DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

Viewer Beware!

Honest question: Do you guys really find this season so hard to endure? In a way, knowing that there is an actual plan in place and understanding why everything that is going on is actually happening have made this season pretty easy to go through for me. This has been one of the more enjoyable seasons in the past 6-7 years IMO (the best was the lockout season when the Sixers started hot and eventually pushed Boston to 7 games in the second round and the worst was definitely the Eddie Jordan season).

user-pic
Seanzybillups reply to Xsago on Mar 12 at 17:13
+/-

I wouldn't say the season is enjoyable, but I can appreciate the plan and realize this is what it takes to get above mediocrity. I'll take a chance at greatness over mediocrity any day.

I would find it more enjoyable if I could see Noel play a couple games and get a glimpse of what we have there (assuming it doesn't get us any more W's and he is healthy).

user-pic
Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 12 at 17:45
+/-

No, I'm all about tanking. But the games have become pretty meaningless now that they're all guaranteed losses and there's no one on the team. You can't even follow the team for MCW's development, because he has no one to pass to. So I used to be invested in the season when the lottery standings were up in the air and you could watch MCW play alongside a semblance of an NBA team, but now it's just become a waiting period until the draft lottery.

The sixers were going to be a terrible basketball team targeting the worst record in the league - I decided not to watch any games this year long before the season started - there was very little to be gained (even from watching Carter-Williams play since the roster around him was barely replacement level when the season started save for Thad). Some people (it seems) just want to find things to get upset about - the goal was the 'worst' record in the league - and I still think they're going to end up with it...what happens in between is less vital...the success or lack thereof of the moves of the useless players who were traded is not anything you are going to determine right away and the over valuation of said players by others who are not working for an NBA team is immaterial

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Mar 12 at 18:43
+/-

You think we'll have a worse record than Milwaukee? They'd have to win 3 games. I hope so but I'm pretty pessimistic.

I think the bucks even at '200' ball (their current record) for the rest of the season (18 games) is 3-4 wins.

I think if the sixers win one more game before the end of the season it'll be shocking.

Though - even though the math doesn't work - history says - if you want the #1 seed DONT be the worst team in the league - because you win the first pick less than the numbers say you should

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Mar 12 at 19:07
+/-

History merely confirms the lottery odds, under which the field has a 75 percent chance and the #1 seed has only a 25 percent chance. Since there have been fairly few iterations of this particular lottery, it probably hasn't distributed in perfect alignment with the odds, but the odds are the odds.

This will be the 19th lottery with 14 teams in it - but only 16 of them were all 14 teams were eligible (Vancouver and Toronto weren't eligible their first 3 years in the league - which honestly - is stupid - the worst teams needing to build a fan base should have the best shot at #1)

The First time the worst team won the 14 team lottery was when Cleveland Tanked to get Lebron James, then the next year Orlando was the worst team and got Dwight Howard.

And that's it - 2 in 16...the highest jumper was the 9 seed when the bulls got derrick rose...and if you believe in trends - the 3 seed has won the past two lotteries.

And the lakers have a good shot at that 3 seed - i'm just saying - if you believe in conspiracies and such

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Mar 12 at 19:22
+/-

So it should have been 4 out of 16, but it was 2.. does that seem strikingly off to you? Go flip a coin 16 times, chances are decent it'll come up heads or tails 2 times more than the 8 you expect.

user-pic
buke reply to GoSixers on Mar 12 at 19:19
+/-

That's easy to say for one who made up his mind prior to the season not to watch any games. You have absolutely nothing invested so who cares, right?

What about the season ticket holders? What about the vendors at the stadium and their employees? What about those who paid to watch this team on league pass? What about the advertisers on Comcast Philly? When is the next time the Sixers will actually be shown on TNT, network, ESPN, or even NBA TV and how many appearances will they make?

Contrary to the opinions of some, I don't believe a team "must" do this to get better and there are multiple examples of those who improved without resorting to making mockery of the game, the franchise, and the league while hurting those who depend upon the franchise for their livelihoods.

I have had a good few weeks without any interactions with you but I felt I had to take the risk by addressing this comment. If you don't feel any need to respond, you'll do us both a favor.

The Sixers are playing by the letter if the law, if not the spirit. The lottery was supposed to stop this from happening, it just failed to do so. Only a matter of time until someone figured that out and was willing to pay the price to exploit it. This is the type of stupid system Harris has made a fortune exploiting. Think of the vendors at the arena as you would customer service reps whose jobs were sent to India in any company he acquired over the years.

Only a matter of time until someone figured that out and was willing to pay the price to exploit it.

Why is everyone pretending like this is the first time a team has ever tanked...maybe (again) it's all personal cause it's the sixers, but come on - the cavaliers were taking when Lebron was about to come out - and everyone knew it.

And no one cared

Tanking happens in all sports - the jags were tanking but then the players got their acts together - some teams don't tank they're just run poorly and then they get a good run in the draft (the clippers) or the owner who is running them into the ground passes away and there is some light (the raiders) but tanking happens more often than not - suddenly it's like a huge thing and the draft is broken and it has to be fixed.

The only more ridiculous discussion (since tanking doesn't happen EVERY year) is the NFL and their 'extra point issue'

I'm sure tteams were tanking when Ewing was coming out...

No team has ever tanked like this, without even the semblance of an attempt at competing. They traded their best player, let all other free agents walk, filled out the roster with cheap cast offs, then traded two starters for nothing at the trade deadline. Now they're playing a roster that would lose to a full-strength Kansas team if Wiggins could slow Thad down, and that's not an exaggeration. Teams have definitely tanked in the past, but never as blatantly as this, and never with a smile on their face.

I'm not sure I'd say that, not when players on the Cavs and Celtics openly talked about not being played because the coach wanted to lose, and when John Lucas said directly to ESPN that the goal was to lose and get LeBron.

I'm with Go in that we're just closer to this situation.

user-pic
buke reply to Brian on Mar 13 at 0:30
+/-

Well said, Brian! I forgot to mention the poor schmucks who are trying to sell advertising to this mess. Your analogy is perfect. I still wonder whether these characters will move the team after creating enough indifference or hostility.

user-pic
Tray reply to buke on Mar 12 at 19:30
+/-

Yeah, obviously a team doesn't have to tank to get better. You could sign a superstar in free agency, not that that will happen here. You can draft and sign good players and content yourself with 50 wins. You can flip what you've got over and over and over until you get something really good, like Houston. You can bumble into a top pick by accident, like Milwaukee, or like us the year we got Turner. I just think our odds are best this way and have no compunctions about tanking, but I respect that some fans really care about being decent every season.

Next time - don't reply - honestly - it's kind of childish to write a long winded (partially insulting) comment and then say 'oh please - i'm going to insult you and contradict your points but I don't want to hear anything you have to say about what I have to say'

It's not as bad as Steve Troll - but it really is juvenile.

No one makes anyone pay for season tickets - as I said - it was pretty clear what the sixers had planned on draft night - anyone who spent money on the sixers since then has no one to blame but themselves.

Sports teams don't owe their 'fan bases' anything - to me that's one of the most common misconceptions in the world today - sure they want you to come - but sadly - mostly they only care about making a profit (it's not how I'd run my team - but I haven't found that billion dollar idea like Cuban conned Yahoo). It's right up their with people who think that the viewer is the customer of the television networks (it's the advertisers baby - the viewers are just how they decide what to charge the advertisers)

A sports team owes you nothing...if you feel like a sports team 'owes you' for years of fandom or something like that - that's fine - but it's not reality...if you think they're performing badly - stop giving them your money - but the sixers were GOING to stink this year - whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant - your opinion doesn't matter to them - if you paid them money knowingly - the only person responsible for that is you

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Mar 12 at 19:34
+/-

I don't know, that's like saying a college doesn't owe its students anything because they paid their tuition in advance. You pay a lot of money to watch what you're led to believe will at least be an nba team, it might be nice if management doesn't field a roster that's 80 percent d-league.

Sorry - comparison doesn't carry weight with me - you don't 'need' the NBA (or to be a kansas city royals season tickets holder - but there are them - and everyone knows they gonna suck every year) - an education is an entirely different concept (and don't get me started on my issues with education - probably one of the few things out there that consistently goes up in price while it's value consistently goes down)

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Mar 12 at 21:35
+/-

Okay... it's like buying season CONCERT tickets to the Philadelphia Orchestra, and then they turn around and fire all their really elite violinists and hire some scabs from the Milwaukee Orchestra to cut costs. I think a refund would be in order there.

That said, the season ticketholders are a really small piece of the picture here.

You seem to not like the plan so i will ask you, what did you want them to do? Keep jrue, sign some role players and fight for the 6-8 seed?

He wants them to trade anything to get Nerlens Noel.

Oh wait. That was last year leading up to the draft.

Has there been any recent reports on how bad his knee is? The prognosis of his knee injury hasn't changed much since last year.

Most Sixers fans consider me an MCW hater, so I'm not exactly sure what I'm supposed to be debating.

Whether MCW is a top 20 point guard who may not get a whole lot better (your position, maybe, I don't know, just a guess) or a top 40 point guard at best who's worse than a lot of backups (his position). You might start by debating who's better, MCW or Greivis Vasquez. Toll would pick Vasquez.

No, I'm definitely not at Toll's level, but I have more concerns with MCW than the majority of Sixers fans. I wasn't a fan of his on draft night, and while he's exceeded my expectations, most of the major concerns are still there.

Well, do share your concerns sometime over here. I read some of the Liberty Ballers comment threads, but I haven't seen your MCW posts.

It's sad to say, because I used to love this blog, but I don't really see much value in conversing over here anymore. Not that there aren't many smart basketball people here (there are), but there are just too many people who aren't really here to discuss basketball.

I don't think there's much value here because there are only a few commenters, but I don't think there's a huge problem with bad commenters here. Once in a while some troll shows up; that's about it.

I'll probably have a post about it sometime between now and the lottery. I'll link to it when I do.

By the way, I don't recall seeing this Nurkic fellow anywhere near the lottery in draftexpress's mocks and now you have him at 11? Has there been some recent development there?

I think the main wonder was whether he'd declare for this year. We've been writing about him for the past year. I know Jonathan just got back from a trip overseas, perhaps he heard some information that made him think that he'd be declaring, although I'm just speculating.

Your highlight package kind of makes him out to be a poor man's Pekovic. Is this that good a draft after 7 or so? I feel like in many past years, players like McDermott, Nurkic, Cauley-Stein, Capela would be somewhere in the middle to the 20s of the first round. It's very easy to see a lot of these guys as busts or merely decent role players. Even the fact that James Young is a first-rounder in this draft... this is a guy who looks like he should be a three and D guy, but he's terrible on defense, makes just a third of his threes, and has no real ball-handling or passing ability to speak of. He can jump and he has NBA size and good shooting form but that's about it. To me that sounds like a prototypical second-rounder, not someone you'd give a guaranteed rookie deal to, unless you're one of the few teams that's really great at player development.

I don't think this is a particularly great draft after 8 or so. Probably around average.

As for James Young, the thing I will say with him is he's a lot more consistent with his feet set than he is when he's on the move. I think the belief among decision makers is that if you can improve his shot selection, you can fit him in an offense fairly effectively. As you said, the body and the form are there. I don't have a problem with where he's currently slotted.

If he can't shoot so well on the move, that limits the kind of shooter he can be, doesn't it? There are only so many shots you can get when you're planted; volume shooters like Korver take a lot of shots running off a screen. But I guess my logic is, if he isn't a proven knockdown shooter and projects more like a 37% shooter from three, or someone who makes a really good percentage but only when he camps out in the corner, then you're drafting him to be an athletic defender/shooter combo. Otherwise, there are any number of players in and out of the NBA who could make a decent number of threes shooting 35-38 percent, or who can can corner threes. But he isn't a good defender at all right now. So it's a pretty open question to me as to whether he's going to deserve a roster spot on someone's team.

On the other hand, I think Hairston probably should go higher than 21st. He could, I suppose, be the next MarShon Brooks, but guys who have both good size and good skills for their position seem to be kind of rare in this draft. I can't see caring at all about him driving some booster's car and I suspect he'd be projected above players like Stauskas or T.J. Warren were he still in college.

I think you have to keep in mind that he's currently at the very tail end of the first round. Getting guys with much more upside than 3-and-d with his physical attributes are fairly rare. If he could do much at all on the move, either off of screens, pick and rolls, or his own dribble, or if he were a strong fundamental defender right now, he'd be going much higher.

With Hairston, what's keeping him from being higher has very little to do with his game.

I agree about Hairston, but I don't see infractions of NCAA rules as a big predictor of character problems once in the league. They're a weird set of rules that don't bear any resemblance to the rules NBA players have to follow. For example, because of one-and-done, Rose was required to pass a test that he's apparently unable to pass, so he did a really unethical thing and had someone take it for him. But now that he's not forced to go through a charade of being an amateur student-athlete, he turns out to be a relatively high-character guy.

I'm not saying it should be holding back his draft stock, I just think it is to a degree.

I understand. Would you take him at 11? Assume that the top ten guys on the Draftexpress mock are gone.

user-pic
Da Jruth reply to Derek Bodner on Mar 12 at 22:27
+/-

This is such a load of crap....and extreme hyperbole {as tray pointed out on the few commenters}... when you come down off your pedestal you'll be much better off.... spare all of us will ya?? {commenters and lurkers alike}

now go run back to your preschoolers and shed your condescension upon them

Hah. This is exactly what I'm talking about. I even went out of my way to say that there are tons of knowledgable basketball people here. They're just drowned out by people looking for fights. Thank you for provging my point.

I'm ambivalent about MCW at this point. He certainly has been a contributor to this garbage, but I don't think we can judge him fairly under these circumstances. How can any one player be held very responsible when it doesn't matter whether or not he plays a coherent team game? When the lunatics run the asylum, it's every man for himself.

My main reason for concern with MCW's play is that what he's struggling at (finishing through contact, maintaining dribble through contact, finishing with left hand, shooting off the dribble) were all major weaknesses in college. If it were newfound problems this year, I'd disregard them more.

The fact remains I'll put up any amount of $ on betting basketball
With any 76er expert and I've offered to escrow with an attorney of that experts choosingn within 48 hours and NOBODY HAS COME AT THE KING

Sigh - it's like the pussy equivalent of challenging someone to a fight on the internet.

I have made internet bets in the past - with rational people - and was paid off when I won - but irrational nut jobs who rant and rave about how betting proves them right aren't people you bet with - the money is probably stolen or in soon to crash stolen bitcoins

he had the surgery one year ago today

And he thinks he's ready to go - and anyone who has fault with the sixers taking a better safe than sorry approach to things baffles me - this is a lost season - nothing can be gained unless you are 100% sure he is 100% - ANY doubt means he shouldn't play...let him work on his game and work on getting a bit bigger

And oh yeah - please don't have chronic back issues like Embiid might

also are reportedly rebuilding his shot which also takes time

I do not think MCW is a garbage point guard. Felt like I should start with that.

As Brown and Hinkie said, we will be able to determine A LOT next November. He has had a full year to see what he can do against opposing players. He shows flashes of using size to his advantage. Tonight will be a good example of a chance for him to exploit a smaller Isiah Thomas.

Can he learn to 1. finish through contact 2. master a tear drop 3. develop some type of consistency with his jumper. I think if he does 1 and 2 then he can be a starter with his defense. As much as basketball is an individual game, the players around you can magnify or negate your abilities. I have no idea if MCW is a distributor, and that was one of the first things I noticed of him at Cuse and early on. He had a much more natural vision of the floor versus Jrue. Seeing passes that Jrue would not. The recent games I have watched, I havent seen that, but it wouldn't be easy passing to Hollis Thompson or Henry Sims. I think his defensive ability is there. He showed in his one on one versus Felton that he can take advantage of slower guys. He should be able to guard some lengthier guys as well. Our rotations are absolutely terrible, part of that is the system and how we pack the paint due to no inside presence. Perhaps Noel solves the latter part and we bring in some wings (draft) to solve the first part. He may be a gambler who gets steals from overplaying. But I have seen his feet and how the move, he is quick enough and long enough to be a very very good on ball defender.

And I don't have any reason to believe Noel is damaged goods. We are not medical doctors and have no insight on his knee. We do have insight that Philly is trying to get a top draft pick. We have insight that they are building for future years. We have insight that Noel has a long term contract and several endorsements which provide little incentive for his agent to "argue" over him not playing. He might not be GOOD in the NBA but I don't think he is damaged goods.

This season is tough, but I will agree I would much rather go through this with the plan. We can all argue over the little decisions amidst the broader plan, but I think most of us are on board with the broader plan.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Rusty on Mar 12 at 23:35
+/-

Good post- agree across the board... and you were not even rude or inflammatory.

user-pic
raro reply to tk76 on Mar 13 at 9:47
+/-

+1

I'm not sure when Michael Carter Williams became garbage, but he's a lanky athletic point guard who can defend multiple positions and has good court vision and yes - some turnovers this year as a rookie - but that comes with maturity - and if he adds better scring - he'll be awesome - but see - I remember when point guards were primarily creators for their more efficient team mates - and if you get some quality scorers to pair with him I think he'll blossom even if his 3 point shot never evolves (which I think he'll make every effort to improve)

user-pic
Rusty reply to GoSixers on Mar 12 at 18:52
+/-

I think we are all just overreacting due to certain people being outspoke and us having little to talk about.

I agree with what you said. He could be a really interesting weapon on a team with other quality players.

Another thing that I might mention which I know is tough to measure, but I really think PGs are different in development versus other positions. His shot is one thing, and we all agree it may or may not ever develop. But his vision of the game, his ability to get into the lane, his defense are all things that can develop.

And leadership goes in there as well.

Maybe I am making things up at this point, but when you look at the growth of guys like Nash, Kidd, etc. it seems as though they went through several stages of growth in their career and were most effective past a normal players prime age (26-29)

The only way to get rid of a Troll is to stop feeding him...they starve to death.

When I was writing what I wrote I was thinking Nash - but I think even when he came into the league Nash had a better shot than Williams.

What's fascinating is how expectations change, because before (hell even after) summer league expectations for him were minimal if that - very little seemed expected and now suddenly he is expected to be a fully matured ready to go point guard...man - the sixers are going to stink next year too - i hope people are ok with that

user-pic
Rusty reply to GoSixers on Mar 12 at 19:00
+/-

Agreed - if you showed me his stats and told me this is what he would give us back in August, then I would be ecstatic. It was the 11th pick which is a total crapshoot. How many guys before him would we have taken over him? Anyone? Oladipo maybe? (I, for one, would be taking MCW over Oladipo).

I think a lot from here will be on him as an individual. He certainly has the tools to be a difference maker at this level.

And (I read a few 'profiles' about him a few months ago) based on the background he has - he SEEMS to have the work ethic (and support system) to maximize what he can do...now - can a shot be fixed? Who knows - Evan Turner spent every off season working on his shot and it never got better - but was that the impossibility of muscle memory alteration or evan turner being - you know - not good

Court vision is such a subjective thing. Feel like people use it to knock down a player they don't like and build up a player they do like. There are maybe 2 or 3 guys in the league who are just masterful (LeBron, cp3, Nash...maybe Rubio). There are guys who are putrid, then there's a huge middle, where the difference is negligible. Feel like Jrue and MCW both fall in that middle, where it's your feelings for the player as a whole that define your rating.

As for MCW on the whole, he has a lot of improving to do to become a top 15 pg, but it's not a position of need at this point and I think it's an easy position to fill in the league, so if you get value for him now, make the trade.

As for this season on the whole, well, I have a really, really busy life and watching the Sixers has always been something I've carved out time for. Something I've always looked forward to. It sucks when they don't even make an attempt to compete. It's a lost year. I understand why they've done it, and I damned sure hope it works out, but this year I'm bummed I have nothing to watch and in acutely aware that there's no guarantee this will only be a one year blip. In fact, if they don't hit in their pick, next year is guaranteed to unwatchable as well...and probably every year until they do hit or they decide they've lost enough money chasing the dragon and they need to change their plan. Of course, if the new CBA props teams up enough, attendance might never really matt and Harris might be content filling a roster with d-league talent and collecting rev share checks indefinitely. No way to tell.

Even in an ideal world - where they get #1 and #6 - the sixers are going to stink next year - i mean come on - four starters with a combined one year NBA experience? They're going to be awful, and I still believe Thad will be traded on trade night for another first round pick (be it this year or next year)...

This was a lost year the moment Jrue was traded - and you knew it - I guess for me since I have varied interests I could just move that 'sixer' time to something else (baking, rails programming, reading, etc..)...and I don't even have kids ;)

It's the bitterness and vitriol that gets to me - this was the plan - everyone knew it was the plan - and yet still people seem to think it's a disaster - like it didn't work when it hasn't even played out yet - it takes a long time to build a contender in the nba and there's no guarantee you're going to become one unless you're a destination franchise (and face it folks - no matter how much you or I like Philadelphia, it's not a destination franchise, in fact in terms of those things players supposedly look for - it has nothing to offer unless they build a roster that can win a ring - bad weather, bad taxes, mediocre night life, crappy stadium, no 'cool stars' (sorry - scientologists whose movie careers are in the toilet don't count) coming to the games, and oh yeah, a rather aggressive fan base not in a good way).

I think Dwight signing in Houston was more aberration than anything (and besides, texas has the tax thing and dwight doesn't seek the limelight - he's probably one of the few 'best at his position' guys who DOESNT want to be the #1).

I think Sam Hinkie knows that the only way to really build a title contender in Philadelphia is the OKC model, which, come on, let's face it, is purely based on luck - lottery goes a different way - the sonics take oden #1 - Durants in Portland and who the hell knows what happens.

Like it or not - the NBA is not fair - and for some reason - the salary restrictions and 'advantages' to the home team - it seems guys are less likely to go to those secondary markets than in other sports (Seattle in MLB or Green Bay in the NFL - if they have money they get guys)...

I know there's a better than 50% chance that even if everything goes right, this team could top out at an eastern conference finals appearance I guess - and I know it could take a while to get there.

As for the court vision thing - i wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't have to be subjective if you have access to all that sports vu stuff - damn bastards stole my idea

If they get a star with their first pick, it'll be pretty apparent early on, and that will make them watchable, even if they stink. Then they'll be building something. Right now, there's just nothing to watch for.

Derrick Williams starting at PF for the kings tonight

please dont double cousins

I really hope Brian is watching this one ;)

anderson 3

first post up for cousins

they dont double and he hits a fade away

mcw 3

thad and 1

made the ft

thad to the line

split them

cousins goes coast to coast

sims posts up cousins and scores

bad shot mcw

mcw has been alot better on defense lately(i didnt see the knicks game)

varnado to the line

made both

12-2 kings run

timeout sixers

thad to wroten

mcw bucket

mcw posts up thomas but missed

dont like that shot mcw

down 4 end of the 1st

the kings have 0 assist

the kings have 0 assist

That's awesome

thad hits both ft

thompson 3

sims and 1 putback

made the ft

A man came up to me and said to me and said I'd like to change your mind by hitting it with a rock he said though I am not unkind

This song just came up on my itunes random and seemed particularly apropos (if you don't know the song, I can't help you - your tastes need adjusting)

good drive by mcw

3 on cousins

sims to the line

made both

sims banks in a hook shot

mcw to the line

split them

refs calling alot of fouls this quarter

sims spilt the ft

nice play for an anderson 3

down 4 at the half

thad and 1

made the ft

anderson 3

sims o-board to the line

made both

good drive by wroten

mcw and 1

made the ft

Hey Steve, I'll bet you that Doron Lamb has a better career than MCW.

If you don't believe me, I have his stats from high school.

down 14 end of the 3rd

Nobody takes you up on it because you're a clown.

Besides, there are things on the internet which would suggest that you don't always pay for your end of a transaction.

user-pic
Da Jruth reply to Derek Bodner on Mar 12 at 22:31
+/-

Didn't you just complain about people not here to discuss basketball? yet you go and do the same- irony indeed

Steve's been instigating this entire thread. If you can't see that, then you either have an axe to grind with me, or you're another one of Steve's fake accounts.

bad start to the quarter

down 19

sims to the line

made both

mcw bucket

lost by 17

turner and pacers on friday

seen this act before sixers score 100 but give up 120 or so oh well knumb now but still hard to watch my team lose every night. better days ahead hopefully we need to hit on these picks please.

I can understand the range of opinions about this season. I agree that the team is somewhat unique in the degree to which they are all in with regards to tanking/rebuilding. Lots of teams blow things up at the trade deadline- and some have been more egregious in intentionally sitting good players late in the season for lottery reasons. But I cannot recall a team completely giving up on a year before the season started.

That said, IMO many of the other bad teams over the years have tried to be a bit more respectable due to financial motivation as opposed to some higher moral reason. Few owners are willing to take on the combination of major lost revenue and risk of long term failure that is inherent in the Sixers current course. But for better or worse, the Sixers ownership sees this team differently than most owners, in that they approach the rehab project through a business lens, where it makes sense to "write off debt" one year as a pat of serious restructuring. I doubt most other owners have the stomach for this.

There are bold owners who will throw away millions if it potentially makes their team a winner (Cuban/Prokhorov). There are owners who cheaply put up a facsimile of a team out of profit motive (Sterling for many years.) But it is a bigger leap to throw away millions (of lost gate/advertising and possible franchise devaluation) while at the same time openly being criticized for losing.

I'm not sure if the Sixers rebuilding approach/process will succeed. But I do think they truly are trying to build a winner long term. They may be completely wrong and destined to 5 years of terrible basketball... but at least at this point I am less bothered by this years approach than the feeling I had about the franchise under Comcast, where they would rather be average then risk alienating their small fanbase through a real rebuild.

somewhat unique

First off, you're better than that man, come on you know it.

But I cannot recall a team completely giving up on a year before the season started.

See the cavaliers the year that lebron was coming out - no one really noticed cause it's freaking Cleveland.

There are bold owners who will throw away millions if it potentially makes their team a winner (Cuban/Prokhorov).

Bold and smart are not the same thing, Prokhorov may be spending a lot of his money (while worried about politics in a country headed for civil war) but he's letting Billy King spend it in an attempt to be - at best -mediocre second round fodder for the Pacers and Heat (no i don't think the regular season head to head record will matter come play off time

As for your assertion of 'lost' revenue or whatever - you have no idea how much - if any - money they're losing. That's a common trope people want to trot out...Harris is a very successful business man - if he was losing millions I bet he might want some changes made.

To me, whether you see it as a rebuilding or a tank depends on a perception thing...

1. Merriam Webster has my back:

"Those who insist that unique cannot be modified by such adverbs as more, most, and very are clearly wrong: our evidence shows that it can be and frequently is modified by such adverbs."

It in unique due only to its extent and not its existence... thus unique in a qualified fashion. And even if this were not the case, I am writing a comment on a blog, and am not in search of a literary award for acceptable grammar. Next you will start attacking people for using compressed words while txtng. BTW, I am a big fan of the singular their, irregardless, and the Oxford comma- but please avoid dang-mods- I can't stand it.

2. There is a risk of lost revenue and franchise value when you punt a season. whether the risk actually translates into lost dollars is not really relevant to my point.

3. You are right about that Cavs team. Similar to the Sixers they got rid of several vets from the previous season without any vet replacements. for example, their top 3 minutes played players from the year prior were age 25-30- and where all gone.

That's a 'semantic development' because people are getting lazy (or stupid) with the English Language...they're allowing it because they can't 'stop' it. Much like I often read dived, pleaded, etc...in books now even though when we were younger the past tense of those words were different and our teachers wouldn't accept them...as the quality of education devolves at the lower levels, what's considered acceptable will adjust. Unique is a word that indicates one only - what's the point of a modifier, out of the ordinary is a fine turn of phrase for instance.

PS - this does relate to basketball - the piss poor quality of basketball in the NBA and the NCAA goes back to when kids are taught the game, high school, and AAU - with better player development in those levels - I don't think the one and done rule would be a problem.

The only real mistake Prokhorov has made is hiring Billy King. Otherwise, he's not as crazy as he portrays himself. His goal is pretty obvious (and is why he is "throwing away" so much money): Win the New York battle. I think Prokhorov smells blood there and is trying to steal the Knicks fanbase by fielding a team that will be better than the Knicks every year. He's willing to pay whatever it takes to do that. It's not such a crazy thing to do from a business standpoint. He's trying to destroy the Knicks actually.

no bynum for the pacers tomorrow

Darius Johnson-Odom to be signed to a 10 day

This is a name I recognize. His D-League stats are very respectable.

Who did they cut?

dont know

Walter "Big Train" Johnson and John "Blue Moon" Odom were both righthanded pitchers, but quite different kettles of fish as it pertains to scale, if one likes to consider such things while sittin' on the dock of the bay. It's akin to comparing the '66-'67 Sixers and the '13-'14 Sixers. But that would be shortchanging the limber "Blue Moon" who made a couple of All-Star teams and was brave enough to wear Charlie Finley's flamboyant A's uniform out of the clubhouse.

Now back to those Sixers, prospects and impending greatness.

What is a noble way for a team to rebuild by acquiring a top pick in the draft?

1. Build a terrible team through front office incompetence?

2. Have the head coach bench players during crucial stretches of a game?

3. Rest the best players on the team for long stretches in the season for minor injuries?


4. Trade away veterans and rebuild with young and inexperienced players?

user-pic
Tray reply to Stan on Mar 13 at 18:12
+/-

I think some people think that #2-4 aren't noble, and #1 might be noble but it's not desirable.

Pretty much. Which is why the draft system needs to change asap to prevent the not noble but desirable situations from happening, whereas the noble but not desirable option should be fixed via the cap system.

Hmm...what the hell does noble have to do with winning...or sports? There's no nobility.

As for the whole 're figure the draft' thing...it's amazing how in one year the entire process is broken. No one has complained until this year and (once again) teams have tanked before - but oh wait - it's a 24 hour news cycle - so we always have to have something to talk about - so let's make a giant issue out of something that isn't really a big problem.

The big problems in the NBA are not the draft, or tanking...it's a distraction from the inherent inequities in the CBA the abilities of some teams to fairly have a shot at free agents versus other teams.

The NBA loves people focusing on the draft 'issues' cause they ignore the real issues.

It's like the NFL talking about the extra point - hey look - extra points are a problem - they're too easy - do you think it's a coincidence that talk started shortly after the concussion settlement pittance they agreed to was thrown out by the courts. What's that you say, concussion settlement - oh right I forgot all about that - you know - the thing that's going to ruin the NFL - EXTRA POINTS are the real problem.

The draft isn't broken (except that it's too fairly balanced and works against the worst teams in the league) - the league is broken - but sure - ignore those things cause some guy on grantland comes up with a cute 'draft wheel'

user-pic
Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 14 at 11:19
+/-

The obsession with nobility is really silly and doesn't nearly begin to justify distributing rookie talent in a really dumb way, and then monkeying with the cap to compensate so that free agent talent is distributed in an even dumber way. Think about how stupid that is. To eradicate tanking, which only a couple teams do a year (name a tanker besides us), we need a system under which players like Wiggins would frequently end up on teams like Miami or Portland, while bad teams could wait five years for a really good pick. To compensate for the absurd distribution of talent that would cause, you then want to make it impossible for a team to pay several really good vets at once, creating a world in which the 2007-10 Cavs would be the mind-numbing norm for a team with a superstar rather than the horribly run exception. And this is all needed in order to eradicate the ignoble behavior of one or two teams a season? Fortunately, the league isn't as obsessed with tanking as you or Henry Abbott are to do that to its fans.

Sports are beloved around the world because they present a unique way of competing against other people in a healthy and noble way. The competitive aspects of sports is what makes them interesting and why they are very closely correlated to entertainment. And all of the fans first and foremost want to be entertained. Wanting to compete is one of the basic human desires.

All of the above is not my opinion. It's the most basic definition of sports. The way the current system is structured goes against everything sports are about.

You think, distributing rookie talent fairly is dumb because a dumb team might not get a good rookie for a few years, i think distributing rookie talent based on losing is 10 times dumber. You want teams with multiple players that are called superstars today, i care about having the best possible competition i don't care how the talent is distributed. What i do know is that the definition of what a superstar is fully dependent on the rules.

Oh and the reason why we are talking about this now, is because someone finally put it up for discussion. I, for example, was never a fan of how the system works. But we simply never talked about it. All we talked about was how to utilize the system for the best of the franchise and here i absolutely agree that what Hinkie is doing is the right way to go.

Sports are beloved around the world because they present a unique way of competing against other people in a healthy and noble way

That's your opinion, and I don't agree with it even a little - most team sports are beloved mostly by men because they somehow find their identify (or happiness) through the performance of the teas they root for.

And many sports are not 'healthy' - football is not a healthy way to make a living

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Mar 14 at 17:29
+/-

Yeah, I see very little nobility in college sports, all the sports where players dope, football... sports is an entertainment. Sometimes a team or player plays with a lot of nobility and "class," whatever that means, and if that's your thing you can root for that team, I guess. But if you like teams that play dirty, or competitive assholes, there are a lot of teams and players that offer that too. Or if you're into narcissistic vanity projects or hero worship you can watch Kobe attempt to justify his ridiculous contract extension while thwarting his team's efforts to rebuild. Some people find that more enjoyable than seeing the Lakers earnestly trying to be a 5th seed. We can't structure a whole league's rules around some ethic of nobility and sporting play that obviously only appeals to a fraction of that league's fans, while another quite sizable fraction really enjoys the bust-to-boom cycle that characterizes today's NBA and has no ethical compunctions about it at all. In any event, whatever system you construct will create some incentives to not maximize wins. If free agency becomes a real source of top-end talent for more than five teams in the league, teams will focus all their efforts on timing their cap room to hit in time for certain players' free agency. And sitting around waiting for free agency to hit so your team can spend all the cap room it's cleared will be a lot less fun than the rebuilding and rejuvenative process that some people pejoratively refer to as tanking.

In regards to the arguments over the new ownership, I have a few thoughts.

I have a hard time agreeing with anyone who thinks that they have the intention to just milk this asset by putting a shitty product on the floor. They come from private equity in which the returns of the funds, and most of the investments, are shaped in a J-curve. You invest capital into these businesses early on, strip them of the fat, and bring them back as leaner, more efficient, businesses. Similar to the largely invaluable management consulting industry, I think their largest value is just having no "tie" or "loyalty" to legacy assets and can execute with a much more clear thought process.

I think we have several instances of them "putting capital" into the business with the signing of Hinkie, the purchase of the D-League team, and the eventual re-do of the practice facility. I remember when the ownership group hired Hinkie and I heard from one minority owner that they felt like this was really their first step in putting their own stamp on the franchise. Which leads me to believe they still felt some loyalty to Collins there (contradicting my initial thesis) but really were hoping for a total overhaul.

The argument in pushing fans away from the franchise just doesn't do it for me. Most of us are more than just 76ers fans, although they may be our favorite team of the crew. But lets look at the Phillies. Lets look at the stretch post 93 until they became relevant again with homegrown talent late last decade. The team was awful for many years in there and naturally had no fan base or attendance numbers. They came back and we had an unbelievable run and an unbelievable crowd to support that run. Now lets watch when the the team is 30-50 in the middle of the season with the patchwork that Amaro has done. Let's just say that, despite TRYING to field a competent team and giving us some really great years, there are not going to be fans in the stands. I don't think we should make Philly fans out to be something that they aren't. When these franchises win, the crowd is there. When they lose, the crowd is not there. The sixers might have a lower floor relative to the others, but its the generally the same story.

None of this is going to prove a point that this will all work out and these owners will look like geniuses exploiting another market. Naturally there is luck involved as with anything in life. But I simply cannot take the moves to date and come away thinking these guys bought this thing to milk it dry and collecting some royalties. Sport franchises are generally toys and I think fairly poor investments for rich big wigs. I think these guys use it as a little bit of both.

Lorenzo Brown getting released to make room for DJO

This list sums up the entire MCW discussion:

http://bkref.com/tiny/30nsk

It is a list of players with 16/5r/6a season sorted by WS/48. There have been less than 50 players (130 single seasons) that qualify, and the list is incredibly impressive... but MCW far and away has the lowest WS/48 on the list (0.011) and it is not even close. All but 15 of the 130 seasons had WS/48 at least 10X higher than MCW.

So we are left trying to interpret a rookie season that is unique in its combination of productivity and inefficiency. Throw into the equation terrible teammates and no prior track record and it is really difficult to make heads or tails of it.

The one disturbing pattern I see in the numbers is that players who had WS/48 under 0.10 tended to not have many other similarly productive (counting stats) seasons. The only exceptions where Jason Kidd and Alvin Williams, who's effeciency improved through their career. But both of them, at their worse, had WS/48 7X better than MCW this season.

user-pic
Tray reply to tk76 on Mar 14 at 10:25
+/-

You can't really put up decent win shares on a team that never wins, can you? Hawes led the team this year with. 075; he also left before things got really bad. That said, maybe you should be searching by rebound and assist percentages, given our frenetic pace. On a normal team his numbers would be lower.

I agree that win shares are a poor measure that is really flawed. Bt suffice to say, MCW's season has been unusual in its combination of productivity (counting stats) and inefficiency. But that typically is the case when you see a player putting up good numbers for a terrible team. Ricky Davis comes to mind.

My point is it is hard to project what MCW will become because it is a challenge to find comparables. Who else put up big but inefficient counting stats as an older rookie for a bad team? He will either get more efficient, less productive... or some combination of both.

And that's why scouting and psychological assessments are still very valuable. That's why watching how someone plays, what kind of skills he has and what his size and athleticism are things that matter.

user-pic
Tray reply to tk76 on Mar 14 at 17:10
+/-

Uh.... off the top of my head I bet Damon Stoudamire put up big inefficient counting stats as a rookie. But I was wrong because he made a lot of threes. Aren't Burke and Oladipo putting up inefficient counting stats? Kemba Walker, per 36, averaged 16/4.7/5.8 his rookie season with a WS/48 of .009. But now he's up to .092 and he's gone from horribly inefficient (.464 TS%) to passable (.509 TS%). So that's a success story of sorts. If we could get MCW's TS% to .510 and get his turnovers down, I think that's a pretty good player.

Not "entire." Just hours ago, CBS This Morning previewed snippets of Sat 8 pm program that includes MCW and overseeing helicopter mother. Furnished clips reminded me of Eric Lindros's situation, whereby apron strings remained attached. Cookie of the year's soft game and brattishness now better understood.

_____

Now we're getting somewhere. From Magic Johnson & Oscar Robertson in late Oct to Alvin Williams in mid-March. I knew level heads, in time, would prevail.

You can't really compare players with vast differences in experience, age, playing in different eras. playing different roles and playing for teams with large differences in terms of success. This list doesn't really tell me anything to be honest.

Here's a simple example of why stats like this need to be taken into the proper context (comparison of Hawes and Turner's WS/48 this year with different teams):

Hawes PHI - 0.75
Hawes CLE - 0.134
Turner PHI - 0.18
Turner CLE - 0.110

Did Turner and Hawes suddenly became much much better players mid season? Of course not. They are just on a different team with a different role and better teammates.

I do however agree that this whole MCW thing is unique and it can't be truly explained by citing past examples.

Given that MCW's productivity (counting stats) put him in elite company and his efficiency stats are amongst the worst ever for a productive player...

How do you project his productivity and efficiency to change over his career? The most logical answer would be that he is asked to carry a smaller load, and becomes both less productive but more efficient. But since he is a PG, I expect his assist numbers will only go up with better teammates. I think his rebound numbers will stay the same. I would be happy to see him as a 12/5.5/8 player with better shooting efficiency on a good team. And IMO this is the most likely outcome assuming he works on his game.

user-pic
ryano reply to tk76 on Mar 14 at 12:23
+/-
user-pic
ryano reply to ryano on Mar 14 at 12:24
+/-

That shrinks the list to players doing at age 23 or younger. Impressive company. Shrink that to rookie years and I'm not sure who's left.

user-pic
ryano reply to ryano on Mar 14 at 12:25
+/-

The point is that his productivity (counting stats) are amazing but his efficiency is equally historically bad.

Here is an interesting list:
http://bkref.com/tiny/Hb1s3

It looks at players who turned the ball over as much as MCW, and had asst/g numbers in the 5-7 range. The good players in this list are great scorers like AI, Harden and Arenas. But even considering most of these scorers had questionable efficiency, MCW ranks second to last on this list for both eFG% and TS%. he is also near the bottom of the list in scoring.

Another list:
http://bkref.com/tiny/9UoWe

Players scoring 15+ ppg with TS% and eFG% bad like MCW. It is a short list, but with some interesting names (AI and and old MJ.)

Please avoid verb form misuse. It's a quite nettlesome prescription, ol' chap. It can make readers break into hives. :)

Different players improve at different rates and at different ages. It's really impossible to tell how much MCW will improve on his current level, if at all, beyond the part of the improvement that is entirely based on experience. And lets face it a lot will depend on how much he will improve his shooting ability and getting stronger.

If i were to guess i'd say he tops out as top 3 defensive PG and an average starting offensive PG. As for counting numbers i'd say something like: 13p/5r/9a/2s/0.4b at 43% FG% and 33% 3P% with 4-5 trips to the FT line per game.

Yet WS/48 of "Snowflake" has gradually but dependably DROPPED from Nov sky of .09 to current treacherous condition of .011. The decline hardly started at trade deadline. Quality of play IS a key factor. Teammate play is coordinate and convenient, but it's not a full excuse for slipping efficiency. The kid has been wildly hyped.

Optimistic note: a mediocre game tonight will IMPROVE his WS/48 number.

"The Villain" is coming.

ET's ORTg has shot up from 97 to 104 since joining the Pacers. Partly this is small sample size (3pt% over 50% with the Pacers), but it also is a reflection of how flawed WS is when you are looking a role player on a great team. All of the role players on the top teams have hugely inflated WS- both offensive and defensive.

Case in point, Birdman has 2.8 offensive win shares this year, hardly any more than Demarcus Cousins, more than Pau Gasol and Vucevic.

1. Looking at just one side of the floor is ridiculous.

2. Looking at just offensive win shares for Turner and Hawes this year paint the same exact picture.

Bynum will not play for the Pacers against the Sixers as they've decided not to play him on a back to back during his first week. Ian Mahinmi may not either. If he doesn't, Lavoy will be the backup center.

Turner will play, of course. We can guess that his crowd reception upon entering the game will be less enthusiastic than Iverson's upon his first return to Philly.

1. Projections/models are useful when making a decision, when you need "expected value"(whether to trade the player for a certain package, what kind of a contract he deserves etc.). What you can't do with them, is say with absolute certainty how good/bad a player will be in his prime.

2. MCW's defensive ability has very little to do with "steals per game".

First you say, "there is literally one person commenting who has an actual understanding of how to quantify/chart defense "

Then you claim that there is no evidence to suggest that MCW is a good defender.

So based on this, I'm assuming that you're claiming to be the one commenter who has an actual understanding of how to quantify defense.

Amusing.

Did you really think he thinks someone else knows anything? He thinks he's the smartest man who has ever seen an NBA game and everyone else is an idiot.

user-pic
Jeff reply to Xsago on Mar 14 at 14:29
+/-

Well, he does know everything. Haven't you been reading his flawed arguments with excessive capitalized words that do nothing more than paint him as a psychopath? Geez.

And the way you reached that conclusion is how? The only weakness MCW has displayed defensively is the one all rookie PGs make i.e. occasional inability to fight over screens. Other than that he's been very good on the ball and reasonable off the ball.

As for the "peak year", it's usually between ages 26 and 29 depending on the player, the year he entered the league and when he reached his physical and mental peak.

Oh and he isn't just 22. He's a 22 year old rookie. He's also 6'6" with very good length for a PG. He's also fairly quick and agile. That puts him in a very small group historically as well, which pretty much means that drawing conclusions about MCW based on past examples won't get you too far.

Just wait it out and we'll see in 3-4 years.

user-pic
TwoSense reply to Xsago on Mar 15 at 0:37
+/-

"Just wait it out and we'll see in 3-4 years."

Confidently and anxiously await this moment too; not so much concerning the team as a whole, but definitely him.

Thaddeus Young has been a real pleasure to watch this season.

nice effort

lost by 7

home vs Memphis tomorrow

...was this really the only comment on the actual game?

yea

i had a fantasy baseball draft during the game

10-31 shooting for Thad is really tanktastic. Toronto's now 10 games over .500 and 31-15 since the Gay trade. I wonder what the next move for them is, or should be. If I were them I might re-sign Lowry and see if I could get a really big name for DeRozan or Jonas or Ross.

Toronto is in an interesting spot. To be honest in theory i'd try to acquire a better PF and see if Valanciunas can make the leap to a very good C, which he could realistically become in a couple of years.

My biggest worry about Toronto is actually Lowry. I'm not sure his production this year is sustainable.

Lots of talk about what the NBA should do about tanking- but what about conference inequality? The current system gives a huge advantage to the top teams in the East. They can rest their players the last month of the season, and have 1 or 2 easy playoff series. By record, Miami in the West would be fighting with Houston for a 4th seed instead of waiting to play the likes of the Nets and Raps in their first 2 playoff series.

Currently 6 of the 8 Eastern playoff teams would fail to make the playoffs in the West. And it seems like this trend has been going on for a while. How about making the bottom 4 playoff teams "wildcards" drawn by record instead of conference.

Applying this you would have 2 more teams from the West making the playoffs (Phx and Minny.) But the bigger question is whether they should change the seeding. 8 of the top 10 teams are from the West. Seeding by record would lead to travel problems, but would be much more fair.

League seeding would also lead to better series. For example, Golden State and Dallas would play as the NBA 8 and 9 seeds instead of them having to go on the road against Western #2/#3. Toronto would be the NBA 11 seed, meaning a road series against Houston or Miami instead of hosting Washington. And teams like the Heat and Pacers would have to play hard till the wire to avoid a tougher first round matchup, as opposed to their current advantage of being able to coast with a top seed in a weak conference.

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Mar 15 at 11:37
+/-

Screw it, draft T.J. Warren already. Best scorer in the country.

Find it funny that the best shooter in the country, McDermott, and Warren the best scorer, are probably the two most underrated players in this draft.

Been wavering all year on whether his type/style of game would translate and I've given up. Kid's a humble, level-headed baller. So efficient. Old school, throwback mid-range game. Willing, above average defender already. He just flat out gets it done while being the target of opposing defenses every night with not much help from any of his teammates.

If I had any issues with him, it'd be I wish he could develop a 3pt shot as a threat but as much other good as he does that's just being picky. He's one of those players where you can just overanalyze his game and try to find flaws but miss out on all the really good things he does for a team.

He'd easily be in my top 7 players in this draft. I'd pull the trigger on him over these prospects that are being labeled with this 'potential' tag. Give me a proven player like this any day of the week over these players that are projected to maybe or maybe not pan out.

In no particular order, the 7 (with an extra added in):

Parker
Wiggins
McDermott
TJ Warren
Markel Brown
Rodney Hood
Embiid/Exum

I would feel so much better about this team going forward if we were fortunate enough to end up with any two of those eight players. (while still hoping we could somehow secure a shooter amongst PJ Hairston, Nik Stauskas, and maybe Jabari Brown if we didn't end up with McDermott or Hood already)

You're like Dick Vitale. "J.J. Redick baby! He's going to be a sensational player at the next level!" Five, six years later he finally emerges as a capable role player. The reason the "best scorers" are so underrated is because the best college scorers rarely translate. Like Turner, Morrison, Luke Jackson, Quincy Douby, Marcus Thornton, Andre Emmett, May, McCants, Hansbrough, Julius Hodge, Salim Stoudamire, Acie Law, Stuckey, Maynor, Luke Babbitt... to the NBA's credit, after the failure of so many great college scorers whose games didn't obviously translate to the NBA, teams have generally stopped wasting high picks on that kind of player. McDermott has an NBA skill or two and he's welcome to come here and do his role player thing, although 10-11 seems high for him. But Warren sounds like a pretty lousy pro prospect, basically a Morrison-type player. No range, highly reliant on floaters and runners, insanely low assist rate, poor defensive rebounder, mediocre handle, mediocre athleticism, doubtful whether he can guard small forwards or play the power forward given his size and lousy rebounding. If he pans out he'll be someone's third option at best, but becoming a role player will be a tough transition because he doesn't pass at all.

On a related note, I kind of doubt that there will be anyone that great at 10-11; we might want to trade that pick for a couple picks in the 20s, if it's possible. Maybe take Hairston and Grant, Hairston and McDaniels... even Hairston and Lavine, as redundant as that would be if both worked out.

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to Tray on Mar 15 at 14:07
+/-

And with everything you just said is exactly why I said this:

"He's one of those players where you can just overanalyze his game and try to find flaws but miss out on all the really good things he does for a team."

Totally disagree on the handle and athleticism and rebounding. His handle is very good, even in traffic. Great control along with the preferred low dribble considering his height of 6'8".

His athleticism isn't of the wow-you variety, but it's far from mediocre. It's above average to my eye. He's deceptive in this regard. Kid lost 20-some pounds in the offseason and is one of the best conditioned players in college. Never gets tired or never shows signs of it while playing 35 minutes a game.

He's 7th in the league in overall rebounding. Leading the league in offensive rebounding for the regular season (overtaken yesterday by Zanna). He isn't asked to stay back on defense and board, he's most of the time leaking out in transtion because he's such a poised and strong finisher.

Also disagree on the passing. He's a willing and able passer, maybe not to set other guys up per se but he's not selfish. Hell, why would a guy like that want or need to pass when he's as efficient as he is scoring? You want him shooting the ball, not passing to less efficient teammates. At least that's what Gottfried is asking and wants of him.

He shot 62% last year in 27 mins. Shooting 52% this year while taking a whopping 18 shots a game. Increased his free throw percentage from 54% last year to 72% this year on just over 4 more attempts per game. Scoring this year has doubled in only 8 more minutes a game compared to last season. Opponents gameplan strictly for him every night, and he still shines and finds ways to score. All while being a team player, not a gunner.

As for his position, I see him as a much better defender, currently and of 3's on the next level, than Jabari Parker. He's a true SF, he'll never be a 4 or if he is he's miscast badly. His first step is potent. Plus, he's so slithery while getting all those floaters and runners off.

It's pretty damn rare for a "wing" to not only lead their league in scoring, but also be the most efficient doing it. This is usually done by big men (Duncan and Horace Grant are the only other two ACC players in history to accomplish this.

------

I'm not sure what I may get more laughs out of; your comment preseason that it was "ridiculous" that I suggested Rodney Hood was worthy of a top 5 pick when you said he was ranked in the 60's (darn close to top 5 at this point), or, that T.J. Warren is a Morrison-type player. Shame on you.

Don't take kindly to your Vitale insult either.

Personally, i'd stay away from wing players who can't shoot from 3. Especially if they are not otherworldly athletes and absolutely elite defenders.

I'm not saying Warren won't develop into a good player, i just think there are a lot of prospects that either have more upside or are far safer (their skills are more likely to translate). I guess you can make a case for him in the mid to late first round, but i wouldn't go much higher than that. Not a lottery prospect IMO.

I thought someone told me that PG's beyond a certain age alway regress defensively and never improve on offense?

Sorry, I did not think you would take a lighthearted remark so so defensively. I figured someone who constantly derided others might have a thicker skin, but I guess not.

Feel free to carry on with your monologue, as Brian is too busy to block every changed IP address. Or feel free to contribute in decent conversation, it would be interesting to see if you are capable.

Just stop responding to the troll. His comments are getting deleted anyway, so it's going to look like you're talking to yourselves.

******MEMPHIS GAME*******

and we are off

thad on gasol to start

thad 3

bad d by anderson leads to a Conley layup

bad mcw shot goes in

zbo backs thad down in the post

mcw to the line

split them

mcw floater

thad puts back his miss

Conley to the line

made both

thad 3

i hope they keep fronting the post even when noel comes back

varnado putback

thad bucket

ed davis putback slam

down 22-21 end of the 1st

wroten to the line

split them

mullens block

elliot williams turnover

11-2 to Memphis run, down 9

timeout sixers

sims putback

mcw to thad

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Mar 15 at 20:26
+/-

I long for when they're worth blogging again.

sims to mcw

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Mar 15 at 20:29
+/-

That's part of my dilemma too, it's so hard to get behind and root for these guys. Which ones are even gonna be around?

Should have said, "even worth being around".

mcw steal and finish, 8-0 run

prince can still dunk

sims splits the ft

mcw floater

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Mar 15 at 20:32
+/-

I feel bad for Marc and Malik too. How would you like to be the crew during a 20 game losing streak?

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Mar 15 at 20:36
+/-

Byron fuckin Mullens.

down 45-36 at the half

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Mar 15 at 20:37
+/-

Held a team to 45 at the half. Wow amazing. Problem with that is, they could only muster up 36. heh

Going to watch McDermont and Creighton tonight. He has been rising on my board without me even watching him...which is not a great sign for my view on the draft post top 6.

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Mar 15 at 20:46
+/-

It'd be sweet if they drafted McDermott for their much rumored stretch forward they supposedly like. McDermott and Noel in the frontcourt? Yeah I could see that.

thad 3

stop posting sims up on gasol

mcw 3 with the shot clock winding down

mcw bucket in the paint

thad to anderson

james johnson is why its worth taking a look at every d-leaguer possible when you are a bad team

DJO in

wroten bucket

DJO takes a charge

down 74-57 end of the 3rd

I could see Tyler Harris (Tobias's brother) being a Hinkie type guy. Good length and defensive instinct. Seems like a natural to try and develop as 3 and D. Doesn't look like he gets much attention....only a sophomore.

MCW seems to be doing things with slightly better efficiency in past week or so.

user-pic
Da Jruth reply to Rusty on Mar 15 at 22:43
+/-

Tyler Harris is an absolute scrub, without question. Plus he's not a sophomore, he transferred.

user-pic
Rusty reply to Da Jruth on Mar 16 at 11:32
+/-

Probably a sign that I am watching too many scrubs on our team, but I honestly thought he had the right build for a role player in the league.

user-pic
Rusty reply to Da Jruth on Mar 16 at 12:00
+/-

Probably a sign that I am watching too many scrubs on our team, but I honestly thought he had the right build for a role player in the league.

williams 3

wroten went right!

anderson hurt

looks like his thigh/knee

mcw and 1

made the ft

mcw putback

quad contusion for anderson

davies is back

DJO to the line

missed both

lost by 26

at Indiana on monday

I'm starting to feel pretty good about our chances of catching Milwaukee. Their losses have been a lot closer since they traded Neal and Ridnour for Sessions and Adrien. Adrien's a very nice role player and he gives them a lift in his minutes. Ilyasova has been picking up his game too. Sooner or later they're likely to win a couple games. And we've been so bad that we have a pretty decent shot at losing out.

They have a decent shot at tying them. But the games in 16 seems to be a bit of a reach.

user-pic
Tray reply to tk76 on Mar 16 at 13:37
+/-

They have won 3 of their last 11 and 4 of their last 14; admittedly the wins were against us, the Magic twice, and the Jazz. I'd say these games are winnable: home against Charlotte, Lakers, Cavs, Hawks (last game of season), road games against Kings and Pistons. (Second to last game of the season is a road game against the Raptors; it's possible Toronto will have its seed locked up by then and rest players.) Perhaps they're only the favorite in the Lakers game, but the others should be pretty close, so odds are they'll win two, maybe three.

Not sure why I am asking this, this I am not the least bit a fan of Camelo...

But if Hinkie wanted to go the straight FA route, signing Melo this summer and Love in 2015, how successful would this roster be:

MCW/Wroten
Wiggins
Melo
Love/Thad(?)
Noel

Add in a solid contributor with the Pelican's pick, and the team fits together really well. You can mix and match big or small lineups. You have great shooting, driving, iso scoring, rebounding, athleticism and defense. You also should have good chemistry, with a lot of intense players and guys not likely to be badly influenced by Melo.

It seems like this would be the most feasible way to contend in 2 years, since you don't have to give up any assets. I would even be on board if the FA situation of Love and Melo were reversed. If they could get Love on the roster first, then I'd overpay for a 31 Melo if it put you over the top- but I would not sign Melo before the other pieces were in place.

user-pic
Stan reply to tk76 on Mar 16 at 17:50
+/-

They could trade for Kevin Love. Maybe for something like the Pelicans pick, MCW, and a conditional future 1st round pick. Then they could convince Kyle Lowry and Melo to sign.

So it would be

Lowry- $8 mill
[1st round pick]- $5 mill
Melo- $20 mill
Love- $16 mill
Noel- $3 mill

Bench:
Tony Wroten
James Anderson
Hollis Thompson
2nd round picks

Thad would have to be used to bring in a 1st round pick and some bench players.

Could that team win a title? Only if Noel pans out and they can draft Wiggins. Wiggins would have to be an elite defender and a capable shooter. If they draft anyone else that team won't make it past the conference finals.

Anyway I'm bored. I don't like Melo, I don't think he's a good fit with Kevin Love, and I wouldn't risk trading for Love or bank on signing Melo.

My predictions:

Melo- Chicago
Love/Westbrook- LA
Durant- Brooklyn

I guess that could work. But my train of thought was that the team probably cannot afford to trade for Love. They need to keep their few assets. Had they been able to get some 1sts for Hawes and ET instead of 2nds then they would have the extra assets for a trade.

I'd rather not target Melo, but he is the only FA star level player I could imagine, and I actually think he would work well with a Love/Noel frontcourt, since they will get some O-board offense off of his isolation shots.

Don't think Melo and Love would work well together, but it would be worth a shot probably. I wouldn't be concerned with giving Melo a long contract because his game isn't about athleticism. Wouldn't really want him, but also don't think there's a ton of risk involved in signing him, his contract will be movable as long as he can score. I really wish people would stop listing Wroten when they're cooking up future rotations, though. If this team ever becomes legit, you can get a guy off the street to take Wroten's place who will do less damage.

mcw milestone night: broke 900 pts and 200 turnovers (on 1st of 6) in his 54th game. scored 23 and "achieved" a 100 0Rtg, 108 DRtg. another 26 seasons and he'll be closing in on oscar robertson on the scoring list.

the rest of the team has room for improvement too. :)

By the way, this is a really solid series of posts by a Hawks blogger about draft prospects; most of the guys he talks about are people we might consider at the Pelicans pick (or, in my preferred scenario, a couple picks in the 20s we get for our Pelicans pick). He doesn't like McDermott at all, is lukewarm on Hood, and really loves my new favorite draft prospect, K.J. McDaniels.

http://www.sbnation.com/users/RedRev/blog

James Nunnally signed to a 10 day

Maynor waived

Wouldn't it be hilarious if Philly goes on a 36 game losing streak and still not end up with the worst record? Being that terrible only to have the payoff of getting the 5th pick in the draft would be so terrible that all you could do is laugh.

anthony davis is something else

40 points 21 rebound game(in overtime) 2nd youngest with a 40-20 game

Only 17 other times since 85 (as far back as B-R tracks.) 12-12 on FT's and Barkley the only player to put up that line on fewer shots.

http://bkref.com/tiny/ICsIm

BTW, how did Gminski make that list?

no james anderson tonight

Sounds like Irving is out for the season. That should make Milwaukee the favorite in their home game against Cleveland, in addition to their home game against the Lakers.

But 1 less team that will catch the Pelicans.

user-pic
Tray reply to tk76 on Mar 17 at 18:56
+/-

All the more reason for my trade-down plan.

just got home

looks like im missing a good one

down 3 2:39 left

mcw misses open

hill hits a 3

timeout sixers

yo go Indiana, get fired up and celebrate when you beat the worst team in the league

If we lose out and still don't end up with the worst record, I might cry.

nice effort

lost by 9

bulls on Wednesday

Nice game from Hollis.

MCW hot and cold.

Thad being Thad.

End the pain!

yea nice game from hollis

i might be a little high on him but i think they should keep him

I am with you. Maybe we are stretching but he has some tools of a role player. If he can shoot, improves aggressiveness and Brown gets him open...valuable.

That was a pretty depressing loss. I've been pretty apathetic for the majority of the season and I was really frustrated after this loss. I could only imagine what MCW and Thad are feeling. 5 more games till they tie the biggest losing streak in NBA history. Their next 5 games are:

Chicago
NY Knicks
Chicago
San Antonio
Houston

There's no value at 11 if the top ten teams draft sensibly. Much more value in two picks in the late first round. I mean, the players projected in the 20s are about 80% as good as the McDermott/Hood types, if not better. So two such players > one McDermott. Anyway, you're an idiot, but whatever.

did anyone else see the CBS program about the NBA summer league Friday night? MCW's mom is his manager and she is fucking CRAZY!

user-pic
Stan reply to Mike on Mar 18 at 14:06
+/-

Lol-

"Mandy Carter-Zegarowski, who is both MCW's mother and manager, admits she's been surprised by her son's incredible start.

"During the summer league, preseason, even after that great start over Miami, I never expected or imagined that he was going to have such a successful year," said the 42-year-old mother of four. "

"Carter-Zegarowski has a goal in mind for Carter-Williams' financials, as well. Earlier this season, the rookie star's mother made headlines when she announced that Carter-Williams can't touch any of the $4.5 million he's guaranteed over the next two years. He lives on his endorsement deals while his Sixers salary is being deposited into a trust that he won't be able to access for three years."

user-pic
Mike reply to Stan on Mar 19 at 7:03
+/-

that's actually pretty smart. she's still nuts though

mcw, final 7 minutes: 1-5 fg, 2 turnovers, blown d assignment (sagged/gambled, left hill open for corner 3)... instructive object lesson in headless basketball. "hyphen" (& team) deleted for 21st consecutive time.

Together We Set New Standards In Futility

I tend not to blame the teams few decent players for their overall futility. Much like Iggy took all the heat for the team only being average when the issue was he was miscast, MCW takes heat for the team being brutal. This team has 2 players on it who could get even rotational minutes on a good NBA team. They have only 3 players who have better than a 50/50 chance at getting better than a 10 day contract on a decent team.

If MCW is to develop into a good player, it will not be in his current role of constantly being one of the only legit NBA players on the floor for his team. We will know a lot more after the next 2 season assuming they put some NBA talent on the floor.

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Mar 18 at 12:22
+/-

Sorry for the grammar typo- still cannot edit posts here.

Anyhow, watching the game I was impressed with the teams effort and overall play. They were clearly over-matched from a talent and experience standpoint, but kept it close and played well as a team. Good games from MCW, Thad, Simms and Thompson. It seems like when they get a decent contribution and half decent shooting from players other than MCW and Thad they are competitive.

Portland plays Milwaukee without Aldridge tonight, and Milwaukee's taken a seven-point lead early. An upset here would be huge; Milwaukee's down to about only five winnable games left in the season.

Isn't funny how the Sixers built a team specifically to lose, are on a 21 game losing streak, flirting with the largest losing streak in professional sports history, and still don't have the worst record in the NBA?

Could you imagine having a 36 game losing streak in the record books only to end up with Julius Randle? A 36 game losing streak would surpass the current record by 10 games. And like the 73' Sixers it would be a stain on the record books that goes unbroken.

I'm all about maximizing the chances of getting the top pick but I wish Hinkie hadn't made it this blatant.

user-pic
Tray reply to Stan on Mar 19 at 0:34
+/-

He didn't build it to lose well enough. The people clamoring to trade Hawes and Turner sooner were right.

Milwaukee heads to overtime against Portland. Bucks point guards (Knight and Sessions) split no less than four pairs of free-throws in the last 63 seconds of regulation.

user-pic
The Six reply to Tray on Mar 19 at 0:48
+/-

This bucks team...good god the game was gift-wrapped. Fucking Sixers won every one of these type of games earlier in the season. Hawes crazy 3pter in the corner, Evan Turner with his garbage...unbelievable. And that 4-game west coast trip was absurd.

user-pic
The Six on Mar 19 at 0:29
+/-

Bucks up 12 secs left.

user-pic
The Six reply to The Six on Mar 19 at 0:30
+/-

That is bucks up...12 secs left

user-pic
Tray reply to The Six on Mar 19 at 0:52
+/-

It's over. They missed four free-throws in the last minute of regulation and went to overtime. To think that any one of those misses could be what causes us to not get Wiggins. They're going to win 2-3 games, though. They're so much better than us right now. Portland took a 7-point lead with 25 seconds left and Milwaukee cut it to 3 or 4 three times.

In the other overtime game, Isaiah Thomas has a 24/11/10 triple double.

Milwaukee has 14 games left in the season. The ideal scenario would be for the Sixers to win tonight's game and lose remaining 14 games while Milwaukee wins 4 out of their next 14(28%).

user-pic
Tray reply to Stan on Mar 19 at 12:10
+/-

I'd prefer us to lose all the games to be safe. I don't think Milwaukee has 4 wins in them, but the Lakers, Cavs and Hawks (all at home, Hawks on the last day of the season) may be doable.

"believe he’d be the perfect complement to Michael Carter-Williams, Nerlens Noel, and Thaddeus Young."


I wonder if Thad is in their long term plans. My guess is that if they can get a mid first round pick in this year's draft for him, they'll trade him.

The bottom 5 teams have lost a combined 42 consecutive games.

EV- Estimated Value?

You have to look at the long term. After this season Thad has two more seasons with the final season being a player option. My guess is that he opts out. I'll take 4 years of Willey Cauley Stein, Motrezl Harrell, or Zach Lavine over 1 year of Thad.

user-pic
Tray reply to Stan on Mar 19 at 14:15
+/-

Nope, Thad is better than ANYONE in the draft going by Toll's proprietary EV metric.

I wouldn't to be honest. Trading Thad doesn't really make sense, as they'll never get proper value and they don't need the additional cap space in free agency, if they trade him for picks who are unlikely to produce a better player (not top 10 picks).

I can see a reasonable Thad trade if you are both convinced he won't resign, and his trae allows you to move up to draft a potential star as opposed to a role player. It would depend on whether you were right in your player projection, but it could work out to be a great vale proposition.

depending on how you project various prospects, say Thad + #11 for #6 and a future top 10 protected #1 could result in a windfall.

Yeah, i can see that happening, but that's not an easy trade to pull off.

user-pic
Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 19 at 15:51
+/-

The player would possibly be worse but we get to hold onto them for quite a bit longer than we keep Thad. And the team isn't going anywhere in two years. So if he's likely to walk, why wouldn't we move him for even 60 cents on the dollar? I'm very interested in getting a third first-rounder; I like a lot of players in the 15-25 range.

I get all that i just have 2 issues with the reasoning:

1. Who says Thad will walk? It was obvious with Turner and Hawes as the team was never going to resign them as they don't fit at all. But Thad is a good fit and i think the team would have interest to keep him long term in the right situation.

2. I think all that talk about the "control" and "affordability" of rookie contracts have gone overboard a little bit. Teams don't win titles with players on rookie contracts. They might have some older rookies as role players, but that's it. Drafting in the mid to late first round is a major unknown. A huge number of those guys don't even get their third years picked up. Why give up a good known commodity for a major risk, whose expected value is a lesser player. The only way that makes sense is if you need the cap space. But i think the chance the Sixers will need that cap space this summer is extremely low.

user-pic
Tray reply to Xsago on Mar 19 at 16:37
+/-

Teams don't usually win titles or contend with major pieces on their rookie contracts, I guess (what contract is Griffin on, or Lillard), but teams seem to have huge advantages in re-signing rookies to their second deal, and I do think teams win or contend with big pieces on their second deal. We're not going to contend for four years anyway, so the question's more Thad four years from now vs. Jerami Grant or McDaniels or Lavine or Hairston extended at some reasonable salary. And of course, one factor in that is how much it will take to keep Thad, which might be a lot more than he's worth. I agree that it's not certain that he'll walk, especially if he likes who we draft, but maybe it's a 50/50 chance. He did, after all, reportedly make a trade request earlier this season, and he may prefer to play on a clear-cut title contender or on a team that's closer to home.

Simmons is really quite dumb. Today he announces that the Sixers, as presently constituted, would lose to any 1 or 2 seed in the NCAA tournament, plus a slew of other teams:

"Philly wouldn’t get past the Sweet 16 — this is the worst NBA team I’ve ever seen. I think every 1- and 2-seed would beat them; I think Syracuse, Duke, Louisville and Michigan State would beat them; and I think Arizona and Florida would blow them out."

Wichita State and Florida have 1-2 marginal NBA prospects each... and Wisconsin is a two seed and has about zero? Who's even on Villanova? We have the rookie of the year, a top 60 basketball player in the world in Thad, and ten other marginal NBA players/prospects, some of whom are kind of good (Sims). I guess Kansas could compete with us if Embiid was healthy. Maybe.

This is also really stupid:

"Right now, New Orleans is losing the no. 11 overall pick. That’s bad if Gary Harris becomes the steal of the lottery for Philly … and not so bad if the Sixers take Doug McBuckets and he turns into the rich man’s Matt Bonner."

It's bad for them either way. The question is what they're losing in the pick (and what they would do with it if they had it), not what we do with it. If Dell Demps is in love with McDermott and wishes he could draft him, then yeah, the team's probably lucky.

im surprised he doesnt like McDermott, im pretty sure he was a huge jimmer fan

I mean, I guess there's a more obvious place in the league for a defenseless shooting point guard than a defenseless 6'8 shooting positionless person. That said, Simmons is nothing if not a trend-follower and these days doubting wildly successful college scorers is conventional wisdom. As it should be, but my biggest problem with Simmons is that even when he's right everything he's saying is both obvious and couched in a really obnoxious way. What's the big entertainment in reading some marginally funny guy mock dumb GMs and/or Mario Chalmers?

For my own part, I think McDermott is going to be a phenomenally incompetent defender in the pros, whose scoring will be limited to threes, long twos, and the occasional runner. NBA shot-blockers would destroy everything he does around the rim. I think Fredette could be a more dynamic scorer if given the opportunity, and I look forward to the Bulls unleashing him at some point in the playoffs in a desperate search for scoring, like they did with Nate Rob. There are a lot of defensive turnstile PG's in the league and I think Sacramento hardly ever playing him says less about him than his coaches there.

no anthony davis for the pelicans tonight(he is sick) vs the raptors

wroten 3

bad shot thad but it goes in

mcw o-board, thad to mcw

nunnally for 3

down 2 end of the 1st

davies putback

nunnally in transition

offense is a mess

T on brown

mullens to the line

made both

wroten 3

varnado block

wroten to the line

split them

mcw bucket

varnado block

wroten to the line

missed both

mcw to the line

split them

varnado tipped in the miss

down 7 at the half

thad jumper

thad 3

thompson to the line

made both

mcw to wroten

mcw floater

sims lefty hook

wroten steal

nunnally finish

varnado to the line

split them

varnado struggling when boozer faces him up

mcw settles for the jumper with gibson on him and it goes in

down 6 end of the 3rd

wroten 3

mullens 3

down 2, timeout bulls

mullens from 3

great hustle from sims and mullens

sims and 1

missed the ft

thad 3

tie game

pair of 3's by the bulls

down 6, timeout sixers

wroten to thad

wroten 3

mullens heavily contested 3 goes in

gibson dunk

mullens 3 changed to a 2

down 7 now

sill down 6 not 7

user-pic
eddies' heady's on Mar 19 at 21:15
+/-

Why are there so many people there tonight? Is it a promotion night or something?

The building wouldn't even be this full when we were making those playoff stretch runs with Iguodala and crew some nights. Weird, with a long losing streak like this.

i was there last night and had the same question. i realized as the game went on there were a lot of Bulls fans. just because of Jordan that team will always have fans in every city i think

mullens dunk!

down 4

also if anyone cant tell, i really want them to win one soon

I am with you.

if they play like they played vs the pacers and tonight it will happen

butler hits the fts, down 6

time out sixers

Drawing up the corner 3?

not a fan of drawing up an eilliot williams 3, he missed

hinrich to the line

missed both

mcw travel

another great effort

lost by 8

knicks on friday

So when I caught the end of the game on NBATV, Isiah Thomas and Wilkins started talking about their longest losing streaks in the league, and both suggested that their teams were trying to tank at the time. Thomas out-and-out said his team, and many other teams, was tanking for Grant Hill, and when Wilkins started talking about the Spurs' losing the year before they drafted Duncan (apparently Wilkins was on that team), Thomas suggested that Robinson and others didn't come back as soon as they might have to tank for Duncan, and Wilkins didn't disagree at all.

Of course, this makes me wonder why it is that people are freaking out about tanking now. There's really only one tanking team - us. And we're not doing anything wrong! If not for the draft lottery what would Hinkie even be doing differently? Would we really have played out the string with Hawes and Turner rather than cashing them in for picks? What kind of sense would that have made? Would we have signed a bunch of vets at the minimum to ensure a respectable 25-57 record? Would we have not traded a middling point guard for the top talent in the 2013 draft and a high pick in this draft? Perhaps we would have made a run in free agency at Paul Millsap or Al Jefferson, or thrown a big offer sheet at Pekovic, or re-signed Bynum to an incentives-laden one-year contract, as Brian suggested? Aside from Howard, who never would have come, Millsap, who's already 28, and Redick, who's 29, there weren't really any very good players in free agency last year. Teams that signed any of the big names in free agency (Smith, Mayo, Jennings, Jack, Kevin Martin) are all regretting it. Everything that we've done makes absolute sense to me from a team-building perspective, even if there weren't a lottery to reward us for our bad record.

No one would have cared if the Sixers had done this last year. But every few years or so there is a really good draft prospect in the upcoming year that is projected to be a top 10 player in league. A few teams try to tank the season by trading away their aging veterans or resting their best players to convenient injuries. Those tanking teams don't have much turnaround on the roster from the prior year.

The only thing that sets the Sixers apart from those teams is that they traded away their best player who was 23, on a very decent deal, mentally sound, and didn't ask for a trade. Utah traded away Deron because they knew he wouldn't re-sign and Seattle traded away Ray Allen because he was old and didn't fit with their long term plans.

The Sixers also had a huge turnaround on their roster. They only retained 5 players, 3 of which were traded at the deadline. They then filled up the roster with a decent* rookie and d-leauge players.

The people who are upset with what the Sixers have done are fans of other teams that are tanking but still have a better record than the Sixers. They conveniently forget that Jrue, who was never going to be a top 5 PG, was traded for two lottery picks. Or that the players that the Sixers had on last year's roster were pretty shitty and free agents.

sixers down 6 late, needing a 3: hyphen does his curley neal solo imitation inside the arc, then gets his shot his totally snuffed by gibson just inside the foul line, chucks dead ball over head with two hands high into air; fouls out in a blink (acquires 4 pf in last few minutes) - - headless down the stretch, once again.

el foldo garbage ball, brought to you by sam hinkie, the maker of extra-fine basketball rosters. wigglin' for wiggins and whatnot.

the intentional foul on Butler with about 35+seconds on the clock? Amid the commentator squabble about the goal tending call (was it?), that struck me as a colossal error. Why foul when you are down 4? Just get a stop and ...
Am I missing something here?
If not, I think it's a troubling error coming from your floor general. Even for a rookie.


*still a daily follower of DF, refrain from commentary unless necessary. Point is; thanks Brian and Co. for keeping it active.

Don't thank me. I'm barely around at this point.

Looked it up. Intentional foul on Butler was when there was 24 seconds left in the game. So obviously he had to foul

thanks.

After several bad months, MCW has upped his game and played pretty well the last few weeks. He and Thad certainly are not carrying them, but both are playing for the most part what would be winning basketball on a team with more than 2 NBA players.

I mentioned a few weeks ago that if you replace MCW or Thad with a superstar that the team still is losing a ton. But their supporting cast is so weak, that even replacing Thad and MCW with 2 stars probably would hardly get them to the playoffs.

james anderson back tonight

and hes starting over thompson

********KNICKS GAME************

the game hasnt started yet im already not a fan of the 2 pg lineup

mcw misses a putback(hes been crashing the boards a ton lately)

wroten to cmw

good work from sims on the o-board

made both fts

good drive by mcw

mcw 3

good drive by mcw

anderson 3, good movement after thad was doubled

up 3 end of the 1st

mullens 3

sims putback, he has 5 o-boards already

mcw with a bloody nose and no foul called

user-pic