DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

If You Have A Switch...

Its a disappointment, but I think Jrue's best future in the NBA is to find a team with a dominat SG and become a modern day Derek Fisher. Meaning a guy who hits jumpers, defends and makes some key drives... but is not really a PG. A guy like that certainly has value, but only on certain teams.

Now if only ET could become the great SG many hope(d) he could be, then all of the sudden Jrue is the perfect fit as his Fisher/Paxon- but personality I don't see that happening. But who knows, maybe once Iguodala is gone both of them raise their game to another level. But that has not happened in the games Iguodala has sat out.

I say wait one more year, this year's summer break was awful for young players. With a good preparation things might have looked a whole lot different.

Stan reply to tk76 on Apr 10 at 14:00

I'm hoping Turner will end up being a Manu Ginobili type player.

Tray reply to tk76 on Apr 10 at 18:09

Fisher could shoot though.

Jrue can shoot.

Fisher is a career 40% FG and 37% 3pt shooter. Jrue is better.

He's probably also a better defender than Fisher ever was

I still think a fresh coach who lets jrue be jrue would be a god send

The "Island Of Misfit Toys" Tour continues. If Sixers don't snatch tonight's game the season is over - until tomorrow @ TOR (grudge match).

Tonight's episode of "The Young & The Restless Plus Uncles Eltie & Iggy" is entitled "Clash of the Williams Past The Venerable Vince Lombardi Rest Stop."

Is there anything left in this TEAM, not individuals?
Collin's concerning turnpike ride, needle leaning towards 'E'.

Stepping back from the anger and dissapointment- it is interesting to see how this season played out.

The Sixers found early success by:

1. Having a potent offense that was solely based on hitting long 2's at a high percentage, protecting the ball and getting out on the break.

2. Having the league's #1 rated defense despite lacking physical/intimidating interior defenders.

Neither were sustainable, but it was interesting for a while to see if it held up.

Re 1: Early hitting of long 2s stemmed from strong sense of common purpose and good ball movement, which has fizzled with guard role musical chairs and resultant locker room combustion, mini-dramas of which we'll never know until Iggy's published tell-all. Began slide when teams got serious in last month, started bodying them up.
Sixers respond by backing off, going helter skelter - instead of hard to the hole.

Re 2: Still ranked at top, despite recent let-up. The construction remains but dissension eats away like termites; one malcontent/loafer on court and ya become pourous, sometimes in key moments.

Doug's opportunistic intensity, "continuity" and gift of Dec/Jan schedule set 'em up nicely.

Hobbes reply to tk76 on Apr 10 at 13:07

"The Sixers found early success by:

1. Having a potent offense that was solely based on hitting long 2's at a high percentage, protecting the ball and getting out on the break.

2. Having the league's #1 rated defense despite lacking physical/intimidating interior defenders."

And let's never lose sight of context. It was the early part of a compressed/strike season, which means teams they played were out-of-shape and many were playing with some new and unfamiliar parts. Also, we had something like the 2nd or 3rd easiest schedule for those first 20 games (so says ESPNers who calculate such things). Point being, we didn't lose grasp of some powerful weapon we had in hand. We're the same team now as we were then. But other teams warmed up (league-wide, FG% was way, way down in the first month), and after a few months of tape we're easy to prep for.

At worst, we're a bad team. At worst-er, we're a mediocre team. Crazy aligned stars at season's opening notwithstanding.

My point is more that what they were doing was fluky and not sustainable. So it is little surprise they came back to earth. And since they are so streaky they actually overshot all the way to terrible. Their true calibre is somewhere in between- which is reflected by their current record.

The defense has still held up pretty well

I thinks the defensive stats are misleading. Objectively, they give up several less easy transition baskets a game becasue of their low TO offense. That has nothing to do with the defense but pads their defensive rankings by trimming off some PPG and takes away several high FG% plays that would be dunks, lay-ups and open 3's.

While subjectively, they are soft and get pushed around at key times in close games. A good DReb% is empty if you consistently give up O-Boards in contested games.

interesting article:

With Sixers' Collins near wits’ end, Iguodala may be on way out


That is pretty harsh. And as usual, the highest profile player (Iggy) gets the buklk of the blame when the ship is sinking... but he also gets the praise when they are winning.

Fair or not, that is the way it is in sports. Honestly, everyone but Iguodala would say that he is not well suited to be a teams leading man. But he'd make a great Robin.

The free throw shooting (the focus of the criticism) is inexcusable. As I pointed out last night, though, there have only been two games where missed Iguodala free throws were the main culprit behind a Sixer loss, and neither of those games happened in the current 9-18 stretch (they both happened during the 20-9 start). The article would have been better served focusing on Iguodala's inability to score consistently on isolations, leading to the (mostly failed) Lou experiment, contributing to the Sixers' poor record in close games. (And the recent spate of blowout losses is due to a lot of things, a systemic failure really.)

Isolation scoring is an uncommon skill in the NBA and tends to be magnified because of the game situations where it's needed. This tends to cause fans to label players who are good at it as "superstars," ignoring the weaknesses in those players that contribute to the game's being close in the first place. Carmelo Anthony is a much better isolation scorer than Iguodala, but I claim Iguodala's contributions throughout the rest of the game typically put his team in a better position by the end of the game than what Carmelo provides (or substitute Monta Ellis or other "super-scorer").

johnrosz reply to Statman on Apr 10 at 13:04

I really hope that stuff about him/Doug isn't true, if he has a problem with Doug to the point where it's becoming a major issue, at what point do you look at the player? Has he ever gotten along with a coach?

I don't even like Doug that much, he's as big of a drama queen as there is in the NBA, but he's done just about everything to NOT step on Iggy's toes, to a fault I think...and if Iggy is still having problems? Yikes.

As far as I know Iguodala got along with every coach (except maybe eddie Jordan) until Doug collins, and now you're want to ascribe some sort of blame to him as Collins loses the ENTIRE team...it's the same as the dalembert nonsense when he was called the 'clubhouse cancer' when eddie jordan was ruining this team.

Iguodala has been treated like crap by this organization and the fanbase for years now

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Apr 10 at 13:20

He ripped DiLeo after having his best year under the guy. I was not a fan of that when it happened, and I'm still not. You don't have to convince me that he's a good player, I know this and I don't really care if the fans appreciate him or not.

The thing is that the Sixers are historically incredibly streaky. So I don't think it is the coach "losing the team" as much as it is just the inevitable ups and down of this team as constructed. The only psuodo consistency was the 95 game down stretch under EJ and early Collins followed by the 85 games of consistently solid play that ended when they peaked at 20-9. But stepping further back to a 6 year view they always have these huge swings of strong and weak play that tend to more commonly last about 35 games.

I don't thing Brown, Ayers, O'Brien, Ford, DiLeo, Cheeks, EJ and Collins have all "lost the team" just because the team went sour. The team is just constructed to go sour after similarly brief periods of sweetness. That is not a defense of any of those coaches. But really I think the team is who they are based on their fualty construction. And that has been the case for a long time. Individual coaches just highlight some of the faults... but I'm guessing you agree with this.

Given the team is in utter disarray, I agree with previous suggestions to really mix things up by starting:


That way ET can be as ball dominant as he wants on the 2nd unit and Lou is less likely to be ISO/Bossy.

At very least, this new starting line-up would have more energy and be more assertive.

That would be fine by me. I doubt he does it, though. If he's going to make a change, my money is on Meeks for Turner. If he does make a change and leaves Turner in the starting lineup, to me, that would signify that he wasn't given a choice about inserting Turner in the starting lineup (and keeping him there).

And to be clear, I'm just suggesting that line-up as a last gasp effort to turn around their death slide. At very least it would inject some much needed energy and offense into the starting line-up. Maybe strike one last vein of Fool's Gold.

MCT reply to Brian on Apr 10 at 11:08

I really wish he would replace Hawes, it seems like he has thrown them all off since he came back. I know he played well in the beginning of the season but reality has caught up with him.

Sharone Wright reply to MCT on Apr 10 at 12:28

I think there's a chence he will. He said after the previous starting lineup change that he always changes two starters because he doesn't want to single out one player. Here's hoping he subs out Hawes. Anything but Hawes and I'm happy. Meeks is likey to now start, considering Collin's glowing compliments of him in his last presser. But I am curious, could Collins be sending in Meeks for Jrue? That would be the following starting 5:

Why not try it? I don't recall that lineup playing together much (but if so, does anyone have stats on their performance?)

That's where Collins is too fussy. One guy screwin' up? Replaces two so the one isn't offended. Goofy approach to line-up decisions.

Walkin' on eggshells to spare feelings - players detect it; manipulators exploit it.

I've always wanted the Nets to be something they're not, an entrenched franchise with an identifiable home and fan base. I would've settled for Scotch Plains. Oh well, on to Brooklyn.

At least the NJ Americans had lovely Teaneck, the Armory and guard Levern "Jelly" Tart.

gerald wallace out tonight, gerald green a game time decision

That's huge, actually. That's one less guy who can crash the boards, and one less potential threat that Iguodala has to defend.

The key to this game will be reducing the amount of possessions where Meeks/Lou is stuck guarding Deron, preventing second-chance opportunities, and announcing that Hawes will sit out the rest of the season and will no longer be with the team for the rest of his playing career.

Sta reply to Jeff on Apr 10 at 14:06

Our team is in a sad state of affairs, when we're glad that the 2nd best player on a 21 win team is out.

This is certainly a sad state of affairs. I don't care nearly as much about making the playoffs or not (if they're #7,#8 seed I especially don't care) as I do about the development of Jrue and Turner. That is, how and when they'll develop, and what the final result will be.

"As the going has gotten rough for the Sixers, Iguodala has been at his worst - not as a player, but as a team member."

Is there a more damning statement than that?

What do Iguodala's staunch supporters (you know who you are) have to say about that opinion offered by a veteran beat writer, one who's pretty solid, one not prone to loose constructions in print? Your silence is deafening.

and when no one has responded to your first four trollish comments, you've now gotten desperate enough to directly call upon people to respond to you. Hilarious(ly pathetic).

103-79. Did ya jot that, junior? Keep payin' attention, ya might learn somethin'.

Right. 100% Iguodala's fault. He's not a team leader. He thinks he's Kobe. You are not a troll.

Yes, that definitely vindicates your argument that he was selling an injury when he was literally scraped across his eyeball.

Everyone gets that you don't like Iguodala. A bunch of us disagree, and some agree with you, but then again they don't publicize it every day. Nobody responds because you don't bring anything new to the table.

Let's operate on truth - I spoke to his OVERselling.

I don't write on him daily, life's too short. I insert when I sense a reality check is in order.

I'm confident about what I offer, in the main and relatively. Not looking for your endorsement.

I posed the question because I'm actually interested in how the advanced stat guys/Iggy acolytes respond to/reconcile that fundamental, derogatory statement. Have read a lot of supportive AI posts on this blog. When he gets slammed unequivocally by a male pro, the room goes quiet. If his ardent supporters choose to ostrich the comment, that too speaks.

You didn't like that he fell down because he couldn't see? He came back the next night to play, so he was he milking it? That was a ludicrous criticism.

Really I don't think anybody cares about that statement. You know, it's funny how people usually slam Iguodala fans on this blog for backing him up too much in the form of "Oh, if that wasn't Dre, everyone would be killing him" or "Oh, all you Iguodala defenders don't let a bad word be said about that guy." So now that people don't respond to a negative opinion because it really doesn't register, you want to read into its saying "Your silence speaks volumes!"

Can't have it both ways.

I can't really speak for anyone else, but personally I'm trying to avoid any conversations that are going to turn into pointless "Iguodala sucks, no he doesn't" arguments.

As for the article, I mean, I don't see how missing free throws is somehow Iguodala undermining Collins as a coach. In fact, if anyone has bought into what Collins is trying to do, it's Iguodala. I didn't really have a problem w/ what Iguodala said about Lou, but that's probably because I agree with what he said, and no one else ever says anything about it, rather than an objective view of "should he have said anything." The objective answer is probably no.

When the team is winning and playing well, they rarely say anything about Iguodala either way. Sometimes they write a begrudging piece about how I guess he has to be an All Star. When the team is losing and playing poorly, suddenly it's his fault.

It's really a tired pattern and every time I get sucked into this conversation it's just the same old, same old over and over again. It has very little to do with stuff that happens on the court, and even less to do with the team. It just turns into people choosing sides and yelling at each other.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter. Whether it's Iguodala's fault, or Jrue's fault, or Lou's fault, or Thorn's fault, or Stefanski's fault, or Collins' fault. None of it matters when the team is playing like this. The truth is, it's all of their faults.

Rich reply to Brian on Apr 10 at 15:19

Yeah, your last paragraph hits on it pretty well. Iguodala is certainly at fault, but so are a lot of people. It is what it is.

What do Iguodala's staunch supporters (you know who you are) have to say about that opinion offered by a veteran beat writer, one who's pretty solid, one not prone to loose constructions in print? Your silence is deafening.

that's baiting for specific bloggers too.
just so you know; that's trolling.
Just own it, and word your posts with less bite.
And No; I'm not a referee, just a helpful hand.

Helping hand? That's funny. You're the one who just jumped out from under the bridge, Twisty. Own that.

He likes to portray himself as the conscience of the board.

Doesn't make anything he said wrong. You are a troll, in love with your literary and archaic references making your obscure and often useless points, poetic yes, but still useless.

I knew I could count on you for a personal attack, Trusty.

L. A. Steve on Apr 10 at 13:43

I don't expect that changing the line-up/minutes will drastically alter the team's fate. However, I'd like to see some changes just to test some theories.

First, I'd like Jrue to hit the pines, at least as a starter. Let ET run the point, and when he's, (Jrue), on the floor with Evan, he plays the 2. Also, Collins needs to make it clear to his players that they need put the ball in Evan's hands, ( aka, multiple touches per possession), and let the offense run through him.

Second, I'd like to see Thad move into the starting lineup at the 3. I believe he's a 3, not a 4, and I'd like for him to get an opportunity to test my theory. I'm sure that getting an opportunity to start at his natural position would be a big morale boost.

Third, in each of the remaining 10 games, I'd like to see a competition between Spencer and Nik, with the criteria being that the player who produces gets the bulk of the minutes.

And finally, Id like to see Craig Brackins get some real minutes. This guy is a first round draft pick, we need to see what he can do. He's suppose to be a good shooter, lord knows we could use that.

I don't think any of these things is a good idea, but it's not like any would hurt them at this point.

Man, it sure would be nice to have Kenny Faried right about now.

Stan reply to Rich on Apr 10 at 14:12

Why? So Doug can sit him on the bench for his lack of offense?

Looked up Faried's numbers- wow. 10 points, 7 rebounds, 1 block in 21 minutes.

The Six reply to Rich on Apr 10 at 14:12

Rod Thorn has been a major disappointment. He truly is "just another guy". Please let's move the fuck on from him.

Rich reply to The Six on Apr 10 at 14:19

Worst part about all of this is 90 percent of the people who comment here, faced with a choice between the two, would have chosen Faried without blinking. I had no idea he'd be this good already, but pretty much everyone knew he'd be better than Voose. Well, not the Sixers.

I had no idea guys don't develop and what they are in their rookie years is always what they are going forward

Rich reply to GoSixers on Apr 10 at 14:25

I'm not saying that Voose is a lost cause. Realistically though, Voose would have to do a whole lot of developing and gain a bunch of different skills that he doesn't have to catch up with Faried.

He needs to develop strength in his legs so he doesn't get so easily pushed around in the post. He's never going to have the leaping ability, but he could at least try to get stronger so he could muscle guys.

And there are skills #8 has that Faired doesn't, for instance, he's got pretty good low post moves and passes better than Faired I bet.

I'm not ready to write either them off as better long term just yet...

Rich reply to GoSixers on Apr 10 at 14:44

Nobody should write anyone off as better yet. If I were to bet, Faried looks like he's going to be a better player. If you were to pick which player you'd want right now, Faried would be the guy. I'm surprised you are even arguing this with how much you harp about how poor the Sixers' frontcourt is.

Big man passing (1.3 assists per 36) and post moves don't mean much when his TS% is 48 and the other guy is scoring more and is at 62. Then there's the defensive potential Faried shows. Voose hasn't been a total disappointment and a write-off, but he has a lot of work to do.

I'd want neither of them actually...but that's just me

Grass always looks greener on the other side.
To me it depends on what you feel you need more, hustle plays and some physicality, Faried is it, more skilled, bigger and upside is Voose. But I think they both wind up bench players in different molds.
Faried will be a poor man's Okafor and Voose will be super-Hawes (1st 10gm version). I'm not excited about either.

The Six reply to Rich on Apr 10 at 14:30

I think Voose may turn out OK, but I don't think he will be a starter in the NBA. He has nice skills but he is just so slow. I am especially frustrated with his other moves (or lack of). Sacramento was begging for someone to take a Hickson off their hands. That was a no brainer, and the Sixers should have called.

Stan reply to The Six on Apr 10 at 14:53

I don't mind the pick. Vucevic will end up being a solid bench player and that is more than I expected from the #16 pick in a weak draft. I liked Brooks, Faried, Singleton, Montejunas, Parsons and Hamilton better but those guys are just OK players, nothing worth crying over.

DeAndre Jordan and Derrick Favors on the other hand are players that I cry over every night.

Why is there a huge disparity between NBA draft sites this year? Some guy that is a top 10 pick on one draft site is projected be a bottom 20 pick on another site.

1. ESPN employs Chad Ford - he's an idiot
2. NBADraft.net changes their mock draft constantly, to increase page view
3. DX I believe (but derek can clarify) ranks purely on how they evaluate the talent until the draft gets closer. It's the only site I find worth reading in regards to player evaluation.

tk76 reply to GoSixers on Apr 10 at 16:22

And DX often overrated Euros.

Yes, yes they do, they do over rate Euros, but I don't look at EUros in general cause I know the sixers aren't drafting them :)

Rightly or wrongly, I always thought they over rated euros because they had a distinct advantage in scouting in europe compared to the other biggies

Is there any chance that Collins tweeks the offensive system instead of the line-up? Its starting to seem like he is now trying to force a square peg in a round hole.

They don't have a lot of practice time (or game time) left to change a system - one of the few advantages ths team had (early) was the roster not changing much and already knowing the system.

They're stuck with this one until Collins is canned

There are still minor ajustments that can be made. More back door cuts, more Brand isolations in the post, less Hawes in the high post. Then there is always letting Turner dominate the ball the way Lou does.

Then there is always letting Turner dominate the ball the way Lou does.

Which is not a positive in my opinion.

Sure there are adjustments that can be made - but they won't be

When the team is playing this badly you have to weight all you options

When a team is as poorly constructed as this island of misfit toys (someone stole the phrase i've been using for years now) there's only so much you can do...the sixers best low post big man is #8 for gods sake...lou is the best finisher at the basket but can't pass worth a damn...Evan Turner is a raw incomplete bad outside shooter who often dribbles right into the defenders block...

There's nothing to be done to make this team a serious contender that doesn't involve roster blowing up in my opinion

This isn't new - this is just like the post 2001 iverson years, tinkering when blowing up was needed

There are about 20 other teams that are as poorly put together as the Sixers maybe worse. Washington, New York and Toronto come to mind. That doesnt mean that playing this poorly is to be expected.

Agree. With the recent soft schedule they could have probably sleepwalked into the playoffs and probably won the division. But in stead they have laid down.

The Six reply to GoSixers on Apr 10 at 16:54

I do kinda like the idea of bringing in Illyasova next year. That would be one move I would do.

I'm not opposed to that (but you have to waive Brand to create the cap room to sign him - which I am in favor of too) - but I think Iguodala should be moved before the draft, and Brand wavied before the draft to see what manuevering can be done...

I am one that believes if Iguodala can be traded and we can get value we should do it. There are teaMs for whom a lockdown, athletic wing would be huge - and who have a go to guy down the stretch already. Send him there. I can't watch him any longer. Not only is he not clutch - I think he lacks heart.

Was a huge supporter until late this year. I think he is part of the problem.

A good year To try to move up in the draft a few spots ...

I was with you until your nonsensical 'heart clutch' statement - which is why I want to see him traded, a common thread through sixer fandom - cluelessness

The Six reply to GoSixers on Apr 10 at 15:19

I believe he has heart for sure, but he certainly is not clutch. He shrinks when the spot light is on. That being said, he has good value in a trade and he should be dealt IMO. He is a good all-around ball player and at times an elite defender. I am ready to move on and get a good player/pick in return.

clutch is a nonsensical small sample size anomaly - you know who isn't clutch if you look at ALL clutch events - kobe bryant - carmelo anthony - no one remembers the misses - only the makes...people who hate igoudala ONLY remember the misses, he's made 'clutch' shots...

It's like evaluating a baseball player with his 'RISP' average which has been proven to be more noise than anything else.

Iguodala has heart, and plays the game to the best of his ability - the problem is that the best of his ability isn't enough for some folks...and it's tiresome (as brian said)

In terms of folk who are resopnsible for the issues with this team, Iguodala probably doesn't make the top 5 (or top 10 if you count guys who have been fired but whose stink still ingers)

But like brian said (before I wrote the original comment) it's tiresome. I've been defending the guy for a long time now - I know what he is and what he isn't - I appreciate what he is and don't dwell on what he isn't - the haters are the reverse, they only focus on what he isn't.

I hope he's trade, I hope he's traded somewhere he's appreciated, but honestly the only thing that matters in the trade is the sixers making the best offer, and right now his value might be at its highest due to silly things like making an all star game or winning DPOY

The Six reply to GoSixers on Apr 10 at 15:35

I must have missed all those big shots and clutch free-throws he made with the game on the line.

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Apr 10 at 15:47

He does have a history of making some incredibly boneheaded plays other than just the ISO fails...no? Maybe they just stick out more because his failures are magnified, but he's thrown away inbounds passes, fouled a 3 pt shooter in a 4 pt game a couple times, traveled, gotten called for charges, silly turnovers that he NEVER makes otherwise. Those that identify Iggy as someone who shrinks late in games, I don't think it's just the free throws and the bricked shots, at least it's not for me.

A suitable sub-title for Depressed fan would be; "Where the Iguodala Argument Never Dies"
Aside from the futility, heated-ness and fruitless-ness of such arguments, it is just a distraction from the real problem that has been exposed for all to see; be it tanking, draft, adding free agents, rebuilding, the Sixers need drastic change now.
This roster, with mismatched being it's only acknowledged flaw, has been publicly exposed as talent deficient in key areas. That Collins got them to play over their heads for the first half gave an adequate contrast to what their true level is.
I see most teams out there (say 75% of NBA teams) that give much less effort consistently than the Sixers and somehow we are achieving results that do not distinguish us adequately from them.
I really like the personality of this team, even their wacky, streaky dysfunctional play. But it's all meaningless when you can already see what their ceiling is. Management will need to take a hard look at this roster in the off-season, but less so at replacing Collins, which IMO is inconsequential at this point. Whether they will make the necessary changes or not, I don't know but it's almost impossible to watch Sixers basketball in this state of mind. Forget fools gold, marginal improvement was enough for me. But now, I think that 1st half was the zenith, now it is all inevitable retrogression from here.

(sorry for sounding so depressing)

My expectations for the year were minimal (and of course derided). I saw them around 500 and losing in the first round again. I was blinded for a bit by 20-9, and should have remembered 13-4 last year. I was looking for certain things to happen, and aside from Thaddeus Young, none of them has happened, though I guess Spencer Hawes showing the front office that they shouldn't re-sign him is a 'positive'. My concerns primarily this season were Jrue and Evan and unfortunately neither has a large enough body of positive work this season to give me enthusiasm going forward. At this point, there's not a player on this roster I'd say is a 'keeper' - and blowing the whole damn thing up might be a good idea.

of course, it probably was a better idea LAST season due to the depth of this draft, but that's sixers basketball, doing things a year or two too late

To me, the key to being a sports fan is to have lowered expectations. If you expect nothing, you can never be disappointed and often pleasantly surprised

Stan reply to GoSixers on Apr 10 at 16:46

My view of Jrue Holiday has gone down significantly. Prior to this season I saw him as a potential star/top 7 PG. Now I see him as a solid player that can play good defense and hit jumpers. He doesn't seem like a traditional PG, a guy that can set teammates up consistently, or use his athleticism/craftiness to get to the basket.

Except that he 'was' playing like a young traditional point guard until about a year and a half ago, and now in an attempt to make 'evan turner' fit - they've messed him up even more - they don't let him play point guard any more - they coach him NOT to be the point guard - they run the offense with him NOT the point guard

And ps (cause i wanna state it and here seems a good place to keep it) - if the sixers keep only ONE of Turner and Holiday, I would prefer it be holiday, find a new coach, and let holiday be a point guard again...this more than anything is why doug collins has to go - he messed up jrue more than eddie jordan ever coudl have

didn't Jrue's struggles (or rather maddening inconsistency) start at the beginning of the season when Turner was still a non-issue. I can't even put it on Collins anymore; regardless of what he's been asked to do; score first or set-up his teammates (and he has been given ample opportunity for either, albeit not concurrently) he shows no steadiness. It's just off and on; he drops 15pts one quarter and then disappears. He's setting up Brand for elbow jumpers and feeding Hawes for sissy jams, the next minute he is driving into the lane and throwing it to the opposing wing.

The 'hot sixer' for a quarter always vanishes, for some reason people forget that, it was evan turner a few games ago...when someone gets hot, doug takes em to the bench and then goes away from them the rest of the game...i'm not sure why you focus on Jrue for this - it's happened for almost every player in Dougs tenure

except Lou. and Meeks.
wow, it's so easy to hate on some players.
not a good thing.

There are very few perfect players in the NBA, most are flawed

If you and I notice it then Collins has to also. He hasnt figured out what to say or do to keep Jrue, Turner or Hawes playing consistant. Not to mention that Jrue and Turner seem to have the shortest leash on the team.

Lavoy Allen and #8 beg to differ


Speaking of Faried, Pruiti had a section in here on how he's still struggling with pick and roll defense. He is doing the "drop and plug" which the Sixers outside of Thad employ, which basically means they don't show and play 1 on 1 with the ball handler until the guard catches up. Faried struggles because he gives the guard too much space. Many of the clips he showed had the defensive guards getting stuck on screens and the ball handler making a jumper. That's not on Faried. The defensive guard has to get over that screen and funnel him toward the big until he can recover.

Pruiti talks about how it's a smart strategy for an athletic guy like Faried. I think it's better for a guy like Brand who has good instincts. Athletic bigs should hedge IMO. I don't know what the numbers are, but when Thad is the P and R defender, he seems to make the offense react to him instead of the other way around.

This is a smart strategy for an athletic big like Faried, who seems quick enough to stay in front of point guards (for a few seconds at a time), challenge shots, and then return to his man

this just sounds counter-intuitive, shouldn't it be that the more athletic (ergo quicker feet) you have the more showing is a more efficient defensive strategy? I mean who can really stay in front of PGs? All PGs are quick enough to get by anyone, you back way off, all you're doing is inviting an open shot. It's not necessarily staying in front of anyone. waste of athleticism, this should be reserved for the Hawes of the NBA.

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment