DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

Sixers Rumors/Ideas/Fantasies Thread

I don't know that I have a specific target as much as Brian does but I want to see aggressive attempts to improve the long term core of this team...that means allowing Andre Iguodala to be traded and using the amnesty on Elton Brand so that if something comes up during the season - or off season you can take advantage - yes Brand will be an expiring contract (see how much value they have these days?) but the cap space is more valuable, even if you have to pay him anyway.

The contract is sunk - you're paying him, whether he's on the team or not - but if you use the amnesty you give your self flexibility and more options - the smart move is to amnesty him - the safe cost effective move is to let him play out and hope someone wants his expiring deal.

Ideal outcome: Keep Jrue. Keep 15 and take a guy like Ross or Perry Jones/Terrance Jones. Trade up for Drummond or T. Robinson. That's several rebuilding years in one off season and from the talk swirling online (not just here), not implausible.

you cant trade up for a top 3 pick and keep the 15th pick

Why not?

If you give the charlotte bobcats andre iguodala and take back diop and thomas you sure as hell better get to keep #15 as well since you're taking back two pieces of crap

The #2 pick isn't worth that much, if Charlotte thinks it is you hang up on them

user-pic
Buke reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 22:39
+/-

Is Drummond worth two pieces of crap? Maybe not.

They don't need a top 3 pick. Drummond will most likely go 5th or 6th. I think it's possible to acquire a pick in that range without giving up #15 but it's unlikely since the price would be too steep.

user-pic
The Six reply to Xsago on Jun 11 at 15:05
+/-

If you identify "your guy" (and that guy is Drummond), I believe in going after him. If it means trading up to #2 to get him... I say do it (bad contracts and all in the return package). Don't leave it to chance. There is no reason to think Cleveland wouldn't take him at #4 or WSH at #3. If CHA is indeed selling that pick, go get it. Bigs will be a lot more valuable a week/day from the draft than right now. They always seem to move up the charts right before draft day.

Yea- I think you can keep 15. Throw in Turner if you have to, or Vuce, but 15 is valuable in this draft and I think it can be done without giving it up. OR...if you decide Iggy and 15 is worth number three, and you like one of the two guards in the draft late lottery, go get yourself number 10 from NO. This is the year to go all in- I'm all for it.

This is news that could impact the sixers - it's interesting how michael heisly was being so vocal - but now it turns out - it's because he knew he wouldn't be making any significant decisions - according to marc stein the grizzlies will be sold for 350 million dollars.

Which is over 20% more (was it 280 or 290?) than what the sixers sold for last year

user-pic
Cholo reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 15:07
+/-

Could that means Rudy Gay is going nowhere?

user-pic
sfw reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 15:10
+/-

May explain the reported efforts to trade Rudy Gay(clear the contract).

Except that Hiesly denied that they were even shopping Gay - vehemently - repeatedly

Remember how new ownership put the kibosh on an Iguodala deal ( a terrible one ) - i think owners bid on a team as it exists and don't want it to change - they're paying for the grizz with Rudy Gay - maybe they like him...

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 15:14
+/-

Does the sale include other assets like arena it a network?

The arena isn't owned by the grizzlies (in fact it's a rather obnoxious deal that they can't get out of until 2021 hence why larry ellison can't have them)

I'm sure the grizz tv contract is much more valuable than the sixers since the grizz aren't currently owned by the team that broadcasts them, and it's probably not a condition of the sale that it's for the next 15 years or so

Funny how the Sixers wasted no time breaking their radio contract. Wonder how much more money they got when they did that.

Didn't even know they did that - baseball and football on the radio i can handle but basketball just isn't made for the radio

Yeah, apparently the WIP contract had certain terms for where they'd be aired if there was a conflict, and they broke those terms when the Flyers were on at the same time. They got out of the contract immediately, and I think the next game was on 97.5.

user-pic
sfw reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 15:33
+/-

What I don't get is the Flyers are also moving to 97.5 next year.

ESPN has hired a former official (Steve Javie) for in studio 'analysis' similar to that guy on FOX NFL Coverage

user-pic
The Six reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 15:08
+/-

They should make those guys still wear their uniforms. Pereira dresses like a banker for christ sake.

Sure, the makes sense, all former players should also be forced to wear their old uniforms for christs sake - how dare they dress nice?

user-pic
The Six reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 15:32
+/-

Don't be so sensitive.

Don't be so ignorant

user-pic
The Six reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 15:41
+/-

The comment was in jest. Maybe I should have put a ":)" at the end of it like you enjoy doing so much (way too much). So relax.

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 16:20
+/-

I wonder if he'll start off his new career by saying something controversial.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/combine-notebook-2-pick-on-the-move1

Sorry if this link has been brought up already but it actually made me think getting drummond could be a real possibility now.

The combination of the sixers interviewing drummond, the bobcats not interviewing basically anyone in the draft that would be considered at the #2 spot and that the bobcats did interview tyler zeller who is likely to get selected around when the sixers are currently slotted to pick leads me to think that a handshake deal could already be in place.

But if that deal does exist is it with the sixers. Looking at the draft order I don't see any other teams(houston, dallas, suns) that could offer anything as good as iggy.

I honestly don't understand why the Bobcats would want Iguodala. I mean, he'd make their team much better, but they're so bad, I mean, what's the point of adding a piece like him? If I owned the Bobcats, I'd be much more interested in Jrue. If I had never seen him play in the NBA, I'd be more interested in Turner as well. They need young assets.

user-pic
sooner reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 15:33
+/-

It could be the case that they'd prefer jrue and/or turner I just assumed it would be iggy since he's the sixers best player.

There was also an SI writer, I believe, that speculated jordan might want to move the pick because of his historic failures with high draft picks.

I honestly don't understand why would the Bobcats trade that pick at all. MJ might be the worst owner in the NBA.

user-pic
sooner reply to Xsago on Jun 11 at 15:36
+/-

I honetly didn't even consider that pick was available until some guys brought it up on here. That's what lead me to look into it further.

user-pic
sooner reply to sooner on Jun 11 at 15:37
+/-

honestly*

I would hate if they went up to #2 and took Drummond instead of Robinson.

The logic of past failures meaning you want to trade this #2 pick is insane (not to mention - read some stuff last week about how others were responsible for, say the morrison pick...jordan is more of a hands off owner)

BTW - the rumors today are that KG will either retire, or come back to the celtics, here's hoping he comes back to the celtics cause that'll clog up their cap with an old punk

That classy guy who left the court before game 7 was even over - that's real classy

user-pic
matt reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 16:49
+/-

"That classy guy who left the court before game 7 was even over - that's real classy"

1. Who cares when he left the court? Today's ESPN-generation nitpicking environment is sickening. For some, that'd be called 'competitive spirit' or 'hating to lose.' It's dumb either way. Grown men don't always need to shake hands goodbye.

2. That isn't even a sentence.

3. The Celtics are probably praying he comes back. Did you not watch the playoffs? He's a good player, and they don't have many. We don't even know what he'll be paid, but it'll be short-term and I doubt they'd jeopardize a big free-agent move to sign him. This is hardly cap killing.

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 14:15
+/-

I don't know, suppose you knew that you were a terrible talent evaluator. (Let's assume for the sake of argument that he really was responsible for Kwame, Morrison, and Kemba.) You have this pick, then, which you know you'll probably botch. So why not trade it for a known quantity? I guess the problem with the logic is that, if you do know that, you really should be getting someone else to make your draft picks for you. Unless, of course, there are people under Jordan who know he'll screw the pick up (they might even know who he wants), who then want to trade the pick for someone they value more than a draft bust so he won't pick the bust. That makes sense to me.

They have nothing of value to trade except for Kemba, Henderson & Bismack. Unless you want the expiring Maggette.

Seems like the 15 pick plus players to take either Maggette's and/or TT's salaries. That's it.

The only reason you trade with the bobcats is to get the #2 pick

Can we buy a pick on draft night?

ESPN Insider Chad Ford says NO told #Cavs no thanks when CLE reportedly offered Nos. 4, 24, 33 and 34 for No. 1. Can't blame 'em for trying.

I believe part of the new CBA is that you can still buy a draft pick, but there's a limit of $3M per year you can spend on one. Meaning you can only buy one per year.

I don't think that's entirely true, you can spend up to 3 million dollars per year on draft picks, but you are not obligated to pay 3 million for a first rounder.

And I don't think lower first rounders (bottom third) should cost as much as upper runs anyway

Iguodala to Sacramento in exchange for John Salmons, Travis Outlaw, and the #5 overall pick.

Sacramento gets a SF to pair with Evans and Jimmer giving them a lineup of Thompson/Cousins/Iguodala/Evans/Jimmer.

Sixers draft Andre Drummond
Rod Thorn gets reunited with Travis Outlaw
and John Salmons returns with a new look: http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/nba/players/full/1726.png&w=350&h=254

user-pic
Rich reply to Stan on Jun 11 at 16:40
+/-

Jimmer? You mean Isiah Thomas?

I'd consider that but doesn't Outlaw have a brutal deal? When do he and Salmons expire?

His deal is post-amnesty clause.

user-pic
Rich reply to Cin on Jun 11 at 16:51
+/-

That's right, thanks. I'd probably do it. Outlaw still stinks though.

user-pic
spencer for hire reply to Rich on Jun 11 at 16:46
+/-

He was amnestied, 3 mpy. .

user-pic
Stan reply to Rich on Jun 11 at 16:55
+/-

Jimmer is their PG of the future :)
I looked up Salmons' contract and it's awful. He's owed about 15 million for the next two years and the 3rd year is partially guaranteed for 1 million. Maybe you can replace Salmons with Garcia who has a team option for next year. Outlaw was signed off of waivers and only makes 3 million/yr. The only problem is that you can't trade him until July 1st.

If you think our team is hopeless, you should take a look at the Kings roster and be thankful for Stefanski.

Their roster consists of:
John Salmons- still owed 16 million over the next 3 years
Marcus Thornton- who just signed a big deal
Fransicso Garcia- owed 6.5 million this year
Tyreke Evans
DeMarcus Cousins
Jason Thompson- RFA
Travis Outlaw
Jimmer

I can't believe this team robbed us of Dalembert, gave us Hawes and 13 million of Nocioni

Doesn't Sacto have a ton of cap space? Might not have to take back the bad contracts, just AI9 for #5 (they'd need $2M in contracts to make it work). I think that might actually have some legs.

user-pic
spencer for hire reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 17:08
+/-

If you could move Iggy for #5 and capspace wouldn't you? It would allow us to target a bigtime freeagent next year and whoever falls to #5 probably starts here.

If they can get Drummond or Robinson, yes. Not for anyone else at the top of the board. Don't like any of the wings up there.

I saw some ESPN rumor that the Kings weren't happy with Evans and weren't playing on extending him. If that is true then maybe they'd be willing to move him. It could go something like:
Iggy and #15 for #5, Evans and Salmons. Or maybe Iggy and ET for #5, Evans and Salmons.

Some people have started to give up on Evans, but maybe in the right situation he could return to his ROY level.

user-pic
spencer for hire on Jun 11 at 16:51
+/-

I agree. Drummond reminds me of Cousins, take the risk at #5 or up but not top 5. I think he is there at #5 because of Bismack, Nene and Serafin, and T.Thompson all more defensive types.

Target the 5th pick and if he is gone get the next best option.

The % Body Fat disagrees.

user-pic
spencer for hire reply to Stan on Jun 11 at 17:03
+/-

Comparing their boom or bust potential, but for different reasons. You forgot the 2 good moves Sacramento made, getting their starting p.g. [I.Thomas] with the last pick of the draft and signing C.Hayes to mentor Cousins.

To tell you the truth I don't follow Kings basketball so I didn't know Isiah Thomas was the PG of the future. $22 million for a mentor? ugh.

Eh. If they want him, go get the pick you need to get him. Don't really care if it's #2 or #5, all I care about is what you have to give up to get it done (or really, what you have to take back to get it done). One thing I don't want to see is making a trade beforehand for a pick in the hopes that he'll be available. If you make the trade for the #2 or #3 pick, then fine. You take whichever of Robinson/Drummond is still on the board at #3, make your decision at #2. No way do I want to be left with my dick in my hands at #5 if both of those guys are off the board. It's not worth it to me if you aren't getting one of the three bigs at the top of the draft. Wait until draft night if you can only get up to #5.

user-pic
spencer for hire reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 17:11
+/-

If getting number #2 makes us take on bad deals and absorbs our caproom it may not be worth it.

Think it would be pretty much impossible to take back enough bad deals to eat up all of the caproom. If you take back bad deals in the trade, it will probably occupy the cap space Iguodala would've occupied, but you can still create space for a max contract by using the amnesty on Brand and ushering both Hawes and Williams out the door.

user-pic
Rich reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 17:28
+/-

I don't really see the point of taking on a max contract if they unload Iguodala for a pick other than Davis. Then it's a longer rebuild, which might be preferable.

Yeah, depends on who it is. I'd still look to create that space by letting Brand, Hawes and Lou all walk.

Having space and young pieces leaves the door open to landing two stars if they become available.

But it's only for two years during a rebuilding period. It doesn't prevent you from extending Jrue's contract and you get a player that has the potential to be really good player.

user-pic
spencer for hire reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 17:19
+/-

With Drummond probably 2 years away from contributing, does it surprise anybody that Collins would feel good about this. As Xsago said earlier, he is a project and unless Collins plans on moving to the front office he may not be around when Drummond matures.

Depends on what they'd need to give up to make the move. If someone was foolish enough to take #15 and Turner in return for a top five pick, I think he'd be ecstatic.

user-pic
spencer for hire reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 17:31
+/-

I actually think Turner is a real good fit art the s.f. spot at Golden St. because of their great shooting from the guard spot.

It wouldn't surprise me if #15 and Turner could get us #7.

Don't think 7 is high enough.

But I'd do it if the price was Turner and #15.

user-pic
spencer for hire reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 17:39
+/-

I would like to see their top 5 targets. I wonder if a scorer is amongest them.

Is there really a big time scorer in this draft?

user-pic
Stan reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 17:42
+/-

Austin Rivers!

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Probably don't need to trade up, if he's the guy you want.

user-pic
spencer for hire reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 17:49
+/-

I think a team in the top 12 will draft Rivers and try to let him develop into a p.g. over the risk of taking K.Marshall, a true p.g., who can't shoot and may have trouble guarding people.

user-pic
spencer for hire reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 17:43
+/-

Waiters, Beal, Lillard and Rivers may be the best but their not all good fits.

The dude buying the grizzlies is 34

Sigh

Dumbest marketing idea ever?

The NBA will enter into a licensing agreement with Orlando-based start-up HerStar to begin manufacturing women’s high heels that feature NBA team logos

user-pic
stan reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 18:07
+/-

Is it daddy's money?

Nope - he's just a billionaire at the age of 34

http://www.rjpblog.com/

This is him

Could be another Cuban type owner...same kind of background

user-pic
mymanjrue on Jun 11 at 18:14
+/-

A thought on Jrue-

There's been a lot of talk, during the year and in the aftermath, about the limits that Collins' offensive system placed on Jrue-ie, whether the coach's singular focus on avoiding turnovers and use of 4 guys to initiate the offense-essentially using a point guard committee-shackled Jrue, and prevented him from developing his natural distributor instincts.

Clearly, to an extent this is certainly a factor. As I am generally not a fan of Doug Collins, and for a long time-really until, sometime in February-considered Jrue Holiday mny favorite Sixer and spent much of my time while watching games on the alert for flashes of special talent from Jrue, I gave this theory a lot of credence. However, the more I think about the player I watched this season, the more I think that the balance between "player limited by coaching decisions" and "coaching decisions resulting from player limitations" tilts toward the latter.

Why was Jrue told to "look for his shot" and avoid "home run plays" at all times, resulting in a torrent of long 2s off the dribble when an obvious, low risk pass was not available?I believe a major, and oft overlooked by the many here who quite naturally want to see the best in Jrue Holiday and have been committed for 3 years to envisioning him as the future of the franchise at the point guard position(and I understand that wholly), is Jrue Holiday's utter inability to freelance with the ball in his hands.

My observation of Jrue Holiday is that he excels when following a script. When the script breaks down, Jrue breaks down. The instinctive feel with which all the great point guards-shoot first point guards included-run an offense-the improvisational quality which makes a special point guard so exhilirating-is nowhere in evidence. As soon as he is not cycling through rote options, his decisionmaking crumbles-he looks lost-he loses control. Obviously, this greatly limits his ability to run an offense. Additionally, due to his tender years to a considerable degree I'm sure-as well as, I'm equally sure, his desire to please his coach and fear of failure-every time this happens, it noticeably saps confidence. When he suffered a meltdown, all too often it snowballed, as his play became in every way more tentative and low confidence, begetting more meltdowns, begetting less confidence, and so forth.

As a coach-what to do?Well, give him a script!Make sure that when the ball is in his hands, he knows what he is supposed to do with it-don't ask him to create offense by making the best decision out of an array of options-give him clarity. This necessarily severely limits his ability to be the sole initiator. So-run him off a screen with a couple relatively simple passing options, or the pick and roll, and if those first options don't pan out, he next option is for Jrue to get off a shot.

Now, what kind of shot?This is a little trickier and where I personally have part company with the coaching strategy to a point, but I think is tied in closely with all the aforementioned. Obviously we all want him to get to the rim!BUt remember-
a)one goal, obviously, is to limit turnovers for the sake of the team
b)another goal, equally important in my view, is to put Jrue in a position to succeed, so that his confidence grows rather than wilts.
and the fact is that Jrue Holiday is below average for his position at driving to the hoop and finishing, well below average in drawing contact and getting to the line in such situations-and it's a play with inherent risk in the threat of a turnover which leads to an oddman break. If driving the lane and finishing/drawing contact is a particular skill of a player, than the inherent risk is more often than not well worth taking. When it's not...

In my opinion, by the way, one of Jrue's major weaknesses in this area is the lack of instinct and feel that I've mentioned-he seems hard pressed to know when the moment calls for aggressiveness. He has received much praise for increased postseason aggressiveness-and deservedly so-he was able to attack more effectively than previously seen for stretches-but I truly believe this was a direct result of Evan Turner's aggressive play upon entering the starting lineup. Evan's feel for the situation and faith in the soundness of his basketball instincts clearly impacted Jrue's approach-ie, I witnessed Evan Turner help Jrue Holiday be a better basketball player in meaningful ways in the postseason-I did NOT witness Jrue Holiday helping Evan Turner be a better basketball player.

All that aside, the other simple fact dictating the coaching strategy applied to Jrue Holiday is that he is a plus perimeter shooter, the best on the team.

So when he has the ball in his hands, have him look for a scripted pass, then look to score-and have him look to score in a way that he does better than anyone else on the team and most NBA players-perimeter shooting-rather than in a way at which he is subpar and prone to harmful confidence sapping mistakes-driving to the rim.

It is easy to see this as placing limits on Jrue-but the closer I look, the more I see that in reality, it is also precisely tailored to suit Jrue's game, play tgo his strengths and weaknesses, and put him in a position to succeed. It just isn't what any of us wanted, when we dreamed our dreams of Jrue Holiday, that to look like.

I think Brian comes closen to hitting the nail on the head here:
The worst-case scenario with Jrue is that he becomes a solid PG/SG hybrid who can shoot the three, run an offense and absolutely lock down the best guard on the other team on the defensive end. That's a valuable piece, and there's still a very good chance he'll wind up being more than that, just maybe not in the upper, upper echelon of guards in the league, on the offensive end.

...except for his presentation of that scenario as "worst case" when I believe it is more accurately closer to a best case once Jrue has matured, honed his strengths, and is not playing to his weaknesses.

I really see an analog to Igoudala in the way Brian and a lot of us here look at Jrue-tons of skill, a very good player-but hard to resist the urge to project weaknesses to turn into strengths and make him him truly elite. Clearly, if Jrue Holiday has had a career like Andre Igoudala's in terms of effectiveness in five years, that will be a great victory. But I think some will long resent him for not being the "top 5 point guard" they were sold while others will always look for reasons he CAN develop into a "top5 point guard," while few will appreciate his strengths, accept his weaknesses, and take an objective view

But of course, if we were objective we wouldn't be fans, and what fun would that be, right?

Jrue has zero bigs to pass to who can finish in traffic in the lane. He can break down his man and then spoonfeed Brand or hawes... who can't finish inside.

I won't judge Jrue as a PG until he is paired with a big who's profile is something more than "pick and pop."

user-pic
mymanjrue reply to tk76 on Jun 11 at 18:41
+/-

Yes, thank you-another major factor thatI neglected which leaves room for improvement for Jrue-actually the most crucial piece for someone withthe strengths/weaknesses I outlined-an option he can look to virtually every time down the floor

But in that scenario, who is making who better?Jrue making the big better?Or the big making Jrue better?Which way should it go for an elite pg?

I agree with you-but that doesn't change what his limitations are, in my opinion

Well, I mean I'm not sure how much of a point there is to having a consistent chicken/egg debate over Jrue. Collins isn't limiting him w/ the scheme, the scheme is limited because of Jrue. Jrue wouldn't be helping bigs get better, they'd be helping him get better. There's no way to prove either false unless Jrue gets to play in another system and you take a look at how good the imaginary bigs were with another point guard. It's just a bias, one way or the other, though I've never heard the argument made that bigs who can catch and dunk make PGs better, but whatever.

As far as Turner goes, I think you're off base. The one game where Turner was like 5/22 I thought it was useful that he kept pounding his head against a wall, but in no way do I buy that he was somehow lifting Jrue up the entire playoff series. For the most part, all he was doing was stealing possessions from him with his shit play.

user-pic
mymanjrue reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 18:59
+/-

Fair points. You're right about the chicken/egg thing but that's sort of my point I guess-trying to come at in from a different angle...additional perspectives don't have to be warring...can just be additional facilitations of food for thought or even understanding!

Speaking of the Turner influence, I thought it most marked in the Chicago series, gms 2-3-4-and most particularly the initial home games, 3 and 4. Thought Jrue was able to rein in his nerves a bit by keying off of Turner's competitive drive and what I perceive to be a relationship to the game both more intelligent and more instinctive-if at many junctures less effective. Thought the turning point was when Turner sat in the 4th with 5 fouls and Jrue was able to deliver on his own(oh, and he did it by hitting perimeter shots off the dribble)

I got through about half of that.

My thought on Jrue is that the system probably didn't do him any favors, but a lot of the regression has to be placed on him. I disagree that he doesn't have the court vision, and can't run a team, but it really doesn't matter in terms of his status on the team. I think he's a keeper because even if what we saw this season was his ceiling, that's still a starter on a contender, and he's on his rookie deal. I believe he'll wind up playing at a much higher level in the future, but even if he doesn't, I want the guy we saw on the floor this year on my team.

user-pic
mymanjrue reply to Brian on Jun 11 at 18:49
+/-

I do tend to get rather windy, guilty as charged. not exactly Miss Manners' idea of an opening conversational gambit by you Bri, but that's neither here nor there

I largely agree with you on Jrue-just coming at it from a different angle I think-you badly want Jrue to succeed and have invested a lot in your expectations of him-so even as you reach ROUGHLY the same conslusions that I do, the message conveyed is very different. Let me emphasize that there is nothing wrong with that and that's not a slam on you by any means-our biases our different, plus the things we value are different, so the way in which we evaluate is deceptively different in tone. Both have some validity as best I can see

user-pic
mymanjrue reply to mymanjrue on Jun 11 at 18:52
+/-

To further illustrate-Jrue defense was unquestionably excellent this past year. You see this as Jrue making "the leap" on that end of the floor. One could also say that in a lockout shortened season with little time for practice and negligible training camps, generally poorer conditioning led to a built in advantage for defenders that 21 yr old Holiday was perfectly positioned to exploit

Validity in both lines of thinking I believe

user-pic
tk76 reply to mymanjrue on Jun 11 at 18:53
+/-

Yeah, I was courteous enough not to admit that o only read through the first part :) I'll read the rest later...

user-pic
mymanjrue reply to tk76 on Jun 11 at 19:00
+/-

I've always loved tact-guess it's been good to me, ha

user-pic
mymanjrue on Jun 11 at 18:42
+/-

btw, headline of the year on ESPN.com in re: the Finals- "Lebron James plans for better Finals"

You don't say!

why do i get this feeling that we will look back on jrue's career and always say, "it could of been so much more if he had a half decent big man"?

I have never said it could of been in the entirety of my life

user-pic
mymanjrue reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 19:07
+/-

What do you get out of trying to humiliate totally innocent and well intentioned posters who for all you know have yet to graduate high school?curious. fyi, your efforts tend to boomerang

Oh please - write 12 more paragraphs pontificating without coming to a point.

I'm not sure how they boomerang at all - and yes I find people who write how English sounds instead of how it should be written as ignorant as those who think u is a word.

If you post here, you're not innocent, you're a bastard deserving to be judged, condemned, and quartered.

user-pic
Stan reply to Cin on Jun 11 at 19:22
+/-

Plus GoSixers thinks he's Jim Parsons from the Big Bang Theory. This is the only medium he has to express himself in that way.

Actually I don't have Aspergers syndrome, nor am I as smart as Sheldon Cooper

I'm just smarter than most of you

And I've been told I use smiley faces too much by some sort of arbiter of the internet so you figure out if I'm kidding or not

i like jrue, i think hes good with a chance to be really good but its more the front office's fault if he never plays with a good big

So? Allen Iverson never played with a good big (no Chris Webber wasn't good by the time he got here) and he turned out alright.

The flaws in Jrue's game are the flaws in Jrue's game.

Many of those flaws have nothing to do with not having a big to pass too. Being flustered by a double team, dribbling too much, taking bad shots, making bad passes to open players.

Don't make excuses for the guy

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 19:18
+/-

Iverson was a SG not a PG during the Larry Brown years. Jrue and Iverson have different skill sets. Iverson was a much superior player. I don't understand why you are comparing the two.

Let's see Rondo be as magnificent as he was in the playoffs without KG.

iverson is different, if jrue passes to open big rolling to rim and the big misses the layup or fumbles the ball is that jrue fault? i do agree with some of the stuff you said tho

See - excuses

Let's say the lottery falls differently and the sixers win the lottery and get tim duncan

How much better would Iversons career have been with a big man.

And Iverson wasn't a 'point guard' but he created more points for guys on his team - and he never had a good big man - than Jrue could possibly hope to do.

The whole Iverson wasn't a point guard thing is fine, but he created for his team mates

Maybe Jrue isn't a point guard either?

I also have to agree with GoSixers. Jrue does not have some untapped court vision that Collins has not been able to bring out, whether by coaching or adding the right guys around him. He's simply not that guy, and quite frankly, I think Evan may have better court vision than him as far as the drive and dish and even pick and roll.

Of course, Jrue is a superior pick and roll operator by virtue of actually having shooting as an option if the defender goes under the pick, but I'm not arguing who should be the ball-handler, just that Jrue isn't developmentally much of a passer yet.

You figure, he was primarily a scorer in High School, a scorer in college due to the Darren Collison dilemma, and a scorer his first three years in the league due to sharing the job of initiator with 2-3 other guys.

I don't think it's a bad thing that he's not a true point. Westbrook, Wade/LeBron, and Parker did nothing if disprove that the need for one has lessened these days.

user-pic
Buke reply to Cin on Jun 12 at 0:42
+/-

I agree that Turner's court vision may be better than Jrue's. Unfortunately, Turner's ability to pass on the move doesn't seem to be any better and we can probably all agree to an extent that his lack of a dependable outside shot allows defenders to cheat. This team doesn't have a really good point guard (Iggy might be better at it than either of them). To some, that's not important. To my preference, it is. I can't swear who is right, but being right about basketball isn't a huge priority for me.

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 22:11
+/-

I agree to an extent, but there's a fine line between the ideas of "excuses" and "personnel problems." Sadly, with Jrue's situation and the extenuating circumstances of last year's team, much of the perception towards him is left to our imaginations. It's truly in the eye of the beholder.

Did Jrue disappoint relatively this year? Sure. Did the team lack any sort of pick and roll partner, inside presence, and general outside shooting? Yep, and those things enhance a point guard's effectiveness.

At the same time, a good point guard is supposed to make his team better in whatever way possible. Jrue does that on one end, but the other is important. This is where the team's direction comes into play.

I just hope people don't fall into the trap of thinking there is one way to play the position. For example, I don't think Jrue dribbles too much. I think he dribbles without a purpose too much. There are great point guards that dribble the air out of the ball and lead really productive offenses (CP3 and Nash, especially). Then again, their teams have general directions on offense, even if LAC's is "Chris, go make a play." There's a freedom there.

Does he make a lot of bad passes to open guys? I don't know, his turnovers are pretty low. Are their a lot of open guys? Are many of those open guys even any good? I don't know, but these are legitimate questions we don't know the answer to in terms of how they affected him.

We are headed towards a crucial season in Jrue's development, one that hopefully will answer the question of whether the team is holding back Jrue or Jrue isn't able to elevate his team's play at a sufficient enough level to be considered a Top 10 point guard in the NBA for a long time. For the sake of evaluating what Jrue Holiday the point guard is, I really hope the front office and Collins give him every chance to succeed.

I'm still high on Jrue, especially after the playoffs. What I would say is that he can be a lower part of the Top 10 point guards in the NBA. A guy that can help everyone around him defensively, and a guy that can be a puzzle piece, if not the biggest or even second biggest one, on a balanced offensive team. That would be fine, too. It would make him one of the league's 40-50 best players for a 5 year period.

Like Collins says, "Know your role and shine in it." I hope he tells Jrue, "This is your team and lead it." Then we can see what the 21 year old (well 22 in about two hours) truly brings.

user-pic
spencer for hire on Jun 11 at 19:26
+/-

If Collins gets his wish, a more conventional team, can that be done with Turner at the s.g. ?

Chris Broussard wrote this

The 76ers are looking to move Iguodala. They believe youngsters Jrue Holiday and Evan Turner won't grow to reach their potential as long as Iguodala is there. They have offered him to the Grizzlies for Gay once before but were turned down.

So, if these guys 'can't reach their potential' playing with a guy who doesn't take tons of shots, is an excellent passer and rebounder, how the HELL will they do it with Gay whose career usage right is 4 points higher than Iguodalas...wouldn't that mean he'd get more in the way?

Whether you agree or not, if the plan is to 'turn the keys over to the young kids' you must trade Iguodala for rookies/developing players as well, NOT another veteran guy, let alone one who needs the ball more than Iguodala.

Is there something I'm just missing in the logic here? I'd never trade Iguodala for Rudy Gay - period - but if you want to 'free up' Jrue and Evan it seems to make zero sense anyway?

It's stupid, but I guess the logic is that Iguodala handling the ball is limiting, whereas Gay never sets other people up. He's the end point on offense, he gets the ball and shoots, and that would fit better w/ two other playmakers on the perimeter. Though I doubt Broussard has thought that deeply about it, he just sees 20ppg and thinks Gay is awesome.

This building around Turner stuff is so fucking misguided. I pray they trade him.

I don't disagree that building around Turner is a bad idea - but I would like to see them commit to it IF it's what they truly believe.

I'd rather they do something smart and commit to it - but if they commit to something and make a move that will take a step back NEXT season but they believe builds towards a better future - that's good

Of course when it explodes into their face, they'll probably figure out a way to be a perpetual 7/8 seed and be happy with it

And if that's really the way they think, that Iguodala has to go for the 'future' which they see as Jrue and Evan (that's a separate debatable point) then, you have to trade Iguodala and get the best package you can...or you're delaying that growth.

Now, whether I agree with the plan of giving the keys to the kids is one thing, but if that's what they think is needed to build towards the future, then they take the best they can get for Iguodala and move forward...that to me is the smart play, no wishy washy half assed thing - commit to the plan

user-pic
Jason reply to GoSixers on Jun 11 at 20:15
+/-

On topic- Wouldn't do the iggy for Gay trade, much prefer the raptors deal. Even though I am a fan of Rudy Gay as stated in prior threads.

Off-Topic- I never felt usage rate was a great indicator of how often someone had the ball on offense. Steve Nash's usage rate is 19%, but we both know that he has the ball in his hand way more than 19%. Usage rate doesn't equate to time the ball is in a players hand imo nor does it equate to how often a player runs the offense through them etc.

user-pic
johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 2:09
+/-

I don't think Broussard has the most reliable of sources, unless it pertains to what Lebron James is having for breakfast. His claim to fame seems to be LBJ's texting buddy, the guy offers nothing worthwhile otherwise, he's just awful on the pre and post game show on ESPN. Wouldn't read too much into the logic he served up.

user-pic
Charlie H reply to johnrosz on Jun 12 at 9:53
+/-

I agree. He probably made up the part about the Sixers wanting to build around Turner. He didn't even start for half of this season. Agree with GoSixers also - Iguodala is exactly the type of player who fits with Jrue (maybe not Turner), because he's unselfish and adapts to situations. Trading him for Gay is a horrible idea - Gay is a taller Monta Ellis. Yes, it makes sense because Gay is an end point in the half-court, he's just not nearly as good as Iguodala.

If they want to move up in the draft, Iguodala is their only ticket. I don't think an offer of Jrue & #15 would do it, for example, not into the top 5 anyway. Add Brand - maybe, because of the expiring deal. I doubt anybody wants Thad for more than a so-so veteran or a late first rounder, not both.

Some of the names on their list of candidates are very uninspiring.

user-pic
Stan reply to Brian on Jun 12 at 9:14
+/-

I like the idea of bringing in Danny Ferry. Or maybe they should just promote Tony DiLeo

It's a figurehead job isn't it? Leveien will be making the decisions.

Don't want anyone who has a history with Doug COllins, don't mind Spurs candidates because they learned in a good situation / ownership group...I wonder how Thorn feels about this though.

We're not firing you but we're interviewing your replacement.

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 12:16
+/-

I don't think Levien is involved right now, as long as Collins is here.

If that's true it would be quite stupid. Involved in an ownership group but not involved because of grand father coach.

If that is a true fact I lose hope for the future of this franchise because the only basketball mind in the ownership group is a pussy

user-pic
Charlie H reply to Brian on Jun 12 at 9:58
+/-

That's putting it kindly. Please don't let it be Danny Ferry. Dileo must not want the job.

Just saw that about Lou & Hawes. Hawes isn't gonna get 7 million. It's from the Inquirer, must have been planted by Hawes' agent.

Interesting news and somewhat expected. I wonder what kind of role would the new GM have though. Who will be actually pulling the strings? The new GM, Collins, the new ownership headlined by Adam Aron and Jason Levien...

Where is Levien since the transaction? Has he been heard from / in the media since the ownership change?

Who knows; has a lower profile than J.D. Salinger. Petrie put him in his place ("see ya"); Collins probably has too ("just you watch").

On Lou Williams and Spencer Hawes

A league source said that both players are wanted by teams throughout the league and that both would probably garner salaries averaging about $7 million a year.

Bye bye

Who reported that?

user-pic
Rodney reply to Brian on Jun 12 at 9:58
+/-

Cooney in the same linked article.

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 10:24
+/-

A 5 year contract that averages 7 mil could start at 5.5 mil for year one... just saying.

WHich one of them do you feel is worth an average of 7 million a year?

user-pic
Ryan F reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 10:55
+/-

Lou is worth 7 per, or close to, on the right team. Spencer is worth less than the least you could possibly give him under the CBA.

Not saying what Lou is worth. Market value for him is certainly in that range or higher.

Just saying that at 7M/yr with raises he would start at a salary LOWER than he was slated to make in 2012/13 had he not opted out. That does not mean they should necessarily resign him.

Also, if Lou's agent is asking for 7M/year, maybe that means the Sixers have an offer on the table that is for less- and that if no one gives him the 7 mil then he will sign with the Sixers for the lower offer.

I know most don't want him back at any price- but that is a different discussion.

4 years/$28M sounds about right for Lou. I don't want the Sixers to pay that, but it seems like a fair deal. Only the Sixers could sign him for five years, if I'm not mistaken. And the starting salary would be well above the $5.3M he was slotted to make if he didn't opt out.

It would actually have to start at about $6.4M with 7.5% yearly raises from the Sixers to get to $28M over 4 years. From another team, it would start at about $6.5M with 5.5% yearly raises.

Think I'm remembering the yearly raises correctly.

$6.26M from the Sixers
$6.45M from anyone else

Thaddeus Young and the 15th overall pick for Josh Smith? This would work salary wise if the Sixers use the amnesty on Elton Brand.

Can't amnesty Brand until after the draft, so they'd have to make the pick, then the trade, which rarely happens. I'm not really keen on Josh Smith at this point. Think he'd be more than happy to jack up 6 20-footers/game in this offense.

user-pic
Stan reply to Brian on Jun 12 at 10:17
+/-

I think he's an improvement over Brand and Young in terms of defense and rebounding. He also has an expiring contract.

user-pic
Marty reply to Brian on Jun 12 at 13:39
+/-

I like this move. You could also do Turner and Thad for Smith and keep #15 (the contracts are almost equal). The is the same idea Brian had with Kevin Martin. On paper, it's a fit, but obviously both guys have shortcomings. You get to take a look at Smith for a year in this system before you'd have to commit. I'd love to make that move. I'd also be interested in taking Emeka off New Orleans hands.

Why do the hawks do it?

Athletic measurements are out in dx. Drummonds non-step vertical and agility numbers are insane for a guy pushing 300 pounds. His agility number is good for a SF and his non step vet is much better than Iggy.

In fact his vert and agility testing us pretty close to D Wade. Although his sprint number is quite a bit slower... understandably.

Athletic measurements are out in dx. Drummonds non-step vertical and agility numbers are insane for a guy pushing 300 pounds. His agility number is good for a SF and his non step vet is much better than Iggy.

In fact his vert and agility testing us pretty close to D Wade. Although his sprint number is quite a bit slower... understandably.

I have a feeling a lot of the 'talk' about Drummond is smoke from folks trying to get Drummond to slip.

If the sixers don't move up at least 9 or 10 spots, they have no shot at him anyway

user-pic
The Six reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 11:56
+/-

Agreed 100%.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 12:13
+/-

To compare the measurements of Dwigth, De'Andre Jordan and Drummond:

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dwight-Howard-2888/

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Andre-Drummond-5772/

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/DeAndre-Jordan-1072/

Measurements don't make the player, but it is interesting.

DJ: 6' 9.75" 6' 11" 250 7' 6" 9' 5.5" 7.5 26.0 30.5 8 12.30 3.27

DH: 6' 9" 6' 10.25" 240 7' 4.5" 9' 3.5" NA 30.5 35.5 7 11.21 3.14

AD: 6' 9.75" 6' 11.75" 279 7' 6.25" 9' 1.5" 7.5 31.5 33.5 10 10.83 3.39


user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 12:14
+/-

To compare the measurements of Dwigth, De'Andre Jordan and Drummond:

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Dwight-Howard-2888/

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Andre-Drummond-5772/


Measurements don't make the player, but it is interesting.

DJ: 6' 9.75" 6' 11" 250 7' 6" 9' 5.5" 7.5 26.0 30.5 8 12.30 3.27

DH: 6' 9" 6' 10.25" 240 7' 4.5" 9' 3.5" NA 30.5 35.5 7 11.21 3.14

AD: 6' 9.75" 6' 11.75" 279 7' 6.25" 9' 1.5" 7.5 31.5 33.5 10 10.83 3.39


user-pic
sooner reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 12:27
+/-

weird that drummond's taller and has a larger wingspan than howard but his standing reach is 2" shorter

user-pic
tk76 reply to sooner on Jun 12 at 12:36
+/-

Short vs long neck. If your shoulders are higher then your reach is higher.

user-pic
sooner reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 12:38
+/-

Gotcha.

Jrue's reach must not be that great then.

user-pic
ryano reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 12:46
+/-

Wider shoulders would contribute to that as well. That comparison makes him look like Dwight 2.0. Everything except the standing reach and I guess the sprints favor Drummond...all at 18. Crazy.

user-pic
Buke reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 12:40
+/-

Two players who are very close on all measurements taken so far:

Perry Jones and Arnett Moultrie.

Moultrie generally has been listed in the Sixers' drafting area on mocks. Jones, while falling, generally has been listed higher. Wonder if the measurements will have an impact? If Moultrie is essentially the same physical specimen, will his superior performance measures in college give him the nod over Jones?

Meyers Leonard measured pretty well for a big man. Perhaps he would be no better than Vucevic as a rookie (who in my mind really wasn't so bad at all) but he is better on physical measurements.

user-pic
Jason reply to Buke on Jun 13 at 0:50
+/-

Leonard Meyers is soft as hell. Not an improvement over voose or Hawes. Hopefully sixers don't make a mistake like Leonard.

user-pic
Jason reply to Jason on Jun 13 at 1:02
+/-

Coincidentally Draftexpress had a video scouting report put up today, just watched it. Does look like he would be a defensive upgrade over Voose/Hawes. Worry about his offense, looks very raw and I see a lot of crap that we would see Hawes do, but he looks like a worse version, offensively.

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Meyers-Leonard-Video-Scouting-Report-3963/

Troy Weaver sounds like a good candidate, no? Learned under Presti.

Lottery luck and one smart trade?

Presti isn't tested until they have to decide on Harden and or Ibaka if ownership won't pay em both - you lose one - how do you handle that.

GM's shouldn't get credit for lottery luck. Balls go the other way, OKC drafts Oden and Portland drafts Durant and it's an entirely different conversation

What free agent of note has been lured to Oklahoma City? What smart late round draft pick have they stashed in Europe

I'll take anyone who learned under the spurs before a guy who learned under presti

user-pic
MCT reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 12:31
+/-

Durant was a no-brainer, but Harden and Westbrook weren't right? I mean they were certainly talented enough to get picked where they did but they passed on some others as well and it has worked out for them.

Also, Ibaka was a steal at #24.

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 12:31
+/-

If it's "Spurs or bust" for you, it's not like Presti is unfamiliar with the Spurs. Plus, the Spurs great run of success started with lottery luck and the best PF of all time.

They took Serge Ibaka 24th, so that's a good pick. He hasn't been tested, but he has a great team and the problem of having too many young guys who panned out in a major way. I don't think he's done a bad job.

user-pic
buke reply to Rich on Jun 12 at 13:34
+/-

"Plus, the Spurs great run of success started with lottery luck and the best PF of all time."

Well, yes, but that pick was in 1997 and I don't recall them having any naturally good draft placement since that time. They drafted Leonard in the middle of the first round last year but they had to make a trade to get that one. Mostly they've continued their success since 1997-98 with low draft picks, free agents, and trades.

The Sixers had the #1 pick only one year earlier and he turned out to be a franchise player, but the Sixers' acumen for team building and maintenance hasn't been anything like San Antonio's. During the Croce/Larry Brown years, the Sixers showed some imagination in assembling teams but not much since.

user-pic
Rich reply to buke on Jun 12 at 13:47
+/-

Well, that's because they already had David Robinson on the team. He was a #1 pick, too. Again though, they got the best PF of all time.

You would probably agree that building around an undersized shooting guard whose body quickly deteriorated is a tad harder than the best power forward of all time, right, especially with a top 10 PF of all time already in town? Not to say the Sixers did an especially good job building around Iverson. Again though, that isn't really the point.

I don't like comparing situations and amounts of lottery picks. When a team is building from scratch, they get lottery picks. There isn't one specific way to build a team in the NBA. OKC did it different than the Lakers, San Antonio, and Dallas. I've been impressed to certain levels with how all of those teams did it. I just don't see why anyone would really question Sam Presti, and his assistants, all that much when he started with basically the #2 pick and nothing else. It's not like you have to hire him, but Weaver's credentials shouldn't be overlooked.

And yet after robinson left they maintained their high level of performance WITHOUT lottery luck...I'm sure it doesn't work to your argument - but smart drafting trades and free agency - that's what San Antonio does to STAY up top - the lottery put them there.

The lottery put Oklahoma up top - let's see presti maintain it - people seem to ignore what the spurs have done because - well they aren't sexy - but they've been championship contenders for a while now - year in and year out

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 14:11
+/-

Caps lock aside, I agree that San Antonio has done a fantastic job. Best organization in all of sports for my (very little) money. Again though, their whole reign started with a lot of luck.

If you are waiting to see whether OKC will be a title contender for a sustained period of time, I can save you the time. They will.

user-pic
Buke reply to Rich on Jun 12 at 14:27
+/-

Robinson retired after the 1999 championship so he and Duncan played only two years together and the Spurs won three championships without him. Of course, playoff advancement shouldn't be the only measure of success. In the 13 years since Robinson retired, the Spurs won at least 50 games every year (including this lockout year) and won 60 games or more three of those years. Without doing a tally, I would guess that this is the best regular season winning percentage in the NBA over that 13 year period. Considering the composition of the Spurs versus some of the other winningest teams over that time (e.g., the Lakers), this level of success is quite an achievement.

user-pic
Rich reply to Buke on Jun 12 at 14:36
+/-

Um, Robinson played until 2003. He wasn't very good then, but he played much more than 2 years with Duncan.

Still, I agree that they've done a great job! When have I not said that?! I need no convincing that the Spurs are great!

Two things, though. I don't get why people say "Presti got lucky with Durant" and the Spurs get swept to the side when they got Tim Duncan with the first pick. If you feel the first thing is lucky, so is the second.

As far as hiring Weaver goes, we don't know if he'll be any good just as Danny Ferry wasn't very good with Cleveland after he was with San Antonio. Just because a guy works with the Spurs doesn't mean he'll be a good GM. But yes, the Spurs are a great organization, best in sports.

user-pic
Buke reply to Rich on Jun 12 at 14:54
+/-

So he did. I knew he retired after one of the championships, but I guess I had forgotten the correct one.

user-pic
Stan reply to Buke on Jun 12 at 14:38
+/-

The only problem is that Perry began his management career with the Cavs in 2005, where he proceeded to ruin a team with the NBA's best franchise player.

user-pic
The Six reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 12:31
+/-

One thing I don't want is anyone from Atlanta. They have had PG woes for what seems like 10 years now and have repeatedly drafted the wrong player (Marvin Williams over CP3 - I think that was the year) or failed to bring in the right gut through Free Agency. No thanks.

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 12:34
+/-

Also, asking what free agent of note could be lured to OKC is not a question the Sixers should be interested in. Nobody in the NBA wants to live there and a big contract for a free agent would screw up his long term vision of the team. Presti has done a very good job up to this point.

What you just said really doesn't make any sense to me but his 'vision' for the team was based on sucking for a long time and getting lucky in the lottery.

Many people here have no interest on the sixers sucking for a long time and getting lucky in the lottery, so why advocate a guy who learned under that system?

Again, Presti hasn't had to make any hard decisions yet. In fact, the Oklahoma City Thunder Coach doesn't have a contract past these season and if they lose him because a team like Portland swoops in first in the off season, is that good or bad for Presti?

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 12:52
+/-

How does it not make sense? Nobody should care about what free agents they lured because: A. They wouldn't have any cap room long-term for their own guys and B. Nobody wants to play in OKC. It's pretty simple.

Your idea of his plan is way off. He inherited the team in 2007 and they sucked for two years after that, and then they became a very good "on the rise" team. They sucked because he let Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook develop as young players.

So, he takes Durant and locks him up, which was nice. He takes Westbrook and locks him up, also nice. He passes up Tyreke Evans and a host of others to take a guy who fit with his team, and he turns out great. He also takes a guy playing Europe (which fills your arbitrary "stashed late pick" quota) and he turns out great. They all love playing together, have literally grown as a team in five years from the ground up and done it the right way.

Inherits a team in 2007, NBA Finalist in 2012. If Sam Presti had "We are going to suck for a long time" as his organizational philosophy, down to having that printed on signs everywhere in his offices, he could have fooled me. I'd love to have a guy who learned under him.

user-pic
Buke reply to Rich on Jun 12 at 13:16
+/-

On the other hand, maybe he just got lucky. What if Kevin Durant would have been the first pick in 2007 and Seattle/OK City ended up taking Oden instead? What if Minnesota took Westbrook at #3 and OK City settled for OJ Mayo at #4 instead?

Film critic Roger Ebert once observed,"If a director makes one great movie, he shows that he had a great movie in him. If he makes two great movies, he shows that he is a great director."

So far Presti only has one great movie so I'm not sure you can extrapolate a whole lot into the future from that. He did spend a fair amount of time in San Antonio so he does have a nice pedigree and his instincts look good so far but so did Rod Thorn and John Paxson's at one time (of course, he had some significant luck, too).

I say the same thing about writers or actors, I neve knew ebert said that about directors, but I very much am a believer in that

user-pic
Rich reply to Buke on Jun 12 at 13:31
+/-

I'm not going to argue with Durant being a no-brainer. That one was easy, obviously. Westbrook was considered a reach by a fair amount of people at 4, but arguing over that stuff isn't really constructive to whether you'd hire his assistant, IMO.

There are a lot of "what if's" in the NBA that you could saddle with every team. Even the Spurs have the "what if" of David Robinson getting hurt in 1997. They would be looked at dramatically differently if that didn't happen. Would everyone look at their brain trust as number one if that didn't happen? Probably not, I would think.

My point, as it is the same with San Antonio, is that Presti has done a great job getting his pieces together and finding guys who mesh around them. You are always going to need luck to find a superstar like Durant, but it's hard to find fault with what he's done after. That's why I wouldn't mind looking at his his understudy.

Sullinger did well in the no step and max verticals and bad in the lane agility drill. Pretty much expected...

I'm officially aboard the Drummond train, though I'd rather take back expiring pieces of crap if AI9 is the trade chip. I don't want any long-term messes.

Then you won't get a deal to move up high enough to get Andre Drummond, plain and simple

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 13:15
+/-

Not sure he's worth it, then.

Then enjoy perpetual mediocirty

user-pic
Jesse reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 13:33
+/-

Hmm either Drummond or perpetual mediocrity? Not sure that logic is sound. He showed very very little in his one year of college, and basically his entire draft stock is tied to his body measurements/athleticism, which a number of crappy prospects in the past have had (along with better performance in college). There are other big men in this draft that will probably be much better pros, not sure why people have such a hard on for Drummond.

user-pic
Charlie H reply to Jesse on Jun 12 at 17:15
+/-

Sean Williams for example. That's the guy I think he might turn out to be. But I'll take the chance.

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to Jesse on Jun 12 at 22:12
+/-

Yeah, I'm trying really hard to understand all this jumping on the Drummond bandwagon going on around here. I mean, didn't UCONN bring back like 6 freshmen that contributed to the previous years' title (sans Kemba) while adding Drummond, yet he wasn't even enough of a game changer to help them since they barely squeaked into the NCAA tournament and was ushered out in a 1st round loss to Iowa State all while finishing below .500 in regular season Big East conference play?

This isn't to say that their failures were his fault but you'd think he would have been a force at least, no? Seems his freshman year was rather underwhelming considering his build and hype coming out of high school.

I'm all for getting a legit big, but there have been many a big that ended up falling short of even legit status while being touted as much more when coming up to this level.

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 13:34
+/-

Well, it's not like that is the only move you can make, but whatever.

If you only want to trade Iguodala for expiring contracts, you'll never get anything of quality - the point in moving Andre Iguodala is moving towards the future - if you have to take on a contract that adds an extra year or two but you get Andre Drummond, it's worth it in my opinion.

You don't lose cap flexibility - you have it even if yo ukeep iguodala by using the amnesty on Brand and not re-signing Hawes and Williams.

The kind of thinking you espouse, to me, guarantees this team never to even have a chance to get significantly better in the future

user-pic
tk76 reply to Rich on Jun 12 at 13:49
+/-

IMO, Iggy is a bit on the downswing physically. He'll be a good player for a number of years, but in an ever decreasing roll.

If you are going after Drummond, then your target is to be a legit contender in 3-4 years, when Jrue, ET, Thad and Drummond are all in their prime. So that sort of takes Iggy out of the equation, unless you see extending him at a much lower number.

Because of this, I'm completely fine with both trading away Iggy as well as taking on "bad contract" players if they only last 2 years.

So my ideal move would be:

1. Iggy + sweetener + 15 for Drummond
2. Brand for Ariza + Okafor + #10

That would leave you next year:

Jrue
ET(?)
Ariza/Ross
Lavoy/Thad
Okafor/Drummon

And in 2 years:
Jrue23(9M)
ET25(8M)
Ross22(3M)
Thad25(8M)/Lavoy25(2M)
Drummond20(6M)

That realistically leaves max cap space to add a star to that core if you are ready to contend. It also gives you a ton of valuable pieces on rookie deals.

user-pic
Jesse reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 13:59
+/-

You probably don't need to trade up to #10 to get Ross, so in this scenario you would be taking back Okafor and Ariza for no reason - unless you want them I guess.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Jesse on Jun 12 at 14:26
+/-

I think they will need to sacrifice the #15 and Iggy to get Drummond- unless he slides on draft day. So getting the #10 pick was to get them back into the 1st round to nab a wing who can shoot and defend.

I like the combo of Jrue/ET/Ross.

They can each switch without major problems. That really is a huge benefit on how you defend. They each can rebound. And in terms of who is SF on defnse, it depends on the matchups. If you need strength then you use ET. If you need quickness then Ross. While on offense it is the right blend of shooting, play-making and athleticism.

Sure, I'd like one of the guys to be Rudy Gay sized, but all in all they would blend close to perfectly.

user-pic
Jesse reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 14:51
+/-

Thanks for the clarification. Makes sense.

Also, I think Okafor and Ariza are decent pieces to have for 2 years while you are grooming Ross and Drummond.

user-pic
Rich reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 14:55
+/-

For sure. Bad, nearing the end contracts but not horrible players.

On one hand we'd probably all be up in arms over Collins giving PT to Ariza and Okafor for the first season. But it probably be worth allow them to acclimate them to the league (and probably result in a lot of losses and broken play.)

user-pic
Rich reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 16:29
+/-

I don't think Collins would be the coach if they make a move like that for Drummond. They'd be significantly worse.

I probably wouldn't want Collins here if they made a move like that. One thing OKC definitely got right was the amount of time Westbrook and Durant got early in their careers that helped them figure out what they could and couldn't do. If I were running this team, I'd have one order to the coach: Play Drummond and Jrue together a lot and see what we have. As long as he did that, I'd be fine with whatever else. Collins doesn't coach like that though.

user-pic
Stan reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 14:59
+/-

If I can have a roster of Ross, Drummond, and Jrue, I wouldn't care about who else was on contract for the next 2 years.

Yep, that is my basic premise.

No guarantee for success, but at least you are at least attempting to build a great team down the road.

IMO much preferable to adding guys like Hump or Gasol and maximizing this current low ceiling squad.

user-pic
Rich reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 14:05
+/-

Yeah, I don't consider two years "long term," especially because that is the length Iguodala is signed for.

Again, your Drummond trade doesn't address who they would be getting back. I like the kid, but what if he's there at 7 but GS wants to do David Lee and Drummond for Iguodala? I don't know about something like that, and the Sixers would not be dealing from a position of power.

Also, I don't understand why New Orleans would trade the Number 10 pick just to shed a year of salary. That makes no sense to me. I would love to do that if I were the Sixers.

I like that roster, except ross isnt a 3 he's smaller than Turner

Alright, here we go...

1. Trade Iggy and the 15 to get high enough to draft Drummond. I hate giving away the 15th as well, but probably needs to be done.

2. Amnesty Brand and use part of that money on Ersan Ilyasova. 25 years old can board and shoot.

3. Find a shooting wing somewhere, somehow with the remaining, Brand, Iggy, Lou, Spence, Jodi money.

Drummond, Vucevic
Ilyasova, Allen
Turner, Thad
TBD, Meeks
Jrue, TBD

this is a team I can watch with excitement. I would love to hold on to the 15th and get Terence Ross, especially based on his D, but not sure that is realistic. We lose a ton with Iggy not covering premier wings, but we have to gain a good bit back with Drummond at the 5 protecting the rim. Ilyasova rebounds, we know Turner rebounds and Drummond has to rebound better than Spence. If we can find a young, cheap, shooter that can defend, I think this would be an interesting team. If we spent money on Ilyasova how much would we have left based on those other assumptions? Eric Gordon anyone?

John Henson is an athletic big that plays great defense. He seems pretty much perfect for this team and is projected to be drafted significantly later than Drummond. The only knock on Henson is his frame, which hopefully NBA strength training can somewhat mitigate.

"is projected to be drafted significantly later than Drummond"

draft express had drummond 5th and henson 9th

Yes, which would be significant in terms of what the Sixers would have to trade.

Draft pick value is not a linear function

That's true, but 5-9 isn'ts a 'significant difference' or a difference that matters to the sixers.

user-pic
Jesse reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 13:57
+/-

You don't think the Sixers would have to give up more for the #5 than the #9? In statistics, "significant" does not mean a large difference in the actual numbers being compared, but rather a large difference in what that difference indicates. In this instance, the difference between #5 and #9 indicates that the Sixers would have to trade a good amount more (or have to take back a good amount of crap) to get the #5 than to get #9. That is my opinion. If it is incorrect, then that's a good thing.

My opinion is also that Henson is underrated and will be better than Drummond, and that is not an opinion shared by most (especially here).

I know what significant means thank you...your opinion that henson will be better than Drummond isn't shared by most (anywhere). The sixers would have to give up iguodala and take back bad contracts, and most likely give up 15 to get 5 or 9 probably. I don't think in this draft the difference between 5 and 9 is seen as significant, it depends on how yo urank your board.

There's a top 1
There's 2 or 3 guys who make up 2-4
Then there's a morass

user-pic
Jesse reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 14:05
+/-

"I don't think in this draft the difference between 5 and 9 is seen as significant"

That's exactly my point. In terms of talent, there isn't a big difference between players projected to be drafted at these spots, so why give up more to get #5? I get what you are saying about having to include Iguodala and take back bad contracts for either pick. I disagree that you would have to include #15 as well for #9 (whereas you probaby would for #5).

And you are welcome for the stats lesson. I wouldn't automatically presume that people would know what statistically significant means.

Options

You have more options at 5 than nine.

It's the same in the NFL - but the NFL has a stupid 'cheat sheet' (CREATED BY THE COWBOYS FOR GODS SAKE) that values draft picks - it's inaccurate - hopelessly out of date, and utter BS and yet still used

user-pic
csth reply to Jesse on Jun 12 at 13:41
+/-

Henson makes Thad look like Tractor Traylor. Based on the bigs we have now, Lavoy would have to be on the floor with him at all times.

user-pic
ryano reply to Jesse on Jun 12 at 13:48
+/-

Did anyone else see Henson's vertical and bench? Bench wasn't a surprise at 5 reps, but a standing vertical of 25 inches is way less than I thought he would measure at. All he is is long.

Andre Drummond and John Henson have two different ceilings. Drummond just because of his size alone could probaly start @ center right away for the sixers.

user-pic
Jesse reply to C.Brackins on Jun 12 at 14:06
+/-

Yeah, and suck

I dont see how bad he would suck though all he would have to focus on doing is defending and rebounding and dunking the ball. Thats all we would need from him his first year which I believe he would be capable of doing. Henson wont be a starter in this league , more like a specialist off the bench.

user-pic
tk76 reply to C.Brackins on Jun 12 at 14:31
+/-

Drummond is stepping up in class from the Big East to the NBA. But he also will be on a team that only will ask him to dunk and defend. On UConn he was asked to be a more complete post player- and he is far from it. That is why I think Drummond will be terrible on a bad team, but be effective from day one one the Sxiers- who have the right players and system for him to play to his limited strength.

Exactly, he would need a big man coach and a vet big man but to me it's worth it. He's still very young . The sixers need to jump on it

@WojYahooNBA
Danny Ferry is the frontrunner to replace Rod Thorn as 76ers GM, league sources told Y! Sports. Doug Collins is pushing Ferry's candidacy.


Craptacular...not ferry per se, but that Collins is the driving force behind it.

An organization that didn't learn from when Larry Brown had his own puppet GM.

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 14:19
+/-

But he's a Spur! A Spur who botched a young LeBron James!

Hmm...so that made me laugh

1. I said Ferry wasn't my issue
2. Lebron James was never on the spurs, and thus he didn't learn from the spurs, he just scurried away to there - and maybe he learned something since then - smart people can learn from their mistakes.

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 14:27
+/-

I was just joking, but yes, he did learn from the Spurs. He was there for a couple of years before Cleveland hired him.

Well, no one is perfect either, he got spurs training but got stupid...and he bent over backwards to try and make lebron happy - but he was also lied to - he had no clue that lebron had decided a year ago to leave for miami...you don't think he would have worked it differently if he knew that (was he still there at the time?)

My preference is usually against retreads, retreads who failed are even worse, but honestly, it's the whole 'collins pushing him' thing that bothers me more than anything else, I don't want Doug Collins getting MORE power over this roster...it doesn't bode well for intelligent rebuilding to try and contend for a title...hopefully collins is less schizophrenic about players than Brown

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 14:38
+/-

Now that I agree with. He's a Duke guy, so maybe they have a relationship through Chris Collins I guess.

I agree. Its obnoxious

Ferry was the one who let Boozer walk, right?

Didn't boozer basically flat out lie to them though?

If I remember correctly, Boozer gave a verbal agreement that he wouldn't bolt, so they didn't extend a qualifying offer to him. So Boozer's a lowlife and the Cavs were morons because there's no risk in extending a qualifying offer, whether there's a verbal agreement or not.

But it did happen before Ferry was there - according to the timeline

Shaq was on the cavs? Sheesh i forget that happening

when was boozer a cav?

Before ferry got hired

He was a second round pick who they 'let off early' and instead or re-signing with them he bolted to Utah - it was seen as a bush league move by him - by Ferry wasn't GM at the time

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1836318

I'm getting old.

haha...Anthony Gargano wants Sir Charles to be the next GM of the Sixers. Charles said he would take the job.

Anthony Gargano again demonstrating what a putz he is

user-pic
Stan reply to The Six on Jun 12 at 14:42
+/-

That guy is a complete idiot. My old internship used to have his radio show on during work, and I would come back home really pissed. Apparently he has a Sixers tattoo, which makes him the basketball expert of their company.

Drummond looks a little like Marvin Gaye during his "What's Goin On" LP phase. (Sixers need more players with soul.) But I've only heard about him through this grapevine. Ain't that peculiar? Is he all we need to get by next season? Is he a stubborn kind of fellow? A distant lover of the game? Or will he be Doug's pride and joy? Can I get a witness, please? Inner city blues make me wanna holler. Can the Sixers build their whole world around this guy? Ain't nothin' like the real thing, baby. Ain't nothin' like the real thing. Mercy mercy me, the organization's ecology.

user-pic
mymanjrue reply to Dollar Bill on Jun 12 at 16:36
+/-

best comment on here in weeks

user-pic
mymanjrue reply to Dollar Bill on Jun 12 at 18:29
+/-

andre drummond?that would be al-right

user-pic
mymanjrue reply to Dollar Bill on Jun 12 at 18:34
+/-

disappointed in the collins power grab reports, but not at all surprised. reading between the lines, i had suspected something like this was going on for some time. thought it especially in regards to the et situation, and his curious move to the starting lineup and offensive centerpiece role for 4 games directly preceding the trade deadline.

really hope turner won't be dumped. but not feeling good about it

user-pic
johnrosz on Jun 12 at 16:57
+/-

More disheartened about the Sixers today than I was yesterday, that's for sure. Doug Collins is running the show folks, enjoy the ride!

Well I'm still kind of hopeful that the reporters (and derek) are wrong and just reading the tea leaves wrong

Of course I'm not very hopeful about it...larry brown all over again except at least larry got em to the finals

I just hope Collins and Ferry realize that the team still needs to find the cornerstone players needed to build a contender. Jrue/ET/Thad et al are not even close to that type of foundation. You can't build a team with a high ceiling if your foundation is weak. This is not the time to add guys like Hump and Gasol. It is the time to aggressively use their current assets to acquire high end young talent that coupled with their current youth can develop into a suitable foundation for long term contention.

I guess this net month will say a lot about the mindset of this front office. I fear we are headed for Iggy/Brand for 5 yrs 160mil all over again.

Woj from Yahoo drops a story on Collins/Thorn power struggle that has going on for 2 years...sounds like the reports are right.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--sixers-discuss-front-office-job-with-danny-ferry.html#more-id

BTW - if this has been going on for two years and i'm a guy who bought the team in the middle of this nonsense - i get rid of all em and start over with a clean house - no dissension

To me - the more that comes ot the more that reflects badly on thorn, collins, and the new ownership

I don't know. It is generally accepted in the business world (including sports) that ubless the new owner is already familiar with the assets they should leave some things in place long enough to properly evaluate what you have and what changes are needed.

If you blow it all up too fast then someone is likely to fleece you of assets that you may not know are valuable- whether that is players or front office staff.

1. They've had a year, if they can't evaluate in a year, then it's a miracle they were successful in business at all.

2. One of the ownership group supposedly knows basketball, that was the key in this new ownership according to various reports, that was what was exciting.

If after a year the ownership group WITH Levine is still clueless, then the sixers fans are screwed no matter what.

A bickering Head Coach and GM that have been at it for 2 years is not a good situation PERIOD

Bringing in the head coachs 'boy' to be the GM is just bad business, it allows him to consolidate power - you'll never trust his opinion cause he's just parroting the coach.

Make Collins the GM or run a REAL search for the most qualified guy - not the most qualified guy who Collins likes

Yes, they have had a year (really 6 months) and now they are taking action.

Regardless of Levien's qualifications, he was not inside the Sixers organization until he became an owner. No way any outsider can know the organizational dynamics and fully evaluate the players until they are actually with the team.

Ferry very well be a mistake. Collins having too much power may be a mistake. But those are informed decisions- as opposed to had they bought the team and put in completely new people from day 1.

So IMO their current process is the right one. But their actually conclusions and decisions may very well turn out to be mistakes. but I won't fault them for waiting this long to make major changes at the top.

Could someone explain to me what in Doug Collins long coaching career where he has run himself out of town in the third year every time (except probably this one) makes it seem intelligent to give him MORE power - and more influence.

Coachs coach, nothing in collins history shows that he's qualified to be building a roster, hell his history doesn't even show that he's qualified for a deal longer than 3 years.

You see it as an informed measured decision, i see it as asinine and uninformed and an indication that the new ownership isn't 'full time' ownership - they're just 'investor' owners looking to improve the value of the franchise to sell - this is not the move of ownership (to me)vested in winning a title - this is hte move of someone vested to maintain the attendance for next year even if they don't get any farther in the playoffs

I'm not debating over whether it was the correct decision. Just saying IMO the owners waiting half a year to turn over the leadership (and roster) displayed a reasonable amount of restraint.

You can't build a team with a high ceiling if your foundation is weak

I'll expect some sort of royalty payment shortly...yes?

Did you coin that phrase? If so, then thanks.

Teasing you, I've been pushing the 'need a strong foundation to build upon' thing for a while now :) The house metaphor really works well :)

Now that Woj is breaking the story, you all know what I've been hinting at for weeks (but wasn't allowed to reveal). The Sixers have been in a power struggle that Doug Collins won, and is the reason for Thorn's sudden departure.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--sixers-discuss-front-office-job-with-danny-ferry.html

I've you've been reading between the lines, I've been hinting at this for weeks, but wasn't allowed to spill it.

Sucks that you aren't allowed to spill it, as a member of the media, but I understand that sources have their restrictions as well - though if you can't spill the beans what good are they?:)

Seriously though, this is more disappointing to me then if they don't amnesty Brand...to me ti shows that new ownership is weak...clueless...feckless even...and they're convinced that for some reason Doug COllins should shape the future of this franchise, which I disagree with wholeheartedly (for reasons I've espoused numerous times)

At this point - a flat off season - with the return of Lou Williams and some sort of minor upgrade at the center spot is what I expect...nothing that makes me think the team is building towards being more than a second round playoff victim to a healthy heat or bulls team

Shoot me an email. I lost your addy.

You may not be able to answer this, but I'd take your best guess...

But beyond a generic "power struggle" are their philosophical differences between where Collins and Thorn wanted to steer the franchise?

For example, does one want to "win now" vs rebuild? Did one want to go all out for an established superstar (seems Thorn's prior M.O.) versus building with more complementary pieces around the team currently in place? Did one want turn turn over the current vets and the other to resign them?

These are the key questions that are more improvident than who won the power strtuggle. What philosophical differences were they struggling over?

Did one want to go all out for an established superstar (seems Thorn's prior M.O.) versus building with more complementary pieces around the team currently in place?

Which one do you think is more likely to content for an NBA title against the heat and or bulls?

contend, not content

I don't think it's philosophical so much, although they've had very different opinions on certain evaluations. Early on, Thorn got his way. The past year it's been Collins.

So if it's not philosophical does Doug Collins think he just knows everything about how to build an NBA title team (evidence to the contrary that he can even last 3 years as an nba head coach)?

So was Hawes/Noce a Thorn move?

Not 100% sure.

I don't really get you guys. Where's the proof that Ferry or Collins or really anyone else will fuck this up? A lot of you just jump to conclusions and bash everyone and everything. I bet that even if the Sixers had the Thunders squad some of you would still say everyone is wrong and continue bashing at this point.

Even if Collins is behind it all, who says he will do a bad job? What has he done so bad so far from a management/coaching standpoint? He increased the value of almost every player on the team. If he truly is behind the decision making than he will probably think far more long term than if he is just a coach.

Whoever is in charge, lets give them a chance. If after 2-3 years we realize they did a bad job, than we will pray for changes. Right now, there is very little proof of anything really.

If you ask me, summing all that happened in the last year up, i am encouraged. The new ownership appears to be taking the team seriously and that's more than half of the league. It's a nice first step. We need to wait now. The Sixers won't become a championship contender overnight even if they draft the superstarest of superstars.

Like I said initially- my concern with Ferry is that he has only worked in organizations that had established stars and were at the stage of trying to build around them. That is where his experience lies.

That does not mean he will take that appraoch with the Sixers. But it is reasonable to expect they would bring in someone who's experience fits what the owners think this team needs. So if they thought they needed an infusion of higher end young talent at the expense of letting go established good players (Iggy/Brnad/Lou) then I would think they would be bringing in a new GM with experience on teams that have done that.

You can also look at it differently. Ferry has been part of an organization that has had stability and established long term strategy for decades now (Spurs). The Sixers want to become a true franchise. They need that stability.

Not to mention that i think when you hire a GM you don't just hire him for his experience. The key aspects IMO are:

1. Ability to run a team/company.
2. Contacts throughout the league.
3. Ability to evaluate talent.
4. Ability to execute whatever it is the owner wants to do.
5. Experience.
etc...

I won't have a definite opinion on Ferry or anyone else right now than we need to be patient and give them a chance.

Initially i think he is a decent guy. Don't know enough about him to be sure though.

They also had a super star

How do you propose the sixers get that super star - Danny Ferry was not real impressive in Cleveland.

Danny Ferry is a candidate because he's friends with Doug Collins

Or do you forget what happened when Larry Brown had his own personal GM?

Coach's care about their own legacy - not a teams - they don't tend to give a crap what happens once they leave - no matter what they say publicly.

Be it larry brown, phil jackson, jerry sloan, whatever

user-pic
Charlie H reply to GoSixers on Jun 13 at 10:02
+/-

Doug Collins is not Larry Brown. And if you don't think he cares about the team, you're not paying attention. You don't have a lot of evidence in support of Collins being the wrong guy for this team. You predicted he'd be gone last February, but it's a pretty sure thing he'll be the coach through next season, probably longer.

And Ferry is not Billy King. Your take is that he's Collins' "boy". I don't think Collins deals with people that way. My take is he wants a good working relationship with his GM. I don't think it's a good idea for Ferry to report to Collins however. If that's what Collins wants, he's wrong and your take is probably closer to the truth.

Most of the criticism of Ferry's tenure in Cleveland is that he didn't put the pieces in place so that Lebron would stay. But what was he supposed to do with that roster? Varejao, Mo Williams, Ilgauskas, Hickson, Delonte West - what trade possibilities did he have? He brought in Shaq, which was at least a nice try. He did play very well in Phoenix the year before.

I predicted he'd be gone the middle of next season actually, and I really hope he is.

All you pro collins folk are pro a guy who returned a team to mediocrity that was mediocre in the seasons before he got here save one - who has no history of takinga team anywhere at 2 previous spots and no front office experience

But hey - the lack of evidence isn't evidence right - the fact that there's nothing in his history to indicate he can run a team doesn't mean at his advanced age he can handle being both a coach AND a GM - so let's let the guy who already has vertigo issues take on more stress

Sigh - it just seems that even here - people are more content to wallow in mediocrity than anything else

I mean if they trade Andre Iguodala who can you all blame?

user-pic
raro reply to GoSixers on Jun 13 at 10:29
+/-

And if Iguodala nets them a top pick, who are you going to pat on the back? Let me guess... not Collins?

I love it when people write comments like this.

Because, if Collins does fail, where will you be saying "hey look I thought it was a good idea and I was wrong"

You won't be admitting that, but you won't hesitate to call peole out when you're right and they were wrong, because like most of you you're a small petty man and think the internet matters and being right on a blog matters.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I've been wrong before, I admit when I'm wrong...

But please, when Iguodala is traded for Rudy Gay don't hesitate to crow about how smart collins is in turning the team into exactly what it already was but with a guy who does less overall on both ends of the court.

user-pic
raro reply to GoSixers on Jun 13 at 10:52
+/-

Your Collins hate is out of control, which is funny considering your constant railings against the WIP - philly.com crowd and their irrational dislike of Iguodala. Do you not see the resemblance?

No - i don't
My collins 'hate' is perfectly under control
I can't tell you why of course - but I'm well aware of it and it being under control
It's not irrational - it's not based on invisible facts

Well, there are two visible facts about Collins the roster builder. Vucevic at #16 and Lavoy Allen at #50. So he's 50%, so far.

Lavoy Allen had one good series against one team - he couldn't get off the bench most of the regular season.

It's more likely that 66 games of play (or not play) is representative than 7 games against Boston...I have doubts he'll maintain it for a season...

If the presumption is that Collins has been 'in charge' since the draft then collins got rid of Speights and collins traded for young.

And yet he didn't play young...

That doesn't sound anything like Larry Brown at all

He played in about 2/3 of the regular season games and contributed to quite a few wins. that's more than you expect to get out of the #50 pick over his entire career. It was a good pick even if he isn't a long-term starter. You're out of control today.

I'm in complete control of my faculties, and my thoughts on Lavoy Allen aren't new

By the way

51st pick

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyle_Korver

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to GoSixers on Jun 13 at 22:39
+/-

Actually, no, Collins didn't return a team to its same level of mediocrity. Know why? Because Collins didn't have anywhere close to the same team, yet you continually throw this out there, and aren't you a touter of the no-apples and oranges comparison? Collins didn't have a mature advanced high-level point guard by the name of Andre Miller. Nor did Collins have anything close to a legit defensive center by the name of Samuel Dalembert. But you always crow about facts and evidence and conveniently leave this out for some reason.

Yeah, I'm not doubting those are all important factors. I'm not saying he will be a bad GM. I'm stating my reason for concern. Time will tell how things turn out. And this next month will tell us a lot about what direction Collins wants to steer this ship.

I am not saying you are wrong either. I'm just saying experience isn't the only important factor and yet he is sentenced as a terrible choice only because ha has worked with a superstar in place so far.

He may be terrible,he may be great, time will tell.

Fair enough. You raised good points above.

Where's your proof that they'll get it right
Where's your proof that a coach who was power hungry and installed his own GM led to an NBA championship
Where's your proof that Doug Collins knows how to build an NBA roster
Where's your proof that he's a long term coach

And on and on and on

And I doubt anyone would be bitching about the thunders roster, but the thunder wouldn't have hired doug collins either...they were too smart to do that.

You wanna be in favor of this, that's absolutley fine, but there's not a SHRED of evidence that indicates this is a good move

As i said, i am not saying this is a move that will work. There is no evidence of anything right now. Be it work or fail.

And yet you think people who think it's a bad idea somehow should give it a chance

Your spurs comparison doesn't work because whle they have stability - they had that stability before Ferry got there by

1. Having Tim Duncan
2. Drafting and stashing international players smartly (anyone think doug collins is pro stashing?)
3. Having a great coach with a long tenure (this is pop's ONLY nba job) not a coach with a history of burning out midway through the third year

There's no evidence this will work but there is evidence to indicate that installing a puppet GM is a bad idea

What i am saying is you are basing your bad idea evaluation without substantial evidence. You haven't even talked to the guy, how can you know?

For the record, i am against the bashing without evidence not pro Ferry.

Also,

The spurs had stability far before Duncan got drafted. No evidence that Collins is pro or against stashing. Stashing is often situational. And you know what's the biggest reason why Pop is a long term coach? there are two actually:

1. Great success when given enough talent.
2. Every single player on that team knew that the team would rather trade them than get rid of Pop.

Whatever you say, there's evidence than Danny Ferry is not a good GM Candidate as he was a GM in Cleveland.

There's evidence that when you put a GM in place that's a puppet of the coach that it doesn't end well (or were you not a sixers fan when Larry Brown had his puppet GM and that didn't end well nor were smart trades made cause the coach was a douche)

There's evidence that when you put a coach in charge, bad things happen in general

If you want to ignore the evidence - go right ahead - be optimistic - i see no evidence that putting a puppet GM in place works - in any sport

Oh yes i forgot about that. Where is the evidence that Ferry would be a puppet GM? What Woj reported pretty much suggested the opposite, that Ferry won't accept if he is supposed to answer to Collins.

I think i saw this link before but here it is again. And yes i think Woj is probably the most informed NBA journalist out there.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--sixers-discuss-front-office-job-with-danny-ferry.html

Xsago, what general direction do you think the Sixers should be headed in?

Should they be consolidating around the current roster (add a vet PF and a vet shooter) or do you think they need to infuse more talent (either through trades to get lottery picks or through a home-run signing like Deron Williams.)

Don't you think their next GM should have some amount of experience working in an organization that mirrors the stage of development the Sixers are in (and went on to success)? While Ferry has spent every day of his front office career on teams that were 100% focused on adding complementary pieces to a contending core of talent. How does that experience make him the best candidate for the Sixers?

The team definitely needs a much stronger foundation of talent. I absolutely agree with this. That doesn't mean that gutting the whole team, playing horrible basketball year after year and praying to the basketball gods for that one superstar is going to get things done.

I think first the team needs to make a firm decision on the organization as a whole. What kind of an approach the organization wants to take, who is running things, which way will they take etc. Than you move from there. You know the true reason why the Spurs have been successful? They have had a firm vision of what they wanted to do. Every part of the organization worked towards the same set goal for years (even decades). The Sixers problems in the past have always started at the top IMO. The previous owners didn't care enough about the team and they never had a firm vision of what they wanted to do (except maybe for a brief moment when they thought Iverson was the end all be all).

Other than this philosophical stuff i think they are in position where they will need to accumulate talent and assets for the next few years. And they will need to use guys not fitting the general vision as assets when their value is the highest. This is why Iguodala probably needs to go right now for a promising draftee or an underachieving young player who can be a star. I'm fine with drafting a guy like Drummond even though i am not really sold on him. I also think they should keep Turner and improve his value and then decide what to do with him.

But whatever you do you have to have an organization that is stronger and more important than any player, coach, GM or anyone else that thinks differently than their path. Great leaders and entrepreneurs choose who to trust wisely and always decide for them selves.

I really was optimistic about the off season. I really was, (most people won't believe me - you never believe I'm optimistic - but I am when I see reason to be), but sadly, like Jed Barlett on the west wing, I wake up ready to face the day but then the sixers just knock the wind out of me and new ownership shows its true face - and it's wearing an ed snider mask with Doug Collins as Larry Brown and Danny Ferry as Billy King

Is Collins now deciding who the sixers draft as well? IS Dileo on the way out?

Collins has been starting last year.

I thought it was weird that DiLeo was interviewing in Portland, now not so much...

Sigh...I wonder who Dileo wanted to draft last year.

Based on Iggy/Thad/Jrue/Spieghts... I'd say Farried or some other raw athletic player.

But not when ET was drafted I assume.

ET was a Thorn pick.

Thorn selected Favors for New Jersey, didn't he ?
Stupensky selected ET..

Yeah, you're right. I meant ET wasn't a Collins pick, I forgot Stefanski was still running the show.

user-pic
mopey reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 17:57
+/-

He was big on Favors actually - too bad he wasnt here a year earlier...

user-pic
Tom Moore on Jun 12 at 17:59
+/-

Sixers president/GM Rod Thorn confirms Tuesday (via email) that he's helping to select his successor.

Anyone else thinking that whole 'year long process' thing is just a crock?

He is getting paid. Doesn't he have a 5 year provision for being a consultant that will kick in after this year?

Yeah, i was referring to the articles that siad they felt it would be a year long process to find thorns replacement and then shepherd him...somehow I think when Ferry is hired they'll say something about his experience in San ANtonio and Cleveland and Thorn will be put 'in a corner office' (is that the japanese business phrase) and collect his checks and have as much say in how the sixers are run as I do

I would imagine the situation is to the point of being untenable. I think the "staying a year" comment was just trying to handle this graciously and not create more controversy.

yeah, it's corner office time for thorn

Not like I was a huge Thorn fan, but this is just cold, and awful (and yes he gets money but he's being kicked in the dirty on his way out) - maybe he'll end up back in the NBA Front office, which would be awesome if someone with a grudge against the sixers was involved in things like schedule making :)

Not saying it would matter - but hey you never know

Just feels a whole lot like this is a backwards step - here's hoping Collins surprises me - but I can't remember the last time I was surprised

Derek/Tom- Since Collins is clearly the head decision-maker, what is your take on where he sees this current team and what they need to raise their ceiling? I'll have to listen to his end of season presser again... but do you think he is looking to add some solid role players to fill needs right away, or do you think he sees this team as needing a major boost in overall talent level?

And does this mean he will be jettisoning ET at the very first opportunity?

For those wondering, this increases the chances Iguodala is dealt.

For those wondering, this increases the chances Jrue stays.

What does it do about evan turner and lou williams?

That is fine with me.

I know that Collins ttrack record makes people think he is a short term thinker in terms of team building. But it seems like with the Sixers he sees this as his final stop (coach to front office) and he seems to want to build over a longer horizon.

That does not mean that he does not want to also win right away- but I think he wants to win through Jrue, Thad and Lou (who are all 25 and younger) as opposed to patch together a bunch of older vetys to win with Iggy and Brand on his last legs (aka what Larry Brown would do.)

Again, this summer will tell us a ton about what Collins wants to do.

user-pic
johnrosz reply to tk76 on Jun 12 at 19:20
+/-

the Sixers are shopping #15 for a veteran now, according to Sam Amico. Pretty much what I expected from Doug.

Which doesn't match up with shopping Iguodala (in my opinion) two moves that are incongruous (right word?) with each other. If you're looking to get out of the first round to add a vet, you keep your best veteran player...if you're trading your best veteran player, why trade the #15 pick for a veteran when you can use that to possibly improve your core.

That's just how I see it if both facts are true :)

PS - folks - think about it - the sixers have no cap room - so what asset plus the #15 pick is really going to return a veteran that would get people excited?

Unless of course doug would make an andre iguodala for rudy gay type trade

PS - if Doug was 'the man' by the draft last year, that means DOUG was the driving force behind the Iguodala Ellis trade that new ownership put the kibosh on.

Think about that for a minute folks...if the reports about Dougs power grab are true, he was the one pushing that trade.

Ugh, now I feel even worse

user-pic
johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 19:30
+/-

Obviously I have no credibility, but I do remember hearing Doug was unhappy when Iggy skipped out on the exit meeting from someone with a little knowledge of the goings on down there. Supposedly DC and Iggy rarely speak, I think Doug has said that himself in the media...and we already know that Thorn thinks very highly of Dre, called him Darrel Revis.

I'd be inclined to guess Doug was very interested in the Iggy for Ellis trade. But who knows.

Well, see, I discount anyone who things Iguodala for Ellis straight up is a trade that would have been good for the sixers.

And now that guy would be in charge of building the roster? Joy of joys.

Best player on the team - who cares if you like him or not

user-pic
Rich reply to johnrosz on Jun 12 at 19:40
+/-

Really, I don't get that at all. He does complement him a lot, too. Collins was almost in tears talking about how happy he was for him after the Chicago series, and whatever you think of the guy, he is very genuine. I don't think it's fair to assume he was behind the Eliis rumor at all, especially if he's been basically running the show the last year. It would be a guess, but kind of a stab with not too much evidence really.

I don't think it's fair to assume he was behind the Eliis rumor at all, especially if he's been basically running the show the last year. It would be a guess, but kind of a stab with not too much evidence really

The evidence is that Collins has been running the show since after last season and before the draft, the evidence is from multiple sources.

The evidence is that an Iguodala for Ellis trade was in place for draft night and the new owners (who weren't actually in charge yet) put the kiobsh on the deal.

The evidence strongly points to Doug Collins being the driving force behind an Iguodala for Ellis swap and only those who don't want to believe Collins could let his personal feelings cloud his judgement would think other wise.

I'm not sure I'd say that.

user-pic
sooner reply to Derek Bodner on Jun 13 at 13:11
+/-

Sorry if you've addressed this already but do you have any insight on whether the new President/GM is likely to be hired sooner rather than later and if it's sooner would it likely be before or after the draft?

user-pic
johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Jun 12 at 19:48
+/-

I think Fagan confirmed that Iggy did skip the exit meeting at some point, Doug strikes me is a guy that takes his personal relationships very seriously, and no I wouldn't be shocked if he still held that against Dre even now.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to johnrosz on J