial combat to the death of old days.

Oh yeah, gambling. GAMBLING makes the NFL more successful than the contracts, but the NFL won't admit it cause, well, they technically don't approve (even if injury reports are mandatory)

Trivia question:

1. Since 2005-6 (only data I have), how many years have the Sixers paid luxury tax?

2. How many teams have paid the tax all 5 years?

3. How many teams have paid it at least 3 years?

2 years for the Sixers.

Paying the tax every year, I'll say Dallas, LA Lakers, NYK, off the top of my head.

Wrong about the Sixers. They have never paid the tax.

And the Knicks and Mavs have paid every year. No other team has paid more than 3 years. The Lakers, Spurs and Nuggets have paid 3X. A few other teams once or twice.

The Cavs paid three times as well.

Boston is at least 3 years I'd think?

Actually I missed Boston. They paid 3X.

of course, this year's tax bill has not come out.

Joe reply to tk76 on May 14 at 18:55

Sixers paid before that. Can't tell you how many times, but they did.

04-05 - #4 in NBA Philadelphia 76ers $70,700,000
02-03 - #5 in NBA Philadelphia 76ers $63.2 m

source: http://www.insidehoops.com/nba-team-salaries.shtml

another decent article:

Doc Signs 5 year extension (did i hear a rumor that it was like 9 million a year this morning or was I just not paying attention) with the celtics.

Not sure I would have done that :)

I don't think Doc's a particularly good coach, to be honest with you. Thought he should've been fired the year before they got Garnett and Allen. They're going to regret that contract in a couple years when Doc is trying to figure out how the hell he's supposed to compete with Rondo and Jeff Green as his best players.

Well that's kind of what I meant, ride off into the sunset while people are still blaming the age of the players, go back to tv and get paid good money without having to actually prove you're a good coach (you know, like Jeff Van Gundy does every time he says 'this is what i'd do' but doesn't have the balls to actually go do it cause you know he has job offers - he likes back seat coaching)

Plus, I mean, his kid is projected to be a rather highly drafted pick when ever he comes out - I know dunleavy did it, but coaching against your kid - kind of weird?

Rich reply to Brian on May 13 at 17:11

He's an excellent offensive coach, but he needs a defense guy to delegate all responsibilities to.

johnrosz on May 13 at 14:46

Could there be any possible benefit to just holding onto Brand through the new CBA? With the assumed shrinking of payroll around the league, his expiring contract would be monstrous would it not?

That could be used as a potential chip in a large trade, if they try to land the next disgruntled star that comes along

Depends on how the new CBA pans out - but if comcast can save money by cutting brand - they'll do it

From what was proposed, it does not look like they would save money by using amnesty on Brand. But maybe something else will be in the new CBA.

The only way they'd save money is if cutting him moved them below the luxury tax threshold (if it still exists) when they would've been above it prior to cutting him. If they're below the luxury tax, cutting him isn't about saving money, it's about creating flexibility (but it'll cost the team more money), which leads back to favoring the free spending teams.

With the owner latest proposal of cutting the rookies salaries I'm surprised more agents sift advise their players to come out this year in hopes to avoid the pay cut. On another note, Chad Ford wrote about a player that has really intrigued me the past two seasons, Greg Smith out of Fresno State. He's projected to be a second rounder right now but I really think once he starts workouts he'll fly up draft boards right into our range. He's a legit 6'10 with a chiseled frame and explosive leaping ability for a man his size(34 inch vertical). Hes still raw offensively but does show nice touch around the basket and has a nice go to move on the block although he's still developing counter moves. Thorn has shown a history of taking athletic, high upside kids in the past(Sean Williams) and this kid doesn't have the character concerns of Williams. He failed with Williams do you guys think he would be gun shy to pull the trigger again?

FWIW, I remember how Speights suddenly got himself into great condition right before the lottery- prior to it he had a reputation of being lazy and a bit overweight.

My favorite approach to the combine was DeMarcus Cousins putting on a bunch of weight.

But he sweated off at least 5 pounds in each work-out. Do you remember his post work-out interview vids? The guy was at risk of drowning in his own perspiration.

Jeremy H (Minneapolis)
With the possibility of the sixers shopping Iggy, where would he fit best? LA Clippers, Twolves, Pacers or somewhere else?

David Thorpe(12:04 PM)
I think the pairing with Monta Ellis is interesting. He's the passer and defender Ellis isn't. They'd need a stretch big to pair with Wright.

Alex (Orlando, FL)
Iggy to Orlando for Turk/Ryan/Future 1st, and the Magic use their TPE to absorb Nocioni's contract. What are your thoughts?

David Thorpe(12:06 PM)
Magic need 3 point shooters.

Yeah, that is clearly an unfair trade in the Sixers favor :)

Jon (Chicago)
Did you hear Roy Williams told Harrison Barnes he would be picked between 8-10 and should return? What a snake.

David Thorpe
I didn't but that is absurd. Barnes would be top 4 for sure. If he does not kill it next year, he'll fall out of lottery.

(My note, If Harrison barnes reason for coming out was only because of Roy Williams, Harrison Barnes needs to learn what 'self interest' means and consult people who aren't hurt by him leaving early)

From what I heard, Barnes didn't return because he was unhappy with his draft stock. All of the feedback he got concerning his stock was positive.

That would make more sense - but does it seem like it's accurate that his feed back in this weak arse draft isn't top 5?

And aside from a few exceptions, don't most guys 'lose spots' when they go back?

eddies' heady's reply to GoSixers on May 14 at 11:44

Barnes is a very intelligent kid and to say he doesn't have self interest just because of a decision that you're questioning is foolish. It's not always about the money. Andrew Luck is another example of that. Barnes stated publicly that he wanted to win a national championship before he left college and he's going back to give it another shot. Why isn't that 'self interest'? There's nothing more to read into it than that.

He's good enough that his 'spot' will be there whatever year he comes out. This kid is very smart and comes from a respectable upbringing and closeknit circle. He got plenty of advice in addition to Roy Williams and himself.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I believe anyone who passes up the chance to be the #1 pick (including in the NFL when you're about to get a new CBA and possibly give up a lot of money) in a sport who passes it up has a questionable dedication to the game. You should want to be #1 and play with professionals as soon as you can, and if you pass that up, you either doubt yourself or your primary love isn't the game you play. And that's fine, but as a fan of a team, I question how these guys pan out if they don't take the first chance they get to be the #1 pick. If you're goal is to play professionally, once you know you'll get picked high, you go. You get to start your career sooner. It's just my opinion, and as usual, we don't agree on anything, and I'm fine with thatl

eddies' heady's reply to GoSixers on May 15 at 11:17

I don't really think this is about agreeing. You're kind of coming with this mindset that every player who has supreme talent should have an end goal to play professionally. Not every kid or player is wired that way. Staying in college can be beneficial for some players if for none other than it gives them tons more practice / preparation time. There's hardly any practice time in the NBA with the string of games weekly. For others it may just be a preference of going through different walks of life. Why start your career sooner when your career, for some, will be there regardless? And along the way, miss out on one of the most fun times of your life in attending college.

Would your opinion change any if every kid's immediate goals aren't to play professionally?

I see no harm in having a goal of wanting to win a national title on the college level, and see it having no bearing at all on someone doubting themselves or the ascertainment of what their primary love is.

I know i'm the only one who finds this even noteworthy - but danny ainge and doc rivers both have kids named austin

Barbera Walters on May 13 at 19:47

I thought Barnes and Jones stayed because of the CBA situation. oh well

Thoughts? http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=6yq8dfy

The Sixers get a first-option scorer and a young big man with promise.

The Warriors get the defensive wing they've been looking for and a gunner that can replace Ellis (Lou is the prototypical GS player).

Barbera Walters reply to Fatteus on May 13 at 20:08

Who would be the primary ball handler, Monte, Jrue or Turner?

Ellis is a rich man's Lou, but he is Lou nonetheless. I feel like on a championship contender, Ellis is a 6th man, nothing more than that. And Udoh is a backup big at best.

I don't like the trade one bit.

Any trade with the warriors that involves Iguodala to california that doesn't involve Curry to Philadelphia is immeidately vetoed, who is with me?

Since i don't think the Warriors would give up Curry for Iguodala i think the only way a trade could be worked out with them is if it's a three team trade. I agree that that Curry is the only worthy player for Iguodala that they have though...

Why not? If they're a team looking to make a jump to a playoff run - adding a guy more mature and experienced in the league is exadtly what you want to do.

And like I said, if the warriors aren't including Curry AS A SIXER it's not a trade worth making. Curry is the only asset on the Warriors that fits the qualifications I have for dumping Iguodala

And predicting what the rudderless clueless new owners of the warriors are going to do is difficult.

If you don't think Iguodala is worth Curry - then I think you undervalue Iguodala. The warriors are terrible in many things, many things that Iguodala excels at - he automatically makes them better defensively, get the right coach in there and they could be the 8 seed - they have too much unbalanced talent

I also don't think the Warriors would trade Curry for Iggy. Just because Iggy is a good player doesn't mean he has good trade value. While I think Iggy is under-appreciated in Philadelphia, I think his trade value is overstated. Most teams aren't interested in paying him $44M for 3 years, especially coming off some injuries. I think it's going to be hard to find a trade partner unless we're willing to dump him without getting much in return.

And I disagree with you as well...if the Warriors WANT Iguodala they have to give something the sixers WANT and if the sixers WANT monta ellis - the frnachise is doomed anyway

Iguodala is not old, Iguodala is not expensive, and he's a player who does many things NO ONE on the Warriors do (PS he's a better 'point guard otion' than either Ellis OR Curry)

Well they could want him but not to the extent that they'll give up Curry. I agree on Ellis, I don't want him.

I'm not saying Iguodala is not worth Curry at all and i stated that clearly in my comment. On the contrary Iguodala is at this moment a better player than Curry. What i am saying is that the Warriors wouldn't trade Curry for Iguodala because they view him as the centerpiece of their squad. If they are forced to choose between Ellis and Curry, they will choose Curry.

If they are forced to choose between curry and ellis they'll choose curry - that's an opinion, and one i disagree with.

They have a lot of money invested in this team (including the current purchase price) and need to start winning and turning around sooner - rather than later. If they want to improve NOW the cost is curry - unless a stupid franchise comes a calling. You don't get better without giving something up of value. Ellis value is low, he's over paid and like someone else said, is he really that much better than lou williams? If you want someone who will make your team more competitive NOW you give up someone who makes your team more competitive in the future...it's simple logic that is applied often in baseball and yet in basketball people refuse to see the logic.

If GSW doesn't want to be good now, they should be looking to move Ellis, Lee, biedrins etc...but I haven't heard any reports that say - golden state is dumping, have you?

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on May 14 at 17:35

any concerns about a really tiny guard rotation with Jrue and Curry starting together with Lou and Jodie off the bench?

I still don't know if you can get away with Turner at the 3 for extended minutes, although the defense he played on LBJ was admirable

Fatteus reply to GoSixers on May 14 at 18:24

Them choosing Curry over Ellis is an opinion but it's as close to fact as you're going to get. The Warriors' management made it very clear that they were open to making a trade but would need to be "blown away" to include Curry. They made no such claim about Ellis. Trading your best young asset is probably the worst thing you can do as a franchise. I'd want them to trade us Curry as much as anyone, but I don't see it happening.

...don't look now peepz but another Thunder/Grizz game is coming in for a landing shortly...

I don't want to make that deal.

I don't think it is that simple.

Tom Moore on May 14 at 14:38

Iguodala attempts fewer 3-pointers and free throws in 2010-11:


Checked out how Iguodala did in two areas Collins stressed before the season.

What about Iguodala and #16 for Curry and Biedrins? Salaries should match up and I think Collins can get Biedrins back to his double-double days of a couple years ago. Probably won't get a better big man value at 16.

Biedrins is the only person who can get him back to where he was years ago, if that's even doable.

I don't know - people smarter than me would work that out if it's viable - i guess the point i'm making is that if curry isn't involved it's not enough for Iguodala at this time - Ellis is pretty damn short too isn't he?

Curry and Ellis are both 'listed' at 6'3. If Curry Holiday is too short - so is Holiday Ellis, no?

I don't think anyone wants Ellis on our team. What people think is that the Warriors are not interested at moving Curry unless they get a superstar that is not past his prime. And as good as he is, Iguodala is certainly not a superstar. As for Ellis, the Sixers shouldn't even think of acquiring Ellis for Iguodala. Lou + nocioni for Ellis, maybe, but nothing more than that. Ellis's contract scares the heall out of me anyway.

Fatteus reply to Xsago on May 14 at 19:12

The point is to get Udoh. Also, although Ellis isn't a GREAT player, he is great at getting to the basket and scoring, and he is trashed more on this blog than he should be. The Warriors have been a poor defensive team for years due to Don Nelson's system, and although Ellis is not a very good defensive player by any means, he would look a lot better in the Sixers' system. The weaknesses (to name a few) on this team are interior defense and a lack of a go-to scorer. This trade would attempt to at least partially address these areas.

Joe reply to Fatteus on May 14 at 19:16

Udoh doesn't rebound and he wasn't much of a rebounder in college either. I wouldn't consider him as much of a prospect.

Fatteus reply to Joe on May 14 at 19:44

Eh, you're right about the rebounding, but the 3.0 blocks per 36 minutes in his rookie year is more than encouraging.

Udoh is a backup big at best. There have been a ton of players that have averaged 3.0 blocks per 36min in the past. Only a few of them actually become anything decent. And Udoh is not even young, he'll be 24 in a few days.

deepsixersuede on May 15 at 8:25

Depending where the Warriors end up after the lottery, [#11 now] I would consider these 2 trades; Iggy for Beidrens and their pick, than either combine #11 and #16 to move up and get a player they like [Kanter or Bismack?] or pick T.Thompson at #11 and Singleton at #16. A combo of Beidrens and Thompson for Iggy is good value, in my opinion.

A second possibility is D.Wright,Beidrens and swapping 1st rounders, which again will net one of the drafts p.f.'s at #11. But if the Warriors drop below #11 to #13 or lower I would probably pass.

deepsixersuede reply to deepsixersuede on May 15 at 8:31

The sixers, because of not wanting to spend into luxury tax territory, are not dealing from a position of strength and probably aren't going to get what a lot of us want for Iggy.

As gosixers has stated many times, they may have to "rob Peter to pay Paul" and hope they fill their big and shooting holes without hampering themselves defensively too much. That is why Singleton is looking real good at #16.

deepsixersuede reply to deepsixersuede on May 15 at 8:46

T. Thompson's 2 main strength's seem to be offensive rebounding and shotblocking. If our front office has any faith that Spieghts gets it, he would be a perfect compliment to Speights at the 4. And a Beidrens/Spieghts combo at the 5 could be productive with the way Collins attacks mismatches.

I made a similar proposal either in this post or a post or two ago. I think it makes the most sense and is realistic. Wright's not a "replacement" for Igoudala, but he's solid and more important he'd "fit" with what the Sixers are trying to do. Biedrins is a mess, BUT 1) he's only 24-25, don't consider hima total lost cause. If the Warriors pick gets us a big that we REALLY like, then I'm for this trade. My question is - if the Warriors move up to #3, and can't get Irving or D. Williams, would they still make this deal? My trade was Igoudala, Speights, & #16 for Wright, Biedrins, and Warriors pick. I think if Warriors stayed at #11, we might not even have to include #16 in that deal. Only if they moved up to #3.

deepsixersuede reply to Marty on May 15 at 10:40

I think if Kanter's knees are fine he is the 3rd pick in this draft and whoever gets that pick, won't move it. I will be shocked if any of the bigs we want here [Kanter,Bismack, Valenceous] are available after #8.

I agree, i too believe that Kanter is most likely going to be the third pick in the draft if he measures well in the combine. I am also beginning to like him more than Biyombo, he is going to be a very good center. Think a bigger Scola with decent defense.

I know nothing about any of these guys, but my guess is Kanter will be a stud, simply based on the fact that Calipari recruited him. Calipari just doesn't seem to miss when it comes to stars.

Terrible idea. I would rather keep Iguodala than trade him for an overpayed average big in Biedrins a huge injury risk who had one decent season and can't play defense in Wright and a mediocre pick that will most likely result in a backup player. We essentially become much worse both short and long term with such a trade.

deepsixersuede reply to Xsago on May 15 at 11:02

I am sure a sitdown with Beidrens would happen before a move of this nature; as bad as he was this year he got 7 reb. in 24 mpg. . Wright would be an ideal shooter off the bench on a good team but here he could be a very good compliment to Jrue and Evan, if they are our future backcourt. The draft pick is the key and if Elton's replacement can be gotten, I would do the trade.

That's the thing an 11th pick in a weak draft on average results into a role player at best. If you are trading Iguodala for a draft pick make sure that pick will actually amount to something. Outside of Kanter there is noone in the draft that really makes sense if you are trading Iguodala (Biyombo and Valanciunas are also options, but considerably riskier ones).

Tom Moore on May 15 at 9:36

Sunday story: Trading Iguodala is necessary for Sixers to get what they need:


deepsixersuede reply to Tom Moore on May 15 at 10:49

Tom, what is your take on when Iggy gets moved? If he is here after the draft are the odds a lot lower that he is dealt at all? The pickings in the league seem so slim as far as available centers.

It could happen by the draft. If not, with the lockout, it could be a while. Might have a better shot at a quality scorer than a big man.

deepsixersuede reply to Tom Moore on May 15 at 12:21

I am hoping they give Turner a chance to fill that role. If Iggy doesn't get a big, I probably don't move him.

Bill reply to Tom Moore on May 15 at 11:13

Actually Deandre Jordan was selected with the 35th pick of the 2008 draft...

I should've made it clearer. What I meant was that the Sixers twice bypassed Gasol -- wasn't referring to Jordan. Sorry.

Just changed online version to make it clearer. Thanks.

Tom Moore on May 15 at 10:02

Sunday column: Is Lou Williams the new Willie Green?


I'm truly amazed how people get excited about mediocre draft prospects. Every year a ton of new players enter the league, but only a few of them actually amount to something. On average around 8-9 players per draft become starter worthy and no more than 5 become top 3 players on a contender. In a weak draft like this one it's safe to assume that there will be 6-7 "starters" and 10 more rotation role players. And only 2-3 of the "starters" will become top 3 players on a contender.

All that being considered in a draft like this years, the 10th pick in the draft for example has around 70% chance to completely bust out, around 25% to become a role player or a fringe starter and maybe 5% chance that he becomes a top3 player on a contender.

Now my question is would you trade Iguodala for a player that has around 5% chance that he becomes close to as good as him?

deepsixersuede reply to Xsago on May 15 at 12:31

In a trade like I mentioned above, the front office would have to be confident that one of the 3 pieces will be a quality starter. It will be interesting to see what players they value in this draft and if they wait to see who is on the board on draft night before pulling the trigger.

If Leonard or Vesely are sitting there at #9, maybe they go for them as Iggy's replacement instead of a big. I think caproom is part of any Iggy trade because even if they draft a big, Collins won't put him out there till he is ready and capspace may allow for a Mohammed, Kw.Brown kind of stopgap if they get Bismack or Valanceous.

As of right now, it makes zero sense to have cap room as your goal for an Iguodala trade. If you are going for caproom than you need to trade both Iguodala and Brand together for expirings. Anything below that is pointless because it won't realistically help cap-wise. Besides, going for capspace when you don't even know what the new CBA will bring is shortsighted IMO.

deepsixersuede reply to Xsago on May 15 at 14:14

I said caproom as part of a trade, not the sole reason. Talent plus caproom is a win win. God forbid that comcast would spend money.

Tom Moore on May 15 at 16:27

Lakers haven't asked Sixers for permission to speak to Collins:


Tray reply to Tom Moore on May 15 at 17:20

I wouldn't if I were them.

hmmm does anyone else think/hope Memphis has one more scare-the-crap-out-of-OKC run left in them??

nope, no they did not...congrats to the Grizz for a surprisingly good season, and now let's all root for everybody's only hope to keep Miami from winning it all!

In the meantime, as much as i dislike Gonzo, who else caught what he got Snider to say about AI9?

Q: About the players: Were you disappointed in Andre Iguodala when he said he expected to be back in the NBA next year, but not necessarily back with the Sixers?

A: Iguodala probably has read a thousand articles about why we should trade him and why he's not worth the money. He's probably hedging his own bet. Don't forget, after that, he added he wanted to be with the same team his entire career. He's been put through the ringer by so-called basketball experts and writers. He certainly hasn't asked to be traded. I think it was an unfortunate interpretation of his words.

He's a good player. The proof is in the pudding - he was second-team all-defensive squad. You have to do two things in basketball. Try to score and try to defend. If you have someone who can keep the other guy from scoring, that's a valuable commodity.

link: http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/flyers/20110515_Gonzo___Snider_on_public_ice_rinks__Flyers_and_Sixers.html?page=2&c=y#ixzz1MSgXw46U

Tray reply to das411 on May 15 at 20:47

I want Miami to win it all, of course. Anyway, what just happened to Memphis is what eventually happens to all teams in the playoffs that only have one good scorer. What happened to us is what happens to teams that don't have any. It's an offensive era.

Solid showing for LePippen.

On multiple occassions Omer Asik forced Lebron to take a long two.. just bad. Chicago's front line seems to be exactly what you need to defend Miami..

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment