DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

Let 'em Have It

On the subject of the draft, here are three players' freshman season per 40 numbers, and minutes:

Player A: 19.6 points, 13.8 rebounds, 5.1 blocks, 1.6 steals, .690 TS%, 22.4 mpg

Player B: 21.7 points, 13.2 rebounds, 4.5 blocks, 0.8 steals, .626 TS%, 28.9 mpg

Player C: 18.1 points, 13.5 rebounds, 5.4 blocks, 2.0 steals, .603 TS%, 18.2 mpg

Player A is Embiid, Player B is Oden, Player C is Olajuwon.

Silly to compare Hakeem. He was a freshman playing against seniors. The only upperclassmen Embiid plays against are scrubs who weren't good enough for the draft.

I am surprised we have no seen any Phi Slamma Jamma comparisons. Then again, few would remember that team.

Hakeem moved so well for a 7 footer.

That Houston/Louisville footage from 1988 is a bit blurry, but definitely a must watch as a comparison to this year's prospects. That was more than 30 years ago and you would expect guys to look worse than they do today... but the athleticism and ability of guys like Hakeem and Drexler jump off the screen.

To be fair, Drexler and Hakeem were both 20 in that game, but the opponents were also older. But watch how Hakeem moves and rebounds and I think you can tell a difference when comparing to Embiid. Overall I'm actually surprised that watching a game from 31 years ago looks so good up against the game today.

Sorry typo- 1983

The Wizards wish they were 19-10. They are 19-20 instead.

I think the Sixers will go 2-8 or 3-7 in the next 10 games. There's no way the'll win both Boston games though.

Ugh. I'll fix it later. Nice catch

I'll bet Boston has a worse record after our two games with them

It's possible. I will never doubt Boston's ability to tank. But it's not going to be because the Sixers win both of those games.

I think the bottom 5 teams this year have more or less settled in their positions. It's going to be Milwaukee, Orlando, Philadelphia, Boston and the worst team in the west. The only thing left to determine is the order in which they'll get their lottery balls. I'm just hoping New Orleans doesn't sit Davis for a bogus injury and tanks to the bottom of the western conference. Teams have done crazy things in the past when their pick is on the line (Golden State 2 years ago, Portland last year).

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 20 at 12:06

New Orleans hasn't won since Ryan Anderson went out. They shouldn't be that bad without him - they started the season without him and were okay, though they had Jrue then - but they should soon be worse than Utah or Sacramento, who both continue to win about half of their games since Burke came back to Utah and Gay got traded to Sacramento, respectively. So if what you say is true, it's really just a two-horse race for the fifth spot - New Orleans and the Lakers.

I am not disagreeing with that assessment. I'm just hoping that when Jrue gets back Jrue + Davis will be enough to avoid the bottom of the conference. The Lakers are a major threat to be terrible rest of the way. I'm not sold on the Kings yet either. They have played a lot more home games than road games.

It took this long, which i think is a testament to the guys characters and Brown's coaching, but the veterans are finally starting to check out IMO. I thought, with all the obvious tanking job Hinkie pulled in the offseason, some of them might check out in November. Somehow they lasted to mid January, but i think it's finally happened. They've shown their improved games thus far and are now are just waiting to be traded i guess. And to a degree understandably so.

The +/- numbers of the starting lineup have been horrible lately, which wasn't the case earlier in the season when they were more or less holding their ground against the opponents starters which resulted in quite a few wins. The losses were for the most part the bench' fault. Not anymore.

I wonder if they can "right the ship" again or continue playing the way they've played in the recent 1-6 skid. The truth is the Sixers could really use a prolonged losing skid and we may have seen the last of the "good" Sixers this season.

I'd be fine with that, although I expect the final 20 games of the season to have all sorts of odd outcomes.

There may be as many as 10 teams literally tanking in March and April (usually it's no more than 1-2). It's gonna get weird. And the league will undoubtedly change the draft system ASAP IMO.

If they change it 'asap' then they're idiots - it's an over reaction to a unique situation that doesn't happen every year.

When i said ASAP, i meant in 4-5 years because, they can't do it earlier anyway due to outgoing draft picks.

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 20 at 13:31

I hate the wheel idea. We would actually have less tanking without a lottery, or if the lottery were less random. They thought that by only giving the worst team a 25 percent chance at the top pick they decreased the incentive to tank, but they just gave more teams an incentive to tank.

Exactly. If you have a team or two willing to lose 65 games to get a top prospect that is one thing. But the current situation has more than 1/3rd the fans in the league more focused on the draft than their team's current season (and some of those teams are currently within a game or two of the playoffs.) This year may be exceptional but only by degree.

That said, I'm not sure what the best route is, a more weighted lottery? The rotation this seems lie a joke.

I think any system that even slightly incentivizes losing games is unacceptable. I'm generally on board with the wheel. Maybe not 100% as it was presented but some variation of it. No system that rewards the worst teams just because they were bad is going to get it done.

I also think that the draft system needs to be closely tied to the CBA in general. If the goal for rewarding bad teams is to have a balanced league, do it through the CBA (salary cap, free agency, trades and everything), not by rewarding losing.

I think any system that even slightly incentivizes losing games is unacceptable.

All drafts incentivize losing - the worse you are the better your pick.

So basically - the only draft that would work for you would be to give all 30 teams an equal shot at the first round pick

Which of course defeats the PURPOSE of a draft in general.

All drafts incentivize losing - the worse you are the better your pick.

Ugh, no. The proposal of "the wheel" doesn't help teams that lose at all. It helps everybody equally over a 30 year period, as it should be. The point of the draft is not to "fix" the holes of the CBA that still rewards teams from bigger markets.

I wasn't referring to the wheel - i couldn't give a crap about the wheel - your problem with the draft is why drafts exist...and you can't fix the problems in the CBA because owners don't want to share all their money - it's not just players versus owners it's rich owners versus not rich owners - you think the lakers care about making things fair with their 1 billion dollar tv station?

The purpose of a draft is to make teams better -t he teams that are the worst should have a better shot at the better players coming into the league...

Once again, this is a unique situation and chicken littles are over reacting

And all that would be perfect, except, teams are rolling out a terrible product on purpose and try to lose games because it benefits them long term. There's simply no way that's good for the league as a whole.

And you're ignoring the point that it doesn't happen all the time - it's infrequent that teams do this - thought would you much rather the sixers over pay tired vets and run out a mediocre product that has no chance of ever contending for a conference finals appearance, let alone a finals appearance.

Making the draft ' equal weight ' for all teams is asinine as well - as it's unfair advantage to teams with great players already...do the heat really deserve an equal shot at #1 as the bucks - no - they dont'

PS - the bucks aren't tanking 'on purpose' their ownership is anti tanking - they just have a crappy gm who signed stupid free agents

I supposed it would be much easier if NBA teams could just troll 8th grades and buy the kids like they do in euro soccer?

That's fine, but you have to fix the holes in the CBA. Otherwise you just double-f'd the small market teams if they miss on a pick.

And good luck with that ;)

I still can't believe the players fought a second year in college at the last thing - plus just like in other sports - the 'big' market teams and small market teams are going to have different views on the revenue sharing required for the cartel to thrive for all the teams

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 20 at 13:57

I don't want to trot out all the old clichés, but the lottery enables small-market teams to compete and prevents the same teams from being awful for decades. Teams like the Thunder wouldn't even exist - the franchise wouldn't be there - if there weren't a lottery that gave really bad teams in places with no appeal to free agents a shot at drafting superstars. Is it an accident that basketball's the only big professional sport in San Antonio, OKC, and Memphis?

Like i said, do it through the CBA, not the draft.

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 20 at 14:10

Oh, so a punishing hard cap that gives the attractive cities so little to spend that superstars will be forced to sign in places like Philly. What if I like balance but also think teams with more than one star are good for the NBA? I don't want a league where LeBron and Garnett would have been trapped on crappy rosters their whole careers.

Crappy rosters are a matter of perspective. The Miami Heat have a crappy roster compared to the US Olympic squad. The perceived strength of the rosters is entirely dependent on the context - average roster strength around the league.

Btw, they would fix half the issues simply by abolishing maximum contracts or at least setting the maximum at a much higher number. They are the core of the problem in the "competitive balance" discussion.

