DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

My Number Is 7

I like the idea of waiting and matching. Seems absurd to offer a 5-year deal with 7.5% raises when no other team can and you have RFA matching rights.

I'm worried that Thad got exposed in the Miami series. Can't go to his right, can't shoot from the outside, and they exploited it. My max is 4 years, $20M (in which case I guess I'd be saying goodbye to Thad).

I'm fine with 5y, 7m offer. Actually my valuation of Thad is more or less in line with what Brian put out there. Let's hope the bottom dwellers with plenty of cash don't value him too much and he can resign at a reasonable price.

$7 m/5 year is the worst case scenario for me. With the drop in the MLE, lowered raises and lowered years, I'm hoping for better. All I'm asking is not to set the market for Thad. Let him go out and get an offer and I'm guessing he'll be back for 4 years, $25 million

deepsixersuede reply to Derek Bodner on Nov 29 at 7:32

Derek, do you sense he is what he is? My one fear about losing him is he starts hitting the 3 and becomes an efficient 20 ppg. scorer, a Rashard Lewis type player.

Can he, under Collins, ever become the scorer to compliment Jrue and Turner at the 3? I doubt he will but wonder how Collins feels about it. Turner and his ball skills may hide some of Thad's faults and allow him to become a catch-n-shoot and catch-n-drive player.

The 3 with Jrue and Turner would be a bad fit for him. If he's ever a 3, I think it's next to a Dirk/Bargs type of 4 who can give him space to operate on mismatches down low.

I think he might have some untapped potential, but I'm not sure I see him being more than a 6th man on this team.

I don't see any way he becomes a consistant 3 point shooter, especially cosnidering the "electric fence" though process collins is pushing on him.

Best case is he learns to rebound and defend better and stop overhelping. Maybe develop a better mid range game.

Whether or not he can become something more, they need to pay him based on what he is right now. He's been around too long to pay him based on potential.

There are two problems with that, the first being that I don't see Thad as a very good catch and shoot player, and he's also a big liability at the three defensively against any player with a semblance of a 1 on 1 offensive game. It's as if Offensive Thad would just blow by Defensive Thad.

Da Jruth on Nov 29 at 10:23

It would be very surprising if some team offers him anywhere close to 7 or 8 million a year. He's nowhere near worth it. His offensive game is too limited and his defense often leaves alot to be desired. I like what he brings to this particular team as set up currently, but this player is just another in a long line of athletes with no polished skills, most importantly a perimenter shot, littered throughout benches across the league. 5 million a year would be generous and only for 4 years with an option for a 5th.

You'd be surprised if a one dimensional player is offered more money than he's worth in the NBA? Why?

Rich reply to Da Jruth on Nov 29 at 11:56

I'm with you on the salary, but your evaluation is off. There are not benches littered across the league with players like Thad. His offensive game being limited hasn't hurt him against anyone in the league not named Joel Anthony. Just because he's limited offensively, doesn't mean that he isn't really, really effective. There's not a long line of guys that scored as efficiently as he did last year, polished skills or not.

I wouldn't offer Thad more than the MLE, the average NBA salary is too damn high in general because players like thad who bring limited ability and demonstrated upside get over paid, in addition to having no natural position he plays well.

Thad is at best an MLE player, and if the nba really wants 'cost certainty' they should pay players what they're worth, there's too many over paid players, the sixers don't need to create another contract that's too much for the production

Do you consider Thad to be an above average NBA player?

Nope - I don't consider Thaddeus Young to be a much better overall player than Louis Williams. He has one strength and many weaknesses

Rich reply to GoSixers on Nov 29 at 13:01

They both are above average NBA players. How much is a question, but they both are definitely above average players.

I'm not sure what that has to do with the money. The average SALARY in the NBA is higher (proportionately) than any of the four major sports leagues. Average players are over paid all the time, that doesn't mean the sixers should over pay Thaddeus Young.

Do you think Thaddeus Young is a better overall player than Louis Williams?

Louis Williams makes a little bit more than 5 million a year - should Thaddeus Young make 40% more than Louis Williams. It doesn't matter where one was drafted any more, it never should, once you're drafted, all that matters is your play.

Is Thaddeus Young worth 40% more than Louis Williams, yes or no?

To me - he's worth about the same, and possibly even less because he's more one dimensional than Williams.

What Lou does is easier to replace. Thad's value, for me, is that he's extremely tough for teams to match up with, and they do have to make changes to match up with him. No one goes away from their best lineup to get a better guy in to cover Lou, when Thad is on, teams have to adjust which opens things up for other guys. Also, on this team especially, having a guy like Thad whose only responsibility on the offensive end is to finish, is very important. You've got 2 or 3 playmakers out there at all times, having a guy who scores efficiently without needing the ball is important. When Lou's in the game, the other guys are either ignored or marginalized while he's dribbling the air out of the ball.

To the Sixers, I think Thad's more valuable than Lou and I'm fine paying him 40% more than Lou. Lou might even do better than the MLE next summer, you can make the case he's underpaid right now.

I wouldn't make the case that Lou is underpaid and I would make the case that 'match up' issues for Thaddeus Young are off set by his piss poor rebounding for his size and position, poor defense, limited shooting range.

I don't think teams fear Thaddeus Young as much as you think they do

But he's not a starter. You bring him in for a spark in the offense and to have teams adjust their personnel for him. He does a good job at that. He doesn't come in for rebounding, defense, or shooting.

that's right - he comes in for one thing and one thing only

And you think a guy who does one thing and one thing only is worth 40% more than Thaddeus young AND more than 10% of your salary cap?

It's fine w/ me if they don't fear. It's also fine with me if they do. If they don't he's going to score a ton of points on very few shots and carry the offense. If they do, then they're going to weaken their team to get a better matchup out there. He's an advantage to them off the bench, that's what I'm interested in and I think $7M/year is a fair price to pay for that. If you pay him much more than that, then I think you're essentially paying him to be something that he is not, and probably cannot become, and that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

I think paying a one dimensional bench player 7 million dollars is just wrong in principle, I don't think he's worth more than Lou and I don't think Lou is over paid.

I realize that NBA and sanity don't go together, but it's just my opinion.

Rich reply to GoSixers on Nov 29 at 15:15

You were asked a question if they were above average NBA players. I think they both are, significantly so. I really could care less about the points that have been made about if he's one dimensional or not, because he didn't shoot threes last year! He played to his strengths and if he continues, those strengths are pretty damn good. Also, I could care less if teams "fear" him. I've seen one guy in the league who can really stop him.

Yes, I do think Thaddeus Young is a better player than Lou Williams. They both are below average defenders, but Thad gives effort on that end, where Lou often is atrocious at keeping guys in front of him. That was born out last year as the team performed better offensively and defensively with Thad on the floor than Lou.

Brian made the point once that Lou can kind of keep your offense afloat at his best and Thad can carry an offense (because they are still running offense) when he's at his best. I agree with that, and that's not a shot at Lou. As maddening as he is, the guy is probably fairly paid.

If they can get him for 5 million a year, great. But I wouldn't be mad if they got him for 6 or 7 either.

I really could care less about the points that have been made about if he's one dimensional or not, because he didn't shoot threes last year!

A. If you could you should
B. Tell me why I should care about your points if you don't care about mine. Thaddeus Young can't rebound efficiently either, which is pretty important when you're putting a guy at the 4.

If you bothered to read it you'd see I never mentioned 3 pointers

Rich reply to GoSixers on Nov 29 at 16:12

Yeah you did mention it above, bringing up limited shooting range. Don't get all defensive and please come up with some insulting remark, but nobody should care about the point because it really doesn't matter. He still scores really efficiently, in the framework of an offense. He doesn't really screw anyone else up while he's getting his points. What is there to complain at length about his offense?

He is a poor rebounder, but then again if he was a good one he'd probably make 10 million a year. The stats show that the team was better defensively with him on the floor than off it, something to look at. Now those stats are helped by the fact that Hawes played so many minutes and Thad played against bench players a good amount of the time, but he is far from a total zero on that end.

Well, I wasn't referring to 3's I was referring to the fact that outside of 5 feet he ain't great - that's his shooting range, not really the 3. I don't care if he can hit the three, I care that he has one move and when teams focus on him (Miami) they'll shut him down easy, and then he's useless

If Turner averages 10 ppg, 4.5 rpg and 3 apg in 25 minutes, would you pick up the team option on him next year?

There's no reason not to pick up the option on Turner unless he blows out his knees and can never play basketball again

But it's 5 million dollars. What if we can sign Dwight or Kevin Love (I HAVE HOPE!!), would you rather spend 5 mill on ET or use that money on a proven player like Eric Gordon?

You're not going to get Eric Gordon for $5M.

I know, but you can get him for 8-10. Why pay ET 5 million if you can get Gordon?

So you aren now using AN EXTRA 3 million on eric gordon (who won't come here) instead of paying eric turner?

So now you have less to pay dwight or kevin love compared to if you just kept evan turner? Counters your argument

Plus, why is eric gordon let go by his parent team?


Yes, if Eric Turner doesn't improve next year, I would pay Eric Gordon an extra 3 million dollars than I would have paid Turner

Pardon the typo, but the point is you wanted to save money for howard or love (put down the pipe dreams) by cutting turner and using that money on gordon and now you have to take some of the money from the (deluded) howard / love signing for eric gordon - who oh yeah - is also a restricted free agent.

I always find that using a bit of rational practicality helps. Whomever has Kevin Loves restricted rights is unlikely to give him away, same with gordon, and Dwight Howard most likely won't hit free agency.

And you wouldn't have to pay Howard or Love less money. Iguodala, Lou Williams, Jrue and Thad's 8 million would bring the Sixers cap to 31 milllion.

So now the sixers have 4 players under contract and dwight howard (who decides against all common sense to come to philadelphia) and an obligation to sign at least 8 more players with only about, what, 20 mil left under the cap?

Sure that's an awesome idea

If we can sign Dwight Howard, I don't understand why wouldn't spend an extra 3 million on Eric Gordon, especially if Turner isn't any better than what he is now.

Again, i don't buy your premise that even if the sixers had the money that Dwight Howard would sign in philadlephia with an existing roster of four players. Eric Gordon taking up 8 million of what's left and you still have to sign 7 players is a problem, and again

It's one of the more unlikely scenarios floated.

Let's just say, unless turner blows out his knee for ever, the common sense thing to do is pick up his option because your pie in the sky scenario is as likely as me starting for the phillies

Tray reply to Stan on Nov 29 at 17:47

I don't think Eric Gordon is an 8 million dollar player. I think he already is, or at least, soon will be, quite a bit better than that.

I'm looking forward to seeing Blake and Gordon miss the playoffs again. Wondering what your excuse will be this season.

They're not one of the 8 best teams in the west? Is that an excuse?

Tray reply to Brian on Nov 30 at 1:50

the players around them are mostly terrible, they're coached by a nitwit, had no point guard, and they're still really young and learning to defend. and last year gordon was out a third of the season, didn't come back so well, and they had absolutely nothing else as a second option. and they play in a stacked conference. I don't expect the playoffs this year, of course, but I do expect a monstrous sophomore season from griffin.

"LEarning to defend"

Seriously isn't that something you learn when you're like 14

You mean a proven restricted free agent like Eric Gordon, where's the guarantee he agrees to a contract and his parent team lets him walk?

The sixers could refuse to over pay Thaddeus Young and let Spencer Hawes go away and have their 5 million you seem to think would be wasted on a 3rd year player.

I suppose Turner could be worse than he was last year and maybe you let him go - but i don't see it happening.

And I'm glad you have hope that Dwight Howard or Kevin Love will come to the sixers. I don't live on hope

Yahoo Marc Spears with a list of players unlikely to even consider signing with the sixers.

except of course for #6

Could a team like Orlando trade away Gilbert Arenas for expiring contracts and $50 million in cash? I know it would never happen, but I am curious as to whether or not something this absurd could be done.

No - in the previous cba the total amount of cash limited in a trade was 3 million dollars (hence the 'going rate' of a first round pick was 3 million dollars)

The new CBA indicates that a team can only receive (or send out I guess) 3 million in total for the 'year' in trades, so you'll probably see less cash in trades than you used to (and first round picks might drop in cost)

How does any of this change if Turner plays like the #2 pick some expected him to be?

He and Thaddeus Young play entirely different positions, so I doubt it changes much?

It hopefully means Louis williams plays less when the sixers go small

According to David Aldridge, even if the Magic waive Gilbert they're only 3 mil under the cap...would you waive gilbert for that 3 million or see if maybe he wants to help off the bench?

Well, the thing about waiving Gilbert is that it takes from a taxpayer to being under the cap. That's a big deal, and they'll be even worse tax payers in the coming years. I think you cut him. He'll cost you more by keeping him.

I guess if dwight says keep him you keep him though?

Seriously - I think Otis should start on moving Dwight right away

Does the new CBA effect a trade with LA?

All depends on what the trade is if it ever happens. Jim Buss seems to prefer Andrew Bynum over Dwight Howard (though no one is sure why, cause Bynum can't stay healthy and isn't at howards level when he is). The hold up is that Jerry has decided that jim instead of jeannie is the heir apparent and jim might not know what he's doing (Jerry buss is quite the misogynist)

I can't believe Washington actually offered him more money

"I'm basically giving back $16 million," Arenas told the Washington Times. "This is in line with what I've been saying the whole time. You see players take max deals and they financially bind their teams. I don't wanna be one of those players and three years down the road your team is strapped and can't do anything about it."

Hey - in his defense - the wizards were strapped immediately - not 3 years down the road.

I mean the wiz handed out a series of stupid contracts

I'll never forget that. Washington over him like the biggest contract ever after he had 2 knee surgeries. I remember laughing when he took less money, even Arenas was smarter than the Wizards.

Chris Mannix w/ a tweet about the Sixers being worried someone will swoop in and offer Thad a big contract. Maybe Sacto.

Did they not watch the Miami series?

Isn't sacramento one of those teams that have like lots of low contract stuff next year so they HAVE to spend some money.

I think the most fun is boston since they only have like 6 guys under contract right now :)

I agree. I hope the offer is enormous, pricing the Sixers out.

Rich reply to Brian on Nov 29 at 19:28

Well hearing that they are nervous is one thing. They should be! I wonder if he hears a team is interested in giving him a big offer.

Shouldn't Mannix be worried about his boy Gilbert getting amnestied?

i know this has nothing to do with the sixers but i found it interesting, its about the celtics looking to deal rondo for chris paul


Amicks point about selling Chris Paul on staying in boston with the 3 grand father of the apocalypse has a pretty strong point, plus finding a 3rd team would be an issue, I mean does the 3rd team get rondo and give the hornets talent or does the 3rd team have to add talent to make the hornest happy and what do they get?

i think the 3rd team would get rondo and the hornets get the picks+players to make them happy

Makes it more doable, but where do you find a team that has the talent to make the hornets happy but still has enough talent to make obtaining rondo worth while?

For some reason houston just pops into my head immediately.

i feel like houston is a darkhorse to trade for howard or for paul its just whether or not they want to play in houston which i dont think they want to

I don't get the love for LA really I don't, from a marketing point of view you can be a superstar almost anywhere if you're good and you win, Chris Pauls problem is he's a point guard (who was the last super star point guard in a marketing way?)

Howard in houston, with duncan about to come to the end of his career, carrying on the tradition of the big men in houston, if they can WIN that would be huge

Not sure why Paul would agree to go to Boston for an extension, which Amick says is a sticking point for Boston to make the deal. That team's core is all pretty old, but for the next year or two it would be a good place to go.

Maybe that's all Ainge wants, Paul has a player option, maybe contending for a title gets paul to pick up that option for one year before hitting free agency?

Kind of makes sense?

Rich reply to GoSixers on Nov 29 at 20:01

Well the conventional wisdom is that Paul wants to play for the Knicks. And the article says this. I think that would be a fair trade, Rondo for two years of Paul. This article says this though:

"Without Paul agreeing to an extension, however, the sources say Ainge will not do the deal."

Maybe Ainge is looking for another KG-giftwrapped trade. I think CP3 might not want to be told what to do by KG, and maybe their personalities wouldn't mesh. Rondo had been fed up with it for awhile as he was making his ascension into a top-flight PG. That's speculation though.

Except that the KG thing went in hand with Ray Allen and Paul pierce was already in place. Those three are about to retire (or play longer than they should and be bad) so after year two (if that) in boston, it'd be chris paul and no one, that's onot good for him (but good for the sixers)

I know the whole CP3 wants to go to New York thing but

A. Does he fit in a d'antoni system?
B. How the hell do the knicks afford him with the new cba. Since they wanted to get rid of them does anyone think the nba owned hornets would agree to an extend and trade with the knicks? I wouldn't be surprised (though of course that could backfire on them in a collusion type way)

A big part of this lockout was doing away with the whole superstar forcing his way to a specific team thing. I don't think the league will allow it to happen to a team they control. I think if Paul is made available, he winds up being traded somewhere like Houston, probably. If he's going to wind up in New York, it's going to be as a free agent because the Knicks have absolutely zero trade assets. The Hornets would have to do the Knicks a massive favor to get CP3 to NY w/ a healthy contract.

But if the NBA makes a move to suit their needs instead of the best interest of the franchise they are running, won't chris paul have a claim regarding unfair labor practices?

It's a VERY tricky situation - the nba HAS to get the hornets sold - they have to let go of this stay in new orleans things - it's not going to happen that's why they can't find a buyer to stay

Privately Stern probably wants CP3 in NYC, but it would look so bad for the league (worse than the Knicks landing Ewing in the lottery) if they engineered that. Best interest of the franchise would probably involve trading CP3 anywhere but New York, since the Knicks have the worst trade assets in the league.

Stan reply to Brian on Nov 29 at 20:41

Who does Houston have that would make New Orleans consider trading Chris Paul?

Rich reply to GoSixers on Nov 29 at 20:12

If D'Antoni was smart, he'd tailor it to Paul's strengths. A team with Amare, CP3 and Melo would be a nightmare in the halfcourt. I'd really think that would make Melo much more efficient. Of course they'd have to score points with those guys on defense. I think they would though.

Stan reply to GoSixers on Nov 29 at 20:47

Paul would have to give a huge discount to play in New York. NY is only committed to 41 million next year, but that 41 million is committed to 2 players. Could Carmelo and Amare restructure their contracts, take less money and lower their cap number?

I don't think restructuring is allowed in the NBA (at least not in regard to the cap).

Yep, that's correct.

johnrosz on Nov 29 at 21:01

CP3, Amar'e, and Melo sounds nice enough, but how long until two of those idiots (we know who) start to bitch about the # of touches they're getting per game? We already heard Amar'e complaining about his touches after Melo came aboard. The trio thing is great as long as your stars aren't me first players, which I tend to believe Melo and Amar'e are both prime examples of.

Amare said that when they weren't winning. They struggled at first when Carmelo arrived. I think winning cures all, and with CP3 they would be winning all the time.

What do we know about the timing of the amnestied player auction? Can teams just decide to use their amnesty whenever they want to, once the new CBA takes place? Seems like it would make sense for teams to hold off on using their own amnesties to see who may be available on the cheap from other teams...but wouldn't every team then have an incentive to not make the first move? Am I missing something? If I'm a team waiving, say, Gilbert and his massive massive deal...shouldn't I wait until I know who else is available with the $$ I save immediately before pulling the trigger on amnestying him, vs trying to trade the expiring?

We know nothing about anything until the offical document is produced and signed. I presume that there's a deadline than the auction - that kind of makes sense doesn't it?

I think because you can use it any time that it might not be used as much as people think this year.

This new deal really isn't a full 10 year deal is it - a bunch of things take place 'two years in' which i think was part of the owner conession to players.

Bucher reporting that the age limit won't change for the first two years - no mention of after though

...do i even want to know what this tweet is all about:

@MindofAI9 (Andre Iguodala): Dick vitale is pole riding the skin off the heat

Go to espn3.com and see if you can find a rebroadcast of the ohio state duke game. Vitale is such a homer tool it's pathetic. Andre was on point in this comment, and pretty vivid too. Can you rec twitter posts?

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment