DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

A D-League Team, Yippee.

What, you never read/viewed Moneyball?! This is the next step in what will turn out to be--cough, cough--an incredible story.

We're gonna be conference champs.

I think Paul Giamatti should play Tony DiLeo when they make the film of this story-in-the-making.

Obviously you've never read Moneyball...

As for collins (Brian) he ain't gone yet - he's just not coaching

We'll see. Seems to me like Collins and Thorn will be sharing their office whenever they need to get out of the house. Probably playing cards. Can't imagine he'll have much input. I think the comments he made late in the season were him saying the game has devolved into something he's no longer familiar with.

Hmm...so he won't go back to TNT either? Cool

Maybe he'll do that. Who knows. I have to think management has the common sense to see the results of his personnel moves this past season. If he has a big voice in the room we're fucked.

Well if he's no longer familiar with the game what good would he do no TNT :) I hope to see him back on TNT soon, then I'd be fully confident he's just collecting a paycheck

user-pic
Mike reply to GoSixers on Apr 29 at 11:26
+/-

not really. you can still be entertaining on TV and not know how to run a basketball team. i had more interest in watching his press conferences than most games this season. not because i necessarily like or agree with him. he's just good at talking.

actually i think that would be a good epitaph on his grave. Doug Collins: "Good at talking."

Maybe it's not that he's unfamiliar w/ the game, more that he doesn't think it's fun to coach in it's current state? I don't know, he said something about how to compete you have to use 30% of your possessions for threes or something like that. Struck me as a "in my day, we didn't even have a three-point line!" type statement.

Can only go based on what the man said right? I mean people tend to be honest and tell the truth right?

That quote struck me as candid, rather than the rote "Play hard, we really missed Andrew, blah blah blah." Seemed like a moment of truth, and I don't really see another reason for saying it.

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Apr 29 at 11:33
+/-

Man, I'm really surprised to see you basically resigned to this depressed state and actually on board with the approach of getting worse than last year, if they can't hit it big which we all realize is highly unlikely. I mean, you're the biggest advocate and proponent around here probably of making the playoffs no matter the seed. I'm in a pretty large state of funk when it comes to this franchise too but without your usual optimism around to give me however much false and shortlived hope, I'm assuming I will now officially be sunk to the dregs. Maybe it's because I'm older now but I don't remember being this down back in the 90's when they were stinking it up. I guess the tenure of years just finally adds up to where frustration and disappointment and obviously depression is the norm with this franchise. Good times indeed.

Maybe it's my own mortality influencing my judgment. Either do it now, while I can enjoy it, or find a way to be good by the time my kids are teenagers :)

Over the past several years, I felt like maybe the Sixers could be something different, centered around Iguodala, with defenders and athletes to disrupt the traditionally built contenders and overcome the status quo. This roster doesn't have any of that left. I'm not advocating getting worse, I think they should take the shot with Bynum, but short of Bynum or a miracle with Howard, Paul or some other superstar out of the blue, I'd prefer getting worse to signing a guy like Al Jefferson. Josh Smith would've fit into the mold of the team prior to trading Iguodala, but not now.

a miracle with Howard

It would require more than one miracle - signing howard would be only the first - maturity and not being a whiny bitch would be the second miracle

Teams have to actively work to not be really good with a guy like Howard on the floor. The Lakers did a great job of doing all the wrong things this year. It's not that difficult to keep a guy like him happy, all you need to do is actually design the team to take advantage of his skills. I'd love to have that problem to solve.

Nope - not just about taking advantage of his skills - Stan Van Gundy did that - Dwight still was unhappy and a whiny bitch cause to me he's a bit of an egotistical diva

Funny thing is - kobe blows out his achilles and it opens the door for Dwight and he fails to step up - I'm not saying the Lakers were going to beat the Spurs, they weren't if Kobe was healthy, but Dwight had the spotlight, and he wilted like an albino would in such light.

Dwight Howard would be weeping after a year in Philadelphia

Van Gundy did the best w/ what he had. If I was Dwight, I would've been much less patient after playing my entire career in ORL w/out a point guard to set me up.

We'll see - I don't think Dwight has done himself any favors the past 2 seasons. Oh he'll get a big contract but I don't think he's 'the guy' any more - I don't think he is a guy who can be the focus of a team that wins an NBA title. He's been in the league long enough he has to know he's going to get fouled hard, and he's still over reacting to it. Gives teams an edge - foul Dwight hard (legally) and he's going to get rattled.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Apr 30 at 11:10
+/-

I don't agree. Howard was a way worse defensive player this season than he's ever been, and not just because they didn't utilize him well. And it was Howard who fought playing a pick-and-roll game with Nash and demanded a lot of awkward postups. And I have to agree with GoSixers that Howard's a whiny, petulant baby.* I would not be surprised if he never played in a Finals again.

* See, e.g., this awesome gif: http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/2540973/howarddealwithit.gif

I'll take Howard any day of the week. If you're looking for a true superstar w/out any warts, only LeBron and maybe Durant fit the bill.

user-pic
Greg reply to GoSixers on May 1 at 13:30
+/-

I'm not concerned about Howards attitude. I know he looks whiney but with his injuries and all I think he's been tough playing through and not taking cheap shots like some other guys might do. The sixers to me seem like a team he just might fit well with. The group of guys here seem to work hard for the team, unselfish play, and seem to enjoy being friends off the court (something dwight finds important in building a team that functions well on the court). Sixers also have an opening there, obviously, but despite all that I'm not sure I'd rather have him or Bynum. I think I'd rather take my chances on Bynum. To me Dwight seems slow and getting older. I don't know whats wrong with his shoulders but at his age I'm not sure how well they will hold up either.

It's not 'just' the whiney with howard, there's a variety of things that I think make him not a guy you build around.

However, if the clippers lose in the first round - sign and trade chris paul - maybe give bynum that contract for him being healthy (I have no idea about the salary numbers making that work, i'm assuming jrue and thad go away)

Yes - if Chris Paul is on the roster, than I would be more in favor of taking a shot with Andrew Bynum cause then you got the best point guard in the game and the best center in the game (when healthy) in my opinion. There's no career arc mis-matches

Howard would be shredded in Philadelphia, he can't take criticism he never accepts blame for his own actions - it's always someone elses fault - and it's really easy to take him out of his game - foul him hard - once - and he's pretty much a mess

Dwight does not have the athleticism (or size) that Shaquille O'neal had to be able to exist with little basketball skill (again, in my opinion). Honestly, I hope he maxes out in LA cause unless they have a nudge nudge wink wink thing with Lebron - I don't think they'll be winning

Kudos to Jason Collins - takes some big brass ones Jason

Read this article on CNN.com and if you talk about a guy who would help young players learn to be men in the NBA - I say sign Jason Collins - http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/magazine/news/20130429/jason-collins-gay-nba-player/

user-pic
stonedeightytoo reply to GoSixers on Apr 29 at 12:25
+/-

he should have a much easier time boxing out now

If this were my blog this comment would be deleted and you'd be banned.

I like the idea of the D-league - and while it's not a huge deal the sixers bought one - it at least says a bit about trying to do something - Snider didn't do it, much like the 'stashing of Euros's' the sixers always seemed a few steps behind. The new owners have done small things that indicate that they're at least caught up, this D-league team, the hiring of someone who understands the newer statistics (who knows if they listen to him) can provide a glimmer of hope that maybe they know what you need to do to try and do the best you can to build a winner. The next step - who do they hire to coach the team? Are they going retread or are they going with a guy who brings something new

Guy on grantland.com writes a rather silly article with no indepth analysis about why some guys are worse or better than he expected but brings up evan turner and made me laugh when talking about JJ Redick

. Instead, Redick has been pretty "meh," as evidenced by the fact that this season he barely shot a better percentage from behind the 3-point line than Evan "The Villain" Turner. In case you don't understand the magnitude of that, maybe this will help: The Villain is to shooting what a foot-long hot dog is to my understanding of analogies.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9223180/mark-titus-watches-first-round-nba-playoffs-rates-performance-some-guys-played-in-college

..isn't Titus the guy who rode the bench behind ET at OSU?

No idea who he is - just found it funny

And besides, riding the bench at a big 10 school more of an accomplishment than most NBA fans / writers :)

The article really wasn't all that good - there's no insight (they knowing about Daequan Cook post prom really makes me regret them trading him) in it (I clicked on it wondering if maybe they'd explain what people missed on these guys when drafting them) just found the Evan Turner thing funny - need me a laugh today - Philadelphia sports is just so depressing right now

I don't think anyone is arguing that having a D-League team is a huge deal in the grand scheme of things. But it is something that will provide a small competitive advantage over most teams in the NBA. And in the modern game, small advantages sometimes separate the good from the mediocre. I see this as a very positive move. Just like the move to hire Barzilai (the stat guy). It's all about staying ahead of the curve in the NBA and this is a step in the right direction.

What is even more important to me, however, is the obvious dedication to trying to do what it takes to win. You say it's just another PR move, but i don't think that's what it is. Noone is going to attend more Sixers games or buy more Sixers merchandise because they have a D-League team. Noone will suddenly start rooting for the Sixers either. The only good PR they'll get out of it is the few articles written this week. And that's it. And even though i would assume the price of the team is probably relatively low, it is still something the owners didn't need to do. In fact they are only the 6th franchise in the league that will own a D-League team. The other 5: Spurs, Lakers, Thunder, Cavaliers, Warriors. What do these teams have in common? 4 of the 5 have been to the NBA finals in recent years.

Jrue, Moultrie, Archie Goodwin, and two guys from the Delaware 87ers. That sounds like the perfect lineup for the second half of next season. Hello top 4 pick!

hoping for Thad to get hurt, or traded?

Oh I would never want to see Thad get hurt, he's my favorite player other than Jrue. I just want to see him traded for a pick in next year's draft if that's possible, so we can tank next season.

user-pic
South Broad on Apr 29 at 16:21
+/-

Thanks for these - looking forward to reading them later

seems like the kings are staying in Sacramento

Well that's just stupid - however heard a 'whisper of a rumor' in the radio last week that Milwaukee might be on the move sooner rather than later - i mean seriously - there are a bunch of teams out there ripe for poaching if ownership is tired

New Orleans
Milwaukee
Charlotte
Orlando

Four teams off the top of my head that probably would do better in Seattle

BTW - Steve Ballmer is one of the seattle folk - he's the big fat guy who does the microsoft press conferences and was with gates from the first day micosoft started stealing other peoples ideas. He's got DEEP pockets

So - the money to keep the kings in Sacramento is from India huh? NBA - trying to get global - screwing over Seattle again

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Apr 29 at 17:22
+/-

The league that pays it's players the highest salary is the NBA. The league that comes in 2nd is.....the IPL. India's Premiere Cricket League

Man - I tried to understand that game in my youth - just couldn't get it - plus they were all dressed way too nice to be playing sports :)

Just heard a note on LA radio (philly radio can only be endured for so long) that the money for the stadium that is keeping the Kings in Sacramento (which is a pit and not as affluent as seattle - it's just stupid) came from India and that the NBA is trying to get a foothold there

I suppose if they didn't already have a foothold in Japan then Seattle would have head a better shot

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Apr 29 at 17:37
+/-

I've never understood the thrill of cricket (or even baseball). Cricket is a sport invented in England where the weather is pretty shitty. The games can last for days and it's just an excuse for people to stay outside all day when the weather is nice.

It's similar to baseball in the U.S. Do you want to drink beer in the middle of a summer afternoon and not feel bad about it? Just turn on a baseball game.

I don't drink (bad for my genetics) and very much enjoy baseball...hell one of my fondest childhood memories is that when the phillies beat the royals - i heard the cheers - in the suburb of Merion - cheers woke me up as they got the last out

...so do the Rockets actually figure out a way to steal this game?

Dear ESPN since image is everything, I know it's wrong, but please use this opportunity to fire Chris Broussard.

Thanks

What did he do/say?

Well, he's walked it back now (of course, the technical term is CYA) but here's a whole bunch of links that will help you suss it out yourself

http://www.swagbucks.com/?t=n&p=1&b=0&f=0&sef=1&q=chris+broussard

that site is blocked for me. can you summarize?

Being gay is a sin, open rebellion to god, doesn't consider Collins to be a christian (which from my limited understanding of said religion - forgiveness and loving is like important stuff right)?

He's walking it back, apologizing, trying to save face, but if dude gets fired for questions a certain aspect of Robert Griffin, no reason not to see Broussard canned as well (not that I think he should be canned for this - it's his opinion - dumb as it may be - I just want him fired)

If Huff post isn't blocked at your office - this should cover it

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/29/chris-broussard-espn-nba-gay-reaction_n_3180080.html

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Apr 30 at 13:01
+/-

I wouldn't fire him even though I disagree with his opinion

Oh - be clear - I'm not saying firing him for his opinion (though I'm really tired of people who don't comprehend religion using it as a defense for hatred) - just use it as a 'context' to fire him for other reasons - I just don't like him long before this - I think he's a dolt - so this is a good reason to let him go - or maybe do what they did with that guy who called out Griffin and just decide to 'not renew' his contract.

He has every right to his ignorance - more power to him - I didn't like him BEFORE this but like on the newsroom you just need to 'create the context' to fire a guy sometimes :)

What part of his statement showed a lack of comprehension or expressed hatred or ignorance?

I find the comments 'sinning against god' to be inherently ignorant and express hatred - they just cloak them in religion

Personally, I don't care if someone happens to be gay, or super-religious. I don't like Broussard (as a sportswriter) because he's shitty at his job. I don't like Jason Collins (as a basketball player) because he isn't a particularly good one. As far as the rest of it, none of my concern. I don't think this Jason Collins story should be such a big deal because there have to assume there are what, 30-40 gay guys in each major sport, just going by averages of society as a whole. It's sad that it's a story at this point.

Dude - the front page of CNN.com is talking about how towns in georgia still have segregated (privately held) proms - our country really isn't as 'far advanced' as everyone wants them to be.

My point at first was just to USE this as an excuse to let Broussard go - cause he stinks - and while Collins might not be a great player - he might help a team full of young immature idiots who don't know how to be focused NBA players...seriously - i'd rather have him on the sixers roster next year than Spencer Hawes or Kwame Brown purely for the fact that this is a guy who can teach you how to focus on the job in front of you and ignore all distractions.

Eh. I mean, someone could make the same case for Broussard, I guess. He shows how you can work in a fast-and-loose place like ESPN and still maintain your foundation of faith, blah, blah, blah. If Collins is a good guy, good locker room influence, OK. I can see some value in that. I'd probably still rather have a veteran who can't play as well anymore, but can show the young guys how to box out effectively.

I'd probably still rather have a veteran who can't play as well anymore, but can show the young guys how to box out effectively.

Any ideas on who that might be?

I totally agree that this is a non-story. It's based on the qualifiers of him being currently active and in one of the four major sports. There's already a prevalent LGBT presence in the sporting world and his coming out is shining a light on the most diminutive elephant in the room.

Hmmm...so you would have been non plussed when Jackie Robinson came to play for the Dodgers because in the greater sports world there were already a prevalence of African American players in other arenas?

You're wrong that it's a non story - it would be nice if it were a non story - if we lived in a nation where this didn't matter - but your head is so far in the sand you'll hit ocean if you think we live in that nation

Jason Collins is not the first gay NBA player. Awful analogy, GoSixers.

Living in the deep south, being from the northeast, and ethnically not being from either, I have an idea where the country is at and where its failures are.

He's the first openly gay player - period - and that makes a difference whether you acknolwedge it or not - it's easy to 'pretend' to not be gay.

I've lived in multiple parts of the country - i've experience ignorance (mostly from so called 'Chrstians' who used religion to support their argument) purely because I'm jewish.

Anyone who doesn't think this is a big deal, in my opinion (cause for some reason if you don't explicitly state that people seem to think you're expressing something more) has their head up their ass about how this country actually works (which isn't surprising since most people have their head up their ass regarding that)

user-pic
Rodney reply to GoSixers on Apr 30 at 21:09
+/-

Period? No. You're possibly uninformed. You must have never heard of Glenn Burke.


http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20110804006935/en/Presents-%E2%80%9COut.-Glenn-Burke-Story%E2%80%9D-Openly-Gay

"Many of Burke’s teammates were aware of his homosexuality during his playing career, as were members of management. Many of those teammates believe that Burke's sexuality led to the premature derailment of his baseball career"

I tend to agree with Cin that this is a non-story and also with Stan below that the qualifier of him being active rings hollow as the season is over and he's no longer under contract.

(Please don't associate this with Jackie Robinson. It diminishes what he accomplished and went through. When Robinson joined the league blacks were not allowed to go to the same school or use the same restrooms as whites in sections of the country. Gays surely face discrimination and poor treatment but nothing on the state level like that.)

Yes I've heard of burke and know the story - and if you don't see the difference between burke and collins I can't help you there.

Anyone who thinks this IS a non story lives in a cave unaware of how American society and culture really works these days - pull your heads out of the idealistic sand and stop pretending everyone gets along - they just don't - mabye if you haven't been a victim of any kind of hatred just because of how you were born you wouldn't understand - but i'm part of a culture people have been trying to eradicate for six thousand years

This is a big deal - and the immediate comment from the moron yesterday about 'getting rebounds' and the comments to SI articles yesterday (read those yet) demonstrate that ignorance spans far and wide in this nation - it would be great if this was a non story - but stop believing we live in that kind of idealistic country - it's nonsense to say this is a non story - keep trying to tell yourselves it's a non story

It's a story - and it matters - whether you want it to or not - and the completely foolish rationalization of why it shouldn't be going on in this thread are beyond comprehension unless all of you live in your own bubbles or fantasy and are unaware of the nation you actually live in

and where exactly can those who care about your opinion on this find your blog?

user-pic
Rodney reply to GoSixers on Apr 30 at 22:43
+/-

There seems to be a great gap between your claim to being open minded and your leap to judgment concerning those who don't agree with you. I guess your years and miles have helped you to justify this hypocrisy and arrogance? Perhaps you have some logic that would persuade us all that your opinions are the only opinions that are valid?

Personally, and what appears to be the case with other posters, it's a non-story to us simply because I (we) don't have a problem with personal choice or homosexual individuals in general; a friend since childhood and till this day happens to be one. I (again, we) don't feel this is such a big deal because when is the last time you heard the name John Amaechi? Likely about 6 years ago the day he fell off the 24-48 hour news cycle.

And cross-linking this with the persecution of a entire sect of people is a tad sensationalist. No one's mass murdering LGBT's or attempting to eradicate them.

Of course, the reason that you throw terms like 'hate' around (as Cin addressed below on your leap) is to shut down intelligent, objective conversation. Conversation is good when adults can speak about a subject and respect the others view even if they do not agree. What you do with your boarding school name calling, is to eleminate any chance of having a legitimate discussion. That in fact may well be your aim. Your bigotry is blatantly obvious so please don't attempt to pontificate as if you are without blemish.

(And heaven forbid anyone making a joke around here- in reference to the harmless comment yesterday)

user-pic
Da Jruth reply to Rodney on May 16 at 0:23
+/-

As you predicted with this story falling out of the news cycle rather quickly (a week or so), Rick Reilly chimes in (finally) to stunt the media frenzy. And proves GoSixers right that there was a difference between Glenn Burke and Jason Collins - Burke was the first openly gay player - period. How he sees it differently is beyond me...

http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/9278493/jason-collins-debt-glenn-burke

He was open to his team mates - he wasn't open to the public - if you don't see that as diffrent than what collins did - I suppose I cna't help you

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Apr 30 at 22:58
+/-

It's a story that matters a little. You haven't explained why you think it matters yet, other than to say that people who think it doesn't matter are stupid. I think it's a relatively small deal because men's pro sports is pretty much the only profession where there aren't any out people, so does that really say a whole lot about America's attitudes towards gay people generally, or does it just say something about sports, and if the latter, why does it matter so much? It can't possibly be a great indicator of American attitudes towards gay people generally because it's a total outlier; we have out politicians (who people vote for), out actors and singers (whose product people buy), out executives, etc. And to be sure, a lot of people in these professions also feel the need to lie about their orientation, but obviously to a lesser extent than professional athletes, and to a rapidly diminishing extent. So if you want to talk about the closet as a problem in America, it makes more sense to look at the degree to which it exists in the minerun of cases, not sports. Now, maybe the total absence of out gay male pro athletes is significant in some larger sense other than what it says about the closet in America generally. I would suspect that a large reason for that total absence is that athletes are more homophobic than the general population and players didn't want to come out to their teammates; I don't see how that's an important issue at all unless you're an athlete. Another possible reason is that sports fans expect a certain kind of traditional masculinity out of the athletes they watch, even if they might not be all that homophobic in an across-the-board way. So I'm sure there are people who tolerate gay people in certain settings, like gay people, whatever, but don't think the NFL or, say, the military are places where gays belong, and to the extent that these sorts of stereotypes are at work, both in terms of what it means to be gay and what baggage comes with being a male pro athlete, I think that that's a bigger deal and that Collins's coming out is a small but significant first step towards defusing those stereotypes.

Certainly he can't speak for Jason Collins heart or any homosexual that is also Christian, his failing is in believing he can make those claims. However, I don't see the leap you made between disagreement and hatred, based on his comments.

Hey Brian

The sixers aren't doing anything, eagles fans who call up 97.5 aren't particularly sane (and neither are the hosts) and I'm tired of hearing about a 4th round quarterback - what did you think of the Eagles draft?

Well, they didn't take an undersized defensive lineman in the first round, that seems like a step in the right direction. Still not sure what to make of Chip.

The one thing I'm taking away from it so far is that all those 'his offense won't work in the NFL" folks don't really have a clue what offense he's actually going to run.

Who knows - maybe I'll pay for the red zone this year

Getting a super-athletic tackle is never a bad first move for a coach. It would be nice if their o-line was a strength, no matter who's under center.

Just think the focus on the 4th round pick is like amazing - I mean come on guys - after the third round you don't really expect great players more than, what, half the time?

I find it interesting that despite all the claims of him being a revolutionary mind, his draft followed the standard Parcells foundation of pass rush (Bennie Logan), pass protect (Lane Johnson), and quarterback (Matt Barkley).

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Apr 30 at 14:40
+/-

Lane Johnson is probably the most interesting prospect in the draft. He played QB and TE in his first two years at a junior college. He transferred to Oklahoma and played DE for a year before playing the next two years as a RT and a LT. He was supposed to be a 2nd round prospect until he played well at the senior bowl and had a decent combine. He put up better combine numbers than most of the TEs. He has the potential to be one of the best OTs in football.

I don't think he'll start by opening day. He lacks experience and there is a good chance he will be a bust. St. Luis drafted a very athletic OT named Jason Smith with limited experience a few years ago and he was cut by them two years later.

Initially I wasn't a fan of the Zach Ertz pick, there was a ILB named Arthur Brown that I thought would be more valuable to the team. The more I read about what Kelly is going to do with Zach Ertz, the more that I am intrigued about the offense he is going to run. It's going to be much different that what we're used to. This is a quote from Chip Kelly:

"Yeah. I go like that," he said, holding up three fingers, "and three tight ends go into the game. Now, if [the opponents] go three linebackers, we split [the tight ends] out, we throw passes. If they go three DBs, we smash you [with the run]. So pick your poison."

I don't know much about the 4-3 under or Benny Logan to comment on that pick, but I watched his game tape and I liked what I saw.

I think Matt Barkley selection was a good pick. Even if he doesn't pan out as a starting QB, a 4th rounder is a good investment for a backup QB. Just as Redskins fans about Kirk Cousins.

Chip Kelly didn't address "needs" with this draft and there wasn't much movement like there was with the Reid drafts. I thought the draft was solid but not spectacular. It's all going to depend on how good Matt Barkley and Lane Johnson can be.

Ugh - every time someone says 'he had a good combine' as a reason a guy gets picked higher than originally expected I remember Mike Mamula

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Apr 30 at 15:21
+/-

Or you could think of Jason Pierre-Paul

He never played for the Eagles

I don't really care for Jason Collins' announcement. He's a mediocre center that is a free agent and is 34 years old. It was very unlikely that he would get another contract even before he announced he was gay. I don't consider him as the first "active" player to come out as being gay. It would have been much more meaningful had he come out earlier in the year or while he was under contract.

I respect his decision, but I don't think it's a big deal. He's not the only person who has played in the NBA to announce he is gay.

how dare you disagree with The Narrative!

user-pic
Mike reply to Stan on Apr 30 at 18:43
+/-

maybe for adults this isn't a big deal. but there are literally millions of kids who are ashamed to go to school every single day. one thing i've noticed in the past couple years since i started teaching at a high school is that they all LOVE the NBA. none of them watch baseball. they like the NFL too but the NBA is what's cool right now for teenagers. it is a very big deal for kids to see this and feel like it's ok to be openly gay.

it's great that adults don't care about this because we're oh so intelligent and cultured, but think about how many people it actually does affect. it seems like a lot of people are missing the point on this.

user-pic
Tray reply to Stan on Apr 30 at 22:33
+/-

I think he has a 50/50 shot of getting a contract. It's probably increased now, actually. In the same way that Cuban thinks it would be cool to have Griner on his team, some owners will want to sign Collins.

Interesting tidbit I heard today that other people may or may not have known but Phil Jackson has never really 'had say' in roster building - he just 'cooked with the groceries someone else bought for him' because that's how he learned from the 'great' jerry krause

The lakers make more money than any other team in professional sports on their tv deal - so says ESPN 710 AM in LA (which surprised me, I thought the Yankees would be #1)

And thus why the salary cap won't ever do squat until the local tv deals are split up to benefit everyone

(And what was that sweet heart deal comcast got when they sold the team again?)

Listen what people do on there personal time is there business people should just be concerned about there own personal matters and stop worrying about others so much. That's how I try to look at any situation. If the player is playing professional sports why would I care about what that man or woman is doing on there personal time as long as they come out to perform in whatever sport it is as fans that's all we should be worried about in my opinion.

Haha, this guy again! I've got to give Bynum credit, he does make me laugh. Like when he sued his former neighbors for harassment, that was really funny! Also when he developed the longest lasting bone bruise in the history of professional sports. Good times. I'll miss them if he doesn't come back.

looks like the surgery was effective. sign him up.

Sign'im Bynum. Dwight Flighty. J.R. Pufnstuf. Thoroughly Modern Jason.

A beleaguered age yearns for Lloyd Free and Ron Artest.

Calling Dr. J and Dr. Dunkenstein.

Bumper Tormohlen can't believe his eyes. Latrell Sprewell couldn't believe his coach.

Luc Richard Mbah a Moute wonders what happened to the simple names.

Oh, Grandmama.

Bored advocates of tanking can see ESPN's 'top 100' recruits and where they're going to college next year (if they've committed, #1 recruit wiggins has not yet done so) here. Plan your college basketball viewing accordingly

I honestly wish the draft had no weighting at all for lower seeded teams. If I had a site I may write an article explaining this in more detail, but since I dont I'll just put a few of my thoughts here. I actually wrote about this in comments before on another site, but I have a variety of opinions.

For the record, I actually like the NBA lottery system better than the NFL system. I can understand having a little bit of weighting to give the worse teams some leverage. We are lucky they dont use the NFL system in the NBA or else we'd have teams competing for last place. It could turn out like that South Park episode where players are intentionally trying to lose their baseball games so they won't have to play baseball in the summer (which if you haven't seen that episode is one of the most unique and funny episodes in my opinion).

The current ping pong ball system discourages tanking because tanking doesnt really help all that much. The last place team gets only a 25% chance of getting the top pick. The system is not perfect. The 8th to last team gets a 3% chance, which is way too low (and likely what the Sixers would get if they tried to get worse).

In my opinion, even if the NBA needs to help out the small market teams, they should at least give better odds to the other low teams. Why should the second to last team have a worse chance than the last place team? The team who works hard to win should be rewarded. The current system rewards teams that have bad drafting, bad coaching, and losing efforts. A team that overachieves with good coaching and hard work and finishes 3rd to last is penalized for trying. So tanking can help too much in some cases which is why the odds at the bottom should be lowered more. Good thing we at least have some lottery in place. The lottery is enough to make tanking a very tough approach, as I explained in my previous posts. In fact if the Sixers aimed for last by putting in D leaguers I bet they'd get in a lot of trouble with David Stern. But why aren't teams battling it out for last? The reason is because of the lottery and because tanking is still a very hard system for building a strong team.

In my opinion strong teams are built on drafting and personel, not tanking. Football is not equivalent because they play more than 5 positions so giving the top pick to worse teams doesnt have so many repurcussions. But football is a good example to show why you don't need to be a beachfront market. Two years ago all the top free agents wanted to come to Philly because we had respected coaches, great facilities, and a constant contender. Green Bay. Dallas. Teams can build tradition. I believe that with strong scouting thoughout the draft, good coaching, team chemistry, etc teams can turn themselves into a destination.

I'm sure someone else has written about this idea and there's a remnant in my mind, but what I'd do is make them play for it. Have a tournament, single elimination, among all the teams that don't make the playoffs. Team #14 is the 1 seed, the team with the worst record is the 14 seed. Winner of the tournament gets the #1 pick. Not only would this give a couple meaningful postseason games to fans of the lottery teams, but it would also make it possible to go from mediocre to great, and it would give teams a real incentive to go from bad to mediocre, instead of just languishing at the bottom.

But where would the NBA air the pacers/hawks series - cause you know this would draw more viewers on NBA TV as well :)

However, the problem with your scenario is that you tend to 'presume' that the team with the worst record is the worst team - so the teams that are 'lower' in the lottery are more likely to win because they are better basketball teams.

I mean - I guess you give the two worst teams byes into the second round - the first round the 'best 12' play a best of 3 - I don't know, but the thing is - if you run it as a tournament the 'best' basketball team is going to get the #1 pick - not the worst - the goal is to HELP the terrible teams

Yeah, that's not my goal. My goal is to reward teams for actually trying to be good. And to motivate the Sacramentos of the world to strive for mediocrity, because if you get mediocre, there's a path to getting great. Think it would make for a much better league if every team was trying to get better every year. Don't think you should be rewarded for being terrible and be hopeless if you're just barely missing the playoffs.

Think this type of system would also shake up the elite teams much more frequently.

Yeah - your system doesn't work because it based on the belief that teams are tanking (for most of the season) every year. The Bobcats and Hornets (or Pelicans whatever) just suck - whomevers fault it it - they are terrible - in your system them being terrible diminishes their chances at a high draft picks.

The 'principle' of a draft is about making the worst teams better - your system gives the advantage to the 'best' worst teams...the teams like the sixers who aspire to a first round playoff loss but might just miss it

I see it as motivating every team to actively try to improve, rather than wallow and wait for a gift from the draft. Think the potential reward for being truly crappy is way too great in the NBA, and the penalty for iterative improvement is far too limiting. It's a reverse incentive. Like promoting the guy who's always late and lazy over the guy who shows up early and does his job well.

Think the potential reward for being truly crappy is way too great in the NBA,

Meh - most drafts don't have super duper stars - I mean - look how 'great' the reward was for the sixers popping up to #2.

A bad team that is truly bad and building towards getting better by going younger gets screwed in your system - totally and completely

Those teams aren't building IMO. They're institutionally tanking. There are moves they can make to improve their team, but they don't because there's a disincentive to gradually building a team.

I think your idea of a tournament to determine draft placement is really cool. But there's no way it's going to be set up like that for at least a few years, and there's nothing the Sixers can do to realistically be a contender next year. They took a gamble with Bynum, it didn't work out, he didn't want to play, that's fine.

I don't like the idea of tanking a season, but to me it makes sense in this situation. Next year's draft is going to be the opposite of the Turner draft. The top four recruits are all rated extremely high, not just Wiggins. If we attain the worst record, we get to draft one of them. Then after the season we have plenty of cap space to fill in with a couple good players to improve quickly.

user-pic
Greg reply to sander on May 7 at 20:28
+/-

Yeah, as much as I talk against tanking, I actually agree with most of this. I can support 1 season of tanking, especially because we are locked into some bad contracts and because the draft is supposedly strong. I still think this is not very realistic unless we revise the entire roster and I also would still like to try to sign Bynum to a reasonable contract, but overall I could handle 1 bad season if they have a plan in place.

user-pic
Court_visioN reply to Greg on May 7 at 20:59
+/-

Sign Bynum with the intention of letting him rehab for a full year. Tell him he can flamenco all he wants as long as he's ready for 2014-15.

Tank WITH Bynum. Pipe dream? :)

The less realistic part in my opinion is the rest of the team and I can't see them downgrading the roster. However, if Bynum is healthy this year and comes back strong then who knows. Then i guess we'd have to see how well he's actually playing. I like the boom or bust idea by signing him. There is that chance that he plays and is less effective, but I think that risk is minimized by his younger age and refusal to play injured (could become more like a derrick rose situation).

user-pic
Greg reply to Brian on May 1 at 15:34
+/-

I like the tournament idea a lot. My only concern would be if that would hurt the bottom teams too much, if they could compete with the number 1 seed. However, if this does make the lazy franchises more competitive then I guess they could all have a fair chance.

Greg - Brian will take articles from other people if you choose to write one (just so you know) - he's taken a few from others (and me) in the past and I know off season is a hard time to find things to write about.

I don't know how I feel about the draft lottery in general, I mean I understand the need for it, but I think honestly it's 'too fair' - the #1 seed has a 75% chance of NOT getting the #1 pick - I think that number needs to be lower (maybe as low as 50%)

There's a lot of things in football that make it a bad comparison - the two biggest (to me) is the guaranteed contract thing and the tv thing - the NFL teams don't have their 'own' tv contracts - all the money from tv is split equally between teams - the imbalances in other leagues, baseball, the nba, i'm betting a large part of that is how local tv revenue is shared. The Detroit Tigers (for example) went on a spending spree one or two off seasons ago which coincided with a big fat tv deal. (I had this debate on a phillies blog about how the fact that comcast sportsnet is the network AND the cable provider is going to cost the phillies money versus an open market bidding on their tv rights when they come up soon).

The Philadelphia sports market (to me) suffers from the comcast 'local monopoly'.

I think the bigger issues in the NBA are not between players and owners (though guaranteed contracts are a problem) but come down to that 'local revenue' imbalance and how it's shared.

user-pic
Greg reply to GoSixers on May 1 at 15:29
+/-

I see no reason to give the last place team better odds than the 4th-to-last team. Even if the bottom 4 teams had an equal chance at the top pick, then the last place team cant have more than 25%. The issue is that there are so many struggling teams and if we are more fair to the bottom teams then the middle of the road teams struggle too. The 8th to last team with a 3% chance may have a rougher outlook than a 2nd to last team with a 20% chance. Giving all the non-playoff teams an equal chance also makes sense to me.

On another note, at least they have a lottery at all. I was reading about the nfl draft on wikipedia which said they didn't used to have a draft, and before the draft that the best players would just sign with the best teams. the draft prevents this from happening, no matter what odds are given to each team.

How does Comcast hurt the market? (I don't know much about all they do in their operations, but the parts I've seen looked good. I've really been happy with the channel too, providing all day sports coverage for years now.)

Comcast hurts the market (in my opinion) because they are the cable provider as well - let's say a new 'fox sports philadelphia' wants to try - they have to get comcast to carry them - (don't get me started on comcast owning NBC universal) - Comcast owns the pipe and then they have the network as well - if the phillies (or sixers) don't want to deal with comcast - who is their other option in the city? Let's say for instance that the phillies wanted to create their own cable channel (hypothetically) and carry the games on that network - what sort of carry fee do you think comcast is going to finagle to avoid the competition - all approved by the FCC cause they think a cable provider should also own tons of networks?

Check out the history of the NBA draft, I believe it used to be a bit more 'regional' - i.e. wherever you ended going up to college the closest NBA team owned your rights or something like that. I heard about it a few years ago.

I'm not sure I think all 4 teams should have it 'equally' - as you say

There are inherent imbalances in the NBA and honestly - the teams that have been good for a long time - well - they've been good for a LONG time without having high draft picks.
I don't know that the NBA wants a level playing field but if they did - I'm not sure the draft is in the top 3 issues required to fix it, in my mind, in no particular order

1. Hard Cap
2. Elimination of Bird Rights
3. Non guaranteed contracts

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on May 1 at 15:41
+/-

This was actually briefly touched on in the Supreme Court's recent decision in favor of Comcast in antitrust litigation against them.

Wilt was a territorial pick for the Warriors - we can only imagine what this blog would be like if those rules were still around when Kobe was coming up...

user-pic
buke reply to das411 on May 1 at 17:51
+/-

I think there would also be more questions today about where someone belongs as people are more geographically mobile. Let's say some kid plays in Philly until his junior year of high school, then he goes to a New England prep school for two years, and then goes to Tuscaloosa Alabama to play three years of college ball.

Philly, Boston, Memphis, or Atlanta could all legitimately claim a territorial right.

user-pic
Greg reply to GoSixers on May 1 at 18:23
+/-

That makes sense, but as far as the channel I used to enjoy watching Sportsrise and pregame and postgame, ray didinger, michael barkann, sparkly hd backgrounds, interviews, and I dont think most cities had such in depth quality coverage around the clock. I hadn't thought about the effects of the monopoly, but being out of the city now I really miss that coverage.

P.S. i remember those posts from you, tk, and rich. I used to read everything back then but just didn't comment :)

user-pic
Stan reply to Greg on May 1 at 14:31
+/-

Everyone knows that David Stern just picks the lottery winners.

user-pic
Diesel on May 2 at 1:22
+/-

I love that tournament idea for the lottery teams.

Only problem is it might cause tanking for the lower 7/8 seeds in the playoffs that would rather dominate the lottery teams than get a probable first round exit and make for a bunch of teams playing to lose anyway.

Saw that. I don't know a whole lot about Malone. Mixed feelings about Hornacek. Think he might be a bit too mellow, but that might not be entirely bad.

You know for guys who seem really impressed with their own 'spin' I'm surprised they haven't leaked that they're talking to Phil Jackson, whether they are or not, leak it for goodness sake, the freaking Raptors and Cavaliers made a run at him

Hornacek didn't want to be here in early 90s. What makes him want to come back now? Sourpussed his way through a crappy year and a half. His 1st yr Philly TO total was career worst by 52. I credit him for strong free throw shooting, good 4th fiddler in playing days.
As charasmatic as a Fluffernutter. Another good idea brought to you by your Seventy-Sixers.

Who was 3rd on those Jazz teams? Can't remember.

Never had one; Hornacek was team guy, complemented with scoring, smarts. One reason, despite Salt Palace advantage and strong head coach, they didn't grab a Ring. Second reason, #23 and the Russell shove-aside move & bull's-eye. Lots of Stockton & Malone mix-and-match shopping through the years.

user-pic
Charlie H reply to Brian on May 3 at 11:21
+/-

Bryon Russell. I remember them bringing in Chris Morris for scoring, and he did.

A theory possibly borne out by these playoffs: NBA offense is too good these days (or NBA defenses are too good these days, or both) for a team to contend without multiple players who are All-Star talents on offense. The Thunder are no better than the 8 seed without Westbrook even though they have the best offensive player in the league, Clippers can't win games without a healthy Griffin, Lakers couldn't win a game without Kobe, the Knicks absolutely need production from J.R. Smith, etc. Consider, if true, what ramifications this has for the proposed Bynum-centric Sixers.

The Bynum centric sixers should obtain chris paul in the off season when they clippers are wiped out in the first round and donald sterling realizes he's going to have to pay the luxury tax

That's a fine theory, but SAS beat the Lakers without multiple players who are All-Star talents. The Knicks are struggling against a team with zero All-Star talents. The Thunder are struggling with a team which only has one, and really the Clips are losing to a team which doesn't have any All-Star offensive talents.

You've also got the Bulls and Pacers on the verge of advancing with probably zero, maybe one, depending on your definition. Curry is the only guy I'd consider at that level playing in the GSW/DEN series.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 2 at 16:47
+/-

So:

1. I think the Spurs have two All-Star offensive talents, Parker and, more debatably, Duncan. There are games when he doesn't have to do much because Leonard and Green and Manu and everyone else are, but his post game is still pretty phenomenal. How many power forwards are better than him offensively when you factor in passing? If you were picking a playoff team and all you were interested in was putting together the best offense for playoff basketball, could you really pick David Lee or Griffin or West or Horford over him, even though some of them are a bit more efficient? I would take Bosh over him and that's about it.

2. Boston - which will probably lose this series - is in any event not winning in the second round. So, okay, maybe teams without offense can win first-round series or be competitive in them.

3. Same's true of Houston. But also, there probably is an exception to this rule when you've got one superstar + lots of good volume shooters. So I'll give you that.

4. The Grizzlies' lack of offense will be their doom when they play the Spurs, but I'd argue they have at least 1.5 offensive All-Stars, or at least, they've played that way this series. You stopped seeing this kind of play from Randolph a while ago, but it's not like this series shows that you can win without multiple players playing like All-Stars on offense.

5. As to DEN v. GSW, someone has to win. Denver would be in way better shape with Gallo. What's ultimately happened is that the team with the better best scorer is winning. That is, Curry has outplayed Lawson.

Hmm - one might argue that the opponents for the bulls apdn pacers also have zero - depending on your definition. I'm curious as to why you don't think the spurs have multiple all star talents (and the lakers have at least one all star talent even with kobe down don't they?)

One might argue that since only two series are complete that it would be asinine to make any conclusions about what is going on in the NBA playoffs this year and what it says about how you should build a team - if one were so inclined.

I'd really like the celtics to complete the improbably comeback - and I'd like Carmelo to continue to demonstrate that all he can do is shoot - and what that isn't working he's useless

Ownership is D-League by early returns, don't care how many digits in bank account. In less than 2 years, got hustled by a chatty midwestern ex-shooting guard (Collins), who, though he was given carte blanche over personnel matters, took his ball and went home when the roster turned into a trick cigar; and was bamboozled by the Lakers and a center (Bynum) who took insurance money and never played, except to postseason Flamenco music. Now they're interviewing a taciturn midwestern ex-shooting guard (Hornacek). And naming their satellite minor league squad the Eighty-Sevenders. Comedy doesn't get much better.

Their best inroads to date: Hip-Hop's extermination, $17.76 tickets and Wilt & A.I. celebrations.

There should be 'Betsy Ross 13 cents' seating offered soon, especially if Spencer Hawes, Lavoy Allen, Kwame Brown and Arnett Moultrie are positioned as interior bulwarks.

yknow these nuggets sure are going into lockdown mode here in the 4th Q, they kinda look like a certain team we used to watch...

...including the ending. And Warriors did it without Lee.


wow Iguodala had 24 points & 9 rebounds last night. hit 5 3-pointers. dude can't catch a break.

good chance George Karl is fired. doubt he would want to come to Philly & wouldn't really want him here, but I'm sure he'll be on their radar.

I did see him make one three late in the game (under 2 minutes) just dribbled to the top of the three, let it fire, and dropped it in. It was a nice play.

I don't know that George Karl would be on the sixers radar, all the names I've heard them mention have one thing in common.

Cheap

Did you hear Karl might be fired? Don't really think that would be a smart move for Denver. Think he's the perfect coach for the roster they've built. I'd like to have him in Philly, but they'd need to completely rework the roster (not that they don't need to do that anyway).

I believe standard operating procedure is that if you keep not getting out of the first round, even if it's not your fault really (he didn't injure Gallinari) - the coach takes the fall...if the clippers lose tonight without Griffin, the consensus is that Del Negro will get fired (which I'm in favor of in theory for the clippers) but how can that be his fault. Coaches get too much credit and too much blame.

And not for nothing - could someone show Marc Jackson the footage of when he played in the NBA and tell him to stop being such a whiney bitch - god he is embarassing

user-pic
Mike reply to Brian on May 3 at 11:38
+/-

just a lot of talk over the course of the series that he has been outcoached by Mark Jackson. he overreacted & decided to abandon the strategies that won them 57 games during the regular season by trying to match GS's smaller lineups. he pretty much did the exact same thing Avery Johnson did in '07 that led to GS's other playoff upset. and he's now lost 9 times in the 1st round with Denver.

Denver has a good GM though who doesn't seem like he would make any rash decisions based on public reaction to this series. should be interesting to see what they decide.

I didn't watch any of the series so can't really comment on the adjustments. I just know I like a lot of his philosophies, on both ends of the floor.

Which philosophies of Karl do you like? Just curious to give some insight to your 'ideal' coach.

Though I still think Karl exceeds the budget for the next coach based on the names we're reading

threes and layups. interchangeable defensive pieces. Not sure I agree with it completely, but I heard him say something about not caring if his defensive lineup gives the other team a mismatch, because when teams start trying to pick on a mismatch, they stop running their offense and you can force them into mistakes when they're doing something they're not accustomed to. I also like the theory of gambling for steals, but think you really have to have smart players on your team or that becomes a slippery slope.

I just like the fact that he doesn't accept the status quo, and I've always liked a bit of chaos. (Insert Dollar Bill Jrue jab here).

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 3 at 14:38
+/-

I don't know how good of a coach he is defensively. Lowe's written a lot about this, but you can skip that and just look at the results; outside of Lawson and Miller and Faried (and very few teams have good defensive point guards) they have a pretty defensively solid roster and yet they're not that good.

btw, do you think Derrick Rose even notices that his teammates are literally killing themselves to try to win this series shorthanded while he chills out protecting his brand?

I don't know - did you notice that his teammates have his back and this is completely blown out of proportion by the media into maybe something it really isn't? The Bulls aren't winning a title this year even with Rose and if he comes back before fully ready and gets hurt again - what's that say? Just saying

And come on - I mean sure the evil ADA midget played last night but Luol Deng let those flu like symptoms keeps him out :)

Seriously though - the depleted bulls are pushing the Nets to 7 games - if everyone on the bulls roster plays, I wouldn't be surprised to see the bulls in the second round, how does the russian guy think billy king did a good job spending all his money?

I'd be shocked if his teammates did anything other than back him up. This is probably the slowest recovery from an ACL ever. It's over a year now. Think Deng has earned the benefit of the doubt after playing about 45 minutes/game last year w/ a broken wrist. Noah's hurt and playing, too.

The Russian hired BK, so you know his judgment isn't sound.

I was teasing on the Luol Deng thing - I mean - the midget played with the flu ( I believe during the broadcast they mentioned that after the third quarter 'mighty mouse' was vomiting at the end of the bench while they interviewed thibodeau)

I'm not sure that being perceived as being soft is something that would 'help' what ever brand rose is trying to build - to me it seems like they're trying to market him as a small but tough super star (you know - like that guy from georgetown that played for the sixers), sitting out if he can play isn't helping his image.

user-pic
Charlie H reply to GoSixers on May 3 at 15:52
+/-

A combination of Magic & Jordan - that was my impression the first time I saw James play. I wouldn't hesitate to play him at the point.

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on May 3 at 14:35
+/-

The Bulls would have a small chance at winning a title with Rose, I think. Look at what they've done without him. I mean, if Miami's just that unbeatable, they all should sit out the playoffs. Noah should sit out the playoffs with those torn fascia in his feet, Luol should sit out the playoffs because he's banged up and nearly led the league in minutes, Hinrich should sit with his injury for the rest of the playoffs, all those guys with the flu should sit out because they'll only get sicker, etc. They're all less healthy than Rose is. And it really isn't as if, you know, Rose's health is this prize jewel that's just absolutely vital to the franchise's long-term success, while Noah's just expendable. Noah's just as important if not more, and he's playing these games even though with Rose out they have no chance of getting to the Finals. I don't think this is something sports talk radio needs to be obsessing over, but it makes no sense.

Every roster at 100% health, I don't think there's a SINGLE eastern conference team that could stand up to the heat in a 7 game series, not a one could seriously threaten the Heat (i.e. get 3 wins) in my opinion.

Now, the Heat aren't 100% healthy, so maybe they'll be pushed a bit more, but Lebron James is Lebron James - he's the best guy to ever play the game because of the completeness of his game - he's michael jordan and magic johnson COMBINED - in today's NBA he can play every position on the court - well. Seriously - look around the league - how many teams would Lebron James be better at ANY position than what those teams run out there (sorry Jrue, but the sixers are on that least).

Maybe the Spurs, hell maybe the Griz, cause they have REAL big men who present offensive threats and can play defense, in the west, but there's no one in the east even fully healthy I think presents a challenge to the Heat

I think that list probably includes every team. I mean, the Clips would be better w/ LeBron at the point than they are w/ Chris Paul. The Lakers would be better with him at the five than Dwight. He can handle the requirements of every position and he brings everything else with him, right?

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on May 3 at 16:30
+/-

Fine, maybe Chicago has a 0% chance of beating Miami at full strength. If so, I don't see why Noah, a player who's less healthy than Rose and is just as vital to their success, is out there while Rose is not. That's my main point. By the logic that says it's fine for Rose to be out because they're not going anywhere, they should rest all of their players with injuries, and maybe everyone in the Eastern Conference playoffs with injuries should sit the postseason out. You might disagree about Noah being less healthy than Rose, but consider that Rose was cleared to play months ago in the regular season, while Noah's been hobbling around and probably wouldn't be playing these games if they were regular season games.

Apparently David Kahn almost traded a second-year Flynn and the #4 pick (Wolves would end up drafting Wesley Johnson) for Danny Granger and the #10 pick (Paul George!), but talks fell through.

Great read for those who haven't gotten to it:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/wolves/205919251.html

If the 76ers resign Bynum they may as well build on damaged goods and find a way to bring Granger into the fold. I wouldn't be averse to sending Thad and the $27M he's owed over four seasons for a one year, $14M rental of Granger's services. Thad would essentially function as a David West replacement.

user-pic
Tray reply to Cin on May 3 at 16:47
+/-

What do you think Kahn will do with the rest of his career? Bad GM's get jobs all the time, but Kahn seems to be this universally hated laughingstock of the league. I could see him going back to the D-League (which is where he came from, after being an assistant to Donnie Walsh).

He'll probably replace BK in Brooklyn in a year-and-a-half.

user-pic
Stan reply to Tray on May 3 at 17:05
+/-

David Kahn traded down from the #3 overall pick (OJ Mayo) to the #5 overall pick (Kevin Love) in exchange for Mike Miller. He then traded Mike Miller along with Randy Foye to Washington for their 1st round pick and draft Ricky Rubio. Too bad he fucked up on almost every other he made

Magic could play all 5 positions. Look the game where he closed out the Finals against the Sixers plying Center (42 points, 14 of 14 from the free throw line, 15 rebounds, seven assists and three steals: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/espn25/story?page=moments/63 )

Magic was a greater creator than Lebron. Although Lebron is a great passer he does not manage the tempo of the game as a true PG like Magic could. Not saying Magic was better, but that Lebron is not MJ + MJ.

Lebron doesn't HAVE to manage the tempo of the game - do you doubt he could if he wanted to? Lebron is still getting better - yet again comparing a finished career to one that is still going never works out.

Oh yeah, he'll be getting the MVP this year - and honestly - even if he doesn't get it any more - any year he hasn't so far he's still been the MVP - but writers have stupid rules about giving things out too much

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on May 3 at 16:11
+/-

Yes, Lebron could play PG full time. He can manage tempo, but not close to how Magic did, because Magic was an all time great at it.

Lebron is arguably the better player. But Lebron can't do everything Magic did or vice versa.

Magic couldn't spell defense, though.

And if called upon you have no idea how well or badly Lebron could do at it, because he hasn't needed to

How many Laker teams would have gone from being a finals contender to worst team in the league just because Magic was gone...the lakers had sick amounts of talent - Lebron played with garbage and took them to the nba finals

Iverson and Dwight Howard also took garbage teams to the finals in recent years. As did Jason Kidd, a couple of times.

Also, the Eastern Conference was probably at an all time low when LeBron took the Cavs to the finals. They were the #2 seed with 50 wins. They went through the Eddie Jordan Wiz, the Nets after they got Vince, and then the Pistons when they brought Webber in as a last gasp to get something out of that franchise. Then they got swept in the finals.

Man - who pissed in your cheerios (or teechia) - absolutely no fun whatsoever -

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 3 at 18:07
+/-

"Iverson and Dwight Howard also took garbage teams to the finals in recent years. As did Jason Kidd, a couple of times."

Our team was a great defensive team with a garbage offense, led by Iverson. And Orlando was not a garbage team at that point, whatever may have become of Lewis and Turkoglu later. That year Hedo in particular was a really good player. Anyway, I think the better version of his point is that LeBron made them a legit contender by 2008-09, though they didn't actually make the Finals those seasons. But they were much better then than when they did go to the Finals, and they were nothing without him. The Sixers or the Nets weren't contenders in the sense that they never had a chance of winning the Finals. LeBron's teams could have.

Would you consider Flip Saunders to coach the Sixers?

No. Don't like Flip.

He's running the timberwolves now.

If you scroll down you'll see an hilarious Andre Miller play. Grantland's nba coverage has been really great this postseason.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/60864/nba-playoffs-short-attention-span-power-rankings-stephen-curry-and-the-upsetters

user-pic
Statman reply to Tray on May 3 at 17:26
+/-

The Denver fans all want Miller gone, even after he single-handedly won the first game of the series for them. He was atrocious the rest of the series, and he threw his teammates and his coach under the bus afterward.

By the way, further down in that same article is some discussion about how Iguodala, down the stretch of this game (while all his teammates were crapping the bed, so to speak), became the #1 scoring option on his team, hearkening back to his 06-10 Sixer days. He actually put together the best two-game playoff stretch of his career (25-12-7 and 24-9-6) and probably the best playoff series of his career.

user-pic
Tray reply to Statman on May 3 at 18:02
+/-

I was hoping to elicit comments on the weird head-shaking, but yes. Well, I think Lawson was the first option for most of the series.

user-pic
Statman reply to Tray on May 3 at 19:10
+/-

Watching that live, I thought it was one of those "savvy veteran plays" to draw a foul, because the Nuggets desperately needed points at the time. Not unlike Paul Pierce flailing his arms and legs in all sorts of unnatural ways when the Celtics need a foul call.

On another note, seeing how Miller behaved this year, I'm glad for Jrue's sake that the Sixers got rid of Miller before Jrue came on board. Miller wanted no part of being a mentor to Lawson or anyone else.

alex len had ankle surgery out 4-6 months

Sign him up.

hilarious quote from Bulls' color commentator Stacey King last night, on Reggie Evans: "he couldn't score in an empty gym with a ladder."

anyways i guess i missed the Collins part of the thread, but a good friend of mine had to shoot a Nets (?) commercial with him a few years back. Collins showed up and was asked to dunk and stuff, but it became apparent that someone needed to feed him, so my pal volunteered, and hit him with lobs and bounce passes for like an hour. Collins and my friend walked out of the gym laughing like two old friends. apparently he is a really,really good guy.

maybe it's lame, but that stuff matters to me. I like to root for good guys. I met AI9 the one time, and he was really effin cool. I grew up with Dr J's kid, and Doc was super cool. A friend who works for the Nets told me Brooke Lopez is the nicest dude in the world. My point is, I guess, as a fan I take a personal interest in some of these guys, and to see Jason Collins raise his hand like that is inspiring. Good on you, Mr. Collins.

key matchup tonite is Jet v JR. Knick fans are gonna finally realize what a HORRIBLE mistake it was to rely on Smith. Melo gets 50 or the knicks lose. that's my prediction.

Well, max offer to CP3, plan A. Think he's going to be available.

At 28 (in 2 days), he's more apt to get thicker than quicker. Are you sure you want all your marbles in Paul's basket at this point? Could he adapt to an unfamiliar role, the Pied Piper of the Paltry Pantry of Philadelphia?

Exceptional offensive PG and strong competitor, but Sixers would still be in need of a frontline and a bench (a pure shooter wouldn't hurt either if they could find one for their shopping cart).

Opposing PG Conley shot 17 free throws last night. "SG" Tony Allen was awarded 12 free throws. Together, they rocked Clippers for 42 points; 13 assists, 1 TO. (Those Grizzlies, hungry.)

And the pesky questions of Sixers GM and head coach hang in invigorating May mid-air like Marko Milic over a Honda Civic Del Sol.


28 is the falling off point for NFL running backs, but between 28-32 is still considered "prime" in the NBA. I don't think there's a worry about CP3 underplaying a max deal, even in the latter years of a contract.

user-pic
Stan reply to Cin on May 4 at 11:38
+/-

Yup. John Stockton was 36 when he went to the NBA finals in 1998

You may be right about Paul. Best years could be ahead. Slater Martin won a Ring at 32. Big O did too. And Cooz got his last at 34. Of course each of those maestros had big talent nearby with whom to attack the competition with their odometers climbing. (Blake Griffin, gifted as he is, is a distance from Bob Pettit as a ballplayer.)

Magic's last Ring, 28. Isiah Thomas, 28. Walt Frazier, 27.

You never can be sure when a point guard's decline will begin. Head compensates but speed kills at the top of the key.

Speaking of dazzling point guards, I miss watching Ernie DiGregorio, Providence Friar and Buffalo Brave ... another in a long line of knee injury victims.

user-pic
Stan reply to Brian on May 4 at 10:46
+/-

They'll fire their coach and trade Butler's expiring contract for a better player. That will be all the justification CP3 needs to re-sign with the Clips. He's not going to sacrifice a guaranteed $20 million to come to Philadelphia, Dallas, Houston, or Atlanta. It would be hilarious if he goes back to New Orleans.

user-pic
Tom Moore on May 4 at 17:09
+/-

Sunday column: A lot is riding on the Sixers getting the right coach:

http://bit.ly/168unZX

user-pic
Tray reply to Tom Moore on May 4 at 19:19
+/-

Yep, if we hire someone who's too good it will screw up our tanking chances.

lol at the Nets. It's teams like the Nets that make me appreciate Doug Collins, Andre Iguodala, and the overachieving mediocre talent that is the 76ers.

but if all it takes is an injured JNoah to win a round....who could match up with (apparently he is able to move, see that dancing video) Bynum?

Prithee, compare hearts: lion and rat.

"At ease." Major Thibodeau's will and perspicacity has a lot to do with troop fortitude and resultant success while missing key personnel. Next hill is extremely difficult, though not impossible.

So the Knicks get a big asterisk next to their first round win and the Nets couldn't beat the Bulls without Rose. Not going to be easy to tank in this division, also won't take much to win it.

user-pic
Jesse reply to Brian on May 5 at 16:30
+/-

Why is there a big asterisk?

user-pic
Stan reply to Jesse on May 5 at 16:59
+/-

The Celts didn't have Rajon Rondo.

user-pic
Jesse reply to Stan on May 5 at 17:01
+/-

Yeah for over half the season. That's why they had the #7 seed. I don't see why that makes the Knicks advancing asterisk worthy.

If the Sixers advancing last season carries an asterisk, the Knicks advancing this year probably deserves 2.

user-pic
Jesse reply to Brian on May 5 at 17:53
+/-

Meaning that Rondo is twice as good as Rose?

Meaning the Sixers were down 0-1 without home court when Rose went down. Not 0-0 with home court, like the Knicks.

user-pic
Jesse reply to Brian on May 5 at 18:14
+/-

Well I don't think either deserves an "asterisk." You play the team that's put against you. I mean if Rondo didn't go down early in the season, the Celtics wouldn't have been the #7 seed and the Knicks never would have played them. They would have just beaten whatever other #7 seed they'd play. The #2 beat the #7. It's pretty unsurprising. Look, I know you hate Carmelo Anthony. I agree that he is a very inefficient and selfish player and is completely overrated now. But this asterisk talk is nonsense.

user-pic
Tray reply to Jesse on May 5 at 18:40
+/-

He's not a very inefficient player, or even a very selfish player. He's an efficient player who suffers by comparison to the first-ballot Hall of Famers he shouldn't be in the same conversation with.

I don't think either should have an asterisk either, but I'm also not one of the people who can't say "The Sixers won a playoff round last season" without saying "They wouldn't have if Derrick Rose was healthy." Those people should have the same caveat when they talk about these Knicks making it to the second round. That's my point.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 5 at 22:24
+/-

Not necessarily, because Boston wasn't very good with Rondo healthy, so I kind of doubt New York wouldn't have won the series anyway. So the caveat should probably be different in their case, i.e. "maybe the Knicks wouldn't have won but they would still have been favored."

This is essentially the same team that swept the Knicks last year, though. Swapping Terry in for Ray Allen. And the Knicks defend PGs worse than anyone.

user-pic
Matt reply to Brian on May 6 at 9:16
+/-

It's not entirely comparable. The Knicks earned the two seed and the right to play a weakened Celtics team that had half a season after Rondo's injury to fall to a more representative playoff seed. The Knicks, as a two seed, were expected to win a series and they did. They played a weak team because they earned that right.

The Sixers' were an eight seed who no one expected to win facing a strong one seed. During the series, after winning game 1, the Bulls lost their star player (Rose) and Noah became hobbled. Those injuries turned a lopsided 1-8 matchup into a Sixers' win.

Let's just give the Knicks their due and say they built a good enough team to win in the first round. They're already down 1-0 to the Pacers, so we still have plenty to hate about their roster.

someone gave melo a first place mvp vote

Even if Bynum was healthy, I don't think the Sixers would be better than the Pacers.

user-pic
Tray reply to Stan on May 5 at 19:54
+/-

Obviously. Nor would they be better than Chicago next year.

well three draft picks in the top two rounds looks positively excellent compared to how phucked the Phillies are now

That picture at the top of this thread is disturbing. Looking forward to change. How did the 76ers ever come to this? Progeny of Ike Richman and Irv Kosloff, keep the faith.

By the way, this is the most comical moment of the playoffs so far. Kudos to Magic for upstaging the ridiculous LeBron/studio in flames graphic. Unfortunately, this video does not include the part where they actually came back to this idiotic topic after the Knicks game was over, and Simmons likened a player's having the most commercials to "having the biggest piece of chicken on the plate."

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2013/5/5/4303164/magic-johnson-lebron-james-commercials

user-pic
Mike reply to Tray on May 6 at 10:48
+/-

Simmons has mentioned this before in his columns. i think the underlying subtext they don't mention in the discussion is the idea that he would leave for LA next summer to become more famous

the way they talked about it over the weekend though without any context or properly framing the conversation was indeed pretty strange

Well that's probably the lakers plan (pending Dwight Howard they only have one under contract after the 2013/14 season) but I wonder if it's a bigger issue of the marketability of NBA players. Paul and Blake have An Insurance company and Car company which also sponsor the NBA (and man i can't tell which more commercial is annoying - they're both up there with 'the most interesting' man) but I remember a Lebron commercial for a phone company (AT&T?) which has a broader appeal.

Part of it, I wonder, is that Lebron is just, you know, um, ugly?

user-pic
Mike reply to GoSixers on May 6 at 12:58
+/-

ha, interesting thought. i think they could make him look better in a commercial. he's obviously self-conscious about his hairline, but they could focus on his physique and just make him look like a beast.

Wilbon's comment was that he just hasn't had any time in the past year to shoot commercials playing basically all summer in the Finals and then in London.

user-pic
Tray reply to Mike on May 6 at 13:02
+/-

But it's untrue, he has deals. He had Super Bowl commercials this year. I also liked the part about how he's never seen anything like this in his 35 years. Duncan was a, in Magic's words, "two-time, BACK-TO-BACK MVP." He's had very few deals. Steve Nash, two-time back-to-back MVP. Not seen in many ads. Iverson was in ads for his shoes and nothing else. Rose, same thing. Dirk was in very little.

Ford has the Sixers taking Dieng if Zeller is off the board. (In one scenario I've seen, he has MIN taking Zeller at #10).

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 6 at 12:58
+/-

Do you really think anyone has told Ford we're all about drafting a center? Or does he just infer that from the roster?

He had us taking Voose pretty early. Don't think anyone had Harkless last season, though. Except someone on here, actually, was saying they wanted him. Can't remember who it was. He had us w/ Speights also. It's a crap shoot no matter how you look at it, I guess. If I was DiLeo, I'd trade Turner and #11 to move up for Oladipo. Two birds, one stone.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 6 at 14:33
+/-

But everyone knew that we were going to take Speights or Al Thornton that year.

Al Thornton was the Thad year. Think it was Speights or Darrel Arthur.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 6 at 15:04
+/-

Right. As it turns out, Arthur's a pretty good role player.

Question: if you were Boston and amnestying Pierce and KG's retirement would create enough cap room to sign Bynum (I'll assume Howard isn't interested in coming there), would you do that, or would you tank for the next generation?

Pretty much the same situation as the Sixers, only Rondo's older than Jrue and Jeff Green isn't as good as Thad. Depends how much they think KG/PP have left in the tank (if KG doesn't retire). If he retires, I'd try to do it w/out using the amnesty on Pierce, if possible.

Another guy who's already 23! I guess their thinking would be why sign veterans when you can get them in the draft.

I just think it's interesting that, while everyone seems to think Boston should move on from Garnett and Pierce, no one's suggesting that they can go and build a new contender with Bynum. I haven't really seen anyone write that their team should go get Bynum, outside of you and some other Sixers bloggers.

user-pic
Tray reply to Tray on May 6 at 18:22
+/-

That was supposed to be a reply to Brian's 4:12.

I can't really comment on what other people say or don't. I think Boston has more avenues open to them because they're the Celtics, but I guess that remains to be seen.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 6 at 21:57
+/-

I'm not sure that anyone actually wants to play in Boston.

So I suspect after tonight the calls for Rose to come back and play will be pretty deafening.

I hope they win it all without him

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 7 at 11:31
+/-

That will not retroactively make our first-round win look really impressive, I'm sorry to say.

The first round win last season remains impressive either way.

user-pic
Stan reply to Tray on May 6 at 21:24
+/-

What teams have been rumored to pursue Bynum? For the Celtics it would be really difficult because they would only have about $10 million in cap space if KG retired and Paul Pierce was waived.

Danny Granger, Derrick Rose, Luol Deng, Rajon Rondo, Andrew Bynum, Russell Westbrook, Danilo Gallinari, Blake Griffin, Dwight Howard, Kobe Bryant, and Kevin Love. I don't think this many NFL stars were injured last season.

The NFL does have tougher controls on PEDs.

The NFL also doesn't have guaranteed contracts.

So, Ken Berger reports that Budenholzer is also high on the Sixers shortlist for potential future coach. This is very very good news.

The bad news is that DiLeo is apparently conducting the search, whereas Harris is searching for his replacement. This is not the way a coaching search should be executed. The GM should always be able to hire his own coach.

Harris will most likely make the ultimate decision on both but while i do think he is a very smart guy, i am not absolutely certain he is the right guy to do it as he is not really a basketball person.

'So' as preface is catchin' on like wildfire. When I hear it now, I deduct 10 points from the message automatically. So there. Sew buttons on your coat. Sophia Loren.

Harris, at top, looks like an oral surgeon informing his only patient that he extracted the wrong molar due to his reading the x-ray upside down - - "and would you mind going under general anasthesia one more time?"

Head coach surveying conducted by GM who is a candidate to be dismissed. Go Sixers!



I doubt DiLeo will be fired. He's just going to move out of the seat he was keeping warm. Ultimate company man.

I do think there should be more of a sense of urgency to fill the GM spot than the coaching vacancy. Unless there's a guy they're in love w/ as coach. And maybe Shaw/Malone/Bud fit that profile. Who knows.

There's those 23 years of franchise glory to consider. He's so low profile he should be dismissed for impersonating a rug. You may be right about his fate. He's always in the room somewhere when they redecorate.

I'd pass on Malone, reported defensive whiz, based on his father's .290 winning percentage with Raptors & Cavs.

Brian Shaw and Budenholzer currently have the edge as I know nothing about their coaching capacities. Hornacek? I'd prefer Andrew Lang or Tim Perry.


I don't really have anything against any of these guys at this point. I'm glad I haven't heard Curry's name mentioned. Was Malone one of Sloan's pupil's in Utah? I'd like to know if Shaw would try to run the triangle. Don't think that would be a good offense w/ the pieces the Sixers have.

I think Curry will get an interview, but will only be seriously considered if their top choices pass on the opportunity.

I really like Budenholzer, Shaw and Malone as options as i think they are probably the best 3 assistants in the league and are sufficiently young to be part of a long term strategy.

Bud has been Pop's right hand man for 15 years now. It's hard to find any assistant with a better profile than that especially after the Spurs kept winning despite changing the offensive and defensive philosophy multiple times over those years.

Shaw learned under the coach with most titles ever in Phil Jackson AND was instrumental to Indiana's success this season (he had a lot of say as Vogel is less experienced and listened to him quite a bit). He was crucial especially on the defensive end, where they were one of the best in the league. He is deemed as a defensive specialist with solid understanding of advanced statistical principles. Not sure what kind of offense he would like to run, but saying he would run the triangle is premature IMO. There is no evidence that, that's what he'd do.

Malone has been the right hand man on teams with very good defenses (Cavs under Brown) or defenses that exceeded expectations (Hornets last season - look at what happened to them after he left and Warriors this season - much better after he joined them). Similar to Shaw's situation in Indiana, Malone apparently has a lot of say in GSW as Jackson leans on him quite a bit due to inexperience.

What is really important to me is that all three of them are reportedly very open to advanced stats and actively use them. This is a stark difference to what the team has been doing in the past. All of them are very different to the coaches that were considered doing during the coaching searches in the past decade.

Yeah, didn't say he would run the triangle, said I wondered if he would. Rambis was a hot name after his time under Phil, then the triangle kind of did him in when he got his own team.

user-pic
Cin reply to Xsago on May 7 at 11:54
+/-

He absolutely would push the triangle offense and there is evidence of that. The last time he made the coaching rounds he was universally turned down due to his insistence on running the triangle offense. Personally I think anything would be better than the "safe ball" they ran last year, but with Shaw definitely comes the triangle. As a note, before Larry Bird began his interview with Shaw he infamously remarked "I don't want to hear any of that triangle bull****."

user-pic
Rich reply to Cin on May 7 at 14:05
+/-

The Triangle is a fine system, but I don't even think that would be a possibility unless Bynum is in the fold. Even then, it still wouldn't be my first, second, or thid choice of offense. I'd rather try and play "four around one" like Orlando did with Howard if they brought Bynum back.

Whatever the offensive system, as long as it produces better shots than "Long Two City," by all means I'm for it.

The problem with system coaches is that they'll try to run the system when they don't have the assets (or the system doesn't work) a la Eddie Jordan - I want a coach who isn't a slave to a system but knows basketball

Still like the dude from Butler.

Still not gonna get him - while they're going 'cheap' they're still fishing in the assistant coach pool - unless they're sandbagging everyone

Triangle. Princeton. Run 'n' gun. They'd all be a step up in entertainment after Collins' 3-man weave.

Malone: Warriors, Hornets, Cavs & Knicks experience.

Warriors get jittery with leads. They'll have to fix that.

Bulls. "Way to go." 3 to go.

It's hard not to root for those guys.

My prediction is that Kobe will be amnestied and he will come home to Philadelphia along with Phil Jackson and reunite with Bynum. In order to not hurt Doug's ego, he will be named the GM and be considered as the "architect" of this team. In Lakers fashion, the Sixers will package Turner and the other expirings to acquire Iguodala from the Nuggets who have buyers remorse over re-signing him.

Starting Lineup:

Bynum
Thad
Iguodala
Kobe
Jrue

And than Kobe and Bynum won't play a game due to injuries, Jackson will try running the triangle with Kwame and the team will win 41 games. Sounds familiar?

If that happens i'll eat your hat

Here's a whole article on whether they should trade Turner that doesn't mention how badly he sucks a single time. It's like the Sixers PR department wrote it.

well how the hell do you trade him by saying "This guy sucks, who wants him" unless you let the Pirates talk you into paying most of his salary?

Is the Inquirer's job to build up Evan Turner's trade value, or to write accurate stories? If this was a press release, I'd understand why they'd avoid mentioning how bad he is. This was not a press release.

actually, this was Philly.com.

user-pic
Da Jruth reply to Brian on May 7 at 22:25
+/-

This is the same guy who in the Stay or Go results article stated that "many feel" Arnett Moultrie can "develop into a Josh Smith-type talent". Who's that "many" this author's been talking to? Must've been the same 62% of jarheads that voted for Hawes to stay.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on May 7 at 17:37
+/-

I was a little bewildered by the part where he's capable of locking down a premier wing and playing fearlessly in offense, but the general tenor of the piece, as I read it, was that he'd been a bust who some teams might think could improve.

user-pic
buke reply to das411 on May 7 at 17:33
+/-

You're right of course. Fans who were watching know that Turner has underperformed here (and probably so does most of the rest of the league). About 60% of fans responding to a Philly.com poll thought Turner should go. I would imagine that a fair chunk of the other 40% feel he should stay because the Sixers probably wouldn't get much value for him and he only has one guaranteed year left.

I just thought the author was being tactful and trying to maintain some sort of balance. I don't have a problem with that writing style. But some people are just addicted to bluster and scorn and can't understand why everyone doesn't write and speak that way.

Bending over backwards to paint a rosy picture isn't balance.

user-pic
buke reply to Brian on May 8 at 10:20
+/-

I didn't think the article painted a rosy picture, but, because it was missing your trademark crudity and vitriol, I can see how it might have looked that way to you.

I suspect that the author's tone may have been the result of 1) his realization that a message of "he sucks" really isn't very informative and 2) his desire to rise to a higher level than many of the goons dominating sports boards

You're right, passive aggressive insults, that's the way to show intelligence and insight on the internet.

The article was not well written, and lacked anything amounting to facts to support the argument of Turners trade value...statements backed up by fact are helpful - what 'premier wing player' did Turner lock down this year, for instance.

user-pic
Rich reply to buke on May 8 at 11:43
+/-

Has Brian ever written "He sucks"? I feel like he usually backs up why Turner isn't a good player with basic stats or observation, at least in the posts. They're much more informative than that article. And that's a fact, Turner's not a good player. There's no vitriol in saying that. GoSixers is right, your comment was very passive aggressive.

Anyway, there was nothing really informative about that article. A lot of generalities, which is fine, as long as they aren't wrong. I don't understand how you can claim he locked down a premier wing player or that they could get "some serious value" back for him. The last thing it was is informative.

I still don't believe that the Sixers got an offer of Josh Smith for Hawes and Turner, btw. That makes no sense why Atlanta would do that.

I still don't believe that the Sixers got an offer of Josh Smith for Hawes and Turner, btw. That makes no sense why Atlanta would do that.

Oh I can believe it because I think Smith had pretty much zero trade value this year, it seems a foregone conclusion that he is leaving Atlanta, no one has even floated it as a likelihood, so the Hawks were probably 'throwing stuff at the wall' hoping it would stick to try and salvage 'pennies on the dollar' for Smith because they know that money ain't getting them Dwight howard. Turner is still on that rookie deal you can let him off of at some point and Thad is much cheaper than smith :)

Not saying it was a good deal for the hawks, nor honestly is it a good deal for the sixers. I mean every one knows that Smith is going to be asking for the max, do you really want to have the bird rights on that guy if you want to try and sign him? Nah you want to try and get him on the open market / sign and trade cause, well - you can pay less.

learned some 'cba' tidbits on the radio from larry coon yesterday that I didn't know about - maybe you didn't either

1. You can not trade a guy who has an 'opt out' clause pending if they have not yet opted in between now and the opt in date - i.e. Ron Artest has an option that is July 1 - you can't trade him in a draft day deal if he hasn't yet picked up that option - makes sense - I just didn't realize it was a rule.

2. There was also a thing about that if you are in the luxury tax and do a sign and trade you can't actually take players back

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on May 8 at 12:14
+/-

I don't believe it. They would have been much better off letting Smith walk than taking on Turner.

Turner's the price you pay for getting the asset of Thaddeus Young, plus, remember, he was lottery pick, so maybe he just needs a 'fresh start' (come on - there are GM's that are that stupid)

Not even sure I would have been that upset if the sixers made the deal and then let smith walk after this season

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on May 8 at 12:55
+/-

I'm sorry, you keep talking about Thad when the proposed deal was Hawes and Turner. Which is weird because in your initial comment on this you copied and pasted Rich's "I can't believe they got an offer of Smith for Hawes and Turner."

user-pic
Rich reply to Tray on May 8 at 22:32
+/-

Yeah, the rumored deal was Hawes and Turner, not Thad and Turner. Thad and Turner would make a little more sense in terms of why that would be getting discussed.

With everything Ferry has done since taking over in Atlanta, I couldn't imagine why he wouldn't view just letting Smith walk as a better option than taking on an extra year of Hawes and Turner. The funny part was that rumor, all floated by Philly based media IIRC, said the Sixers actually turned that down. So in essence, I think that's a fake rumor that makes the Sixers look even worse than they already do. How do you turn that down?

user-pic
buke reply to Rich on May 8 at 13:31
+/-

Let me explain the message of this article to you because some of you appear to have missed the forest for the trees.

The article opens up with the question of whether or not Turner should be traded. The theme of the author's article was that, although Turner has shown flashes, he has been frustratingly inconsistent and doesn't appear to be a good fit for this team. The author ends the story by answering his basic question (Should Turner be traded?). His answer is probably yes because the Sixers can't afford to wait to see if he becomes more consistent or becomes a good fit for this team. I may not agree with some particular phrasing in the article but I thought the general theme and resolution were perfectly acceptable ways of thinking about this situation.

I am also not claiming Turner is a "lock down" defender or any other favorable language from the article that appears so offensive to you. Just because I find the theme of the article reasonable doesn't mean I agree with all of its points.

But, I certainly don't want to be accused of being passive-aggressive so let me switch to being aggressive-aggressive. The lead blogger on this site is an uncouth goon who once referred to one of Hawes' performances in the language of prison rape and the majority of the rest of you are pathetic sychophants. Is that better?

The only thing I take offense to here is the fact that you say I only referred to a Hawes performance in the terms of a prison rape one time. I'm positive it happened more than that. And the sycophants around here do nothing but disagree with me, which blows.

- lead blogger

user-pic
Rich reply to buke on May 8 at 22:41
+/-

The funny part is I actually agree with some of your points here.

I just thought you saying that Brian's stat and observation based evaluations of Turner "weren't informative" (which I do disagree with) was a way of saying that article is informative. Which it isn't, and that's OK. It reads to me like something that's supposed to facilitate discussion in the comments. He's not really making any big stand, so it doesn't deserved to be picked apart, even if he does make some sloppy mistakes IMO.

user-pic
Rich reply to Rich on May 8 at 22:42
+/-

But obviously don't agree with any of the last paragraph if that's not clear!

Rob Mahoney, writing on one of our potential competitors' for Bynum's talents, basically says that Millsap and Smith would be better (though themselves bad) uses of Houston's money, dismisses Bynum as "a 7-foot red flag," and concludes:

Houston has no need to commit to a questionable player such as Smith, Millsap or Bynum out of desperation this summer.

http://nba.si.com/2013/05/07/houston-rockets-offseason/#more-42204

Smith's a better fit for them than Bynum imo. And I'd say they need to make a desperation move as much as anyone. They're pretty much topped out at the bottom of the conference and they couldn't beat OKC w/out Westbrook. Don't think their ceiling is very high as constructed, despite Harden's offensive excellence.

phil jackson says no to brooklyn to be their head coach

I wonder - is there any team out there that would

A. Offer Phil the Job
B. He would take it.

I mean - would he take the clippers job even?

Kurt Rambis doesn't see Phil taking a 'rebuilding' job - he's maybe gonna come back for 2 or 3 years to win - so he can get the LA taste out of his mouth and move into a front office - he's not gonna rebuild.

It was Hawes and Turner, right? Not Thad and Turner.

Yeah - I see that now - guess the food poisoning hasn't fully worn out

Sigh - ok - i'd definitely have done the deal if i was the sixers - i expect that if the deal was offered - it was the sixers making the offer - and still would have let smith walk

i need to get over this damn thing

No team is trading anything of value for Turner. He is going to be here next year, he is going to help us lose with his lazy and self serving ways, and I couldn't be happier about it.

Josh Smith is not going to help this team win big, nobody the Sixers could realistically get right now is going to make them do that. The player that's going to eventually take this team into contention is not in the league yet.

user-pic
Stan reply to sander on May 8 at 15:26
+/-

Kevin Love will force Minnesota to trade him and Turner will serve as the salary filler for the Love/Thad swap. Their GM will champion the trade as if he got two young promising players for Love.

Kwame Brown was traded for Caron Butler and then traded again for Pau Gasol. Never say never.

YEA TO GEORGE KARL!!

he's a really good coach. wish he was available.

He's a great coach

As long as you don't want to win in the playoffs

He could very well be available

Lionel Hollins and Tom Thibodeau both more deserving of the award in my opinion

Damn - the Heat making a statement tonight

I do expect the Spurs to make a similar statement to the Warriors tonight as well...spurs gonna wreck Steph

Unless Curry gets super star treatment in San Antonio - and Danny Crawford waits to see if he air balls a 3 before calling fouls

Wow these Warriors continue to amaze me. And everyone saying that Jackson is not going to be a good coach was wrong IMO. He's been out-coaching his opposition in the playoffs so far. Or is it his assistant and Sixers future interviewee Mike Malone that is making the difference?

user-pic
Mike reply to Xsago on May 9 at 7:28
+/-

i think Jackson handles the motivational stuff. Malone does many of the schemes and helps with Jackson's lack of experience from what I understand

Pretty disappointed in the spurs defensive performance in the first two games - very unspur like - i still think they'll win the series but i wonder if this is the series where the front office of the spurs sees that age is catching up to them.

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on May 9 at 9:57
+/-

I think the Spurs front office knows that age has caught up to them a few years ago and that the team doesn't have much of a chance to win a championship. But what would you do if you're in the SAS front office. With Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, and Popavich, they'll win a lot of games and sell out every home game. A rebuilding process would cost them a lot of money

They are doing the right thing though. They are in primer position to strike if a key star gets injured or they land a favorable matchup in the finals/conference finals. That is pretty much the definition of a contender and is all any team should be trying to become. They've "only" won 4 titles, but they've been legit contenders for 15 years now. It's not like they are Boston (or the Mavs to a degree) - blinding themselves into the thought that they do stand a chance in the playoffs.

They are a true contender year after year. That's all you can ask for in the modern NBA.

I think there is enough evidence in these playoffs to suggest that it's not so much about how bad their opposition has been, but rather how well the Warriors have played so far. They were downright terrible in February/March and they've improved tremendously since.

What i am trying to say, the surprising results in the Nuggets and now the spurs series (so far at least) are all about the Warriors, Curry and their coaching staff. So far they are the biggest story in the playoffs IMO.

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on May 9 at 11:15
+/-

I think the Spurs have enough young perimeter defenders to survive Manu's age. Duncan's still really good and I don't know that Parker was ever a good defender. And I think the offense is more than good enough to beat just about any team outside of Miami and OKC when healthy. A couple years ago, their age looked like more of a problem than it does now, but with Duncan playing as well as any big man in the league this year, not so much.

Well Turner and Jrue have made it public that they want Curry

Philly.com (be warned)

Saw that this morning. Turner's endorsement is enough for me to cross a guy off my list. Don't really care much about Jrue's preference, either. Get the best coach you can.

user-pic
CM reply to Brian on May 9 at 13:26
+/-

Neither of those 2 are the caliber of player to have their opinion carry weight in that decision.

Quinn Snyder has been added to the interview rolls, it's a nice litany of inexpensive assistants ain't it?

who do you want the sixers to hire?

Not usually a game I play because I don't know who is available but like I said - at least make a SHOW of giving Phil jackson a call - maybe dip into the college ranks for a brad stephens

The thing is there are 'hot' assistants (thibodeau was one) and assistants - hot assistants are going to get paid more than your plain old assistant because there's no demand for them.

It's the process that they're going through that's bothersome - it's bargain basement hunting - I was listening to the radio the other day and they were talking about how Sterling wouldn't shell out for a big name coach - and I was thinking that compared to the money he was going to shell out (if he did) to keep his roster together, 7 mil (or a bit more) for a coach should seem like chump change.

This is a team (the sixers) that threw money out the door last year on crappy players - but now they want to penny pinch on a coach - it's the process that bothers me - even the great 'showman' the new owner has shown himself to be doesn't know that leaking even an INTEREST in Phil Jackson would get them some buzz - sure he'll turn them down - but at least make the damn call - just don't interview your plethora of assistants most other teams wouldn't consider cause you know they're the cheapest bunch

Remember the Randy Ayers hire? Sure that hire sucked, but no one else WANTED the job, they at least 'shot' for other names, they just got turned down by everyone (and no I don't remember the other names - it was a long time ago)

Does Thibs really count as a hot assistant? Wasn't he interviewing for years w/out getting a shot as a HC?

user-pic
Greg reply to GoSixers on May 9 at 20:13
+/-

Both jrue and turner seem pretty smart to me, and would be good for them to have a coach that they understand and philosophies they respect. I think of what rueben frank said of juan castillo that even if he was a smart coach it wouldn't have mattered much because not everyone was on board. combine that with the fact that i've always heard good things about curry and i'd be ok with this move. I trust turner and jrue more than someone who doesnt have first hand experience with him.

My overall opinion though is that i'd be shocked if any of the candadates make that much of an impact.

I'm not sure where Turner and smart came from but in general players picking your coaches is a bad idea...in my mind, as for those comments about Juan Castillo, those players not on board - that's a different problem - whether or not you 'respect' the guy who they hired you should work your hardest to implement the system - i.e. DO YOUR DAMN JOB

I take issue with lumping Jrue and Turner together as anything other than 'players on the sixers roster at this time' and I've seen nothing that indicates they know what makes a good coach - they just know they had fun with Curry.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned and modern players are whiny bitches who need to be coddled or something - but you choose to do a job (and it's a job) you do the best you can for your boss - I despise my boss and I work my ass off for her

I considered him a hot assistant because his name was always out there - people always seemed interested - and every team out there seems to have made a mistake not hiring him it seems :)

How do you feel about Lionel Hollins coaching? Some stuff I've read and heard indicate that it's like a forgone conclusion he won't be the Grizz coach next year. Irreconcilable differences or something.

The point is - most of the guys the sixers are bringing in aren't guys being interviewed by other teams - so the sixers have their option of the guy no one else wants...I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it comes down to who will work the cheapest.

I still think it's weird that for a guy who seems to be good at creating buzz out of nothing, in a town where you are at the bottom of the bottom, they aren't at least floating some bigger names out there, I mean come on, the Nets knew he was going to say no, the Cavs knew he was going to say no, but they still floated Jackson out there and got some press for a day (Toronto had a bit more than just vapor just because of Lieweuke and his relationship with Phil in the past)

Just this morning I saw headlines for Hornacek, Malone and Shaw having multiple teams linked to them. Haven't seen anything about Curry or Snyder. Hollins has done a good job there, not sure how I feel about him. Wonder if he's on the outs because of Hollinger, maybe he doesn't like advanced stats. The rumors don't really excite or bother me. Feel like they made the predictable choices the last two times, maybe we'll be surprised this time. They've also been good about masking their intent w/ the media.

Meh - maybe i'm just still in food poisoning fog combined with coping with my manufacturer shutting down with no notice and having to find a new one in a matter of weeks so I can make product (life is fun) but I don't recall seeing much about them - the only name i've heard is that guy in Spurs land but sounds like he's the 'coach in waiting' because Pop has said something like 'when tim goes I go'.

I wonder if the new analytic guy has any input in who they're talking to - I'd like to know that

user-pic
Jesse reply to GoSixers on May 9 at 20:36
+/-

I'd be happy with Hollins. I think the Grizzlies are favorites to reach the NBA finals this year though, so I doubt they're going to fire him regardless of the behind the scenes relationships.

Would you hire him if he chose to leave?

user-pic
South Broad reply to GoSixers on May 9 at 23:15
+/-

In a New York minute.

user-pic
Jesse reply to GoSixers on May 9 at 23:35
+/-

Yep

I think you are wrong on this matter. Shaw, Malone and Budenholzer are the hottest assistants in the league. They've been interviewed multiple times over the past year or two and at least half the teams without a head coach want them. They are always at or near the top of any best assistants in the league lists. There is interest about Hornacek by multiple teams as well. Curry has some previous head coaching experience and has been interviewed for other jobs. I think Snyder was interviewed last year too and someone was interested in him again this year (forgot the team).

These guys ARE the hottest names out there, outside of perennial retreads. And i seriously doubt they will be very cheap. Malone for example is the highest paid assistant in the league this year. If you want to go cheap you can hire a complete unknown like Dunlap, Vaughn and Lindsey Hunter last year i.e. guys with very little experience and/or weak resume. The rumored names are not unknown.

Actually i think it's quite the opposite. I think Josh Harris just wants the hottest assistants (unproven guys) out there. I am worried that he pays to much attention at the "names". I'd much rather have him look for good fits in terms of Xs and Os.

The only potential retread that was rumored was Lionel Hollins. I'm not too high on him, but he does strike me as a potential Doc Rivers type of coach i.e. a coach good at player management. He could be a very good coach on the right team, i just don't think he would be a good fit for the Sixers at the moment.

The bigger problem is which on of them will actually want to coach the Sixers without a guarantee that they will spend the cap space on Josh Smith type of players. These guys are assistants, but are not without options. Shaw for example rejected Charlotte last year after they offered him the job.

The only time I've ever seen Lionel Hollins mentioned for the sixers is when I mentioned of it.

But this conversation is getting no one anywhere - and honestly - it's likely that as sixers fan's we'll be having it again in 2-3 years

I've read multiple rumors that the Sixers will be interested in Hollins if he is indeed let go.

I don't think the Grizzlies will part ways with him though. He will sign a new contract after the playoffs.

Just for fun, since you call ownership cheap which would be your choices for interviewees? 5 names maybe? I can see you like Phil Jackson but he ain't coaching in the league unless he is made a GM/coach on a top 5 team in the league and even that's far from certain.

I apologize in advance if i am mistaken, but I'm getting the feeling that you are just trying to put yourself in a position where you will bash the hire regardless of who that guy is.

P.S. Contacting Phil Jackson when you know there is no way he'd accept is not a good move IMO. That sends a signal that you have no idea what you are trying to achieve long term. The team is very far from contention and Jackson wouldn't even be a good fit. I could care less about a day of "good" press. I want them to make the right hire.