DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

The Worst Team Ever

What do you think the Sixers' record would be had they kept Jrue Holiday? I guess keeping Jrue would have resulted in 7-10 more wins. That would probably give them the #9-10 overall pick in the draft.

How would you move forward with this core for the 2014/15 season?:

[#9 overall pick]

Keep in mind that if they make the playoffs in 2015 their 1st round pick goes to Boston. Also keep in mind Thad might opt into free agency after that season.

I'm not sure what the record would be, but i definitely think the team is in a better position going forward with the Jrue trade.

If everyone else is the same i'd say around 30 wins. The team still has zero legitimate rim protectors or wings that can shoot reliably and defend adequately.

And by 30 wins i mean 30 wins at the end of the season, not now of course.

Well, considering Jrue will only play 34 games this year, I'd say they'd still be hovering around the bottom three.

So assuming Hinkie was still going for the tank (and I don't think there's any reason to think he would've tried to build the team up, even if he had kept Jrue), it would look something like this:

MCW/Jrue/Thad/Crap/Crap with a top five pick.


MCW/Thad/Noel/Crap/Crap with a top four pick plus New Orleans pick (which will disappear if they move into the top three).

Also assuming they would've drafted MCW had they still had Jrue, obviously, all depends on what Noel winds up being and what happens with that New Orleans pick. I'd say the odds are absolutely in favor of them being in better position now than they would have been had they not made the Jrue trade, but it certainly could still go the other way.

My feelings about Jrue haven't really changed, he's flawed offensively, but he can shoot, defend, and play the point or the two. He's paid fairly and he can easily be a starter on a contending team.

I might agree with the general conclusions but i disagree about some of the premises in the article.

1. Thad is definitely not a borderline starter in the NBA. He is a top 60 or so player. That's far more than a borderline starter in a league with 150 starters. Also i'd say MCW is top 100 as well which makes him a comfortable starter right now.

2. Being less accomplished doesn't always mean being worse. Yes, this Sixers team is probably the least accomplished team ever. But i'm not sure they are the worst ever. They are really bad, the worst in the league this year, but there have been quite a few terrible teams over the years. They do belong in the discussion though, at least as long as J-Rich and Noel are sidelined.

buke reply to Xsago on Mar 1 at 12:34

Can you think of another team that is worse than the one we have now? I've been watching the NBA off and on since the seventies and I can't.

I agree with Brian that the current team is worse than the record setting 72-73 team. That team played in a smaller league with less variance of talent among the teams and one that didn't have about eight teams preferring not to have a winning record.

Charlotte from the lockout year was definitely worse IMO. I mean Byron Mullens was a starter and one of their best players. Imagine that!

Also it's difficult to compare other teams for a period of 25 games (assuming the team remains this bad till the end of the year). All kinds of teams have been really bad in the past for stretches of 15-20 games. Remember the Cavs from a few years ago after Lebron left them. The year before they drafted Kyrie? They were much worse from what i can remember as well. Just look at that lineup. At one point they went 2 and a half months with only 2 overtime wins total. Sessions and Hickson were the best players on that team. I'd say Thad and MCW are far better than those guys.

And these 2 examples are just from recent history.

buke reply to Xsago on Mar 1 at 16:19

You're right. There have been some god awful teams for stretches because of injuries. One that comes to mind immediately is that 2007-2008 Miami team that won 15 games and had Chris Quinn as the starting point guard in the latter part of the season. But, that was a team where they decided to let ailing players sit after the season was judged a washout.

You mean tanked? Great franchises like Miami never tank, right?

Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 1 at 14:08

I agree that Thad is a top 60 player. It may be the case that because he's a tweener his best use is coming off the bench, but that's true of some other top players in the league as well. Regardless of whether he's a starter on a great team or a 30 mpg bench player, he's better than a lot of starting power forwards and as good, I think, as some fairly highly regarded ones, like Monroe or West or Randolph.

I rather doubt that MCW is a top hundred player; at the moment he's probably a bottom three point guard. But he shows great potential, is having an exceptional season for a rookie in this year or any other, and has been hamstrung by the crappiness of our roster.

Fine post and pretty accurate, Brian!

At this point, I slightly disagree with one player classification and can neither agree nor disagree with two others.

1) Byron Mullens came into the league a year before Turner (from the same team) so this is his fifth year. As a Big Ten fan, I got to see him multiple times as a freshman (his only collegiate year) and thought he was wildly overrated then even for college ball. He struck me as the poster child for the policy of requiring high school players to wait a year before entering the draft. He left after one year anyway and a team was foolish enough to make him a first rounder. He has had sufficient opportunity and has demonstrated that he is not good enough, or committed enough, to play in this league.

2) Henry Simms has not had sufficient opportunity yet to demonstrate that he can't hang around in the league. Wroten is only 20 (or maybe 21 by now) and was playing a position he had no business playing for most of the year (although for a team wanting to be terrible, having Wroten play significant minutes as a point guard isn't a bad strategy). As an off-guard, he might develop into a reasonable rotation player yet. He certainly has the speed and athleticism at least.

I think there's a good chance they win tonight against the Wizards on Iverson's retirement night. I never trust the Wizards and Wall on the road.

Not sure about that. With Rose out, Wall's the closest facsimile to Iverson in current NBA. Speedy and fearless to the cup. He may be inspired by A.I.'s proximity and whiz past Sixers (pun intended). Sixers adrenaline should pump for awhile too. Looking forward to tonight.

Tray reply to Dollar Bill on Mar 1 at 14:30

One thing that we don't talk about with Iverson is his very solid midrange game. He was actually a pretty accurate shooter inside the arc. Wall isn't too accurate from anywhere. He is a much better finisher than Iverson was - Iverson was an incredible finisher for his size, but Wall is much bigger and dunks the ball far more often - and he shoots a lot less than Iverson did, but that's because he's not the only scorer on his team. In his Denver years, Iverson was much more efficient than Wall is now. I don't think Wall will be much more than a middle-of-the-pack point guard until he either acquires a jump shot or drastically curtails his own shooting and focuses on using his tremendous quickness to set up others. The real reason we'll lose this game is not because of another one of your beloved plucky point guards, but because Washington's actually a pretty respectable defensive team.

1st 5 statements, agree. But Wall is better than a middle-of-the pack guard now, as is. Your closing prognosticating statement will be answered shortly, one way or another. Enjoy the unfolding events.

Pluck goes a long way. Even Thad, who's built like John Henry of West Virginia rail fame, could use more of it, good player that he is.

eddies' heady's reply to Xsago on Mar 1 at 14:44

Huh? Are you kidding? You appear to be spot-on with the prediction of winning no more than 4 games after the break. Surely you didn't count this as one of your four?

They get drug tonight. Handily. D-Leaguers never beat an NBA squad do they?

Well i don't think they'll remain winless rest of the way. And i have a feeling this is as good a chance as any to get one of the 2-4 remaining victories. At home, riding a huge home losing streak, with a good crowd, after an emotional moment - retiring Iverson's number, against a mediocre team that has been known to underestimate teams and underperform, that's also down to only 2 viable rotation level big men (Gortat and Booker) with Nene and Seraphin both out with injuries.

I'm not confident they'll win, they are still a terrible team, but this is the type of game i can see them steal.

eddies' heady's reply to Xsago on Mar 1 at 15:05

Yeah I understand what you're basing it on but Iverson getting honored will have about zero bearing on this hodgepodge group. I've seen bad, but I can't even come up with an adjective to describe what these guys are supposed to be. Not sure one even exists in the English language.

They don't give two cents about defense and have no one to carry them on offense. This may not affect the overall culture they're trying to create but I do have concerns about the bad habits being displayed and developed by a few of the guys.

no Seraphin for the wizards who normally plays the sixers well

The Six on Mar 1 at 14:35

The plan is working. And watching the Bucks, they are playing at a higher level which could translate into at least four more wins. What happens if they both have the same record from a tiebreaker perspective?

In the event that teams finish with the same record, each tied team receives the average of the total number of combinations for the positions that they occupy. In 2007, the Minnesota Timberwolves and the Portland Trail Blazers tied for the sixth worst record. The average of the 6th and 7th positions in the lottery was taken, resulting in each team getting 53 combinations (the average of 63 and 43). Should the average number not be an integer, a coin flip is then used to determine which team or teams receive the extra combination(s). The result of the coin flip is also used to determine who receives the earlier pick in the event that neither of the tied teams wins one of the first three picks via the lottery.

The Six reply to sixerfan1220 on Mar 1 at 14:52

After losing out on Patrick Kane after the last coin-flip, I don't think I can handle another if it came to that. Thanks for the info.

I think if Asik was available for some 2nd round picks, he would have been traded by now. With Thad already on the roster do you think the Sixers would have signed Milsap?

Even if the Sixers have the worst team in the history of the league, who cares? This season literally doesn't matter at all, we're playing for more ping pong balls, and half (if not more) of the scrubs will be gone probably next year.

I get that it's easy to complain when your favorite team sucks this bad, but come on, we all knew what we were getting into at the beginning of the season.

Was more of an observation than a complaint, or meant to be at least. If things break right, they could turn it around quickly, on the other hand, think about how many pieces they need to add to be relevant in any way. It's daunting.

the game is on NBATV for the out of towners

Thompson and sims starting again

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 19:35

Allen Iverson is the sole reason why I even started getting league pass. Just so I could watch him; in amazement.

(of course, loving the Sixers played a part too)

I miss Iverson, and kind of wonder if I'd love him as much as I did knowing what I do now about advanced stats and the impact of efficiency.

eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Mar 1 at 19:46

Well I guess I benefit from not paying any attention to them, so I'd still love the hell out of him. Miss him too.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 19:39

What a creative oxymoron to retire this warriors jersey on a night and during a season like this with these scrubs. Talk about contradicting every thing the guy ever stood for.

Hell, he bitched about practice, what do you think he'd have to say about tanking?

gonna be interesting to see how this crowd will react if/while they are getting blown out

Most of them will leave. The rest will watch Kiss Cam in amazement.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 19:41

agree, if you mean in the context of likely booing?

yea, will probably be the highest attendance total since the heat game to start the year

Should've been an and-one on that MCW drive.

So does Beal always take these stupid shots?

OK, so I've seen enough of Sims. He's a d-leaguer.

Thad, you're supposed to be better than that.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 19:47

Josh Harris says tonight is what the franchise has to look forward to. Really?

Huh? Are they going to drag Iverson out every night in requirement to draw a crowd?

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 19:50

There was a time a short while ago that I would have been excited as hell that we picked up Varnado for a stretch-playoff run. Oh the days.

Remember about two or three years ago I wanted them to pick him up but they picked some other guy over him? Anyone remember who that guy was? (they worked out him and Varnado at the same time I think)

xavier silas?

eddies' heady's reply to sixerfan1220 on Mar 1 at 19:52

Don't think so. It was a big they signed and worked out wasn't it?

Probably Battie.

george karl would be a perfect coach for the wizards

Good touch on that floater by MCW.

hes been getting better at those

Oh nice, a PartyPoker commercial. I tuned in just to see them whore out the franchise.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 19:53

sf1220 should just be happy for the company tonight. I would. you can thank Iverson...

Eh. You can thank my wife. She has some work to do, or I'd be hanging out w/ her.

eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Mar 1 at 19:56

Advanced stats have had an effect huh.

Yeah, and I'm kind of thinking not a good one at all. Makes it hard for me to enjoy the micro sometimes. You know?

i dont care a ton that he keeps missing them but thompson is really good at moving without the ball

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 19:55

Man, I seriously hated to watch Hawes out there most of the time. But damn if they didn't smear even more shit on me by getting Mullens. Ugh, anybody but him. That guys garbage and fortunate to have a job.

2 on wall

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 19:57

Another 70 pt half? sigh

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 19:59

Can we hurry and get to halftime? NBATV better show all of it.

Hmmn, Wall was better as a rook than MCW has been. Didn't expect that. link.

How much did Harris pay Gary Payton for this interview?

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:01

Who was that they just introduced? When the crowd was cheering?

Good patient drive by MCW there.

mcw floater

Mullens shamefully rejected by Chris Singleton. What's the height difference there?

4 inches

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:03

Fucking Byron Mullens. heh

As much as this team sucks ass, it's easier for me to watch them now that I don't have to have the constant reminder on the floor.

eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Mar 1 at 20:04


mullens dont run at gortat when hes about to shoot a jumper

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:04

Please tell me he's not on the team next year is he? Not as Noel's backup I hope...

I remember saying I wouldn't mind having Singleton in that draft. Who did they wind up taking that season, was it Speights?


eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Mar 1 at 20:05

Vuce wasn't it? I liked Chris too.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:08

These motherfuckers are on pace for 80 in a half.

And they done turned Ariza into Kobe. 24 in the quarter. Of their 41.

down 13 end of the first

mullens to the line

made both

HA! Maynor just tried to throw an oop to Mullens.

Was Maynor in Jrue's draft?

mullens alley oop!

It's funny, remember the Granger/Iguodala/Gay/Roy arguments we used to have? Iguodala is the only one who actually lived up to his contract and was never just dumped for salary relief.

gotten away twice leaving webster open in the corner

9-0 run, down 4

Comeback city! The Wiz should be ashamed of themselves. A full d-league lineup just closed the gap by 10.

Rusty reply to Brian on Mar 1 at 20:21

I'm rooting hard for the win tonight, don't get many games to watch in NYC.

wroten to the line

split them

maynor 3

Oh man. Sims, go back to wherever you came from.

Maynor/MCW back court. Should be fun. I'd like to see if he can play off the ball at all (not that he necessarily will here).

Won't get a chance to see it. Maynor to the bench in the timeout.

mcw makes both ft

Sims is a waste of a jersey.

eddies' heady's reply to Brian on Mar 1 at 20:29

You left quite a few of his teammates unmentioned.

Stream of consciousness. I'll get to all of them.

Thad fires a pass to Sims who pussyfoots it in from a foot away.

3 on gortat

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:32

Hawes actually ran down the floor better than Sims it looks like. Man, it's a hoot to watch him do whatever that is he's doing down the court.

mcw bucket


eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:33

Sims twisting down the floor. Shifts over out of the way so as to not be on a Beal poster. heh

dont like that shot mcw

29 for Ariza.

Any way to look up how many guys have scored career highs against the Sixers this season?

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:41

I can't wait for halftime. Pumped to see this ceremony. Hope it's good.

i hate doubling the post

thad putback

down 12 at the half

62-74 at the half.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:50

Iverson is #2 in steals for the franchise, who's number one?


Does Iverson's son have a major weight problem?


eddies' heady's reply to sixerfan1220 on Mar 1 at 20:56


eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:57

Josh Harris is a cornball.

They're booing Harris.

I love watching rich guys who have completely lost touch with reality. they're surrounded by yes men who laugh at all their jokes and never disagree with them.

Wow, they bought him a bass boat.

Now he's talking about the heritage that his general manager has taken a giant dump on this season. He's getting booed.

It's kind of weird that he's sitting down.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:59


eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 20:59

I don't see how he can refrain from crying.

That little fucker was so awesome. Miss watching him play.

Rusty reply to Brian on Mar 1 at 21:31

Agreed no one will ever be the same but - I want that type of motor and talent combo - Randle closest but not sure it translates the same

Eh. W/out the athleticism and grace, the motor/hustle translates into Reggie Evans.

Rusty reply to Brian on Mar 1 at 21:37

He has athleticism and can handle the rock better than many guards , significantly better than wiggins I'll add. I know his combine will be shit in terms of measuresables and that's whyni hope he falls in pelicans territory

eddies' heady's reply to Rusty on Mar 1 at 21:38

It would be a godsend if he falls to us there. whew

He will be - it's going to be an ideal situation and his stock will drop as thenharrison twins screw uk, Calipari does not showcase his perimeter game and he measures poorly. I used to think that Philly would never draft him until I saw his comments about heart and hustle. It's my glass half full scenario - wiggins and rsndle

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 21:02

Miss McKie's ass too.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 21:11

It's not right for Josh Harris to be in all these pictures with AI. He didn't have shit to do with him.

nice elavator play for anderson but beal runs over thad

sims putback

thad steal and finish

ariza 3

good movement, thad bucket

mcw to wroten

Alright, I'm out. Enjoy the rest, fellas.

williams 3

Can we please make a run here? Every time I watch Hollis I lose all faith that I have gained in his box scores, he is young and can learn but just seems to fuck up on iq plays

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 21:43

Gonna give up 100 before the end of the 3rd?

I'm not sure lack of talent carries as much weight as thought here. Bad teams can still play respectable, willing D. Look at last year. Hope this isn't Brown's achilles heel, not good to glean much from this slop though.

Agreed - this d is absolute shit. Fucking painful.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 21:45

Does anyone here watch D-League games? Obviously don't watch them myself, or read about them, but is PJ Hairston doing anything since he debuted? Haven't seen him play since last season.

How does he look in those helter-skelter games?

down 14 end of the 3rd

wroten to the line

split them

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 21:56

Besides the obviousness of it, I would give anything for the two possible picks to both be quality players and integral pieces going forward. I don't want to have to sit through a slightly polished version of this next year, again.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 22:06

Who you taking right now 1220 if you have the 2nd and 8th picks? and Wiggins is gone already

embiid and if hes there aaron gordon or noah vonleh if neither are then gary harris

eddies' heady's reply to sixerfan1220 on Mar 1 at 22:13

Not sure why, but I've soured on Gordon. Vonleh is kind of bleh to me for some reason. He plods it seems.

Haven't looked at mocks or rankings but I'd have to go with, man, I don't know how I could pass up Embiid if Parker's there. But I really, really like Parker. But Embiid man...

Really want a player that offers and can do other things, but can definitely shoot, with that second pick. I like Harris but would rather have others over him for sure. I honestly think I'd take McDermott (and quite a few others) over Harris. And likely could regret it, but I doubt it. Think he's going to translate much to surprise. Seems so well-refined and IQ to match.

There are so few players I really like in this draft. I love Embiid. I'm not completely sold on Wiggins and I don't know how anyone could be, though I would take him at 2 or 3. Vonleh plods, as you say. Randle looks like less and less of a top prospect all the time. I'm not going to pretend to know anything about Exum. Gordon's game is all holes. So is James Young's, plus his much-vaunted shooting is more theory than reality. McDermott and Harris seem to have low ceilings and high-ish bust potential. I don't know what we would want with Smart; even if we didn't have MCW I wouldn't be that interested. Lavine is so inconsistent he may not even go in the first round. I'm starting to wonder if we should reach for P.J. Hairston with our second pick. He's tearing up the D-League and I don't think he's a bad kid.

Tray reply to Tray on Mar 2 at 3:04

To be clear, "our second pick" = the Pelicans pick.

buke reply to Tray on Mar 2 at 12:12

Hairston might not be a bad idea, but he probably could be obtained with the high second rounder. Have you given any thought to Lavine's teammate, Kyle Anderson? He's no guarantee but he has an interesting skill set and this team could use some secondary playmakers given that the primary point guard isn't much of one.

I am very high on Kyle Anderson. Higher than Lavine for example. The Pelicans pick would probably be too high for him, but i'd take him with a late lottery/mid first round .

lost by 19

at orlando tomorrow

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 22:26

Seriously, how many games are left?

eddies' heady's reply to eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 22:36

23. Still a lot. But getting there. It's an absolute damn shame that as a fan I'm more thrilled and excited for the offseason than the actual in-game season.

So awkward, and unbecoming.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 22:28

I used to fear Junior Bridgeman, amongst fear for Moncrief.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 22:41

May be; or may not be necessary (the hard tank).

Be so glad when the mess is over. Dislike being this bad of a squad. Potentially by default though is understood. It's a messed up league that needs some fixin'.

It's reminiscent of when us here would clown other franchises for doing/looking like this.


eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 22:45

Markel Brown reminds me of a Dwyane Wade at Marquette. Not in the literal, just saying.

He's an intriguing player to me.

eddies' heady's on Mar 1 at 22:46

Brown (Markel) with a nice dish!

Wiggins answers.

Heh might as well blog this game. Foreshadowing.

well tray, forecasting isn't your bag, but keep your chin up; at least you have some vague notions of constitutional law.
i must amend for accuracy's sake: "[A] real reason for sixers losing [WAS] because of one my beloved plucky point guards, john wall."

in closing, mcw shoots like uncle wiggily and is built like olive oyl. and he defends like gen. custer!

Tray reply to dollar bill on Mar 2 at 13:08

Changing "the" to "a" really changes the sense of what I wrote, to be fair. I said that THE real reason, i.e. the main reason, that we would lose was their defense. We scored 103 points in spite of playing at a ridiculously hopped-up pace, and scored at a rate of 97.6 points per 100 possessions, which is significantly worse than our league-worst mark of 98.9. A healthy offense would have scored over 110 in such a fast game. So our inability to score was at least a contributing factor; the other big problem, admittedly, was their scoring, for which Wall gets a lot of the credit. I expected something more like a 100-110 score.

40-28 after 1. Playing catch-up all night again. MAIN PROBLEM was no defensive answers for Wall and Ariza.

How does Brown claim that he stresses defense, when game after game the team imitates a sieve? I know they're short a shot blocker, but required effort is absent. 'Unfocused and out of sync': trademark.

The Sixers have lost 13 games in a row. There are 23 games left in the season. The longest losing streak in NBA history is 26 games. I hope they beat Orlando or Utah next week just so they won't have to have another infamous record.

Meanwhile New Orleans lost 7 games in a row and moved down from the 11th to 9th worst record in the league. I like where they are right now. There's a 93.9% chance that they don't move up into the top 3.

the pick is top 5 protected not 3

I know. But teams in the lottery can only move up into a top 3 pick. So there's no chance that they can get the #4 or #5 overall pick if they have the 6th-14th worst record.

I'll get a little nervous if they end up with the 6th or 7th worst record.

Chance of getting New Orleans getting into the top 3 based on their lottery standings:

6th - 21.5%
7th - 15%
8th - 10%
9th - 6.1%
10th - 4%
11th - 2.9%
12th - 2.5%
13th- 2.2%
14th- 1.8%

I would have no problem with setting another infamous record if it meant playing 4 times in the finals in the next decade, which is what happened after the 9-73 season.

Anyway, they'll win a game eventually i don't think they'll set that record.

Stan reply to Xsago on Mar 2 at 16:36

After that season the Sixers selected Doug Collins #1 overall in 73', Marvin Barnes #2 overall in 74', and Daryl Dawkins #5 overall in 75'.

But it wasn't until 1976 after they had signed George McGinnis that they made the playoffs. And it wasn't until 1977 after they had purchased Julius Erving from the Knicks that they made it to the NBA Finals.

Stan reply to Stan on Mar 2 at 16:43

I would also add that none of the 3 players drafted from 73-75 were part of the Sixers title run in 83'.

Doug Collins retired the year prior due to injury, Darryl Dawkins was traded the year prior, and Marvin Barnes never suited up for the Sixers.

The core of their title team:

Mo Cheeks: 2nd round pick in 1978
Moses Malone: Free Agent
Julius Erving: Purchased
Andrew Toney: 1st round pick in 1980
Bobby Jones: received in a trade for George McGinnis

He takes the owner's side over the fans, which isn't shocking. The owners directly pay his salary, who gives a crap about those schmucks buying tickets snd watching on tv.

Tray reply to Brian on Mar 2 at 16:12

I thought his observation that even in business you sometimes take a step back to ensure long-term profitability was wise. Of course I also agreed with the dig at the Collins Administration ("if you look at what's happened here over the last several years, it's badly needed," he said. "Somebody needs a plan. Somebody needs a vision to win here."). And I think that the fans are going to be happier (and more numerous) over the long term going this route than had we attempted to build a mediocre team with the scraps we had left after the get-rich-quick scheme of the Bynum trade.

buke reply to Tray on Mar 2 at 18:19

Making an analogy to "business" always manages to impress some people who don't know much about business. While it's true that businesses of some size can improve themselves going forward by disposing of segments that are underperforming, noncompetitive, or outside of their areas of competence, I've never heard of a business improving itself by trashing its core product and disgusting its customers.

Rusty reply to buke on Mar 2 at 18:38

How about managing their assets and maximizing the value of the portfolio? They realize that mediocrity won't sell out and generate profits, but much like Iverson teams, those season ticket prices will rise as a young team develops.

We all know philly has a VERY short memory and attention span with their teams. Get good, and the fans will come.

buke reply to Rusty on Mar 2 at 19:28

I don't disagree with what you've said, but my point was that pro basketball, especially as presently constructed, is a very peculiar type of "business" and attempts to compare it to the general business environment should be met with a sneer. Most businesses, other than utilities, don't have regional monopolies and most businesses are expected to attain operating profits or aid in the operations of other segments. Professional sports teams are more like prized art in that they appreciate in value even if they don't generate profits.

He had an interesting quote in the interview during the SSAC conference yesterday. He said something like, he doesn't think anyone tanks and he supports the rebuilding strategy, but is very worried about the business aspect of it because everyone is talking about tanking right now.

Essentially, he doesn't care if teams tank as long as it's quiet and noone talks about it.

I was at the game last night for the AI deal. It was an amazing ceremony. Fans were going nuts for AI and all of his ex teammates who were either there or sent video messages that played on the board.

Josh Harris absolutely got booed. He was clueless. Has no real connection to AI and other than AI, he was at the podium for the longest. At least when the new commish spoke, he kept it super brief.

Super loud cheers for Larry Brown's message on the Jumbotron. Loud cheers for Pat Croce, Doc, Moses, Mo Cheeks, Ratliff, Mckie, Mutombo who were all in the building.

AI nailed his speech. He even thanked the equipment guy by name. Very cool night.

Tray reply to Steve on Mar 2 at 17:01

The whole thing was pretty surreal. Iverson shows up in a long coat/robe and half a dozen gold chains; his former teammates, and Sixers greats, are all seated behind him in suits. There was a kind of Rip van Winkleish aspect about it; he seemed like he'd been blasted by a time machine out of the late 90s into a world and NBA that's passed him, his style of play, his style of dress, the way he speaks, by. I mean, even Artest, who was a much bigger threat in his brawling days to the league's image, has basically become a comedian. Iverson is still Iverson, albeit a little older and wiser. Zumoff, the owners, and Silver were totally inadequate to the moment, mouthing platitudes about his all-star appearances and "hard work" and "Philly," and even seemed a little nervous and flustered to be speaking in front of him. You got the sense that Silver and ownership are relieved that guys like Iverson no longer exist. The fishing boat was sad and pathetic. Iverson's speech was brilliant, of course. I enjoyed the pointed thanks for "Howwwwahd Eskin" and Stephen A. Smith, who was last seen in the Inquirer reporting on Iverson's downward spiral into alcoholism and gambling addiction. I wasn't sure what to make of his neglecting to thank Larry Brown, whose video tribute was the only speech in the ceremony besides Iverson's that I liked.

Steve reply to Tray on Mar 2 at 17:21

Yeah he had on a couple of chains but he was wearing a black winter jacket that hung barely below the waist. Long coat/robe?

There's no way you expected AI to show up in a suit after all of the dress code battles he had with Stern and the NBA.

I thought Zumoff was decent hosting the whole deal. I was a bit surprised that AI didn't mention of John Thompson.

Brown's video tribute was great, and AI was in Texas visiting with LB and his SMU team last month so I'm sure there's no animosity there.

no Affalo and nelson is a GTD

Nelson will not play tonight

ronnie price starting for him

******MAGIC GAME******

mcw bucket

harris hits back to back shots

thad travel

bad mcw shot goes in

mcw has 2 fouls

sims putback

mcw steal and finish

mcw hits both ft

2 on dipo

vuce block

vuce tip in

stop switching

varnado coming in

please give him moultrie's minutes

mcw looks really good tonight

wroten steal and finish

williams hits both ft

down 1 end of the 1st

offense has bogged down mostly cause wroten wont pass to open guys

this Mullins guy almost almost almost makes one miss 00....almost

wroten bucket

thad to anderson(nice cut)

good passing

sims to the line

split them

nice pass by vuce

mcw block

harris putback

both teams a mess on offense this quarter

that wasnt a travel

nice move by mcw

up 3 at the half

mcw to thad

anderson to sims

thad steal

mcw misses an easy one

vuce and 1

missed the ft

good stuff from thad this quarter

man the things he must have been thinking last night, only guy left who actually played with AI

mcw to thad

mcw bucket

late whistle on vuce

eddies' heady's reply to sixerfan1220 on Mar 2 at 19:43

phantom whistle too, he never grabbed the guy as the ref said he did

wroten 3

harris putback

sims jumper!

up 3 end of the 3rd

o'quinn is good

solid bench guy on a contender

lazy pass by maynor

moore finishes

thad to sims

thad rebound and goes coast to coast

Mullins and Maynor may be the best tank protection this team has had all year

thad doesnt deserve this

someday when they put 1, 4 and 22 up in the rafters, all of those guys will shout out Thad though!

tried to run the elevator for anderson but the magic fouled someone

thad misses an open 3

mcw splits the ft

lost by 11

at OKC on tuesday

Milwaukee's next two home games are against Utah and Sacramento, and in nine days they play Orlando at home. They play the Lakers at home on the 27th. If we're really lucky we may catch them.

Andrew on Mar 3 at 9:24

The Sixers are trying to rebuild a product. yet i see many tripping on how it's happening. why not support the team. why not spend money to go see the games with the family. i guess the bandwagon will get full when they start winning.I live in Denver and when the Sixers come to town i get tickets. That is my team. good or bad.

Stan reply to Andrew on Mar 3 at 10:39

I have a younger brother who is 18 years younger than me and I was planning on treating him to his first basketball game this week. A buddy of mine offered to give me his tickets to the Utah Jazz game (Section 114) absolutely free.

I'd love to take him but I really don't want to tarnish my brother's experience by having him watch Byron Mullins play. Plus it would either take 45 minutes for us to get to the game via MFL and BSL or cost of $14 in parking. And I know he's also going to make me buy him overpriced ice cream and nachos.

So that's where I am right now. I'm seriously debating if I should spend $35 to see a professional basketball team play or use that money take him bowling or to a movie.

Sadly I'm leaning more towards the movie.

Tray reply to Stan on Mar 3 at 11:13

Non-Stop looks somewhat enjoyable. Alternatively, Wes Anderson has a new movie out, The Grand Budapest Hotel. I wouldn't go to see the Jazz.

Stan reply to Tray on Mar 3 at 11:25

He wants to watch Ride Along but I'm probably going to convince him to watch Non-stop instead

Tray reply to Stan on Mar 3 at 11:31

I would probably pay $35 to not see Ride Along, so good choice.

We should get a group together to go see a movie one night when the Sixers are playing.

Tray reply to Brian on Mar 3 at 13:17

Maybe the Lenny Cooke documentary.

Andrew reply to Stan on Mar 4 at 9:36

The Sixers don't have a good product. why is it wrong to wait untill they get one. the family outing is the most important aspect when going out on the town.

The Sixers really don't cater to families, anyway. They could have weekend games in the middle of the day when you could bring young kids, but they choose 7pm starts on saturdays and sundays.

Andrew reply to Brian on Mar 4 at 9:53

i don't think sports teams can fully do that.we parents have to work odd hours just to support our family. i just hope that the sixers make good picks this draft. I see so much negative comments at time. I am sure the players are trying to make winning plays. MCW comes down the court with an idea of scoring or passing. yet there is a defensive player that is looking to stop him.Is it 50/50.

Byron Beck or Mullins on Mar 3 at 10:54

As Eddies commented above, Markel Brown's big play ability reminds me of D.Wade also. Would love Derek's take on him not moving up on draftexpress's mock.

I consider our top 2nd rounder as a 3rd first in this years draft with the depth in talent. We make get starter material there if McGary[injury concerns], G.Robinson Jr.[disappointing play] or a Markel Brown or Jabari Brown[shooter are sitting there.

I disagree with Brian's assessment of Wroten as an N.B.A. talent. His tunnel vision with the ball in his hands with D LEAGUE bench players turned me off also but I believe he could become unguardable on the wing if he perfects a decent 3pt. shot and doesn't dominate the ball.

I think playing with M.C.W and Thad more and next to Maynor may allow him an audition the rest of this season. I harken to L.Brown moving an explosive scorer, just honored, to the wing rather than driving through 5 people as a way to making Wroten a valuable asset moving forward as either a bench scorer or possible starter.

Gman 08 on Mar 3 at 21:41

The Bucks leading 85- 60 at the end of 3 go Bucks, number one pick here we come, hopefully!!!Go SIXERS!!!

LeBron with one of the greatest regular-season games ever tonight - 61, 7 and 5 on 22-33, 8-10 from three, 9-12 from the line shooting. Only Jordan, Robinson, and McGrady ever had a 61 point, 5 assist night, at least since 1985. Al Jefferson had an amazing game for the Bobcats, the Heat's opponent tonight, that will be completely overshadowed by LeBron - 38 and 19 on 18 field goals. Only Shaq, Webber and Ewing have (since 1985) had 18 field goals and 19 boards in the same game. Andre Drummond had an only slightly less rare line tonight, becoming one of just six players to put up a 17/26/3 block line, and one of just two ever with a 17/26/3 block/2 steal line. (The other player? Kevin Willis.) With Detroit's win, the Pelicans moved to 9th in the lottery standings.

Tray reply to Tray on Mar 3 at 22:30

Oh and of course Milwaukee won behind a huge night from Ilyasova and a defensive effort that held Utah to 89. So we're only 2.5 out of first place, and Milwaukee has upcoming home games against the Kings and Magic.

Good news all around. At least I don't feel pangs of guilt rooting for other shirty teams.

oh Lebron scored 60 you say? Only needs to do it....31 more times TO TIE WILT


perry jones starting for sefolosha

*******OKC GAME******

ibaka dunk and fouled

made the ft

anderson corner 3

ibaka missed jumper

sims missed jumper

eddies' heady's on Mar 4 at 20:14

Pure laziness on D. Every score for the Thunder, that is what has led to it. Lazy.

dont chase jones off the 3pt line

anderson with his 3rd 3

nice pass by thompson

mcw floater

stop going over on the p/r

anderson 3

wroten splits the ft

nice flop kevin

down 14 end of the 1st

sims/mullens front court right now

sims makes both ft

mcw to thad

varnado tip in

T on brown

ball is sticking way too much

thompson dunk!

anderson banks in a 3

mcw makes both ft

sims postup

mcw 3

down 16 at the half

good play leads to sims ft

made both

mcw to sims

offense is better to start the 3rd

mullens 3

anderson's 6th 3 goes down

mullens 3

varnado tip in

mcw to the line

missed both

durant 9-15 from the line


down 22 end of the 3rd

im not watching the 4th, will post the final when it happens

lost by 33

vs utah on saturday

Fearing games vs. "the 76ers" will kill attendance, opponents' arena marquees now promote "Sam the Sham & the Phellows" instead.

Very interesting article on the best screen setters in the game.

hmmm Simmons finally writes about the sixers for the first time since that 2012 series...just as we start to out tank the Celtics, tanking all of a sudden becomes bad hmm


Matt68 reply to das411 on Mar 6 at 8:22

He's right. I wasn't at all offended. I dont get the backlash from LB and twitter.

Simmons basically wrote a dumbed down version of what Derek Bodner wrote the other day. You can't blame the Sixers for tanking, but I absolutely agree tanking is "bad." The system needs to be fixed so that the smartest fans aren't the ones rooting against their own team.

It remains to be seen if the culture and habits developed now will extend into the future, specifically with MCW, but that's not a major concern for me. If you get the core now, you turnover all the role players and have a couple years to engender the culture you want.

Stan reply to Matt68 on Mar 6 at 10:55

There are only a maximum of 3 or 4 elite teams every year (if that) and the other 12 teams in the playoffs have no shot at all at making it to the NBA Finals. Fans know this. Which is why there isn't much enthusiasm among fans in Atlanta or Phoenix when their teams are playing really well. They're talented and fun to watch but they have a limited ceiling due to their players, salary cap, and market.

Individual talent is crucial to the game because there are only 5 men on the court. Only a few players in the league can make a team elite and there's really not much you can do to build a championship roster without one of those guys. That is why GMs have to take drastic measures to acquire those players.

Changing the NBA lottery or the salary cap isn't really going to solve any problems. If the NBA really wanted to improve their product they would contract half the teams in the league and make the playoff series shorter. That will never happen because there is so much money involved. So I really have no problem with the way things are right now. Let GMs be creative by making trades, managing their cap space, or by trying to put their team in the best position to get a top draft pick.

Matt68 reply to Stan on Mar 6 at 11:47

You're right that in the NBA elite players will always be able to drastically change the fate of entire franchises. But, I'm in the camp that thinks hardening the team salary cap and removing the cap on individual salaries would lead to a better distribution of talent.

You could agree that we really don't need to better distribute talent, but I think that would lead to a more level playing field and lessen the need to bottom out. The Sixers are unwatchable this year, intentionally, and I'm somehow happy about that. It doesn't seem appropriate.

I disagree with this completely. It's a topic for another discussion, but superstars aren't essential to building a title contender because of their individual abilities but because of the existing financial system in the NBA. Superstars at the maximum contract are the biggest bargains in the NBA. That's why teams with superstars are that good. If you can build a team with 5 very good non-superstar players on bargain contracts that would fit under the cap/tax line you'd have the same chance as superstar teams do...

Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 6 at 13:20

Portland has the same chance that the teams with superstars do? Or do they not have 5 very good players? What about Golden State? Can Indiana win if George doesn't play like a superstar, with their 5 very good players, him included?

Neither Indiana nor Portland have 5 very good players. Hill and Lopez are definitely not there and Matthews probably isn't either.

Also, Indiana is a legit contender. It doesn't get anymore legit than that.

Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 6 at 16:06

If George doesn't play like a superstar, I said. You may have noticed that Indiana's just a .600 team in their last twenty games, and that that development has coincided with a downtick in George's play from superstar levels to very good player levels.

I think Lopez and Matthews are very good players, within the team-imposed limits of their roles. And I really have no idea if Jrue, Afflalo, Horford, Batum and Asik would contend. I think they would be a very good defensive team that might struggle to score in the playoffs. You can definitely contain that group.

I guess we can agree to disagree than.

Anyway, every contender is a .600 team over an arbitrary 20 game stretch. And Lopez and Matthews are not very good players in terms of what i defined as needed for a contender.

Here's an extremely simple explanation of what i am talking about. Assuming the team spends 70 million per year (still under the tax), of which 15 million are used for the bench, you are left with 55 million for your starters. So you pretty much need 5 players that are more or less paid 10-12 million per year and are bargains or at least adequately paid at that contract. Lopez and Matthews are far from that. I'm talking about 5 very good players that are a good fit and are not overpaid. I am also assuming that the bench doesn't matter as much in the playoffs which is why i am only talking about the starting lineup.

Here's another interesting lineup Conley/DeRozan/Iguodala/Anderson/Hibbert
and another one

you can go on and on...

And i forgot to add the 2 reasons why we don't see this type of teams often:

1. This kind of players often get overpaid
2. It's not easy to acquire 5 players of that caliber. Getting 1 superstar to attract other superstars in FA is easier...

Oh, as for Golden State, i think they are not maximizing their talent offensively. They are under performing right now. They have the roster to be a legit contender IMO.

Here's a hypothetical team for you:


That team is a legit contender without a single top 10-15 player on it. And there are many more combinations like this you can build.

Portland does indeed has a chance to build a team in this mold if they swap Lopez with a better defensive center, someone who can actually improve their defense.

Just a side note:

For Portland of course it will be crucial not to overpay Aldridge and Lillard next summer.

Russell Westbrook, heat-seeking missile, eliminated "Snowflake" with a 20 minute triple-double while taking up residence in Cookie of the Year's head.

It would be interesting to see how many games this Sixer team would win if you removed either MCW or Young and replaced them with a legit NBA star. To be fair, this current roster over 82 games probably wins probably 5-7 games total.

Lebron: 30 wins (not enough shooters or defense.)
Durant: 35 wins
Westbrook: 15 wins

Pt a star on the team pre-deadline and they would be i the playoffs. But this current team reminds me of when the bad Heat team with DWade or bad Lakers team with Kobe... but probably worse.

Those win totals are way too high IMO. Even LeBron can't win more than 15 games with this supporting cast over an 82 game season.

The team has 2 legitimate rotation players right now. There's no way you can create a 30 win team out of that by swapping Young with LeBron.

To me putting too much stock at individual numbers (traditional or advanced) this year is pointless. There's too much noise introduced by the level of the supporting cast to draw any reliable conclusions.

Westbrook on this team barely moves the needle IMO. Wilt on this team barely moves the needle.

I think that's part of my frustration. I'm not convinced MCW is a piece of the puzzle. I have no idea if Noel is. Thad might be, but really he's a guy off the bench. They're starting from scratch. Two big question marks, a guy off the bench, one really good draft pick in this draft, and then probably another big question mark w/ the other pick. Plus, who the fuck would want to come play here?

Tray reply to Brian on Mar 6 at 13:32

I don't think a really good sixth man, which is what Thad is at worst, is a negligible thing. He's not just a nice bench player, he's a player who's better than a lot of more traditional starting power forwards. As far as the "question marks," odds are one of them won't be too good and one or two of them will be very good. Hinkie's a smart drafter. Of course, MCW is more likely to succeed than he's not, given what he's done so far.

"what he's done so far": given keys to the car, runs it into fastbreaks-the-other-way ditches, breaks turnover curfews, rubs paint off rims (.395), gets pissy with his rookie bench parent. .015 WS/48 (lower than Turner's). 95 ORtg. 108 Drtg. Looks good vs. league laggards and during mop-up play.
Peaked in season's opener.

I think with the new CBA and shorter contracts free agency is huge. You can find a lot of talent there every year. I also don't think this is a one year deal. The Sixers will probably be sort of tanking next year as well. Not completely like now, but they'll just let their young guys carry the show, and young guys usually don't win more than 30-35 games even if they are really good.

I don't know if MCW or Noel are pieces of the puzzle either, but that's something that we will probably find out next year.

As for Thad, i definitely think he's a starter, i really don't get the hate. Unfortunately i'd be shocked if he's still on the team after the draft. Thad's probably gone this offseason.

Westbrook is a talented dynamo. Better than anything the Sixers got. Of course he'd move the needle (assuming that expression stands for team improvement through talent upgrade and sharper competitiveness).

Wilt moved every needle he ever met. He'd have current Sixers vying for 2nd tier playoff slot. "Dipper dunk."

Westbrook isn't very efficient, and with the dregs around him it wouldn't be hard to limit his shots. They might go from historically bad to just the worst team in the league currently. Assuming you swap MCW for Westbrook in this scenario. Better, but not meaningfully so.

Add Wilt, he's triple teamed on every play and surrounded by the worst three-point shooting team in the league. No way one guy makes this club into a playoff team.

Westbrook adds ineffable and vital spirit to the team that's currently missing, along with his talents.

You obviously didn't see Wilt in his prime. Anderson & Thompson would have all kinds of time to line it up. Thad would have more room to roam. Guards would learn to cut hard to the hoop and expect ball. And he'd crush most of today's centers as they tried to forestall the inevitable, Chamberlain point accumulation. I'm telling you, with Dippy, they're a playoff team in today's NBA.

Matt68 reply to Dollar Bill on Mar 6 at 21:54

Serious question since I'm too young: how do you think Wilt would do in the 90s? Now? With increasing size and athleticism, as well as numerous rule changes, I think its obvious his numbers would be down. Do you think he'd be a top 1-2 player in each scenario?

Tray reply to Matt68 on Mar 6 at 23:37

I think that, to the extent advances in fitness and athleticism at the center position are manmade, Wilt would have benefited from those advances too. Of course, teams were smaller during Wilt's heyday, presumably in part because of vestiges of racial discrimination, and in part because the NBA didn't pay that well and it made economic sense for agile 7-footers to do something with their lives besides playing basketball. I suspect Andrew Bynum would not have been in the NBA in the 60s. Wilt obviously benefited from that. But if you look at tape of him, he looks like he would be the best center in this league, and competitive with Hakeem and Shaq in their primes. He was a strong 7'1 guy (in his later years as he got less athletic he bulked up to 300 pounds, little of it fat) with a 7'8 wingspan, a 9'6 standing reach, a huge vertical leap, and immense skill. If you look at some of his shot-blocking highlights, he seems to have had Griffin-like hops.* He was like a less musclebound Howard with a far greater talent for scoring and passing. I think he'd be putting up something like 25, 13 and 3 really easily.

* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDMCh5HrcG0

* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF8yJ1J1W7Q

Matt68 reply to Tray on Mar 7 at 8:40

Does that make Wilt MVP over Lebron, Jordan, and/or Shaq? I know this is an aimless conversation, its just hard for me to imagine a dominant center in to day's game. Half the blocks are called fouls. There's second violations, etc.

I think he would do exceptionally well in both decades you mentioned, just as he did "back then."

He was a tremendously gifted athlete - strong (toyed with 6' 9", 240 teamate Luke Jackson in arm wrestling before "tabling" him at will), swift (could outsprint quick pg teammate Al Attles; won Public League high jump & shot put titles as an Overbrook Senior), could really jump (one step to touch top of backboard according to a variety of eyewitnesses), showed instinctive timing. Had an array of offensive moves (the fadeaway bank shot, the shovel shot, the turning in to lane "get off my damn back" crouch-pump-and-Dipper dunk). Oh, and those shot block numbers that weren't then officially recorded.

Who would stop a prime Wilt Chamberlain in any era? No one. Not Hakeem Olajuwon. Not Shaquille O'Neal. Not Dwight Howard. A phenomenal player. Once in a lifetime. (When he battled a youthful Kareem Abdul-Jabbar to virtual deadlocks in early 70s he was past his prime, was playing with knee and back ailments, still acquitted himself well.)

Look at the eye-popping numbers. Look at the #13-inspired rule changes. Read the testimonials of his contemporaries.

One and only one - Wilton Norman Chamberlain. August 21, 1936 - October 12, 1999.


"In junior high school Wilt began to play basketball. At first he did not like the game very much. He told his parents he didn't think he was going to be very good.

But then something exciting happened. One day in the school gym Wilt leaped high in the air for the basketball. He caught it and push it down through the basket. This is called "dunking" or "stuffing." Not many players are tall enough to do it. Wilt's friends cheered.

Thinking it over, Wilt was excited, too. He decided he wanted to be a very good player. He played at school. He played on church teams, on police athletic teams, on YMCA teams.

Wilt was six feet eleven inches tall when he entered Overbrook High School in Philadelphia. He was sixteen years old. A newspaper reporter came to see him play basketball. "With those long legs," the reporter said, "he looks like a man on stilts." The reporter gave Wilt a nickname. He called him "Wilt the Stilt."

The nickname was catchy. Today thousands of people think of Wilt Chamberlain as Wilt the Stilt.

But Wilt does not really like his nickname. "It sounds like some kind of an ugly bird," he says. Wilt prefers a different name. It is "The Dipper." That name came from the way he dipped his head to get through doorways even as a young boy.

During Wilt's three years at Overbrook High his basketball team lost only three games. Wilt broke all the scoring records for high school players. Twice he scored 90 points in a game. That is more points than an entire high school team is likely to make in a game."

- excerpt from "Wilt Chamberlain"; written by Kenneth Rudeen; Scholastic Book Services, 1970

I agree with pretty much all of this. Think Wilt is probably the best to ever play the game. Don't think even he could make these scrubs into a playoff team. No way, Jose.

In this watered down league? He'd raise team confidence and help individuals' games.
Only 11 wins out of the 8 spot now. A gentlemen's disagreement.

Fair enough. It would basically be Wilt, Thad, a fading rookie and 10 guys off the street.

The original question wasn't about adding Wilt to the current squad though. It was about swapping one of Thad and MCW with a great player.

Ah..so Wilt, Moultrie, Hollis, Anderson and MCW. That's your starting five. Yeah, they wouldn't make the playoffs.

Exactly. And it's not even close.

Yeah, Wit was the Secretariat of basketball.

Matt68 reply to Dollar Bill on Mar 10 at 11:19

Thanks for the response. I've seen conflicting views and it's tough to tell whether he was just a stat-stuffer in a weakened era, without going back and watching games.

I'd love to see another generational big man in the league, but I worry it's just a different game now. I'm not sure an offense will ever run through a big man like that again. Slashing, jump shooting, and passing are the skills we see from centers on offense now.

The Six reply to Dollar Bill on Mar 6 at 23:26

I like Westbrook, but his 3.9 TO/gm are absurd. He's much more of a scorer than a PG. He does not belong in the class with a Paul or Rondo.

Yeah, he's not certainly not a textbook floor general but he IS a classic game-changing force. In that regard, he's in the company of Paul and Rondo, while being less nuanced as a player. Perfect player for Tornado Alley.

Interesting win speculations.

Current team reminds me of 18 win '61-'62 expansion Chicago Packers who sported rookie center Walt Bellamy and an assortment of odds & ends.

Also, the 15 win '67-'68 expansion San Diego Rockets who featured Don Kojis/Dave Gambee/John Block/Toby Kimball/Hank Finkel as a frontline and a team strength.

Yes, I actually watched the Packers on a weekend national tv broadcast vs. the dynastic Celtics... Cooz, Tommy Gun, Jungle Jim, the Kentucky Colonel, the Jones terrors, Satch, a mean cat who wore number #6 and victory cigars... Naismith nirvana.

dollar bill ive been meaning to ask you, besides nelson what point guards do you like?

The poised veteran captains Chris Paul and Rajon Rondo; the fearless John Wall, Kyle Lowry, Ty Lawson and Goran Dragic; the creative Ricky Rubio; the shooting-gifted Stephen Curry and Damian Lillard; the jaw-dropping Kyrie Irving; speedy, clever Brandon Jennings; improving Jeff Teague; the soulful sparkplug, Nate Robinson. Lots of good ones today. Fun to watch.

Whom do you like among the maestros?

Forgot Jose Calderon and Andre Miller who've been quality PGs for wanting teams for a number of years. Smart, tough players.

some of the guys you mentioned like CP3, rubio,lowry,teague and curry

also like Parker, a healthy nash, bledsoe if you count him as a PG

im sure im forgetting a someone

Safe to say: point guard position, motherlode of talent. I guess to delineate you have to ask yourself, which of them excel at BOTH ends of the court?


point guard d is tough to judge but you can usually tell which ones are below average

CP3's defense is 100% about his quick hands which is really rare. You get lazy with the dribble for a second and he's got the steal. Don't think he's great at staying in front of his man, or fighting over screens, but he can really make a sloppy dribbler pay. Lowry's good on D. Jrue and MCW are both better defenders than offensive players. Think PG is the position you don't have to worry about via draft. There are a plethora of good ones in the league right now, you'll be able to grab one of them via trade or free agency pretty much every year. Concentrate on wings and bigs with high picks for the foreseeable future.

The Six reply to Brian on Mar 7 at 10:33

It's not THAT easy to grab a good PG Brian. How long did it take Atlanta to find Teague? Seemed like they were drafting PG's for damn near a decade(slightly exaggerated of course). Now feel free to insert a joke about how incompetent ATL is, but I don't think its that easy. MCW with his size, vision, and Defensive (future) ability, is not the type of PG that you can say "we'll just find another". He's a real asset.

Not talking about the draft, talking about the PGs already in the league. If there's a position you can fill via trade or free agency, it's PG.

To me, MCW has two plus abilities right now: defense and getting to the line. Think his vision is average, at best, (and negated by his decision making). His shooting is putrid, to put it kindly. Surround him with a bunch of good players, limit his shots and find a way to limit the turnovers and he can be a piece...maybe. It's a maybe because you'd need shooters around him.

I'm not giving up on him. He can definitely improve his shooting, and I'd be shocked if he didn't improve his decision making with time in the league, but if someone offered me a high first-round pick for him, I'd jump at the chance knowing I can get a PG better than he'll probably wind up being in free agency or via trade.

I wouldn't hesitate to trade MCW for a top 5-6 pick in this draft. Lower than that? Only if someone really good drops.

As for your view on the large pool of PG talent in the league i think it's a interesting topic. While i agree that the PG position is definitely the deepest in the league i also think PG is the most important position in the modern NBA. In addition to that, i think for some reason a lot of PGs in the modern NBA have short "primes". That's why i am really worried about guys like Lowry, Teague, Dragic, Thomas and the rest. Felton and Nelson are 2 PGs that immediately come to mind that were pretty good for a year or two, but immediately washed away. If you can find a PG that you think will be very good for a long period of time, i think that's a great thing to have. And i think the biggest reason why a lot of PGs have short primes is the combination of extreme dependence on athleticism, lack of size and lack of defensive ability.

MCW is far from a sure thing but i think the combination of size, defensive instincts, solid passing ability and getting to the line are pretty sustainable. It will all come down to his shot. If he can shoot even in the 30-35% range from three i think he'll be a very valuable piece. His age is definitely worrisome in that respect.

In some ways, you always look at something unique and elite when evaluating NBA players that can make a difference. MCW definitely has that.

Elite w/out requisite = a piece you have to make accommodations to fit into a winning squad, usually. For example, a PG who is an elite ballhandler/passer always fits, even if his D is atrocious. But a PG who is an elite rebounder? Not much of a help. MCW will probably wind up being an elite defensive PG, but if he can't run a team or shoot, he's not a building block...not unless you have a wing who can run the offense most of the time and a SG who shoots the lights out.

Just like having a great passing center who can't defend or score inside. Not all that helpful.

Now MCW gets to the line, which covers for the missing jump shot somewhat. If he figures out how to take care of the ball and becomes an above-average facilitator (which he is not right now), then yeah, he's a solid piece. You have to accommodate his lack of shooting with strong shooting at a couple of other positions (Wiggins and Parker especially could fit the bill), but you can work with that. If he develops an above-average jumper, plus the other stuff, then you've got that position locked down. The odds of him putting the whole package together, though? Not that great IMO.

I'd love it if he did, because I think having a great defensive PG is a huge advantage with so many solid offensive PGs in the league, but if you want to have an efficient offense, you can't have it run by a guy who plays like MCW does right now. He'd have to make dramatic improvements in a lot of areas for the team to ever have an elite offense.

If you get can get a pick in the top 10 for him, pull the trigger. Fill some other holes, then go after one of the 15 really good PGs in the league via trade or free agency. You have all the cap space in the world. Which of these lineups is closer to relevance?

(Wroten as 6th man)


(McDermott as 6th man)

Or you can plug Harris, Stuaskus, maybe Randle if he drops on measurements or whoever into that second lottery slot.

If you want to improve the team next year, you go after Bledsoe, Thomas or Lowry in free agency to play the point. If you're going to tank again, you fill the PG spot using dregs and then go after your PG the following summer in free agency first (Rondo, Kyrie, Rubio, Dragic, Parker).

Point being, there's plenty of opportunity to acquire an established PG, and there are so many quality PGs in the league, you probably aren't going to have to overpay to get them.

Yeah, Paul's a real good one. I wouldn't want to try to cross halfcourt against Lowry either - low, quick, tenacious; a North Philly pit bull.

Jonathan Givorny of draftexpress did an interesting podcast today. Says this is an average draft and that there's not even close to a LeBron or Durant in it. Sees a top 6 but says that a lot of GMs don't like anywhere from one to four of them.


The Six reply to Tray on Mar 7 at 17:07

I'm starting to hear a lot more of this. I think Jerry West said the same last week. This draft still projects to be significantly better than 2013, but how ironic would it be if last year's "weak" draft ends up yielding a better crop of NBA talent?

Tray reply to The Six on Mar 7 at 17:26

Really ironic but also really unlikely. 2013 was really weak. Other than just maybe Giannis, the top of the draft is third best player on a good team if they develop right kind of guys.

I think people misunderstand the point these guys make. All they are saying is that there are no transcendent type of players like Lebron, Durant, Davis, Duncan... But the existence of such players in the draft isn't what makes the draft good or bad. That's just one player and that happens only once every 3-4 years. The strength of the draft is generally evaluated by the depth of high end talent. And this year there are somewhere between 6 and 8 really good prospects and all kinds of intriguing players all the way to the second round. That's more than any draft recently. Really, a lot of people have compared this draft to the 2003 draft but more and more this draft looks to me like the 2008 draft - no sure things, but lots of really good prospects.

Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 7 at 20:01

The existence of players like that is what makes the draft good or great for the teams at the top. And coming into the college season there were people saying saying Wiggins or Parker were Durant-level prospects, so it is somewhat disappointing that they probably aren't. I mean, either we're going to get the superstar we need in this draft or we're going to have to resort to trades and free agency, because I don't see us having a top 3 pick in 2015. It's a pretty decisive moment for our future.

I get the point, but i don't really agree with this, because it's all about luck. Only one team is going to get that generational type of player. It can't make such a huge difference to all of the top teams. Only to one team. When you are talking about the top of the draft you really need to look at the top 5. And this year, maybe there is no number 1 pick, but there are like 6 number 2 picks, which is far more than most drafts. Even if you look at the 2003 draft, after Lebron, none of the other was a sure thing. Not even close. Anthony was looked similarly to how Parker is viewed today and the others (Wade, Bosh, Milicic...) were i think a notch below this current crop (Embiid, Wiggins, Exum...) as prospects.

P.S. Some of this year's prospects might actually develop into a generational type. It's just you can't predict who that one will be before hand. There are no guarantees.

Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 8 at 3:47

Not quite true; if you're the second or third team in the draft you're hoping it's a two or three superstar draft, or that someone above you misses. Anyway, I'm not at all interested in what the best definition of good draft is (although I agree a good draft is a draft that's deep at the top) and whether this draft meets it. What I do know is that we're slightly more likely than not to pick in the top 3 (56% chance if we finish with the second worst record, which is still the most likely outcome, 64% chance if we finish with the worst), and will almost certainly pick in the top 4 (88% chance if we finish second, 100% chance if we catch Milwaukee). So for us, this draft will either be great or a big disappointment depending on whether there's a superstar or two or three in the Wiggins-Embiid-Parker trio, or the Wiggins-Embiid-Parker-Exum quartet. If the guy we draft is pretty good right away but never becomes a superstar, that screws us out of winning the 2015 draft and puts us in a spot where we're left hoping that some superstar who's unhappy in his small market gets traded here and decides to stay. Of course, we probably won't know for two to three years whether our pick is a superstar or not.

I absolutely agree that this draft will be the key for the team going forward. But i don't think the importance of this draft on the Sixers future is completely on them landing a superstar in the draft or not. Draft picks and young prospects can be used in many ways in the modern NBA. Everyone's talking about building around MCW/Noel/2014 pick/Pelicans pick, but i don't think the team building process is that straight forward. You have to take risks and be opportunistic when some options present themselves.

P.S. You were talking about generational players before. I don't think there are drafts that have more than 1 almost guaranteed generational player. So there is practically 0 value in having the 2nd, 3rd, 4th pick etc. Those guys are the same as Embiid, Wiggins, Parker and co at best i.e. a notch below guaranteed future top 10 player.

I really am not expecting them to find a superstar in this year's draft. But they certainly will have a ton more talent next year and but much more watchable- even if they lose a lot of games. I'm not sure if they will try and be like OKC and build their core internally, or be like Houston and try and wheel and deal their players to get stars. But either way, right now their only assets are picks, where starting next year they should have some interesting players on the roster.

Honestly, i don't think Hinkie knows that either. It seems to me that he wants to be ready for both situations. A lot will depend on what's available and how good the draftees will turn put to be. He wants to make the best decision i.e. he'd take the direction that he thinks gives the team the best chance to become a contender going forward. The real question is a) will he make the right decision and b) will there even be a right decision to be made or he'll be unlucky. Luck always plays a huge factor.

Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 8 at 18:12

Well, what about the draft with LeBron and Wade in it, or the draft with Jordan and Olajuwon, or even the draft with Oden and Durant, which very well might have been a two-superstar draft had Oden been able to stay healthy.

I agree that our getting a superstar in this draft may not make or break our future, primarily because it's possible that we could trade a non-superstar prospect or two for a great player. However, the path becomes way more difficult, because for that kind of trade to help you for more than one season, the player has to be willing to stick around. All the stars and not-so-stars that have been traded in recent years - Harden, Melo, Deron Williams, Paul, Howard, Bynum - were in or approaching the last year of their contract. The same may happen with Love next year. Now, you can take a big risk and rent a guy like that for a season without having any idea of whether he'll re-sign with you, and in limited circumstances that might be a sensible strategy. For example, it might not be crazy for Golden State or San Antonio to attempt to rent Love next season, even though all the rumors are that he wants to end up in LA. But then you're talking about a one-season window of contention. So if our pick this season doesn't turn out to be a superstar, and if you accept the premise that you do need one to contend in almost all cases, then our paths forward become:

a) free agency
b) getting a superstar in a trade who wants to play here
c) renting one for a season and hoping they stick around for the Bird rights and talented roster
d) the off chance that next year we're still really bad or get a really great break in the lottery
e) finding a superstar in the mid-to-late lottery in 2015
f) trading for a top pick, which it's unlikely any team would do in this day and age.

Of course, maybe Wiggins or Embiid will turn out to be superstars, and maybe we'll get one of them. It's nice to see Wiggins scoring 41 points. But superstars drafted out of college tend to be dominant college players, which Wiggins hasn't been. There's a really long line of highly touted high-school players with great size and athleticism who had good but not great freshman seasons, got drafted in the early lottery anyway, and weren't that special. Rudy Gay, Harrison Barnes, Marvin Williams, Julian Wright, Brandan Wright, Favors... the list goes on. (A couple of these played in college for two years.) Wiggins has done quite a bit more than guys like Barnes and Williams, obviously, but he's also done quite a bit less than players like Durant or Davis or Griffin or Love.

A couple of thoughts:

1. Wade wasn't a superstar prospect at the time of the draft. He was similar to what Smart is now as a prospect. Maybe slightly better.
2. I don't really believe in needing a superstar to build a contender, even though i do see the huge financial benefit when building the team. Maximum contracts on superstars are the biggest bargains in the league.
3. I think you are selling Wiggins season short. He is much better as a freshman than all of your examples of failed great athletes (Gay, Barnes, Williams, Wright, Favors etc.). He was also better than many more highly touted prospects that were based on athleticism you didn't mention. His freshman season is on par with other great athletes: Griffin, Rose, Wall. Defensively, he is also better than anyone you mentioned in the post, except Davis.

I think with Wiggins, the hype was so ridiculous, that people overlook the fact that he is actually having a great season for a freshman. Not all time great, but great for a raw player whose potential is based on athleticism and not superior skillset (like the aforementioned Durant, Love or this year's Parker)

The Six reply to Tray on Mar 7 at 22:57

Finally had a chance to listen to the rest of this podcast. Interesting points made at the end when projecting Aaron Gordon and discussing the likelihood of him realizing his potential, and how maybe more than any other player it may be contingent on the right organization drafting him. Then he went on to compare Gordon's future situation with the draft that saw Kawhi Leonard an Jan Vesely go to SAN and WAS respectively. He wondered how (if at all) their career paths would have changed if their draft teams would have been flip-flopped and Leonard was drafted by the Wizards and Vesely by the Spurs. Thinking about Gordon in that context makes more sense. It would also make me want to pass on him if the Pelicans pick was as high as some are projecting Gordon to go. Thanks again for posting this.

Yeah, that point actually mirrors my opinion about Gordon. I've been thinking the same thing for a long time about him. And i don't see the reason why the Sixers should shy away from a player like that. If they are truly building a great player development franchise, he's the perfect guy to draft...

If you watch the highlight entitled "Retribution," you can see Turner botch a fast-break and get blocked. So far the Pacers are just 0.8 points better than opponents per 100 possessions in Turner's minutes. They've lost their last 3 games, two of which were blowouts by 22 or more, and 3 of their 4 wins with him were by 5 or less.


Hawes, on the other hand, has been really good for Cleveland.

South Broad on Mar 8 at 10:01


Mentioned briefly here but not touched on, there's rumblings on Tobacco Road (before this article) that Parker has mentioned that he feels he "owes it to Duke" to come back next year. Not only to try to win a title, but to pair up with his former high school rival and friend Jahlil Okafor next year. Should be interesting to follow.

Love the mentions about his coachability and will to succeed. Really hope he comes out and ends up a Sixer.

So Vegas puts the odds at 3:1 in favor of the Sixers finishing out the season 0-36 (losing the remainder of their games.)


I think there is a huge chance they win tonight vs Utah and stop the streak.

Stan reply to Xsago on Mar 8 at 12:35

I'm rooting for them to win tonight and then for them to lose the remaining 20. I don't want the Sixers to have another infamous record in the books.

I did some quick math, and if you have a 98% chance of losing each individual game, you have the same 3:1 chance of losing 22 games in a row.

For them to put the odds at 50:1 (98%) to lose a single game is astounding, but to put those odds for each of the next 22 games is even more remarkable.

Tray reply to tk76 on Mar 8 at 17:40

Yeah, so I think 3:1 is just way off then, because Vegas probably gives us, say, a 30% chance of winning tonight.

The Six on Mar 8 at 14:03

Wiggins with a big time performance today. I think he's got 34 right now.

Gman 08 on Mar 8 at 14:03

Wiggins going off has 34 so far, trying to bring em back for a win.His defense looking pretty good too.

if it matter Lorenzo Brown will not play tonight