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 20 at 14:32

That's true, and it's a clever point. But aesthetics aren't quite as relative. Kobe without Shaq or a prime-years Gasol, LeBron in Cleveland, Garnett before Sprewell and Cassell joined Minnesota - these were depressing teams to watch because of the huge reliance on one player and the huge gap between star and teammates. They were all forced to play a poorer brand of basketball than they were capable of and play roles that they weren't really fit for because they had no one to pass to. Ending two-max-player teams and raising the max would go a long way towards making the sport into a solo act.

That was the case in the past IMO. Modern offenses after all the advances in using stats and after the hand-checking rule are different. For example Houston had one star last year - Harden. Were they boring to watch?

I get your point but i think what is interesting to watch and what isn't is closely tied to success and perspective. I just think we as fans would watch the games differently. On the other hand you forget the huge bonus towards watch-ability that would be more unpredictable games and results.

I'm not following any other US sports other than the NBA, but isn't the NFL so popular because the outcome of the games is not as predictable?

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 20 at 15:13

I'm not advocating for predictability, just for a certain amount of talent on some teams. I don't watch the NFL at all, but from what I read, the very good teams have multiple stars; Seattle has an incredible running back, a pretty great quarterback, and an elite cornerback (who's all over sportscenter), and that's just the people whose names I see on Grantland.

Houston wasn't boring to watch, but a difference between LeBron in Cleveland and Harden in Houston, besides Houston having a more fun offense and a more intelligent approach to roster-building, is that LeBron was fundamentally miscast as a solo scorer on a predominantly defensive team, while Harden wasn't miscast at all. Garnett was even more miscast in Minnesota - tragically so - until he got to play with a couple of All-Stars and eventually a couple of Hall of Famers, and Kobe without great big men was forced to shoot so much that his style of play and personality became borderline psychotic - which was fun for a while, but ultimately not the fate you want for one of the league's greatest scorers. I think the league currently has a nice mix of superteams built through free agency and draft-grown small-market franchises. That kind of diversity creates fun narratives when teams like the Heat and Thunder play each other, it doesn't lock the standings in place forever but allows traditional dynasties to hold up for decades... I think it's a very nice system.

Except at least a third of the GMs in the league aren't even trying to put as good a team as possible and aren't really trying to win games. And winning as much as possible is the core function of sports. And most of that happens because of the current draft structure.

I don't really have a problem with super teams and everything i just think teams should never think about putting an inferior product on the court in order to have a higher draft pick. It ruins the game.

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 20 at 16:56

A restrictive CBA would (and already has) give teams an incentive to not win as much as possible one year so they can afford some big star the next. What's more fun to watch, the team that's tanking so it could get some exciting unknown quantity in the draft, or the team that's furiously clearing cap space and trading its good players for expiring contracts on injured reserve so it can make a big pitch to LeBron in the offseason? Obviously the former is way more exciting, because the games matter when you're tanking - just in the opposite way. In the 2009-10 season, it didn't matter what the Knicks did, just so long as they had lots of free money to pay people who weren't on the roster yet.

I don't buy this premise at all. The CBA doesn't stop you to sign players to one year contracts (or to whatever length that fits your free agency goals), nor does it force you to overpay bad players.

Teams tank because of the draft, not because of free agency. Bad management is not the same with bad system.

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 20 at 19:11

Oh, so you can field a competitive team with one-year contracts while you sit and wait for a star's free agency. Of course, you can only get players who aren't the greatest to sign to those deals, but at least you'll win 44 games with these guys who everyone knows you won't re-sign. Tanking is a lot more fun than that, too.

i doubt wroten plays today, he was in a walking boot yesterday

no wroten, davies and moultrie

Finally some games in a Europe-friendly time slot.

so apparently turner might get some backup pg minutes while wroten his hurt

76ers @ Wizards. "Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown."

no booker for the wizards

Wiggins, the ghost of Marcus Liberty

done eating back to the game

et at pg here

et jumper

good find by evan even though williams missed the 3

good find by evan

thompson 3

down 6 end of the first

williams to the line

good drive by thompson

turnover by the wizards

mcw bucket

mcw bucket in the paint

mcw steal and dunk

defensive 3 seconds on thad

beal hits the ft

i swear Kevin Seraphin only plays well vs the sixers

good drive thad

bad shot mcw

et to the line

thad saves et bad pass

sixers end up turning it over anyway

et has to finish that

beal 3

mcw to the line(split them)

nice move thad

beal 3

thad to mcw

mcw 3

mcw and 1!

made the ft

charge on hawes

nice move by spence

et to the line

down 10 at the half

mcw looks a ton better today than the last 2 games

Yeah, i think this is his best half of the season so far. It's not just scoring, i think his passing and making the right play is what caught my eye the most. Too bad his teammates are missing layups and wide open threes.

nice play the wizards ran there but thad took the charge

mcw and 1!

made the ft

bad shot thad, should passed it back out

5 on anderson

mcw tip in

et almost screws up a 3-1

mcw and thad save him

good run to cut the lead to 4

thad and 1!

missed the ft

good transition d by mcw after his floater was blocked

williams to the line

made both

et at point

really bad pass by evan

no ball movement right now

et to the line

split them

down 13 end of the 3rd

thad long 2

you should expect more from a 5th pick but jan vesely energy big is interesting

bad shot thad

bad mcw shot goes in

mcw to the line

split them

Down 20 when I walk in. Should've stayed out

missing a good mcw game(that air-ball 3 aside)

mcw to the line

missed both

Solid game for Turner.

Hollis fouls Porter shooting a three.

sissy 3

So Otto Porter looks like he has a lot of Evan Turner in him, huh?

injury put him way behind

team is trying to make the playoffs

think he could be a good 3 and d guy down the road

I'm not impressed.

Tray reply to Brian on Jan 20 at 16:51

I think this is one of those games where if Turner plays his average game, we might win.

Eh, they were down 20 when I stopped watching. His average game doesn't make up for that. Closed it in garbage time

I really hate it when Thad has games like this. 3 boards in 30 minutes.

anderson to the line

made both

lost by 8

at the knicks on Wednesday

The Wizards have to be the worst player development team in the league. They've ruined so many talented players. I bet San Antonio would've made legit contender rotation players out of Vesely, Singleton and Seraphin. Porter is probably headed there as well. And it's not like Wall's talent is being maximized either. And that's before you even get to Nick Young and Javale McGee...

When it's only one player or two, it's usually on the players, but when it happens with everyone, there something fishy there...

Also how is Randy Wittman still employed. This team has too much talent to be a .500 team.

P.S. The funniest thing about the team i never realized before today's broadcast. The Wizards have not been over .500 in John Wall's career. So suitable...

I'm hoping the Knicks can help keep the Pelicans out of the top 5. The Nets are blowing them out at MSG, which will drop them to 15-26, one game worse than the Pelicans. They'd "figured it out," but now they're on another losing streak again.

Brooklyn on the other hand looks like a legit team. Kidd got a ton of heat this season, but despite all kinds of injuries and pressure his team looks like they may have figured it out even though they are playing without their best player and the second best player is in and out with bad ankles. For someone who was labeled as the worst coach in the league that;s not so bad.

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 20 at 18:41

Maybe he finally realized that even with all the big names, they have to play through Joe Johnson. And now that they are, they're a mediocre Joe Johnson team instead of a superannuated Pierce and Garnett team.

eddies' heady's on Jan 20 at 19:55

From reading the comments, any reason why ET was given backup PG minutes with Wroten out, instead of Lorenzo Brown being trotted out there?

I mean, Lorenzo aids the tank (which you'd think they would be doing) but if ET is getting run at that spot maybe they're trying to showcase his questionable versatility to other teams? (didn't see the game but if ET was ET he probably stunk the joint up at backup point?

Sixers are getting their heads knocked off one day at a time. It's a process. This year is about development. Of nausea.

Say we get the #1 pick and take Embiid. Is there a plausible scenario where we could trade Noel to obtain a pick to get Wiggins, too? Noel plus Pelicans pick for #2 pick?

tk76 reply to Brian on Jan 20 at 22:17

I don't think they should do that if the Pels pick is in the top 8. There is no lock that Wiggins is a superstar, so I don't see undoing part of the benefit of the Jrue trade as worth it.

The whole point is to ideally grab 4 very good players in 2 years, with hopefully 2 being legit stars. I guess if you were certain that Embiid, MCW, Wiggins and a max FA makes you a contender then you do it, but I'm not sure any of the three are locks to be a top level star.

Tray reply to tk76 on Jan 20 at 22:34

But at the point you draft Embiid, Noel is probably deadweight. So the question is whether you trade someone who's useless to us, however good he might be for someone else, and the 6th to 10th pick for Wiggins. I might consider doing it for Parker instead, but I'd do it for one or the other.

Can Wiggins pass? Does he always spin when he drives?

He can pass. The problem is, right now, his ball handling in traffic isn't good enough to really take advantage of it. It's the biggest thing holding him back at this point (both in terms of his own scoring and setting up teammates)

The Pelicans are apparently interested in trading for a big man. How about Hawes and filler for Ryan Anderson. Hawes is a lot like Anderson and the Pelicans are trying to play Davis as little as possible at C anyway. Meanwhile the Sixers can just sit Anderson for the rest of the season.

I'd do it, doubt the Pels would.

Would adding Turner move the needle for them?

Do they need a less athletic, less efficient version of Tyreke? I wouldn't think so.

Tray reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 10:34

Also, do they need a better version of Jason Smith? Is that the sort of big man they want?

Not fair to compare Smith and Hawes. Smith is 1/15 from three over the past four seasons. He's doesn't really stretch anything. Hawes could be a decent compliment for Davis, though I'd rather have Anderson.

Tray reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 11:38

I think the Pelicans want an actual center, and see Davis as a four. That seems to be what they're aiming for when they play Stiemsma and Withey. Maybe that's misguided, but I don't think a larger Anderson is what they have in mind.

Withey has been good in limited action. Liked that guy in the draft.

Hawes is unrestricted. I don't think they want a Hawes rental, although I guess it cold give them a trial run with Hawes and Davis before committing to him. So I think they wold be interested in Hawes, but only at a minimal price.

On a related note, do you think Hinkie would have interest in Gordon if he could acquire him for a minimal cost (say Hawes and ET.) The main issues would be his contract and whether he wold mess up their tanking chances for this year.

I don't think the contract would be a killer for the Sixers as much as it wold be to other teams, as it only goes 2 more years and he is still young. If you think he is the right pairing with MCW, then it potentially further accelerates the rebuild. You could essentially have your team next year and grow into it over the following 2 years:

#1 pick
#1 pick

The positives of this lineup is that your hardest to fill slots are done (PG/SG/C.) It is comparatively easier to find talented SF/PF in both the draft and FA. They would also have enough cap space for a max player and another big contract.

I'm not sure either the SIxers or Pelicans would be interested in such a deal though. What is Gordon's value right now given his contract and injury history?

That's probably about what his value is right now. I'd hope he was hurt the rest of the year if they made that deal, though.

So if the Sixers rolled out a lineup of:


Does that kill the tank?

Because you could win 50 games within 2 years with the right picks and a major FA signing. And MCW/Gordon and 3 promising lottery picks would be a legit draw to a young FA. But I'm not sure who you could actually get to come to Philly. Lebron and Love are probably out of the question. Aldridge is unlikely. So that leaves you more with guys like Monroe, Bosh, Melo ect. And that level player is probably not worth the big contract because you are unlikely to be a conteder.

I don't know what Hinkie or the Pelicans think about it, but i think that's a horrible trade for the Sixers. I'd rather let Hawes and Turner expire. The Pelicans should pay to get rid of that contract if they are getting expirings in return, let alone expiring contracts that actually have some on court value. Gordon's injury history suggest he's a year or two away from Roy/Granger/Bynum territory.

Anderson is an interesting target because he is currently injured and properly payed. Gordon is a terrible target and i would stay away from Evans as Wroten is practically the same player just a lot younger.

I would have zero interest in Evans. I'm not sure Anderson is getable as he has a good contract and is 25. I'm sure Hinkie would love to have Anderson next to Noel, but I doubt it would happen.

As for Gordon, he is sort of like the Bynum trade, but at SG. The league is really weak at SG, and he would be a great fit next to MCW. The cost would be low, and they have less cap issues than any other team in the league. Basically you are agreeing to overpay Gordon for 2 years (the second of which you might be a contender.) Then if he can stay healthy you pay him market value to expend him at age 27. If he is not healthy then you let him walk.

I guess I have much more confidence in Gordon being an effective player than Bynum, given their positions and skill sets. Especially if you get a quality 3&D SF so you can hide Gordon on defense and save his legs.

The 2015-2016 year on his contract is unacceptable for me. The Sixers should be players in the 2015 offseason with Love as the primary goal. Gordon cutting into that cap space would be a terrible move.

It would not keep them from having Max money available. And if things played out then they would likely have Gordon exercise his ETO and resign him a a better cap number but longer deal.

My point is that without an established player next to MCW they won't attract a max player to Philly. Max players want to win right away, not to wait 2 years for lottery picks to develop. MCW/Gordon/Thad/Love plus 3 developing former lottery picks is enough to contend right away and potentially win multiple titles.

While if they trade away Thad and don't go after a name player then I do not see someone like Love wanting to join MCW and 3 lottery picks who aren't fully cooked.

Tray reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 17:40

I'm not going to argue with you about the waste of money and how good Gordon actually is and all that; I just want to dispute your premise that we'll be more attractive with Gordon on the roster. Gordon hasn't actually been a name player since the Chris Paul trade; he has the reputation of being the fourth best player on a bad team, after Davis, Jrue, and a very well-regarded shooter in Anderson. There are no huge Gordon highlight dunks anymore, which says a little about what kind of a player he is now, but more importantly, matters to players who largely know guys on small-market teams from their highlights. Players all know of his attitude problems, his injuries, the time he told the Hornets in the media he'd be disappointed if they matched the Suns' max offer. Why would Love prefer to play with Gordon and MCW over Rubio and Kevin Martin, exactly? I guess MCW is better in some ways, but Kevin Martin's more durable and he's also a better player.

On the other hand, if we draft a star in the draft and he has a great rookie season, he doesn't have to be completely "cooked yet" for a superstar to be interested, because superstars aren't idiots and can project what a really promising rookie may become just as well or better as your average fan who's stoked about a star rookie. Blake Griffin was nowhere near being "cooked" after his rookie year, but because of his great rookie year, the Clippers became one of a small list of teams Paul was willing to be traded to. I don't think that Chris Paul is an eccentric in this regard, or that it's impossible for our top 3 pick to have a similarly great rookie year. Granted, superstars are not going to go to Milwaukee this offseason to play with Giannis, and that may be a big mistake, but whoever we draft is going to be a lot more polished than Giannis.

Tray reply to Tray on Jan 21 at 17:47

Another example of a star who was quite willing to join a young team; Kobe was willing to waive his no-trade and join the Bulls - in fact, the trade was his idea - but only if Luol stayed. Luol was going into his fourth season, and Kobe was willing to let the Bulls give up Gordon. The idea was to go play with Luol, a rookie Noah and/or Tyrus Thomas, Sefolosha, Nocioni, etc. Noah hadn't even played a game yet.

tk76 reply to Tray on Jan 21 at 19:34

The point is not so much Gordon as adding someone for a couple of seasons if the price is right. My point with Gordon was you could get him for next to nothing and maybe it pays off. It would not cost them any of their picks. It would not lock them into any money beyond 2 years.

Maybe Gordon is washed up and not the right target. Maybe there is someone else young, good but seen as overpaid with a couple of years left (the way Iggy was perceived prior to leaving the Sixers.) Maby Gallo or Illasova (team option after 2 years)?

I am not for signing someone to 4 years like Stevenson or Monroe that locks the team in. But if a name player becomes available for 2 years and all it cost them is 2 years of cap space, then the team should consider it if the player has a good chance of being good and helping attract a star. This is such a buyers market right now with so many teams looking to dump players.

Sure, they Sixers lottery picks might be enough to entice a superstar to push the Sixers over the top in 2 years. But I think that involves a lot of risk and blind faith. If the lottery picks are slower developing (as 19 year old players often are) then the team could end up instead locked into being stuck as a "developing" team for a long time. I think if they add the right young vet for a couple of years then it could tip the balance to where the team wins 45 games next year in a weak East is a viable destination.

Again, maybe Gordon is not that guy- and I certain;y don't want to risk their tanking chances. But if they can turn ET and Hawes into a young name player with a couple of overpaid years on the books then it could further accelerate their rebuild in the same way that trading Jrue accelerated their rebuild. That 2 year window also allows for the team to get really good before they have to extend all of their lottery players.

So if the front office is willing to pay the tax (the way OKC was not) then they could put together a superteam in 2 summers and use their bird rights to keep it together indefinitely.

Tray reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 20:24

Gallo and Ilyasova are even worse. I mean, Gallo's missed this whole season and last year's playoff. Ilyasova appears to be "cooked" in the bad sense.

I think we're getting a top 3 pick, that Embiid is widely perceived as the best young center since Oden, that Parker will have a really big rookie season, and that Wiggins will struggle his rookie season. That gives us a 2/3 chance of drafting someone who will impress free agents.

tk76 reply to Tray on Jan 21 at 20:36

Cab you think of a target that would fit the profile I mentioned. Someone in their prime and good, but overpaid and our injured with s couple of years left where they're team wants to"head in a different direction."

tk76 reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 20:38

Sorry, phone swype keyboard and lack of proofreading. That was the most egregious use of a "they're" I've seen in a while.

Stan reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 16:51

Would you rather overpay Lance Stephenon? If you offered Lance $10-12 million, I wonder if Indiana would be able to match. I think EG is going to make $30 million over the next 2 years.

stephenson is an unrestricted free agent

I'm not that big of a fan, but have not watched him much in this breakout season. I get the sense he might not be the right type of guy for a team that is not winning.

yea i dont want any part of him

Amusingly, I can imagine them getting Gordon, and him being comparatively healthy next year. Then he takes his ETO to renegotiate a long deal with the Sixers right after they sign Kevin Love. Then the feature MCW/Hobbitt/Wiggins/Love/Noel/Thad but Gordon and Love are never healthy enough to win anything...

Stan reply to tk76 on Jan 21 at 16:12

I'd be ok with that trade if you replaced Hawes with Jason Richardson

No interest whatsoever in trading for an injured player on a big contract.

Tray reply to jsmoove on Jan 21 at 16:45

I don't enjoy watching him though. He shoots threes, mostly open ones, he swings the ball to the point guard, he throws the occasional bad post entry pass, he drives and spins into double teams, sometimes he gets to the line, he plays some nice perimeter defense at times, and that's pretty much all he does right now. It may bode well for his pro prospects, but it's not enjoyable in any way.

I think everything you just described are exactly the things he'll be asked to do in the pros. At least early on.

I think people expect him to be a dominant ball handler and the center of the offense and for many reasons, he simply not that.

I don't really share the opinion that others have that he'll struggle early on in the NBA. I think he'll be pretty good right away - 12-14 points per game on solid efficiency, good defender, someone who will help his team win. He just won't be the guy who you run your offense through.

No matter how you slice it, bad press on wiggins is good for us.

A somewhat surprising in parts, but well-reasoned draft ranking.


Embiid at 1 and Wiggins at 6. I could live with that

The Kings are hammering the Pelicans. They're helpless w/out Jrue.

Tray reply to Brian on Jan 21 at 22:39

Is that why Gay had 41 points and Big Cuz (yeah, Big Cuz) had 18, 11, 6, 3 steals and 4 blocks (third youngest since 1985 with such a line)? Did you see that Cousins made Lowe's all-star team? "He’s a damn artist on the pick-and-roll, one of the few bigs alive capable of catching the ball 20 feet from the hoop, on the move, and dribbling or passing into a great look for the Kings."

Anyway, I blame the Pelicans's struggles at least as much on Anderson's absence as on Jrue's.

Tray reply to Tray on Jan 22 at 2:09

Seriously, I give very little credit to Jrue at this point in his career. This season he got the opportunity to play with (a) the best or second best stretch four in the league, (b) one of the very best young big men in the league, possibly soon to be the best, and (c) one of the top few shooting guards in the league, and he's given his team a thoroughly mediocre season and his team didn't even consistently score points when he was playing. He scores less efficiently than Turner. How is that possible on a team where he only needs to be the fourth option? You would think that with all the scorers at his disposal he might cut down on the long twos, which would help with the crappy efficiency, but in fact he's taking just as many of them as he ever did. At this point I can't begin to count all the point guards ahead of him, but the list would include, in addition to all the obvious stars, Lowry, both Phoenix points, Conley, Isaiah Thomas, Lawson, Rubio, probably Jeff Teague. Even MCW isn't too far off.

Have you seen the Pelicans play this year? Aside from the Sixers games?

Jrue isn't nearly as bad as you described him. Actually he's had a better season than last year's despite a lot of team-wide problems. There are a ton of factors that need to be taken in consideration:

- He's on a completely new team, and the envisioned lineup barely played together, due to all kinds of injuries (Anderson twice, Davis, Evans, Jrue and even Smith now). They still have zero chemistry. Too many people in and out of the lineup.
- The Pelicans have zero spacing without Anderson. Gordon can shoot threes but he's not the type of guy who stands in the corner and spaces the floor. Jrue was very good when Anderson played. He even carried the team to a passable record when Davis was injured (they can't survive without him on the other hand).
- Monty Williams offense is very similar to the one Doug Collins used. Everyone takes a ton of long twos. Actually, to me eye, it's an even worse scheme. The funniest thing is, it was working, because they were good offensively when everyone was healthy.
- Jrue was on a tear after a slow start. If it wasn't for the injury, who knows how good he might've been.

Jrue really has one single weakness: He doesn't get to the line enough. That's it. And i think people have gone overboard with equaling getting to the line with efficiency. That's why i largely prefer eFG% over TS%. TS% can be very misleading. Getting to the line is often a function of scheme and the players that surround you. I bet he'd get to the line 5+ times in a Brett Brown offense. Just look at Turner's improvement for reference. Turner hasn't really improved from last year. He's just taking slightly different shots because he's asked to take slightly different shots.

I agree with this. The Pelicans have been sort of the the T-Wolves in that they never seem to have their lineup together for a long enough stretch to go on a run. They did reasonably well during Anderson's and Davis's injuries. They probably could have jelled into a reasonably good team if they stayed healthy for a reasonable stretch. Although I still think their ceiling was a bit limited.

Supporting cast isn't a great argument. He's played 6 games with both Davis and Anderson in the lineup. In the 14 games with Ryan Anderson, his TS% is .548 and his assist:TO ratio is 3.21.

He did get off to a terrible start, and he still doesn't get to the line, but when he actually had the best stretch four in the game on the floor, he was pretty damn good.

Tray reply to Brian on Jan 22 at 14:57

I think you're all right. It would be interesting to know where healthy teammates Jrue stacks up to other point guards in the league.

Something you're probably very familiar with?

Trolls are so funny - need a laugh with the way this season is going

I need to come up with something that takes less than 5 minutes to block his IP address. Pain in the ass.

Well he does use the same screen name every time :)

Nah, he changes the name up. IP address is the best solution, at least it makes him work a little bit. What a waste of oxygen.

A strong argument for my sterilize the stupid plank

Parker and Vonleh to the Sixers in Ford's mock draft.

One thing about Jrue: he ups his game in playoffs, rises to occasion.

Agreed. Going to be a while before he gets a chance to show it again, though. They need a new coach down there.

Monty lost his new car smell? I'd been impressed with his early results. It's hard to rally a Red Cross team longterm.

CP3 makes a lot of coaches look good, no?

CP3 and WG1, double whammy.

Wow, so Wroten hasn't attempted a single mid range jump shot all season long. That's incredible... Meanwhile MCW is strangely very good when shooting from the left side of the floor and horrible when shooting from the right side. This is actually very easy to spot even from the eye test.

Also, a fun interview with Brett Brown from Zach Lowe.

Tray reply to Xsago on Jan 22 at 17:10

Second link is same as first.

Sorry, my bad here it is.

i'm headed to the Garden tonite dudes. First game all season!

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment