DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

Not Much Can Go Wrong...

Worst nightmare? Sixer's get No. 1,pick and take Randle.

Best case: 1 and 10 which leads to Wiggins and Staus

Worst case to me is losing that Pelicans pick. I want assets and I see legitimate starters well into the 1st round.

Roughly a 50% chance they get a top 3 pick + #10. really hoping they come out on the right side of that coin flip.

I understand why they are sending Dr. J to represent the team- as he has represented them well. But they should have asked former Sixer Mitchell Wiggins.

I'm fine with 4. I'm not sure that I don't prefer Embiid and Exum to Wiggins and Parker. I actually think that, health risks aside, Embiid is the clear-cut best talent of the top four, and that Exum will at the least be a very good player. Wiggins and Parker could be great, but they have a lot of downside and I wouldn't lose any sleep over missing out on the chance to pick either of them. The only way I'd be unhappy with getting the fourth pick is if Embiid looks really bad when doctors examine him and he's the guy who drops to 4.

The Six on May 20 at 1:14

Tomorrow is a big day. I really want Exum or Wiggins, with Wiggins being the number one choice. Embid scares me with the back issue. Parker is definitely a four for me (both in preferred pick and NBA position coincidentally). Bottom line: Please give this team and fan base a top 2 pick plus #10.
As far as the second pick goes, I can't really argue with a shooter. I like Saric as well.

God I hope we don't get fucked tomorrow night.

The Six reply to The Six on May 20 at 1:37

By the way, my worst case scenario - and "worst case" means we still get the Pelican's pick because I'd be too depressed to think about that not happening (so #5 and #10), I believe I'm looking at Vonleh at #5 and McDermott/Stauskus/Levine/Saric at #10. I just have trouble pulling the trigger on Randle at #5. I just don't trust his future on defense or offense.

Gman 08 reply to The Six on May 20 at 1:49

Amen Amen to that!!!

deepsixersuede on May 20 at 7:29

Of course I want the top pick but disagree with the worries about getting #5. As the E.Turner draft showed, the best player out of this draft could be anybody in the top 8. Paul George and Cousins and Favors are doing pretty well.

Nobody established themselves as a clear cut favorite this year in my mind, other than Embiid but than his injury issue brings him back to the pack. It wouldn't shock me at all if Sam gets #1 and takes Exum and shocks us all.

Randle could be a dominant scorer when one man has to guard him and may allow Nerlens to just be himself and dominate all the other facets that Randle can't. They could be a match made in heaven when all is said and done.

Worst case scenario for me:

1) Lakers
2) Celtics
3) Pelicans

Rich get richer, and we stay Depressed Fans TM.

Yeah, that's by far the worst case scenario, but fortunately it has almost zero chance of happening.

Charlie H reply to Kainer on May 20 at 14:49

This nightmare scenario occurred to me this morning. The Lakers could get the first pick! It's obvious of course - they're in the lottery - it just never occurred to me for some reason. They got the first pick in '82 when they were the defending champions (pre-lottery of course, trade with Cleveland I think, just like in '79). I think that's the only time that has happened. Anybody know?

1. Wiggins
2. Embiid
3. Exum
4. Parker
5. Randle

Randle is the hardest to evaluate. You have to love his attitude and heart. He can't go right at all. Because his arms are so long, he's not undersized for a PF like some people are saying. He's an excellent athlete, though he doesn't play above the rim, which is troublesome. Very good shooter from inside 15 feet, probably can extend his range. Rebounds well, good hands. Bad fit with Thad, but good fit with Noel as someone else said. You could do worse.

Exum doesn't want to play the #2, but he'll change his mind as soon as he starts getting paid.

The knock on Wiggins is he doesn't seem interested all the time. Tim Duncan never seems interested.

The UCLA kid, Levine, is drawing raves but he's at least 3 years away from being physically capable of playing at this level.

I think they're gonna end up with #3 and #10.

If the pick is Embiid, it'll be Noel and Joel and a 3rd straight year having a new center who doesn't play all season. Call it the curse of Jeff Ruland.

Do the sixers lose the pelican pick all together if they move up. don't they get the pick next year

the pick is 1-5 protected for next year if they dont get it this year

keep this in mind tonight


I take no solace in, "That plan was so smart, it really should've worked." Signing Elton Brand when the team needed a proven scorer at the four was a good plan. Trading for a really young center to build your team around was a good plan. Drafting the NCAA player of the year was a good plan. Stefanski's process was in shedding cap space to get in position to sign Brand was more sound than anything Hinkie has done to this point. It'll only mean something if the results are there.

Stan reply to Brian on May 20 at 19:25

I see you complaining a lot about what Hinkie has done but I still haven't heard what you would have done differently. So tell me- what would you have done with this roster had you been hired last summer instead of Hinkie?

Off the top of my head I would've dumped Hawes and Turner in December instead of holding onto them for the sick packages he got at the deadline.

Overall, though, he's executed his plan pretty well. I'm just not a fan of gutting a team and giving nerd high fives to everyone as you make a mockery of the sport. Not his fault the system is stupid, but that doesn't mean I have to applaud the resulting shitty product.

I fully agree, but the outcome of the lottery will still be very disappointing. It's the process that will eventually make you a contender, but it's luck that will make it happen sooner rather than later.

I'd like to get lucky right now, and it's inevitable not to be disappointed if the sixers fall to #5.

I'd argue it's always luck that makes you a contender, no matter what your process is.

GoSixers reply to Brian on May 20 at 18:26

There are degrees of luck though. I mean Houston got lucky that

A. The Thunder were cheap - and didn't realize the salary cap was going to go up

B. That Dwight Howard was soft and couldn't handle Los Angeles (though I'm not sure that's good for them long term)

But they smartly positioned themselves to take advantage, and it's still unsure if that will work out as they hope long term.

If somehow they get Kevin Love i'll be flabbergasted though.

9 teams passed on Paul George before the Pacers drafted him and it could be argued that in a redraft today he'd go first (some people still love wall and we know brian would take demarcus cousins first) - maybe he was just the 10th name on the Indiana board or maybe they were targeting him

Luck only gets you so far though - Luck got the spurs Duncan but would they have been so good for so long without targeting and getting guys like Parker, Leonard, Ginobli?

On another entirely different note - it seems like that Levien fellow is getting run out of another organization - Derek - what up with that

only luck gets you so far. Until proven otherwise by Houston. Of course, shouldn't Houston's current situation really be written off like Larry's Piston squads because it's such an outlier?

GoSixers reply to Brian on May 20 at 19:35

Larry's Pistons are an outlier now because history shows them as one - with the new CBA and new ownerships who knows if what the rockets pulled off is still going to be an outlier. Cheap owners are showing up all over the place

Like I said, Houston isn't an outlier until they're actually a legit contender, then I guess history will tell. I certainly hope the Sixers follow suit.

GoSixers reply to Brian on May 20 at 18:27


please maximize the value of your first round pick who won rookie of the year this off season


To Sam:

Karma Karma Karma Karma Karma Chameleon,
You come and go, you come and go.
Loving would be easy
If your colors were like my dream:
Red, gold and green
Red, gold and green.

Spencer Haywood at age 18 led the USA to Olympic gold in Mexico City 1968, this after having migrated north to Detroit from his native Mississippi to play his final 2 high school seasons for Will Robinson (Doug Collins' coach at Illinois State) and leading his team to a State Championship. At age 20 he was ABA Rookie of the Year AND League MVP for the Denver Rockets. He was some player when he was young, one of the very best. Peak NBA season was at age 24 with the Sonics. Career fizzled due to coke. You can read his personal account in a Deadspin 3/14/14 interview with Rob Trucks - "Why I thought About Murdering My Coach (And Why I Didn't Do It)."

Best case:
Wiggins at 1; trade Thad + 10th to Lakers for 6th and take Vonleh. SGs can be had in the 2nd round.

Tray reply to Mike on May 20 at 16:21

Yeah like who? They are second-rounders for a reason. Maybe Jordan Adams or the UVA guy will be really good, but the chances of any given second-round shooting guard prospect panning out can't be too high.

Mike reply to Tray on May 20 at 16:48

Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting SG is some kind of slam dunk in the 2nd round. I was just tossing out a best case scenario, i.e. I really want Vonleh as a stretch 4 without having to take him as our 1st pick. As for 2nd round SGs, there's also Wilcox and Jabari Brown. And that's also something that could be addressed in free agency in the next couple years.

ABOUT INCREASING ORGANIZATIONAL WORTH: If your ironing technique is exceptional but you wear wrinkled clothes in public, nobody on Market Street notices or cares about in-home cleverness. Philly's a "git'r dun" place; spaghetti sauce is all over our t-shirts. Come out of your bunker and bring it home, Hinkie. By the way, what did you think of this past season? Cat got your tongue?

Someone pleas post updates here. I'm on the train and I'd rather get the bad news from you guys than ESPN.


Is the drawing at halftime?

Stan reply to Brian on May 20 at 19:40

It's supposed to be right before the Pacers/Heat game.

GoSixers reply to Brian on May 20 at 19:40

Everything I've seen says that it's at 8 (your time) and the game has an 8:30 start time

Makes sense. I'll still be on this godforsaken train.

GoSixers reply to Brian on May 20 at 19:51

Remember, in New York they get VERY touchy when people are loud on public transportation - please don't tasered if it doesn't go your way

starting soon

they introducing the people representing each team

14 PHX
13 MIN
12 ORL(via new york)
11 DEN
10 PHI(via NOP)
9 hornets
5 utah


that hornets pick is from the pistons who fell from the cavs rising

MIL, CLE, sixers still alive

3 sixers
2 bucks
1 cavs

We needed 1 or 2 pick smh

GoSixers reply to marcus on May 20 at 20:42

Except that the cavs might take Embiid - which bad backs and big men always make me worry

GoSixers on May 20 at 20:40

I'm utterly flabbergasted, literally...I screamed in the car on the way home when they said "Cleveland moved up" - i was cursing as I waited for my tri tip burrito when the app told me Cleveland won the lottery


Now I believe in a fixed lottery - in an attempt to convince Lebron James to go back to Cleveland this off season they give them the #1 pick again.

Imagine if Cleveland hadn't ROYALLY screwed the pooch last summer.

I'm satisfied.

1. We got a top 3 pick. I was hoping for top 4. This has saved me from reading through countless debates about whether Julius Randle has what it takes to be franchise player.

2. Boston stayed out of the top 3.

3. We kept the New Orleans pick.

But I am kind of bummed out that Cleveland got the #1 overall pick. I would have preferred it going to Utah, Sacramento or Milwaukee.

1. Are there people who think that about Randle? I haven't' read much about it after his year in Kentucky...

2. Right, I forgot that, and the Lakers slid down one.

3. Has a team that was a 'double digit' lottery every jumped into the top 3 in the 14 team lottery - I think 9 is the highest (and it's happened multiple times)

I would have preferred that every pick before the sixers go to the western conference, but seriously, being forced to live in Milwaukee or Sacramento or Utah is probably just as bad as living in Cleveland

Stan reply to GoSixers on May 20 at 21:20

Well maybe not a superstar but there would be plenty of articles and comments about how his wingspan doesn't matter and how he is going to succeed once he develops his jump shooting and basketball IQ. I'm not interested in reading about that at all (unless the Sixers can jump up from #10 to get him)

Fuck Cleveland, but at least they'll ferret out the bust of the top three

I was just thinking 'how can they screw this up'.

With the #1 pick, the cleveland caveliers select Julian Randle out of Kentucky

If Lebron goes back to Cleveland because of this - Adam Silver is dead to me

IasIrulla on May 20 at 20:55

Probably will end up with Parker

Not too bad really...his defensive shortcomings at the 4 can hopefully be cleaned up by Noel playing center in a small-ball lineup, a good fit with the current roster at hand

I still feel like Parker is 20 pounds overweight, and with Brett Brown being the FITNESS FREAK as we know him to be, I can see him running him till he's in great shape.

Scott Howard Cooper is reporting that the Kings want a vet for their lottery pick.

Thad's a veteran.

Sigh - Ford had 'source' who tells him Cleveland will not Cleveland the pick and is projected to take Wiggins

IasIrulla reply to GoSixers on May 20 at 21:09

Woner how Winggins will deal with the LeBron comparisons?

He'll essentially play the same position on the wing, has similar athleticism, but none of the finishing/passing ability that LeBron had but clearly isn't the finished product that LeBron was out of high school

Lebron is also built like a brick outhouse - there's no comparison between Wiggins and Lebron

Just think if Cleveland hadn't utterly blew last years pick.

Scott from VT on May 20 at 21:26

Quick name the NBA city closest to Toronto in the NBA lottery... Hate Cleveland more and more now

I guess it's a little poetic justice for SVG after he bashed Hinkie and Sixers for tanking? Let's see him coach a successful team with a top 3 pick.


, no team with the No. 1 overall pick has won the NBA title since 1998.

Oh yeah, in case you're wondering, the cavs odds of winning the 3 lotteries they won, combined is .085%, or 85 in 10,000

sixer fan for life reply to GoSixers on May 20 at 22:12

Spurs won it with Duncan as recently as 4 or 5 years ago.but overall getting the 1 has not led to great results since the 90s.

Charlie H reply to GoSixers on May 20 at 22:42

LA Lakers (3), San Antonio (4), Miami (3) all won with the # 1 pick since '98. That's 10 out of 15 if you start with '98 - '99 season. S.A. had 2 #1 overall picks in '99.

Not sure what that statement means - having the #1 pick on the team that picked him? Or any overall #1 pick? Either way, it's not true.

Neither the Lakers nor the Heat made the #1 pick

Duncan was picked #1 in 1997

I was quoting someone else's writing (538.com) and I guess it wasn't as clear to everyone as it was to me.

Da Jruth on May 20 at 21:56

So Hinkie couldn't even outdo Eddie Jordan?

Well like I said, I wanted Embiid or Exum anyway.

sixer fan for life on May 20 at 22:12

Spurs won it with Duncan as recently as 4 or 5 years ago.but overall getting the 1 has not led to great results since the 90s.

OK....I can live with this. Give me Exum and I'll be very happy.

Charlie H on May 20 at 22:58

Top 3 was crucial. The only guy who's certain to be picked 1 or 2 is Wiggins.

I can't even be pissed that Cleveland got the first pick for the 3rd time in four years. They're a mess.

Wiggins will go 1 or 2. Milwaukee will take him or Embiid. Sixers will take Exum. If Parker and Wiggins are the first 2 picked, the Sixers will take Embiid.

Hoping Saric is there at 10.

Celtics are gonna offer their pick and Rondo to Minnesota for Love and Rubio. Just a wild guess.

The Six reply to Charlie H on May 20 at 23:04

I hope you're right. Exum makes a lot of sense for MIL. That concerns me since I would prefer Exum over Embid or Parker.

Charlie H reply to The Six on May 21 at 8:24

Why do you prefer Exum? Nobody knows anything about him! He doesn't fit with MCW, but a team this bad shouldn't pick for need.

eddies' heady's on May 20 at 23:09

If this somewhat disappointing but entirely expected night causes us to end up selecting Jabari Parker with the third pick I'll be one happy son of a gun as a Sixers fan. Thrilled.

And the cherry on top would be to end up with Stauskas or McDermott at 10. Talk about a sweet result for the pain of last year.

eddies' heady's on May 20 at 23:12


Does that lineup lose as much as some of us (me) are preparing ourselves for next year? I'm not sure it does. Maybe I'm just longing for some optimism.

Big Will reply to eddies' heady's on May 20 at 23:30

I would be fine with Parker and Stauskus or McDermott. Your projected lineup looks decent to me if Noel is the real deal.

I don't know. Even Durant wasn't really a winning player in his rookie season, but Parker comes in with some size and strength. I think he'll be pretty decent his rookie year, and I tend to think that that team could win 30 games. Partly for that reason, but mostly because he's 4th on my draft board, I would rather have Exum or Embiid, either of whom would likely be slower to move the dial on our win-loss in their first or second year in the league. I want another top 5 pick next season.

deepsixersuede reply to Tray on May 20 at 23:44

Something that isn't mentioned much but I noticed again tonight when he was interviewed is Wiggins personality. Going to Cleveland to replace Lebron could be the worst case scenerio for him.

Parker seems more ready to handle the "franchise player" mantle than Wiggins, in my opinion and that would worry me a bit, or as much as Parker's defensive shortcomings and Exum's mystery.

last I checked Cavs still have Kyrie Irving, who despite his play-making and defensive shortcomings is a budding star. Wiggins will not have to be or may never have to be 'the man' in Cleveland. Especially since Irving is the primary and secondary ball-handler.
After that desperation trade for Deng that yielded squat, I feel like Wiggins at #1 is a no-brainer for them. But who knows.
All I can say is that there wont be that much pressure on Wiggins to affect him negatively. Now concerning the organization, coaching and player development ....

deepsixersuede reply to jkay on May 21 at 7:28

I know the days of building a team by getting your center and p.g. first are dying, Embiid, if healthy, is the best player to me.

Wiggins personality could play into it if they are equal on Clevelands' board after workouts.

Now that we have a top 3 pick I'm not sure how I feel about Parker vs. Exum vs. Embiid.

Parker and Staus/McDermott. Time to stop being allergic to actual offensive talent. I'm still in favor of trading MCW.

If you pick Parker then you better not pick McD. I don't see how you can have both on the floor at the same time defensively. Either individually works next to Thad- if he stays.

Ford has Parker/Staus for us. DraftExpress has Embiid/Gordon. Wow, if it's Embiid/Gordon they'd definitely be in the running for worst record again next year, though it would be funny to watch them try to generate any kind of offense with a lineup of MCW, Thad, Gordon, Noel and Embiid :)

deepsixersuede reply to Brian on May 21 at 7:23

I just hope Embiid has no red flags as his workouts begin. Draft him and McDermott and he and Nerlens can have Doug's back.

As Chip Kelly adjusted to a sit in the pocket quarterback, so may B.Brown as far as style of play. Target another shooter [Bogdanovich?] late first or early 2nd and see what the 2 bigs can do.

What do you think the interest would be in Cleveland and Milwaukee for Noel? Is he valuable enough to use as a trade piece to move up from the #3 spot? I'm hearing the Sixers are very high on Wiggins and may not want to pass up on him.

Not good considering he has not taken the floor after an injury. I tell you what CAN get you that #1 pick; the #10 pick. So, it probably becomes 'how much do they really want Wiggins?'. I like Wiggins a lot, but I still wouldn't do that considering the top 3 are quite interchangeable and this is a deep draft.

I would not trade away Noel or the #10 unless you get another prospect in return. The whole point of the Jrue trade was to compress the painful years of rebuilding by having 4 lottery picks in 2 years. If you turn 2 of those picks into only 1 player then your are likely extending the rebuild another year.

I wouldn't make that move either but I'm trying to weight all possible options as I'm sure Hinkie is. I don't think anyone is untradeable on be Sixers roster.

I'm not for trading up.
Hypothetically it depends on your conviction on Wiggins. If he's Paul George in 4 yrs, then I am tossing whatever I can to get him.
But drafting is always a crapshoot even for the shrewdest, so if there is no certainty, the later route is more sensible.
Personally I put a lot of faith in Cleveland's ability to pick the bust out of the 3. So I am fine with whoever we get.

If they're that high on Wiggins, it's bungling business as usual. The kid is a light heavyweight AT BEST, more likely a middleweight imo. Heredity matters. As does his recessed elimination game showing this past year. A somewhat-passive 6'8" jumpshooting kangaroo with speed... occasional ESPN Sportcenter highlight candidate, but what else?

Parker can score right away, Embiid can do a lot in the paint right away (O & D). I like adding either feature. "Make shots. Rebound. Intimidate opponent."... every coaches pre-game wishes.

Noel & Embiid... 2, 2, 2 minted rejectors in 1 team. Could it work with small ball gaining traction in league?

Exum sounds turbo-driven, but who knows? Projecting an untested 18 yr old includes bust or, at least, deferred gratification potential. And quick, aggressive, non-shooting guards are fairly abundant in supply.

Expect the unexpected. Hinkie, upsetter of apple carts; Mr. Peabody to Brown's Sherman.

Heredity? Jellybean. Stan Love. Tito.

Was Press Maravich much of a player?

Jellybean was multi-talented but loose as a goose. Outstanding player at LaSalle, long pro career in Philadelphia, Houston & Italy. Kobe gifted by dad & uncle, Chubby Cox of Villanova, University of San Francisco and Washington Bullets.

Stan played in a men's league. Uncle Mike sold millions of records. Kevin was well-prepared for the spotlight.

Tito??? Tito who? Tito Francona had a longer playing career than his son, Terry.

Press Maravich was a damn good player in Western PA. Was Pete's lifelong hero and demanding booster. Played pro ball for the Pittburgh Ironmen and Youngstown Bears. Coached for 20-plus at West Virginia Wesleyan, Davis & Elkins, Clemson, NC State, LSU, Appalachian State and Campbell.

Yes, heredity matters.

"Old man, take a look at my life, I'm a lot like you." ~ Neil Young, power guitar player

GoSixers reply to Dollar Bill on May 21 at 10:51

Bill Walton / Luke Walton
Roger Clemens / His Sons can't pitch
Dude who was the white sox gm (kenny williams?) / his son

for ever example you can come up with where it 'did' matter - there are examples where it doesn't matter

Genetics is not simple, nor is it a guarantee of anything...if genetics was simple I wouldn't have had students taking it for a third time who couldn't pull a C when I was in grad school

Sounds like you're well-versed on the topic. On the science of genetics, I defer to professors.

On the art of reading players, I consider what I know of both nature and nurture in my estimations. Wiggins, possessor of natural talent, dad a middling pro with addictive substance interruption; his demonstrated personality to date doesn't impress. Lots like him at #1. Do you?

GoSixers reply to Dollar Bill on May 21 at 11:19

Not sure who I like at #1 is relevant since your assertion was that heredity matters...heredity is genetics...and all things play a part but genetics guarantees nothing

Snotty answer. Pardon me for deviating to the player of reference. I know you like to play Hinkie. I'll avoid real questions next time.

Never asserted heredity was a guarantee on anything, only that it mattered. Any human offspring inherits genetic transmission (nature) AND environmental influence (nurture).

The predictable thing about human outcome is unpredictability ~ Curly Howard, Esq.

GoSixers reply to Dollar Bill on May 21 at 12:10

Not my intent to be snotty - intent to avoid engaging with off the point of what you said because tired of being drawn into arguments with you as you resort to name calling like you just did

What name did I call you?

The Greek reply to Dollar Bill on May 21 at 14:50

Same o'l j magoo

Welcome back, Greek. Long time, no see.

The Greek reply to Dollar Bill on May 21 at 16:05

Thanks Dollar Bill, although I have been silent I always enjoy reading your banter.

if the Sixers think Wiggins is going to be one of the best players in the league then they should have no problem trading the 3 pick plus MCW and or Noel for the 1 pick.

i look at it like this. would you trade Carmelo Anthony plus your first pick for Lebron? of course. so why wouldn't the Sixers trade MCW and or Noel?

What makes you think Wiggins is/will be a dominator like Lebron?

Were Wiggins' high school games televised nationwide?

Will Wiggins end his Slim Fast diet and grow a broad back?

Will Wiggins have 2 Rings, 4 MVPs and 23,000+ points by age 29?

Horses of different colors.

I think he would fit pretty well on this team especially if Thad is traded and they obtain a bruiser from somewhere. I agree with you that Parker probably is more ready, but I could see Parker and MCW taking 75% of the team's shots if Thad is traded.

Thad took a slew of shots this year! I wonder if Parker could keep up the pace. Was surprised where he ended up on league list. He's probably icing his arm or chillin' at a Memphis bar-b-q patio or thinking of a fitting new graceland team beyond Philadelphia as we blog.

Any genuine talent will "fit" Sixers. Come one, come all! Fire regulation capacity: 15.

Tray reply to Mike on May 21 at 14:07

Would you trade Carmelo plus the 10th pick for someone who may or may not develop into Paul George?

GoSixers reply to Mike on May 21 at 14:46

Because even at his complete utter upside - Wiggins isn't Lebron James when he was coming into the league.

Lebron James wasn't even a finished product when he entered the NBA - but he was a damn sight better than wiggins is right now.

from Simmons yesterday:

One more important note: Joel Embiid is going to be the first pick of the 2014 draft. Don’t let anyone tell you differently. These teams are full of it. We’re worried about his back, we’re hearing it’s bad … Hold on, I’m actually going to stand under the bull as he craps on me. It’s Smokescreen Central right now. And enough with the Oden parallels; unless Embiid’s pre-draft MRI reveals a career-threatening back issue (doubtful), NOBODY is passing on a franchise center who could easily be described as “The 7-Foot Serge Ibaka.” Stop it. He’s going first. We’re officially calling tonight’s lottery “Bleed for Embiid.”

GoSixers reply to Mike on May 21 at 9:53

Well, Bill Simmons insight into the actual facts has always been questionable.

Embiid refused to do medicals at the combine - people are worried about his back - why aren't they letting teams see the back issues.

History scares GM's, what's the history on big men coming into the league with multiple back issues (remember, it came out that this wasn't his first back problem this year) in the league.

Greg Oden fear can influence people, and after the disastrous pick last year I wouldn't be surprised to see Cleveland pass on a guy with the back injury risk, cause they need to hit on this pick with reasonable certainty.

Agents have way too much influence in the NBA in numerous ways, their influence on the draft is probably the worst.

I would not be so quick to dismiss Embiids back concerns. He also missed time because of back issues as a senior in high school.

GoSixers on May 21 at 12:26

If Joel Embiid refuses to undergo any sort of medical examination on his back before the draft, the sixers should pass on him...

His agent would want him to go as high as possible and he will only go #1 if his injury concerns are abated with a medical checkup. So if he does not submit to that, then it means that there is definitely something they don't want to show at all. Good idea to pass. Not for principle though.

I'd think he'll have to allow at least the top three or four teams to have their doctors check him out. If that doesn't happen, then I'd take Exum over him. There's nothing to be gained by a healthy guy not allowing teams to have their doctors check out an injury he missed time for unless you're hiding something chronic/serious.

It'd be interesting if he'd only allow the Lakers to examine him, or something like that. Or the Celtics. What if he had his heart set on playing for a certain team with a pick later in the lottery and used the medical information as a way to dissuade the other teams from selecting him. Then do you take the chance?

GoSixers reply to Brian on May 21 at 16:08

Then you have a petulant player and bitter agent who are unhappy with you and possibly spend the entire rookie deal looking for a way to get out or leave after their first contract is up.

I only know a few instances where guys were drafted somewhere they didn't want to be - and in the end they didn't play there very long if at all

Eli Manning
Kobe Bryant
John Elway
I think Tracy McGrady and Toronto right?

Different sports I know for sure, and off the top of my head, maybe people know where a guy changed their mind after they got drafted after publicly saying no?

Ricky Rubio. He changed his mind, but he hated Minny.

draft season, where 2 reporters working for the same site report conflicting info

GoSixers reply to sixerfan1220 on May 21 at 12:56

What are you referring to?

regarding the cavs

ford's sources say wiggins

jeff goodman's sources say embiid

GoSixers reply to sixerfan1220 on May 21 at 13:10

Ah gotcha

I think you gotta go with 'level of reliability' and Ford comes in last at ESPN for me

I like Wiggins but he has a few problems. First being he seems kind of passive. Not that he doesn't play hard just that I am not sure he has the alpha dog mentality. Other problems are a sub par handle for a wing and for some reason he didn't finish particularly well at the rim. One thing with Wiggins though is he figures to be elite defensively. I think there is a chance Wiggins will be there at 3. Embiid is going number 1 imo and I think Parker will wow people with his offensive game in workouts.

Some combinations I would be thrilled with: Wiggins and McDermott or Stauskas. Parker and Stauskasm Gary Harris, or Aaron Gordin. Embiid and McDermott, Stuaskas, or Harris.

Wiggins current level of aggressiveness is a good fit with his current skill level. I'd rather him be a guy who defends great, hits open shots and scores on the break initially and then grow into a more aggressive player as his handle and shot mature.

On the flip side you have guys like ET, who have the alpha dog mentality without the alpha level game. I'd be actually more concerned if Wiggins was on the opposite extreme, acting like Johnny Football and maybe scoring a bit more at KU but trying to dominate the ball.

For example, Marcus Smart has your Alpha Dog trait in spades but he can't shoot. So although he will turn out to be a good player, he could also really hurt his team by trying to do too much.

buke reply to tk76 on May 22 at 16:34

I think that is my sentiment too. I'd rather not see a major alpha dog personality drafted by this team at this point.

Wiggins has an alpha dog ego. Stated on lottery night that he should be #1 pick. Even after his one underwhelming year of college play. "Woof. Woof, woof."

Alpha dogs need not apply to Philadelphia. Gimme players. Who was the alpha dog on '83 Sixers? Erving, Malone, Toney, B. Jones or Cheeks? All five led the cause at one time or another. Because they were hard-drivin', skilled basketball players. That's what it takes.

In my opinion, there are three top players in the draft(Wiggins, Embiid, Parker). I guess the bright spot of picking third is that you don't have to do a lot of research on your own. You just pick the guy that is available.

Wiggins and Embiid probably have the highest potential since they are long and terrific athletes. Parker scares me a little. Not that good of an athlete. Could end up being like Paul Pierce(upside) or more realistically Evan Turner(fuck).

I agree with getting a shooter with that 10th pick. Stauskas is probably my favorite.

I think another interesting route to take would be to become participants in this Kevin Love sweepstakes. I fully support trading MCW right now. I think the value is as high as it will be with ROY. Point guards in the NBA are like RBs in football. Easily replaceable and you don't want that position taking up your CAP. When is the last time a team won a title with a star PG? It's usually a role player shooter like Chalmers or Derek Fisher. MCW, Thad, and a lottery protected pick for Kevin Love. I would definetly do that.

GoSixers reply to Ernst on May 21 at 16:42

I'm not sure the sixers would have enough to get Kevin Love if Minnesota ever decides to trade him, and I'm not sure the sixers meet his reported goal of 'close to contending', so you're renting him and then he leaves.

I believe good point guards are harder to find than an NFL running back, but I also think Carter-Williams should be traded if there's a good offer out there. Tony Parker is a pretty good point guard who won a title, the league is changing, and the heat have the best 'point forward' since Magic Johnson

(PS - does anyone know what the NBA concussion in game policy is - cause if Paul George really blacked out last night then someone fell down on the job letting him back in the game)

Ernst reply to GoSixers on May 21 at 16:55

With the deals that go down for these marquee stars they are usually traded for peanuts on the dollar. A ROY and a decent player in Thaddeus Young who is hitting his prime is as good of a deal as I see them getting for Love. They have no leverage and will get screwed in any deal.

And I am not a fan of building around PGs. I wouldn't even say the Spurs are built around Parker. These days they are more similar to the 2004 Pistons build where they get quality production from every starter + an amazing bench + an elite head coach. Just look at the top PGs of the past few years. The ones that truly dominated the league. Those teams rarely ever actually win. You win titles with either a dominating frontcourt or a hall of fame perimter player who is about 6"6-6'8. The truth is guys shorter than 6'6 or so don't have close to the same impact as bigger guys in the NBA. Building around a traditional 6 foot PG is a terrible idea.

GoSixers reply to Ernst on May 21 at 17:00

Well those are two different arguments - you don't like building around point guards - that's fine - and I don't think the sixers plan on building around Michael Carter Williams.

Michael Carter Williams is 6'4.75" w/o shoes (Dwayne Wade was 6'3.75" w/o shoes when he was drafted).

There are lots of ways to win an NBA title - but I'm pretty sure Nerlens Noel and this years pick play into it as much if not more than Carter-Williams.

I've seen nothing that indicates the sixers feel 'let's build around Carter-William'.

Ernst reply to GoSixers on May 21 at 17:09

Yeah i don't think they plan on building around him either. I just do not feel his impact measures up to his hype(rookie of the year). Thats just my philosophy and observation following the league. I would rather sell him to a team that thinks highly of him because I think there is someone who does. I also really hate guards that lack consistent long rage on their shot.

GoSixers reply to Ernst on May 21 at 17:19

I don't think he's over hyped because he got Rookie of the Year - I think that's more evidence of the weakness of the players in the draft this year - and Nerlens noel not playing - I expect Noel might have won it if he played

1. Minny would not want MCW given they have another quality PG who cannot shoot (Rubio.)

2. I expect Love would walk as a FA in 1 year on that Sixers team. He wants to be on a contender, so unless the plan also involves the Sixers acquiring another star player, then Love would simply be a 1 year rental. It would be Bynum all over again.

Ernst reply to tk76 on May 21 at 16:57

Yes I suppose Love not wanting to play here would be the issue. Still I think it's at least something to talk about. LeBron-Durant are the two best players in the NBA by FAR. After that its a steep drop and I would argue Love is the third best. When a guy like that is on the market it's something to consider.

Mike T reply to tk76 on May 21 at 17:03

Agree on both counts. I want nothing to do with the Love trade drama as good a player as he is. We have too many other options and I'd rather milk this draft for as much as we can get out of it including:
1. trading Thad to either move up from 10 if it means grabbing Vonleh (he'd probably have to fall to Sacramento for that to work or maybe the Lakers) - or - grabbing one of those Phoenix 1st rounders. Big fan of Thad, but he's not going to be here for the long haul, so may as well get something in return while we can

2. leveraging our cap space to grab one or both of Chicago's mid-1st rounders by absorbing Boozer's contract so they can go after Melo

Combine that with whoever we grab at #3 and #10 and owning 1/6th of the 2nd round should give Hinkie plenty of ammunition to wheel and deal the team into a solid foundation moving forward. Love is not worth the headache. The only way to trade MCW is if we grab Exum and someone blows us away with an offer. As you mention, Minny is not that trade partner. I'm coming around a bit on Exum's ability to play alongside MCW, at least for now.

GoSixers reply to Mike T on May 21 at 17:09

Not sure where the bulls stand on paying the luxury tax - but if they want Boozer off their cap to sign Carmelo Anthony (though since their coach loves defense and Carmelo loves himself I'm not sure why - they'd be better off targeting love themselves since Love supposedly wants to go there) - they can just use their amnesty on Boozer.

I've ever really been able to get a handle on what the true value of Thaddeus Young is...

I wouldn't over value those second round picks - they dont' hold a lot of cache I don't think. Be nice to see the sixers take some risks on some draft and stash guys with those picks.

Mike T reply to GoSixers on May 21 at 17:30

Oops... forgot they still had the amnesty option. Still, there could be some package negotiated if they'd rather find a trading partner instead of going the amnesty route.

I'm not really sure on Thad's value either but there will certainly be some interest out there for him. I'd really like to grab Vonleh somehow as a stretch 4 (assuming we don't use our #3 on Embiid) and I think it would be worth it to package #10 even if it only means moving up a couple spots to get him (assuming he falls far enough).

Agreed on the 2nd rounders, but they could also come in handy as trading chips.

Don't you see Parker as a stretch 4? I think that's his optimal position in the NBA.

Mike T reply to Brian on May 21 at 20:38

Good point. Yes, Parker is a 4 in the NBA. If Vonleh is in play, then Wiggins or Exum would have to be the option at #3.

As far as a stretch 4, I should have clarified that I'd also prefer one who can defend the position and rebound. You'll have a better chance of getting that from Vonleh as opposed to Parker, despite what you would gain from his offense.

I think Parker is the better and safer prospect due to his offensive skill alone. But when you get into that next tier, the more I look at Vonleh, the more convinced he'll be the cream of the PF crop after pick 4 (him, Randle, Gordon) and would fit so nicely between Noel and Wiggins or Exum.

Mike T reply to Mike T on May 21 at 20:48

And by alongside Noel and Vonleh, I'm not saying Exum is the 3 in that case. He'd have be your 2 and 3 would be the hole you'd have to fill elsewhere.

KH reply to Ernst on May 22 at 0:12

I don't think people are being fair to Parker with the Turner comparisons. He is bigger, longer, and a better athlete then Turner. He was also much better as an 18 year old then Turner was. Also, he is a much better shooter. I just don't see the comparisons.

Ernst reply to KH on May 22 at 2:48

The similarity that strikes me is that Parker isn't an elite athlete. If you look at the swingmen(2 + 3 guards) that are in that top tier they are almost always ELITE athletes. If your not an elite athlete you pretty much need to have a disgustingly good three point jump shot(from three point range). I'm not sure if Parker has that. Paul Pierce and maybe Ginobili are the only exceptions to the elite athlete swingman rule. That's why I'm not too high on him.

Also Turner was a very good player in college, player of the Year. The dilemma with Turner is he can't fill a niche on an NBA team. His skillset is dominating the ball and the problem is he isn't good enough at the NBA level to warrant that.

deepsixersuede on May 21 at 19:57

It surprises me that Sacramento is in such a hurry to move the #8 pick with the possibility of M.Smart or Gordon being there, both good fits, in my opinion.

If Wiggins is our #1 target, and Sam had interest in Bennett last year, would you guys trade Thad and #3 for Bennett and #1.

GoSixers reply to deepsixersuede on May 21 at 20:05

All these teams looking for short term gain of making the playoffs next year make bad decision (i.e. Cleveland biffing last year, imagine if they had been smart, drafted Noel, they still end up with #1 this year and they're sitting pretty - now they just have a wasted pick)

I'm not sure how confident I am in Noel. Obviously, they'd be better off with him than Bennett, but there's a pretty high risk of bust with Noel right now, both injury related and non-injury related. There's also maybe a 33% chance he's never a starter for the Sixers (maybe a bit less than that, they might try a Noel/Embiid front court before moving Noel).

If you're worried about Noel injury bustness you should also be worried about Embiid injury bustness as well.

I'm not really sure where the high risk of bust comes from - but ok.

I am worried about Embiid's injury risk. And I think there was a risk of Noel being a bust before he went a year and a half without contact, I'd say that risk is even higher now, wouldn't you? Not saying I'm writing him off, but also not getting my hopes up that he's going to be the second coming of...Ben Wallace?

Noel has more offensive game coming into the league than Ben Wallace ever had...the fact that you would think that's his upside is kind of disappointing.

I'm betting if 'necessary' he could have played this year but don't risk him until he's 100% and don't mess with your tanking.

Sure he'd probably be the 5th or 6th pick if he were in the draft this year, but then the sixers get the 3rd 6th and 10th pick in this years draft for all intents and purposes.

Numerous people have recovered from torn ACL's

Numerous big men have been felled by chronic back injuries.

I'll take the torn ACL over the guy who has missed time multiple times for back injuries (including in college) who is avoiding showing teams his medical records.

Apparently I think Wallace was more important to those Detroit teams than you did. If Noel winds up as that type of defender/rebounder I think we should all be very happy.

I'm not sure why you're trying to make this an Embiid vs. Noel fight. I'm not banging the Embiid drum, I've had him as #3 on my list pretty consistently. If they do wind up drafting him, I'd say it's much more likely Noel is moved than Embiid, though simply because Embiiid seems to have a much better offensive game now and a much higher offensive ceiling, among other advantages. I hope it's Parker or Wiggins, and I'd definitely take Exum if my doctors didn't give Embiid a clean bill of health. No matter who they take doesn't change the fact that Noel is probably going to be a guy with a decent footprint on the defensive end (hopefully without gambling too much to make big plays) and limited on offense. I mean, that's what he projected to be before he missed 18 months.

KH reply to GoSixers on May 22 at 0:18

Ben Wallace in his prime is a pretty good player though. Wallaces career numbers are a bit all over the palce but if Noel could be what Wallace was in his best seasons a 10-12 winshare player that is a pretty much a top 15-20 player in the league.

Tray reply to GoSixers on May 22 at 0:32

What offensive game? Noel reminds me of Camby more than Ben Wallace, anyway.

Physically, yes. Camby had a pretty refined jumpshot, though.

Yeah, Camby without a jump shot. Camby was a pretty poor rebounder early in his career, too. I don't think Noel will be quite as bad as Wallace on offense. Wallace was a really burly guy who was not only unskilled, but really uncoordinated on offense, very much like Reggie Evans. Noel lacks a skill set, but I think he at least has the ability to move fluidly on offense.

Tray reply to Tray on May 23 at 14:31

Actually I think that if we're lucky Noel could eventually develop into something like Tyson Chandler on offense. Then again, he could be more like Deandre Jordan.

Gordon is going to be an absolute bust at the NBA level. Not sure about Smart, but Point guards are a dime a dozen.

Anthony Bennett is terrible, probably the worst use of the #1 pick in league history. And this isn't a case of the guy massively under performing, it was a WTF pick from the beginning. That deal would depend on how much the Sixers like a specific player of the top 3(parker, wiggins, embiid).

deepsixersuede reply to Ernst on May 22 at 7:34

I disagree about Gordon and hope he is there at #10 for us. As far as p.g.'s being a dime a dozen, it is a perimeter players league now with the change in the handchecking rules and p.g. may be the most important position on the court.

The exception to this, as Gosixers mentioned yesterday is when to have a point forward type[Lebron] or a creator at the s.g. spot, Stephenson of the Pacers.

Sacramento seems to draft better than sign veterans, in my opinion. A guy like Iguadala is out there and they signed guys like Landry to long deals. Putting a defensive, athletic p.f. who doesn't need the ball [Gordon] next to Cousins would be a good fit.

And a backcourt of McLemore and Smart along with Cousins would be a solid, though quite unpredictable foundation. But they will probably reupp I. Thomas to a long term deal anyway.

I think McBuckets would be a great fit and needed asset in Sacramento.

Think they'd probably be gun shy after Jimmer, no?

Not if they remember the 'glory days' effectiveness of Peja Stojakovic... "Bang!" (the late, great sports radio man Steve Fredericks)

Ahhh, Peja. Those teams were good. Probably would've won a title if they got by the Lakers and the refs that one year.

sfw reply to Brian on May 22 at 11:45

Brian, good point.

Charlie H reply to Dollar Bill on May 22 at 11:44

That's what Mike Breen says after made jump shots. It's the worst call in basketball. "Bang!"??? Shots make a bang when they miss.

Mike Breen's a copycat then. Steve-O used it long ago (70s & 80s) with West Philly street elan, transmitting quickly a hinging result of a regular court action to the interested listener. In fact, Breen was in elementary school when Fredericks was a Boston radio station talker in late 60s. "Step aside, Mikey!"

Good play-by-play communication: enthusiasm, accuracy, articulation, concision.

"Bang" in Frederick's sense was the "bullet" to the competitional health of the enemy, the brief bull's-eye registration at the scorer's table.

Isn't onomatopoeia fun?!

The Six reply to Dollar Bill on May 22 at 13:03

I prefer the late great Jim Barniak's: "Stops..pops, BINGO!"

That was great too! Good memory, Six.

Jim died at Roxborough Hospital. Nice guy and a very good broadcaster.

Miss the PRISM days when the Sixers were legit.

The Six reply to Ernst on May 22 at 12:57

"Gordon is going to be an absolute bust at the NBA Level"

Really? I'm always amused when people make these types of declarations because it sounds so silly. If you don't like his game and don't think he'll succeed at the next level, why not make your point by listing the reasons why rather than say "he's going to be a bust"? I happen to like the kid and think he has a good chance to succeed at the next level. But he has his flaws and he may/not make sense for the Sixers. He's a terrible free throw shooter and not a very good offensive player in general. But the bottom line is he's 18 years old and has too many promising attributes to simply dismiss him as a bust. For starters, he's an elite athlete. He also has a very high motor and he projects as an elite defender at the next level. That's a good place to start.

Hmmmmm... an underschooled elite athlete and defender from the University Of Arizona who clangs jump shots and free throws...

"Please, God, spare us, we've suffered enough. Anybody but him."

YoungGun13 reply to Dollar Bill on May 22 at 14:56

oh no not another Iggy!

You must write for Cliff Notes. An excellent synopsis!

Ernst reply to The Six on May 22 at 17:49

Aaron Gordon
-No shot at all(42% from the line is fucking terrible). I do not see him ever becoming a good shooter.
-no post game whatsoever
-A tweener
-Not particularly long

These aspects mean offensively he will be ENTIRELY useless offensively. Defensively he isn't that good either. Not very long or anything.

This kid is ALL athletisicm. It's his entire game. If he was 7 feet tall he might be able to get away with that, but he is not. Pass.

anomiemnemonical reply to Ernst on May 22 at 18:53

What do you mean he's not that good defensively? He's excellent defensively.

The Six reply to Ernst on May 22 at 20:36

We agree that he struggles offensively, and he may just be a put-back guy for awhile(maybe forever?), but I have not read a single scouting report that doesn't project him as a legit defensive presence in the NBA. You may not like him but you can't dismiss the fact that he is a good defender now, and will be better when he fills out.

Tray reply to The Six on May 22 at 22:25

I guess my issue with drafting someone because he has elite defensive ability is that coaches seem to be able to put together really good team defenses with teams full of mostly bad-to-average defenders, but you really can't have a team that's offensively strong enough to contend without a lot of plus offensive players. It seems like good defense is a lot easier to attain. I don't know that a team can seriously contend with two lousy offensive players in its starting rotation; the Thunder with Ibaka has three good offensive players and two bad ones, but they've always been much better when they get away from that lineup and bring a fourth scorer onto the court, and they also have the best scorer in basketball and Russell Westbrook. Players with so-so lateral movement and size can be coached to be in the right spots, at least, but if you can't make and create shots you can't make and create shots. We hear so much that at this stage of our team's development we should just draft for talent and forget about fit, but lottery picks in good drafts are an extremely finite resource. The reality is that if we draft Gordon we'll very possibly be locked into a lineup with both him and Noel in it for years down the line. I think if we believe in Noel, we don't need an elite defender nearly as much as we need skill guys. That extends even to a huge defensive liability like Parker, and certainly to guys like Stauskas.

The Six reply to Tray on May 23 at 2:16

Keep in mind that I never said he was "my guy" at #10. I just don't think he should automatically be referred to as a outright bust because of his offensive deficiencies. If anything, I would probably be more inclined to agree with Brian and draft a shooter with that pick.

It's pretty rare for a guy w/ short arms to be an elite defender at the NBA level. Can't really think of an example of one who is/was, especially not a big.

Charlie H reply to Brian on May 23 at 8:27

Kevin Willis. The exception that proves the rule.

anomiemnemonical on May 22 at 19:03

Why am I not excited about Exum at all? Also Embiid's back issues scare me. I really hope either Wiggins or Parker are there at #3.

South Broad reply to anomiemnemonical on May 22 at 23:52

You're not alone on all three points. I ponder why Exum will be any better/different than the Schroeder kid the Hawks drafted. If he could shoot a tad I may warm to the kid, but two guards with questionable shots? I'll pass.

I really liked Embiid mid-season but those back issues flaring up after being an issue in high school made me leery.

Hope Parker's there, if not, Wiggins will have to do.

Tray reply to South Broad on May 23 at 0:49

Exum's a whole lot bigger than Schroeder (6'6/200 vs. 6'2/165, and the standing reach of many power forwards), and from what one reads he's a really gifted finisher. Schroeder, according to draft express, was actually pretty incompetent in transition, while a strength was his jump shot. So they don't sound comparable at all to me. Exum has legit two guard size and an elite point guard's speed. He's more like Penny Hardaway than Schroeder.

YoungGun13 on May 22 at 22:47

i just don't understand why gordon is projected as a 4. when i look at his game i see a 3

I'd rather avoid him, honestly. Think he's going to be way too much of a project on the offensive end and not sold on his defense at the next level. I really want a legit shooter w/ the #10 pick, and I think there will be a couple on the board.

deepsixersuede reply to Brian on May 22 at 23:44

I like Gordon at #10 if we draft Parker so Parker can defend the lesser scorer in the opposing frontcourt. I don't think Parker will be a pure 3 or 4 and believe whoever drafts him will utilize his offensive versatility to take advantage of mismatchs.

I agree with Tray that 2 offensive liabilities probably won't work but Gordon's passing and ballhandling won't make him a nonfactor, in my opinion.

If Thad is part of the future he may play that role next to Parker if we draft him. I would love Derek or xago, if he has seen him, to comment on Kristaps Porzingis, a 7'0 stretch 4 that is 18 and a candidate for our 10th pick if Hinkie wants to lose again next year and put a bigger player next to Noel.

According to draft express he is very athletic and can shoot from deep.

I LOVE Porzingis. I haven't seen a lot but from what i've seen he's the perfect draft and stash guy. He can't contribute right away so he should probably be left in Europe for a year or two and start his rookie contract later, but he has all the tools necessary to be a great modern PF. Very rare combination of shot blocking ability and jump shooting ability. His shot is still a work in progress but he's definitely capable. Very athletic for his size. Good coordination on the court. His main weakness is major lack of strength, but he looks like he has the frame to add a ton of muscle on his body. He's also a pretty bad defensive rebounder right now, but i think the lack of strength is a major reason for it.

Here's DX's video and another scouting video that i like even more.

Honestly, i don't know where i have Porzingis right now, but i might seriously consider him even in the lottery.

P.S. My only major concern about him is that he will withdraw from the draft and re-declare for next year's draft. He might be a top 10 pick next year if he adds enough strength, similar to how Saric went from a mid first rounder last year in a weaker draft to a top 10 pick this year. That's a real danger unfortunately.

YoungGun13 reply to Brian on May 23 at 3:44

oh yeah i could deal with stauskas at 10 that's my guy

Charlie H reply to YoungGun13 on May 23 at 8:50

From what I read, he could be a Taj Gibson type. Or a Joe Alexander.

YoungGun13 reply to Charlie H on May 23 at 12:48

I'm not sure if that was meant to be a reply to me

Charlie H reply to YoungGun13 on May 23 at 16:50

Yeah, it was. You were talking about Aaron Gordon right? When I saw Alexander's tournament games and highlights in '08 or whenever it was, I thought he was going to be a star. Gordon has no offense according to reports, but he's supposed to be a good passer, elite athlete and excellent defender. And he's only 18. So who knows? I like him at 10. If we get Wiggins, we have a shooter, so it's worth the risk. If we don't get Wiggins, Saric should be the guy. (But you don't pick for need, right?) Guys here are high on Stauskas. I hate to go by the played-at-the-same-college comparison, but a coach like Izzo tends to maximize his players talent. Since Steve Smith, Michigan State hasn't produced very many good pros. Jason Richardson was very good and Zach Randolph too. But they were picked more than 12 years ago. Since then?

At the moment it looks like Embiid is going first. I think Parker will go second. Who do you like better, Wiggins or Exum?

Rusty reply to Charlie H on May 23 at 17:13

I don't think Wiggins is a "shooter" and actually expect him to really struggle in his first year. He outperformed expectations with his jumper this year so it's a good sign of long term prospects ... But I domt think it's "pure" quite yet.

Status went to michigan, not Michigan State. But I'd apply your point to Gary Harris who I am pretty low on. stauskus made huge jumps from freshmen year to sophomore year... Don't think same can be said for Harris.

Charlie H reply to Rusty on May 23 at 18:05

I'm sure I read something about Wiggins being a good shooter. These scouts do not agree. Everybody agrees on his defense. Looks like he might go 4th, wow. I really think the Sixers will take Exum over him. Orlando is sold on him, and Brett Brown knows him at least as well as Orlando does.

Exum is the Harden-Westbrook-Beal of this draft. All those players were picked 3-5 picks higher than forecasted.

Charlie H reply to Rusty on May 23 at 18:08

Speaking of Michigan, I liked McGary in the tournament last season ('13). Would love to get him in the 2nd round. Good passer, good athlete, fairly big.

YoungGun13 reply to Charlie H on May 23 at 17:58

Oh okay my first comment yeah I see what you are saying. I wouldn't be mad about the gordon pick but I really like stauskas if he's still on the board. He could be the perfect plug in shootr/backcourt mate to MCW.

Rusty reply to YoungGun13 on May 23 at 18:18

Agreed - really like the idea of those 2 together

Scott from VT on May 22 at 23:57

Best combo?





anomiemnemonical reply to Scott from VT on May 23 at 0:26


A followed by C.

Simmons has really stupid trade ideas for us:

"you’re not crazy about taking Jabari, anyway — what if Utah flipped you no. 5 for no. 3 and no. 23 and threw in Alec Burks plus a first-round pick-swap in any of the next three years? Would that do it? Any interest? Any?"

Trading out of the top four in a four-player draft, what? He also says he saw Embiid in a secret workout and he looks great:

He wasn’t playing against anyone, just going through a two-hour workout with Will Perdue. Here’s what I can tell you: He moves around as effortlessly as a 7-foot Serge Ibaka; he’s such an athletic freak that he’s one of those “still going up as he’s finishing the dunk” guys; his freakish wingspan might make Jay Bilas pass out; he has been playing basketball for only four years (which seems impossible); he gave up a world-class volleyball career; he has 3-point range; he can shoot jump-hooks with both hands already; he couldn’t have seemed more coachable/agreeable/likable; he’s a hard worker with a goofy sense of humor; his voice is just a touch Mutombo-y (deep with a heavy African accent); and his friends call him “Jo-Jo.” And again — his back seemed totally fine.

Embiid's stock rising can only help us.
If he goes #1 and becomes a stud; nothing we can do about that.
If he drops to us at #3 and is a bust, no way we can recover from that, franchise-wise.

Tray reply to jkay on May 23 at 14:18

It can only hurt us because he's the best thing in this draft by a long shot. For some actual scouts' perspectives on this, see:


The Six reply to Tray on May 23 at 14:49

Thanks for posting. I thought this was a real interesting read. And I love the line about Kidd-Gilcrist's shot when comparing that of Wiggins':

"It’s not as bad as Kidd-Gilchrist where you say, “Where do we start?”

Judging from the media reaction at this week's workouts, and barring any significant medical report (apparently the back is good?), I think it's safe to say that CLE takes Embid at #1. After that who knows. I still think MIL could take Exum ar #2. It would not surprise me a bit.

Charlie H reply to Tray on May 23 at 17:10

Very interesting comments. Every scout I've seen quoted puts Embiid in a class by himself. After reading this, I think the Sixers will take Exum over anybody except Embiid because "you need a star in this league." Parker might get there if the Pierce comparisons are accurate. Doesn't sound like Wiggins will. He can't dribble? Yikes. He might not be as good as Thad.

Hmm...assuming his back passes musters, this is how i'd love to see it play out.

Cleveland takes Parker cause:
1. They're Cleveland, so it's inevitable they're going to screw it up right?
2. He's the most ready now and we know how important making the playoffs to lose in the first round is important to Dan Gilbert

Embiid refuses to workout for Milwaukee cause, honestly, the only town worth anything in Wisconsin is Madison, it's freaking awesome. It's almost as asinine that they required an owner who wouldn't move the team as when they required the same thing for the pelicans new owner (in 5 years I bet at least one of those teams has moved, Seattle first...maybe a St Louis franchise?)
So, Milwaukee takes Wiggins cause they figure Milwaukee has to be an upgrade from Canada (it's not -I mean maybe it's an upgrade from Cleveland or Detroit, but maybe not cause honestly it's just a disgusting suburb of chicago best known for Laverene & Shirley).

Embiid works out for Philly, enjoys the idea of bringing back a passionate fan base, working with a second year player who knows how to get him the ball...and another lottery pick and possibly making it work with Nerlens Noel (some of those comments about Embiid's range were nice) and his back passes muster 100%...

Come on Cleveland - you can do it - you KNOW you can

Tray reply to GoSixers on May 23 at 23:37

Cleveland does have a new GM. Now, he was their vice GM since 2010, and I'm not sure what role he played in the Bennett, Thompson, and Waiters picks. Maybe they were his guys. But maybe not. I also think that the players they missed in the drafts they screwed up were much less obvious talents than Embiid. They get heat for missing on Drummond, Lillard, MCW, and Oladipo when a lot of teams did and would do the same. It's a lot harder to miss on the most highly regarded big man prospect since Oden, or maybe even Dwight Howard. If they hope to bring LeBron back, Embiid makes more sense than Wiggins or Parker. Finally, I can't think of a team that's passed on a potential franchise center for a really good wing in semi-recent draft history. The only thing that seems to make it more likely now is the memory of the Oden-Durant draft. But I think that's something that's more in fans' and journalists' heads than GMs and scouts' heads. I think if Embiid looks healthy, he's gone.

After that happens, I don't know what Milwaukee does. If I were them, I might go with Parker. They have Giannis, who's an awful lot like Wiggins. How many rangy, athletic lockdown wing defenders with shaky ball skills can one team start? Where does he even play if they draft Wiggins? He's not a 4 or a 2. I think Wiggins is a somewhat higher-regarded prospect than Giannis, but I thought Giannis played pretty damn well his rookie season for a 19-year-old kid with extremely little experience. If they believe in Giannis, as I think they do, the guy with an offensive skillset who can play the four makes a lot more sense. That would almost certainly leave us drafting Wiggins, which is fine. But I see Wiggins being something like Paul George with quite a bit less offense, so a lot of people are going to be disappointed if that's correct and he never develops into a superstar.

But they still have the same stupid owner...right?

Tray reply to GoSixers on May 24 at 13:07

Even really stupid people know to take the potential franchise center. I bet your average wip caller thinks we should get Embiid if we can.

Daniel Snyder and Jerry Jones would beg to differ with you on the no-brainer always being a no-brainer.

Last year there were a lot of 'obvious' options at #1 before the fat turd they took...but they wanted to make the playoffs 'right away' - if they're still thinking that, maybe they take the most NBA ready guy, that ain't Embiid

To me, the NBA draft has what the heck picks than any other sport, over and over again.

I wouldn't be surprised whomever Cleveland picked, and I wouldn't be surprised if Embiid's agent played games to avoid sending his client to two of the biggest armpits in America (seriously - how many NBA teams are in armpits, Cleveland, Detroit, Milwaukee, Sacramento, just off the top of my head)

Tray reply to GoSixers on May 24 at 14:57

So again, has a team ever passed on a potential franchise center at #1? Even Olowokandi went first. And all these playoffs are doing is underscoring that centers really matter.

Cleveland only passed on one obvious #1 last year, Oladipo. Noel couldn't have been a very obvious #1, because he went sixth. And Bennett only looks like a fat turd now. He had very similar stats to Parker's this year, except his were better. I don't think Bennett over Oladipo is comparable to Parker over Embiid. Bennett was a much more gifted scorer in his one year in college than Oladipo was by his junior season.

I also don't think Parker, who reports say Cleveland doesn't even like, is much more of a win-now player than Embiid. Embiid will be a defensive presence from day one. And he's certainly more of a win-now player than Wiggins. His offense isn't there and his defense will be potential until he gets a lot stronger. He's going to be like a Giannis or Harkless his rookie year.

Tray reply to Tray on May 24 at 17:32

Finally, I think that after picking a doughy 3/4 ace scorer freshman who didn't defend or pass and seeing how awfully that went, they would be pretty skittish about picking another doughy 3/4 ace scorer freshman who doesn't defend or pass. And by the time of the draft, the pressure to pick Embiid will be huge. Even the GM's job security enters into this. If they pick Parker and Embiid turns out to be great, they might not keep their job. If they take Embiid, who can blame them, regardless of what happens?

Stan reply to Tray on May 23 at 15:17

nah. Derrick Favors, #5, option to switch picks in 2015 and their 2016 1st round pick? I still don't think I would do it.

I've had some time to digest 3 and 10. I guess I view this as a combo draft for us even though I know it's too early in our development to be drafting for need.

I have been in the Wiggins/Stauskus camp for a while now. I like the way they compliment each other and even fit with MCW. I think Stauskus has a really high offensive ceiling and can't emphasize enough the difference between elite shooters and regular shooters. So, this combo is in the lead by a small margin for me.

Next up would be Parker and Gordon. I doubt anyone tracks my comments but I was a Gordon hater throughout the year. I just didn't see it. But since watching the tournament and his ability to start a fast break, some of his defensive agility, and his interviews At the combine , I have a vision of what he could be. I actually think a pairing of him and Parker would be interesting and complimentary. Gordon
Parker Noel would be a very interesting but undersized front line that could cause trouble. I know it wouldn't work against Memphis but I think it'd be worth exploring. We would need need need a shooter at the 2 but I think we could find it or make something happen. But I've warmed up to this and think it'd allow Jabari to play to his strengths.

It looks like Embid is a very high probability for number 1. I'm fine with either of these wings and just like them a bit more than Exum.

That said I'm also still fully on board for trading up to 8 if Randle falls.

SUBSTANCE AND FLASH: Hal Greer, 13th pick in the 1958 draft, doesn't get enough credit in Philadelphia for his accomplishments and contributions to the 76ers. Julius Erving, New York Nets owner Roy Boe's estate sale item due to financial duress and contract demands, gets too much.

For those keeping score, UMass Minuteman Erving was the 12th pick in the 1972 draft, selected by the Bucks. The Sixers selected Oregon guard Freddie Boyd with the 5th pick, Suns took Penn's 6'7" guard and defensive specialist Corky Calhoun with the 4th pick, Blazers had chosen obscure center LaRue Martin 1st and rued their decision until they landed Bill Walton of Grateful Dead University later on.

Draft comments from Kevin Pelton (smart stats guy) chat on ESPN:

Q: Is there a long term play comp. for Andrew Wiggins? Great athleticism, high upside on "D", not a great shooter. Andre Iguodola perhaps?
Kevin Pelton
(3:14 PM)
Iguodala is so much better as a playmaker that it's tough to see that one. I've used Luol Deng as a realistic scenario for Wiggins, with Paul George something of a best-case scenario. [Later he writes that Kawhi Leonard is a "realistic case" for Wiggins.]

Q: I know you said you were skeptical of Wiggins' ability to create off the dribble, but can't a large chunk of his offensive troubles in this area be attributed to the lack of spacing in college basketball and the use of zone, which is practically non-existent in the nba?
Kevin Pelton
(5:12 PM)

If you're a Wiggins optimist, that's your argument. My counterpoint is that along with the better spaced floor, he'll also be facing far better athletes as wing defenders.

Q: Do you have a player comparison for Dario Saric or are his Euro numbers impossible to translate?
Kevin Pelton
(4:31 PM)

Small pool of players so young to draw from, but Al Harrington came out as his No. 1 comp, followed by Tobias Harris.

Q: Kevin - do you think MCW and Exum can play together? If you paired them with Noel, you should have a solid defensive start. Similarly, do you think Embiid and Noel can be paired together?
Kevin Pelton
(3:12 PM)

Given their size and the way the Suns demonstrated the value in having two point guards on the court together, I don't see any reason Exum and Carter-Williams couldn't play in the same backcourt. Embiid and Noel would be more challenging to me, since neither of them really spaces the floor at all and that's exceptionally important to the Sixers' offensive philosophy.

My choice at #3 in order would be:
1) Wiggins
2) Embid
3) Exum

1) Stauskus
2) Saric
3) McDermott

Does anyone have any new information on Saric's intentions if he's drafted in the lottery? Assuming he stays in the draft, what I read is that it depends on a) where in the lottery he gets drafted, and b) Which team drafts him (fit-wise). What position does he expect/demand to play in the NBA? He has defensive limitations at both the 3 and 4, but I still think he has to play the 3. I'm not sure how I would feel if the Sixers draft him and he decides to spend two more years in Europe. I guess I'll trust Hinkie.

I'm leaning a bit towards Stauskus(over Saric and Mcbuckets) because he has a defined NBA position and can flat shoot it. But there is something about Saric that I can't stop thinking about with that second pick.

Here are some Embiid workout draft highlights. He looks pretty bouncy and quick. Not freakishly so, but not much less than Dwight, and more fluid. Of course he'll be number one.


....uhhh, yeahh...
guys how about trading up to #1 to select Embiid?
more crazy thought: how about trading Noel and #3 for #1 and someone like Bennet or Waiters that the Cavs want to unload?

I have been Wiggins all the way but Embiid live just looks like a beast. he literally little-girl-Bunny-Jane-hopped to dunk some of those balls. He looks BIGGER in person and FLUID.
All I'm saying is that we all know how the NBA is; we have literally gambled our future on draft picks; why not just up the ante and swing for the fences with Embiid.
I'm not buying the Cavs passing up on him, or even the Bucks, not after seeing S*** like that.

Tray reply to jkay on May 24 at 17:21

Really depends on the odds you give to these prospects of achieving their potential. Suppose Wiggins is available at 3, and that he becomes as good as Paul George and Noel gives you Ibaka's defense and some limited but okay offense; that is, it's not like he's Bismack or Ben Wallace out there. That tandem, with MCW, sounds like the core of a contender. I wouldn't give all that up for Embiid, even if I knew that Embiid was going to be really great. Now, if you think the most likely scenario for Wiggins is being about as good as Luol Deng or Rudy Gay, it makes some sense to me. But then, what's the chance that Embiid doesn't reach his full potential? My guess would be that Hinkie would feel trading two potential All-Stars, one of whom has some chance of being a franchise player, for one guy who has a somewhat bigger chance of being a franchise player, is a really risky move. And that's without even considering the back issues.

the way I look at it, all you need is a superstar, game-changing player. Embiid has that potential. What weighed him down was the health concerns.
Projecting Wiggins and Noel to become PG and Ibaka respectively is as generous as projecting Embiid to be the 2nd coming of Olajuwon considering the holes in each of their respective games at this point.
In the NBA, a grade 5 player is more valuable two grade 3 players or a grade 3 and grade 4 player. It's such an individual sport that if you see a light at the maze, it's worth jumping in and risking getting lost if you can just get there.

Tray reply to jkay on May 24 at 18:33

Wiggins has some superstar potential. But more importantly, in the NBA you need more than a superstar. Look at what happened with Paul, LeBron, and Love and their first teams. They never got a second star, couldn't win, and their superstar left, or is leaving in Love's case. And it's not as if they didn't try; it's just hard to get a second star once you draft a superstar and he knocks you out of the top of the lottery. Top prospects/stars are a really finite resource and it's tough to get one without losing a ton of games, so trading two for one is obviously risky, though possibly justified in some cases. As I say, it just depends on the chances you give Noel and Wiggins/Parker of reaching their potential.

deepsixersuede reply to Tray on May 25 at 9:24

On your earlier comment about who the Bucks will take if Embid's gone;

1] I see Wiggins as a 3 and D type of player who could play s.g. next to a ball dominant p.g., something the bucks don't have but pairing him with "the greek freak" on the wing would excite me as a fan.

2] Exum may be who they choose because B.Knight had a decent year and is not a pure p.g. and together they could compliment the "greek freak" well.

3] Middleton is proving to be a good shooter from deep [40%] but I don't know how well he defends but a rotation of the greek, Henson and Middleton may lean them away from Parker and towards Exum.

Another point about an A.Gordon comp from a recent draft. In 2011 the Spurs traded G.Hill for K.Leonard, a player who had shooting woes at San Diego St. who had to rework his shot at workouts to prove he could be more than a defensive role player in the N.B.A. .I remember his videos and how he slowed down his release and I believe Derek talked about him as being unsure if his slow release would translate to the N.B.A. .B.Brown was part of the staff that turned him into what he has become so I have no problem believing they can't do it with Gordon.

OK...I just watched the Embid workout video. Jesus Christ. I know I'm nothing but a you-tube scout, but Embid is the No. 1 pick. Then Wiggins followed by Exum.

anomiemnemonical reply to The Six on May 25 at 3:15

Link plz?

anomiemnemonical reply to The Six on May 25 at 14:21

thank you

anomiemnemonical reply to The Six on May 25 at 14:57

thank you

anomiemnemonical reply to The Six on May 25 at 14:58

thank you

anomiemnemonical reply to anomiemnemonical on May 25 at 15:03

-2 of those. Stupid phone

Tray, jkay: "Superstar, star, game changing; beast, level 3, 4 & 5"... please use better modifiers than these oversimplified clichés and gauges when describing prospects of prospects. I'm hopeful that you are up to the task. Enjoyed reading your exchanges in spite of the regrettable diction.

Winning basketball is about interwoven talents and the realities of on-court chemistry:

Mikan, Mikkelson, Pollard, Martin, Lovellette,...

Arizin, Johnston, Gola, Graboski, George, Beck,...

Pettit, Hagan, McMahon, Martin, McCauley,...

Cousy, Russell, Heinsohn, S. Jones, K.C. Jones, Ramsey, Sanders,...

Greer, W. Jones, Costello, Walker, L. Jackson, Wilt, Gambee, Cunningham,...

Frazier, Barnett, DeBusschere, Bradley, Reed, Riordan, C. Russell, Stallworth,...

West, Goodrich, Erickson, Hairston, Wilt, McMillian,...

McGlocklin, Robertson, Dandridge, D. Smith, G. Smith, Alcindor, D. Cunningham,...

White, Chaney, Havlicek, Cowens, Silas, Nelson, Westphal,...

Barry, Wilkes, C. Johnson, Beard, Ray, Dickey, G. Johnson, P. Smith, Mullins,...

Hollins, Gross, Twardzik, J. Davis, Walton, Lucas, Neal,...

Hayes, Dandridge, Unseld, Henderson, Grevey, C. Johnson, Kupchak,...

D. Johnson, G. Williams, F. Brown, Sikma, Shelton, J. Johnson, Silas,...

I like to call the above championship team examples "optimal enmeshment" or "patently productive porridge."

None of the 2014 field of undercooked cagers will be the ultimate answer for an organization, just a part, if they're lucky.

Joel Embiid, my favorite roll of the dice for next season's 76ers edition. Merlin Sam, get out your wand and glut of draft picks and wind up with the Cameroon aircraft carrier [the late, wonderful Al McGuire].

"Dean Meminger was quicker than 11:15 Mass at a seaside resort." ~ Al McGuire

deepsixersuede reply to Dollar Bill on May 25 at 9:30

I could listen to Al Maguire talk all day. He was a great commentator and an even better coach. He and Dick probably had some good arguments at the dinner table.

Me too, suede. Man with the Golden Tongue. What would Butch Lee have done without him? Or Bo Ellis?

Dead End Kids. They had an older brother, John, said to have been a better natural athlete than Dick or Al but was limited by injury, who would bet on cockroach races, if he couldn't find other action. The McGuires were well-stocked with competitive juices.

Charlie H reply to Dollar Bill on May 25 at 13:44

Once said on national tv that Earl Tatum was "a black Jerry West."

Moral: Never characterize with an oxymoron. Almost accurate though - Earl wore #43.

Al could sell ice to an eskimo. And he actually owned an ice cream stand when he coached at Belmont Abbey.

Started as an assistant at Dartmouth. Now there was a contrast in styles.

Al McGuire, unforgettable. I have Pete Vescey's column on him stashed away somewhere; was a fine tribute.

deepsixersuede on May 25 at 10:09

Trade #3 and #10 and a future lottery protected pick to Minnesota for K.Love. Absorb his cap hit. Sign L.Stephenson and D.Collison. Draft C.Early, C.J.Wilcox and R.Smith in 2nd round, all more N.B.A. ready than most.


Could this team win the east in the next 3 years and allow K.Love to stay?


Strongly doubt Love has any interest in living and playing in Philadelphia.

Even if Noel is Secretariat, which I doubt, he's been in the barn FOR A YEAR AND A HALF! Untested. Asset X. Big question mark.

MCW is now a marked player. What'll he give you moving forward? Remember the case of Temple's G/F Clarence Brookins in the 60s: best season was his sophomore year (1st varsity campaign). Mark Macon peaked as a freshman. Snowflake" still has a lot to prove, starting with Ws.

J. Richardson, AARP Monday Night League standout.

L. Stevenson, refuses to leave shots for Evan Turner.

Brett Brown may be the Sixers best guard, at least their most tenacious.

Nope. Not a good team. Looks like 45 wins and a #4 seed.

deepsixersuede reply to tk76 on May 25 at 14:00

I wouldn't do it but was trying to come up with the best case scenerio of a Love acquisition. I feel players like Stephenson aren't in this organizations plans. They seem to be taking a Chip Kelly approach as far as character.

#3, #10, and a future lottery pick for Kevin Love- dayum.

The only players I would give that much up for would be Lebron or KD.

a) Just NO to Stephenson. I don't want him anywhere near the Sixers.
b) They need to convince Love to stay in one year, not in three...

Btw, i'm not opposed to trading for Love, he's a top 5 player in the NBA and is most likely better than anyone in this draft will ever be. However, if you are doing it you need to do it carefully. The Sixers can't afford to waste more assets. A Love trade would have to be a part of a much bigger play.

CJ Henry on May 25 at 13:36

Five days after the lottery here are some thoughts:

I think it's very possible that we wind up with Wiggins.

Cleveland does what it should had done last year and drafts a franchise center, despite the injury concerns. Drafting Embiid for Cleveland gives them much-needed frontcourt talent regardless of whether LeBron will return or not.

As for Milwaukee, they have always been an impatient franchise; they were competing for a playoff spot this year & wound up with the worst record in the league. Due to their impatience, I could see them taking the most NBA-ready player who can provide offensive production instantly, Jabari Parker.

This leaves Hinkie with Wiggins. While this scenario is unlikely, there is some logic behind it and there is probability that it could happen (just like the probability of Cleveland winning the lottery).

Also, if Embiid is not taken within the first two picks, it is very possible that he slides down the board like Nerlens last year. In terms of court spacing, it's hard to believe that Embiid & Noel can coexist together (maybe they can what do I know). Out of all the elite prospects in the draft, Embiid has the worst fit with Philly. Therefore, if Wiggins & Parker are the first two players off the board, Dante Exum becomes a real possibility at #3. Throw in the Australian bond between him & Brett Brown, it looks like destiny.

As for the tenth pick, an elite shooter (Stauskus, Young) or one of the many available power forwards to back up Thad, assuming we keep him.

Here's how I see the draft so far:

Tier 1 Elite:

Tier 2 Premier:

I'd really be fine with any of those tier 2 players at #10. At that point it just matters how that second prospect fits on the court with our selection at #3, MCW, & Nerlens.

It's nice finally having a front office that values draft picks & potential. After this draft, it will be a while until we lose 60 games in a season again, and we might have an outside shot at the playoffs next year given the state of the east (although we may be another year away from making serious noise).

Having two top 10 picks in a loaded draft is pretty fun.

Praise Hinkie

Tray reply to CJ Henry on May 25 at 14:25

You say your scenario is "very possible," "unlikely," that there's "probability that it could happen," and that the chances are "like the probability of Cleveland winning the lottery" (0.8%). So I don't know what you're saying. I think it's more likely than not, but what do you think?

Here's video of Parker's one-on-none workout. He looks slimmer and can dunk 360 at 6'8, and makes lots of jump shots off the dribble. But I didn't really learn anything about Parker from watching this that I didn't already know.


The Six reply to Tray on May 25 at 14:43

I watched this video earlier and wasn't blown away like I was watching the Embiid video. If the sixes had the 4th pick and nabbed Parker, I'd be Ok with it. But at #3, I like the other guys better (Embiid/Wiggins/Exum).

anomiemnemonical reply to Tray on May 25 at 15:01

Turner dunked 360 in the Lakers game.

Yeah. The libertyballers commenters are really excited about this video but I don't see why. I think Parker's athletic enough to be a big-time scorer, but explosiveness isn't a strength of his game.

Rusty reply to Tray on May 25 at 18:57

There was a lot of love for the Embid video. Honestly, I'm sure we could put Brandon Davies in a 1x0 video and he will look amazing.

After being a Wiggins guy all year, I have taken more to Parker. It's the scoring that does it for me. I still expect this to be a very strong draft class overall so I am going to be happy with 1 of that top 4, but I will have my favorites going in.

I think we should have a tier breakdown, maybe top 4 and guys who could be available at 10. I'd like to see what combos people like the most and why. Again, I like Wiggins and Stauskus or Parker and Gordon.

Tray reply to Rusty on May 25 at 19:59

I think the Embiid video is meaningful insofar as it shows that he looks pretty healthy, can really jump for a wide-bodied seven-footer, is pretty nimble, and knocks down open jumpers with good form. It's analogous to the combine athletic tests and shooting tests he skipped; you can see the same sorts of things in a one-on-nothing workout. By itself, being a really athletic seven-footer with a soft jump shot and quick feet isn't enough to make you number one, but I think it is when you combine it with the things he did in games. Analytics say he's going to be terrific; I saw today that the stats draft guy who blogs at Canis Hoopus, the Wolves blog, says his top statistical comp is Ewing, and two of the other four top comps are Olajuwon and Barkley.

Anyway, I don't think Embiid is available to us unless we trade 3 and 10, and even then I'm not sure that the 10th pick is enough to compensate Cleveland for the Wiggins/Parker vs. Embiid talent gap. I guess of the players who might be available at 3, I can't quite choose between Wiggins or Exum. I see Parker as somewhat less than a sure thing on offense and the biggest defensive liability of all of them, as well as the least willing passer, and I think that Wiggins will at the very least be a fine defender and solid third option.

As for Exum, he has tremendous burst and ability around the rim, seems to have a good mental makeup, and I think his passing looks very good on tape; his assist numbers are low because of his dreadful Australian teammates, who remind me of the sorts of big stiffs I used to see in high school playing on PA/NJ prep school teams. But I'm very unsure of his shooting or mid-range game, and am concerned that he's sort of a bigger, less athletic John Wall, or that he could even be a smarter Tyreke Evans if his jump shot never comes along. After all, Evans has been among the league leaders in made layups for years thanks to his great burst and length and he's still a bad player. Absent superlative athletic tools along the lines of a Wade or Wall, I think we should be somewhat hesitant to draft a guard with such an undeveloped jump shot at 3.

Tray reply to Tray on May 25 at 20:04

Actually, let me amend; I don't think that Wiggins has an absolutely solid third option floor. He could be even less. It took Gerald Green years and years to amount to anything with his insane physical tools, and there are lots of other examples. But I think there's about a 70-80% chance he'll at least be a solid third option.

Rusty reply to Tray on May 25 at 20:30

The point on Embid is a fair one. I guess I just figured he could do this from watching him at KU but I don't know if it really says anything about his long term health. I think he has to go number 1, he is a level above the others.

I guess I miss the point on Parker's offense translating. His shot seems top quartile to me. He has very good jump shooting numbers. He seemed to develop and adapt as the ACC season went on. His measurements outdid my expectations. I definitely get the defensive question marks and I admit they concern me, but I just don't see him NOT becoming an elite scorer. And I think he can be efficient as well. At age 19 and "conditioning" being the problem - he seems like he has the right mindset and attitude to figure things out.

I think Parker's going to be an exceptional offensive player, and playing in a system that rightly devalues the long two, he has a chance to develop into the type of scorer whose defense doesn't matter. Would be really happy if we got him. My top three hasn't changed at all in the past month or so. I'm not on the same page as most, it seems, with Embiid. He was impressive when I saw him, but the back troubles me, as does the fact that he couldn't stay on the floor in college even when he wasn't hurt. If we were at #4, I could stomach taking a shot on Exum, but there's no way I'd take that kind of a risk at #3 when there are three guys I see as having a legitimate shot at being a star at the top of the draft unless Embiid's medical status was a big red flag.

Ultimately, it comes down to this for me. If Wiggins doesn't improve his offense at all at the next level, he's still a lockdown wing defender who can shoot, which is an extremely valuable asset. Even if Parker's defense is as bad as advertised and never improves, he's still going to be an efficient 20PPG scorer who you can play at the 3 or the 4 (and there's every reason to think his rebounding is going to translate). As long as Embiid isn't damaged goods medically, he's going to have tremendous trade value (worst case) and you can figure out if Noel or he is the keeper.

Exum might turn out to be the steal of the draft, but to me he doesn't look a whole lot better than the guy we drafted at the position last year (who I'm not too high on right now). Which brings me back to my ultimate (probably misguided) point. I really don't want to be in the position where they've duplicated picks in consecutive years. I want to accomplish this rebuild in as few steps as possible. Right now, if you squint your eyes and ignore some glaring holes, you could say they filled two long-term positions in last year's draft. If they take Embiid or Exum at #3, then they've still only filled two holes. Like I said, probably misguided, but there you have it.

steve toll reply to Brian on May 26 at 0:15

Noel and MCW both suck and are NEVER going to be NBA starters (at least not on a title team). Hinkie has filled zero spots

Tray reply to Brian on May 26 at 0:27

"If Wiggins doesn't improve his offense at all at the next level, he's still a lockdown wing defender who can shoot, which is an extremely valuable asset."

This sort of thing was said about Corey Brewer, 7th pick in the Oden/Durant draft, and taken over his teammate, Noah (and Thad). Brewer scored less in college, I know, but the point is, the long, athletic college defender doesn't even always turn out to be much of an NBA defender. And average college shooters (34% from three for Wiggins, 35.6% over Brewer's college career) can be really lousy pro shooters (29.5% from three over Brewer's pro career). Could Wiggins be as bad as Brewer? Seems unlikely, but not impossible.

I think that Parker could be something less than an exceptional offensive player, though I'm not predicting he will be. First of all, exceptional college scorers don't always translate, like Beasley and Turner and Anthony Bennett, who people already forget had a really impressive inside/outside game in college, with efficiency stats that were stronger than Parker's. Much like those guys, Parker was regularly guarded in college by players that were either much too small or much too slow to contain him, and that won't be the case in the NBA. Instead, he's either going to be a somewhat undersized four or a somewhat below-average athlete at the three.

I also find it rather remarkable that on a team that led its conference in scoring, with Rodney Hood on it, where every regular shot 37% or higher from three except for their center and Parker himself, and most shot over 40%, he didn't average at least 3 assists a game on simple kick-out passes. Instead he averaged 1.2. It's been suggested that he had bad teammates and was wise to pass as little as he did, but even if his teammates weren't the most dynamic offensive options, they could all really shoot. And if they were so limited, how do people explain his being fifth on his team in assists in spite of having the ball in his hands more than the four players ahead of him, and in spite of constantly being double and triple-teamed? He averaged fewer assists per minute than Amile Jefferson, their overmatched 6'9 center out of Friends Central, Wynnewood, PA. Gifted scorers do sometimes improve their passing over time, see Durant this year, but this has to be a concern, especially if we're going to try to structure our offense around this guy. Do we want a guy who's even of more of a black hole than Melo,* but with somewhat less talent? Parker could absolutely be that, and it's not even an unlikely worst-case scenario, it's what he is right now.

* Melo, it's worth noting, averaged 2.2 assists a game in his one college season, on a roster with vastly less talent than Parker's. After Hakim Warrick, the third scorer was Gerry MacNamara, a celebrated coach's child shooter type who led the team in three-point percentage at 35.7%. Aside from a walk-on who hit two threes in garbage time, only three (!) players in their rotation made a three all season - Melo, MacNamara, and a shooting guard who averaged about one a game on 35% shooting.

Being a black hole wasn't the reason Melo held his team back for so many years,it was because he was in love with long twos and iced the ball to create those scrappy shots for himself. That's why I mentioned the system, specifically the fact that the system is against those shots. And the matchup thing works the other way, too. He's quicker than most fours, bigger than most threes with the inside-outside game to exploit both situations.

And really, Brewer is a silly comp. As a freshman, he averaged e d 7.5PvP, and only 12.5 as a junior. Wiggins is getting trashed as this total bust after averaging 17 as a freshman on a really good team and getting to the line over 6 times/game. Here's a comp for you, Durant averaged 7.3 fta on 18.5 fga as a freshman. Wiggins averaged 6.5 on 12.1.

I think people are upset he didn't look like LeBron as a freshman in college so now they're talking themselves into this bust story. If I had to bet, I'd say Parker wins the rookie of the year, Wiggins is the best player three years from now and has the best career overall and Embiid winds up as a good pro who's eventually underrated after three years of people calling him a bust because he didn't live up to the overblown hype 2/3 of a college season playing 23 minutes/game stirred up...or he's just never really healthy so people compare him to Oden. Of course, if the Sixers get him I'll be hoping for more, but that wouldn't really be their fault unless they trade up to get him. If he's there at three, I like his odds of panning out better than Exum's.

I agree with this quite a bit actually.

Wiggins - I think people have gone overboard with his weaknesses. If you read the comments from many people you would think that they are talking about a kid who is a great athlete who didn't play a lot because he's very raw, can't shoot and has zero offensive game outside of transition dunks. And even when he scores he's inefficient. The reality is quite different. The guy averaged 17 points per game as a young freshman on 12 shots (56% TS%). He shot 34% from 3 and 77% from the FT line. Brewer was far far from that at that age. Green never played in college so we can't compare, but he was always labeled as a great athlete who has potential to be a good defender down the road because of the athleticism. Wiggins is already a great defender (Wiggins and Gordon are way ahead of everyone else on the defensive end).

Embiid - He's always looked great on film. No doubt about it. But i just can't shake out the fact that he's a full year older than Wiggins and Parker (1.5 older than Exum), he barely played 23 minutes per game, fouled like mad and has potential back issues. To be honest i have a feeling that Embiid is going to end up like Bogut. A good player when healthy, it's just he's injured too often to truly make a difference.

Parker - I'm a bit worried about him to be honest, because i have doubts about predominantly perimeter players who put numbers due to major strength advantage. Not sure how his offense will translate. He might be great, the potential is clearly there, but i don't think he's as safe a prospect as many think

Btw, all in all, a lot of people have cooled down on this draft but i still think it'll end up as one of the best (top 3-4) in the past 10-15 years. And there is a very simple reason why i think that. There are quite a lot of players with high upside in the draft, it will all come down to maximizing it. And maximizing the potential is where the top prospects separate from their peers. Every year there are some guys with huge amounts of talent that simply don't care about the game enough, are not ambitious, or have other character or off court issues (Beasley is always the best example). The nice, but not intelligent kids don't succeed in the modern NBA unless they are 7 foot freak athletes that can get away with it as long as they work hard. This year, i really like the mental makeup of all 9 of the top prospects. Issues about some of them will probably come out as they do more interviews, but as of right now, they all look like they have a realistic shot at maximizing their potential. The only guy that still looks questionable to me in this regard is Vonleh, but i haven't seen/heard enough (for this reason alone i hated McLemore and Robinson in the past 2 drafts and so far it turns out i was right).

Forgot one thing about Parker. I think he can only be a superstar as a 3. As a 4 he'll be good, but not great (on the flip side power Forward is his safer position). As for his defensive issues at the 3, they are really worrisome, but at the same time as he gets into much better shape (which i think he will be in the NBA), he'll be better at moving laterally.

deepsixersuede reply to Xsago on May 26 at 10:18

Is it wrong to think Parker, because of Brett Brown's fitness routines could be the player, out of the top three, that improves the most. I agree with your comment about him at the 3 and think Thad would be an interesting fit next to him.

The organization's timing with Thad is perfect, as far as his contract. I hope he is here after the draft and given a year next to Nerlens and our pick. Can Vonleh or Gordon be better than him, maybe. But going all young ,no pun intended, is never good in the N.B.A. .

I hope caproom is used to move up or add a pick rather than Thad because if we get talent here and he is allowed to go back to his lesser role offensively he may be a perfect fit here.

I think "upside" and "room for growth" are almost impossible to quantify. In my opinion, the upside depends on 2 main aspects:
- ambition and hard work
- possession of skills that were hidden in college due to scheme, small sample size etc.

In general i think all of the top 4 guys look pretty ambitious and hard working so the separation there is not obvious at the moment. As for "hidden skills", Exum is probably the guy most likely to have them, as he hasn't played at a high level in a while. The second will probably be Wiggins as he showed more in high school and the system he played in was kind of limiting to wings like him.

Tray reply to Brian on May 26 at 13:23

Re: Brewer, I agree that Wiggins will produce more on offense, but when you say that he'll at least be a lockdown defender who can shoot, I point out that an equally good college defender with the same length and frame and hops, and better shooting numbers, turned out to neither be a lockdown defender nor a shooter in the league. Wiggins was a better player in other areas, but what does that have to do with being certain that his shooting and defense will translate?

I don't think I agree that Carmelo's passing hasn't been a factor in his teams' success. Even if we discourage long twos, Parker's preference is to try to finish over two or three defenders than to pass the ball. Those aren't great shots either.

Brewer had excellent length and quickness for a perimeter defender in college- and was a tremendous college defender. He did not actually have great length for a SF (6'8" wingspan and 8'7" standing reach.) But he was sort of like MCW in that he was skinny and quick to where he could really lockdown shorter wings on the perimeter and create havoc playing FS in passing lanes.

But Brewer was in no way a comparable athlete to Wiggins. Not explosive, not strong and did not have wiggins frame to likely bulk up. If Brewer was a true freak athlete like Wiggins then he would have found more success in the NBA.

Tray reply to tk76 on May 26 at 15:08

"Brewer might just be the fastest player in the league without the ball."


he isnt super important but Furkan Aldemir agreed to a new contract with his euro league team for 3 years

More measurements:

Chad Ford @chadfordinsider
Andrew Wiggins measurements from today. 6' 8.75" in shoes, 7' 0" wingspan, 8" 11" standing reach.

Chad Ford @chadfordinsider
Jabari Parker's measurements very close with Julius Randle & Aaron Gordon.

The Six reply to The Six on May 26 at 14:53

Jabari Parker's measurements at workout on Friday: 6' 9" in shoes, 6' 11.75" wingspan, 8' 11.5"

That standing reach is really surprising given the other measurements. for example, Vonleh has only 0.5" better reach despite being taller and having 5" more wingspan.

Those measurements suggest he probably can physically play PF.

The Six reply to tk76 on May 26 at 15:02

Agreed. This changes how I look at Parker if he can physically defend the 4. He could be a real match-up nightmare there.

Brian, how much of the Sixers did you watch their last 15-20 games? I was really impressed by how MCW seemed to catch his second wind and show improved smarts and efficiency once he stopped shooting 3's.

I currently feel similarly about MCW to how I felt about Jrue before he was traded- except Jre was on tap to make 11M per year. Both are valuable second tier PG's who have skill sets that can really help you. In Jrue's case, he had a great combination of man defense, driving ability and a solid jumper. MCW has tremendous length and is more of a pure PG than Jrue- which we likely will see more of this coming season.

I didn't see much of the "pure pg" difference you're talking about, and I don't find it heartening that a perimeter player has to stop shooting threes to be effective. He needs to fix the jumper before he's going to be one of the better players on a contender, don't really think that's debatable.

tk76 reply to Brian on May 26 at 17:49

I think he actually stopped shooting threes in part because of his labrum injury. He did shoot respectably from inside the arc during that stretch.

No doubt he needs to be able to hit the open three. But that is an area I think he can improve. Players with shots more broken then his have developed that shot. IMO the biggest weak spots in his game are areas players tend to improve with experience: open jumper, TO's and finishing high quality looks on the lane.

My ideal pick normally would be Wiggins who fits our need for a shooter and a defensive stalwart to add to the other couple of top athletes we have.
But I pick Embiid, if he somehow falls. As highly inconvenient as the pick is with respect to redundancy, I think you go with the best player available logic. Over these last 2 wks I have been slowly moved to the point where his upside just overshadows the worrying injury history. Out of the 3, I think he is the easiest to project his development.

The thing about Andrew Wiggins' game that disturbed me a lot, and I could not point a finger at it until this article, which is a good read, did it for me
His finishing ability evidenced by his percentages at the rim are not good. Considering he is an exceptional athlete with crazy wingspan, then it's more bothersome. It could either stem from a lack of body control (something evidenced in his lack of an NBA wing handle) or poor touch. I remember the difficulty Iguodala had (still does) with finishing over defenders at the rim, when he was the man for the Sixers and needed to score; just a below average touch that had nothing to do with his shot. Wiggins' doesn't look that bad but does not allow the comfortable projections of his improvement. I can't think of any elite wing player who can't finish extremely well at/around the rim. Wiggins needs to be at that level to get where we project. But then again, he's still 18.

Parker is the one most likely to have success in the league because of his unique combination of skills and size. The 76ers had this phase where, after they drafted Iggy, started to pick freak athletes with the hope of turning them to basketball players. Dollar Bill can explain to you the excruciating pain of this flawed philosophy. Now we just drafted MCW and Noel, which is sort of going in that weird direction again. Watching teams like the 2013-14 Mavs just shows you how important the right mix skill, athleticism and IQ of individual players are in TEAM basketball. On that note, I want to pick Parker just so we can have that right mix of types that's essential to balance; scorer and defenders, play-makers and shooters. At #2 or #3, he is great value and will fit in very well I think. However, if anything else is more scary or red-flaggish than Embiid's back, for me it's Parker's foot speed. For that reason, I would be satisfied with him but he's not my top choice.

Embiid just has no glaring holes in his game. Skill wise, he has a solid grasp on the fundamentals and has a good feel for bthe game. Athleticism and size; check. Mental make-up; irrelevant but good. His situation (when he started, progression) are scary. Court vision, bball IQ, passing are all very fixable things. I dont discount the legitimacy of an injury history but the more I look at him as a prospect, the more I can't pass him up. That's madness to me now.

This is a deep draft and that #10 pick will probably be decided by what we get at #3. For me

Wiggins, Stauskas - 2 strong (1 elite) shooters; we are on our way (hypothetically) to being a run and gun team with size and defense at almost every position.

Parker, Gordon - A shooter at #10 would be good too but after picking Parker, who is my safest pick out of the trio, I'm going with a riskier, high upside pick in Gordon. He has good vision and impressive handles, good enough to play the 3, in the unlikely scenario of developing a shot, he becomes a matchup nightmare.

Embiid/Hairston or Lavine - I have just picked another injury prone center at 240lbs, so everyone is either saying I am a genius or a madman, so I go with the safest I-know-what-I-am-getting pick for my wing in Hairston or gamble again by purchasing a subscription of the Zach Lavine Project.

Rusty reply to jkay on May 26 at 20:13

I think your thoughts are rationale here and I agree with what you have to say. Ultimately I agree with what you say at the bottom with the 3/10 combos. I would like 10' to compliment our other players if possible. Gordon and Stauskhs both do that with the respective #3s.

I'm least excited about Exum but actually think there is a decent chance we take him. I haven't seem nearly as much of hi as the other guys so I know any nba scout has a major advantage, but doesn't it seem like his lateral quickness is limited too? He's not a jump out of the gym athlete, he best the Harrison twins badly but are they really top tier guys? I guess I just don't get why Jabari gets SUCH a tough rep and Exum doesn't catch that besides his limited shooting abilities.

And honestly, if we didn't have Wiggins in the draft, would we say the same things about Jabari's athleticism? I know it's his lateral quickness and I saw how shitty it was , but I see ways to hide it.

I do love that i will have no idea what the sixers are thinking until draft day. So speculate I will.

Over the last 2 months, the barometer has moved from Embiid to Wiigins back to Embiid for #1. Add in Parker's consistent stock and you get the interesting, subjective debate I think we have now.
3 relatively interchangeable choices at #1. All this moves me to the immoveable conclusion that the Cavs will make the wrong one.
If Milwaukee is as enamoured with the Greek Freak as everyone else on the internet seems to be, then they will pick Parker after that.

Go Cavs.
Joel Embiid welcome to Philly.

deepsixersuede reply to jkay on May 26 at 22:15

I keep thinking stash pick at #10 or trading back into 1st round again. If Exum is the pick than Saric makes sense to me at #10. Talk him into staying overseas and add another developmental guy in midfirst [Jer.Grant?] and we may be able to keep our 1st rounder next year by missing the playoffs.

A future of M.C.Williams, Exum, J.Grant, Saric, Noel and our 2015 1st rounder would give me a good feeling about our future.

If that's the lineup you feel good about going forward, who's your shooter or the guy you go to for a bucket when you desperately need one? That lineup screams a ceiling of mediocre all over again, whether 3 or 5 years from now, at least to me.

Tray reply to Rodney on May 26 at 23:35

Really depends on how good Exum is.

really depends on if Exum or Saric or someone can shoot.

deepsixersuede reply to Rodney on May 27 at 7:20

I trust our front office to make the right picks and if they feel Exum will have more of an impact than who is there at #3 with him than I will be fine with him.

As far as Saric, he may be the most proven player in the draft, other than Napier, who led his team on a big stage to a championship.

And Saric, at 19 years old did it against older players which is even more impressive.

Grant has a chance to be a solid role player in a rotation and maybe more. He made some game changing plays for Syracuse this year and could fill Thad's role if he is moved.

I am hoping Hinkie and Brown know Noel will have a major impact on wins this year and hope to set this team up for one final draft piece next year.

Even the scouting reports of people who love saric haven't made me want to take him. If any of the shooters, including Lavine are on the board and we take a guy to stash with that pick I'm going to be pissed. Eventually you have to at least make an attempt to assemble a team rather than stockpiling (assets). I'd view Gordon as a step in that direction as well. If all goes well, they have two plus defenders and minus scorers in their core right now, it's imperative they come out of this draft with guys who can stretch the floor, at a minimum. Ideally, Parker or Wiggins can be the cornerstone, or Embiid and something crEATIVE to turn the logjam at the five into an asset at another position.

deepsixersuede reply to Brian on May 27 at 7:26

I think shooters will be brought in last or developed by our coachs. They seemed to avoid adding shooters last year because they can win you games. I am as ready for winning as you Brian, but their mindset seems to be 2 years from now, in that regard.

Tray reply to Brian on May 27 at 11:06

I will say that while I think it extremely unlikely that Embiid would fall to us, Embiid seems to have a nice mid-range jumper, and I think he could potentially play with Noel without destroying our spacing, in the same way that Ibaka manages to play with Perkins, or Steven Adams.

The Six reply to Tray on May 27 at 13:06

I was thinking the same thing. And Embiid's jumper should only improve. Then you start filling out the lineup with good shooters.

But Cleveland has to take him right? I mean, all kidding aside about that franchise, if they don't take him they would have to have significant long-term concerns about his back. But if they do draft Embiid at #1, I believe that clears the way for Wiggins at #3. I have a difficult time seeing MIL passing up on Parker at #2. He seems to me like the best fit for them.

I feel much better about our #3 spot now than I did on lottery day.

The Six reply to The Six on May 27 at 13:20

Just saw this from Chad Ford right after I wrote my last comment:

"And if Wiggins doesn't go No. 1? I don't think he's in the top two on the Milwaukee Bucks' board right now, which means he would fall to the Philadelphia 76ers -- a team that has had Wiggins as its top target all season."

Tray reply to The Six on May 27 at 13:25

Yeah, I read somewhere else that they have a Parker/Exum board (which I don't think is crazy).

Tray reply to The Six on May 27 at 13:21

Yeah, I think Cleveland takes him unless they trade the pick for Love or something. And that any team that gets the pick would probably take Embiid. And I agree that Parker is likely the pick at 2. I would very seriously consider Exum at 3, though. At the very least, I think we'd all have to agree that he has a much better chance of being good enough to anchor a team on offense than Wiggins does. Wiggins has less going for him as a scorer than Iguodala did coming out of college. This is an interesting read on the translatability of transition and halfcourt college scoring that touches on Wiggins's poor numbers in the halfcourt.


I find this analysis flawed, and particularly biased against Wiggins because they're using eFG as the measure, rather than TS%. Wiggins' ability to get to the line is not factored in at all. My guess is his non-transition TS% is nowhere near the bottom for wings and guards.

I'll agree that Noel/Embiid would work with Durant at the three and Westbrook at the one. Probably not with Hollis and MCW, though.

And I don't agree at all that Exum has a better chance to anchor a team offensively than Wiggins, unless your definition of anchoring a team is just playing the point.

Tray reply to Brian on May 27 at 19:47

Why? What can Wiggins do on offense, really? He's a great transition finisher (like Brewer and Gerald Green), an average shooter who can sometimes shoot a step-back, and currently he can't do anything that requires more than a couple dribbles. He got to the line a lot in college, in the first year of the no-handcheck rule. Evan Turner got to the line 7.3 times per 40 minutes in his sophomore season, before that rule. Jimmer got to the line 9.5 times per 40 minutes in his junior season, 8.5 times per 40 in his senior. James Anderson got to the line 9.2 times per 40 minutes in his junior season. Derrick Williams got to the line 10.6 times a game in his freshman season, 11.6 times a game in his sophomore season. (Keep him in mind when people say Parker is a sure thing, by the way.) Do these numbers project at all? It seems like NBA prospects just get to the line a lot in college basketball, period. If you have NBA size and speed, it's hard for overmatched college defenders to not foul you. Wiggins basically has to develop an entire offensive repertoire to become a bigtime scorer in the NBA; right now all he has is a great first step and vertical, an okay jump shot that may or may not extend to NBA 3-point range, and a very shaky spin move that just as often leads to a turnover as to anything productive. He's not even a very deft finisher right now, as he seems to lack touch and tends to fade away from big men around the basket.

As for Exum, he's a gifted scorer who can do pretty much anything on the offensive end but shoot from outside. He's about as good as Derrick Rose was at 18. He does not need to learn how to finish or dribble. He does need to learn how to shoot or otherwise he might just be Tyreke Evans, but even Evans is of more value to an offense than an unskilled pogo stick.

in defense of Wiggins, it's not how many tools you have, it's how well you can use 'em. Or how effective they are considering your elite athleticism.

I think Wiggins with one and a half of his kangaroo dribbles can blow by half of the NBA wing defenders to the rim, on foot-speed alone.
And if he shoots or posts-up against another wing, he can get his shot off almost 80% of the time simply because he is so long and can jump so high, effortlessly.
If he spins away from help defense, he can get a shot off with space even when his defender anticipates the move simply because it is so quick.
He will be an effective player in the NBA with just that.

It seems different people have different projections for what he will become. I dont see him as a go-to scorer or ballhandler yet. IMO with his ability as a two way player he has a chance to be a game changer even if he's not Paul George. My comp right now is a more explosive Nicholas Batum.

deepsixersuede reply to jkay on May 27 at 22:45

I like Wiggins, and he fits what we are doing here but I feel scoring will be needed at the other 2 spots in our lineup to go with him, M.C.W. and Noel.

I know Randle is not thought of highly on here but if he slides to 7, a possibility, would the Lakers swap 7 and Nashs' contract for Thad and #10?

Randle works well between Noel and Wiggins and Nash spending a year with M.C.W. and Wroten couldn't hurt. Although he may want a buyout.

So everything Wiggins did well was just because he was playing against NCAA level defenders, but Exum is as good as Rose based on what he did in Australia against what competition? I mean, do we know how Exum's going to be able to finish over length, at all? Or how his handle is going to hold up against NBA point guards? I have a really hard time believing the definitive statements people are making about a kid who hasn't been tested at all.

The fiba tournaments have some pretty good competition. The sample size is small, but he was playing against at least 3 point guards who will be in the NBA next year, along with numerous NBA big men.

So I looked through all the rosters and you had a number of guys who will be drafted on the USA team and then Saric. Otherwise, pretty sure I didn't see a single name I've seen mentioned as a possible pick in this year's draft. So Exum did play one game against borderline NBA level competition. He played 11 minutes, turned the ball over 4 times and had 2 fouls.

1) Limiting it to this years draft is
, an interesting decision.
2) He played in U17's as well.
3) The NBA doesn't have a monopoly on good basketball players. Spain, for example, is loaded with a bunch of guys like Alberto Diaz, Edgar Vicedo, and Guillermo Hernangomez, who will be playing professional basketball for a very long time, in some of the same leagues that many on, say, TCU or Toledo would only dream about playing in.
4) You definitely missed some legitimate prospects. For example, we have Vasilije Micic 38th in our top 100 prospects. That Serbian team also has Nikola Milutinov, who we have going in the first round next year.

Six players from the Canadian team played NCAA basketball this past year.

Kevin Pelton had this to say about it today:
"In general, the level of competition appears to be slightly worse than major-conference NCAA basketball."

Say I cede the point that these tournaments represent decent levels of competition, which I don't, we're still talking about a tournament. So an extremely small sample size of a pretty small sample set against maybe halfway decent competition. I have trouble believing a definitive POV on a guy when he's played in the NCAA against at least knowable competition, I find it impossible to take seriously under these circumstances. To me, being basically unknown and unproven is somehow being considered a huge plus for Exum, which probably speaks to the holes in the other guys games, which doesn't make it any less unreliable. The video I've seen of Exum means about as much as the high school video I've seen of Wiggins to me, or very little. The only way I'd be happy if they picked him is if Wiggins and Parker were off the board and something in Embiid's medical history threw a huge red flag. I just refuse to put as much stock in NCAA stats/performance for a guy like Wiggins when I watch the garbage NCAA hoops has devolved into. Athleticism on the wing is essentially pointless against these defenses/in these offenses. The NBA doesn't even remotely resemble college hoops anymore. Wiggins game is going to be much better suited to the NBA IMO. Anyway, my two cents on Exum vs. Wiggins. Parker I see as an efficient 20+ppg scoring stretch 4 who can be hidden on defense, much like Dirk.

GoSixers reply to Brian on May 28 at 19:24

Say I cede the point that these tournaments represent decent levels of competition, which I don't

How many of these tournaments have you been to?

At this point I think you're just being obstinate to be obstinate cause you've already made your mind up about certain things and no amount of actual evidence could change your mind.

When did you become a creationist?

Rusty reply to GoSixers on May 28 at 21:24

I think it is a bit extreme but I mostly agree with Brian. I just have a tough time taking Exum over any of the top 3 based on what I have seen. I have only seen youtube clips of these tournaments but he doesn't do anything there that gets me jumping out of my seat. I have decided I would be fine with him at 4 (hypothetically) but that is just based on what the scouts say his upside is. I really don't see it myself. I understand that I have seen less than the experts but why isn't there anything we can point to? I can buy the Exum over MCW argument because of the age and all, but I would still take the top 3 above a "better version of MCW".

And I do believe that if he played in the US, we would have plenty of things to key in on as deficiencies. Especially if his shot does not develop. Just look at Marcus Smart between last season and this season. I understand that Exum's size may allow for much more but he seems to just escape the criticism that these other guys go through.

That sad, if we took Exum over Parker at 3, I would clearly be disappointed but would have to find a way to fall in love. I just need THAT guy in this draft. Give me someone who can be THAT guy for years to come.

Everyone will have their favorites, and at this point Jabari is my favorite. I like his intensity and his scoring ability. I know he has his flaws but I think you could go to bat with him and a supporting cast.

anomiemnemonical reply to Rusty on May 30 at 20:22

"I just have a tough time taking Exum over any of the top 3 based on what I have seen. I have only seen youtube clips of these tournaments but he doesn't do anything there that gets me jumping out of my seat. I have decided I would be fine with him at 4 (hypothetically) but that is just based on what the scouts say his upside is. I really don't see it myself. I understand that I have seen less than the experts but why isn't there anything we can point to? I can buy the Exum over MCW argument because of the age and all, but I would still take the top 3 above a "better version of MCW".

And I do believe that if he played in the US, we would have plenty of things to key in on as deficiencies. Especially if his shot does not develop. Just look at Marcus Smart between last season and this season. I understand that Exum's size may allow for much more but he seems to just escape the criticism that these other guys go through.

...I just need THAT guy in this draft. Give me someone who can be THAT guy for years to come."

Yes! this^. Could barely shorten it because I agree with every word.

And also this, which Brian said in the post above: "To me, being basically unknown and unproven is somehow being considered a huge plus for Exum...".

I feel like 60-70% of Exum's game exists in this vacuity of the unknown. But it seems that, for some reason, many people are happy to surmise only the potential positives from these unknowns. Then I think - it's because I don't know anything and more knowledgeable people like Derek are fans of Exum so maybe there really is a reason to get intrigued. But ultimately, what's there to point at, like Rusty said? Maybe I'm still in this delusional pre-NCAA season mindset that Wiggins is the best prospect since Lebron and Jabari is a more likeable Carmelo, but Exum just seems like a guy who can be had in the lottery just about every year.

I glanced at his shooting numbers and was horrified (free throw % especially). Not even kidding, I honestly believe I might be a better shooter than Exum; and I couldn't get off the bench at a D-II school my freshman year so just ended up quitting. I remember in an earlier post, Tray called him something along the lines of 'a less athletic rookie John Wall'.

Is this the reward for management's decision to piss on the very spirit of competition for a full season or two? Just a "mysterious" [sic] international guy with a nice wing span and a nice first step?

It really doesn't matter if the talent level in one tournament this kid played in was almost as good as NCAA basketball, that's my point. NCAA basketball isn't even a good barometer imo, it's just the best we have, and playing a handful of games against a notch below that doesn't seem like enough info to make definitive statements about him. That's not me backing down from my original statement, that's me reiterating it because you seem to have missed the point. I stated very clearly why I do and don't like certain players and why I distrust the hyperbolic praise (imo) I keep hearing about the only prospect who remains untested in even the standard medium-pressure cooker the others guys went through. It won't surprise me if they take him, I'm just hoping they won't because athletic pgs who can't shoot rarely turn out like Westbrook, not to mention the fact we already have one of those on the team, and Exum might not look so athletic when he plays against legit players all the time.

I'm wondering why no one has made a mix tape of Exum's game against Smart like they did with Wiggins.

"So an extremely small sample size of a pretty small sample set "

I never disagreed with that point, in fact I made it above in my first response to you. Obviously, there's been other places scouts have seen Exum play -- hoop summit, addidas, workouts -- and that all helps, but there's concern with Exum (and all of these guys, really) that sample size isn't all that great. But we don't live in a world where you get 4 years of college ball anymore.

Still, we got by drafting high school kids in the lottery with less of a track record, and with a fair amount of success. Exum has played enough, and against good enough competition, that I am confident in his long term potential.

Jerry West, who's seen a court or two of dreaming hoop colts, wasn't impressed with this set of available draftees. I think he used the term "poor" regarding quality as opposed to the prevalent hype of this year's crop.

Dante Exum. Will he be better eventual value than high schoolers Sebastian Telfair (13th, '04) or Martell Webster (6th, '05)? Krikey, we don't bloody well know yet! He's leaping into sharky waters where there's no waltzing Matildas. Lack of aim doesn't bode well. Do you want your big investment guard to be a brickmeister? "Not I," said Louie Dampier. "Me neither," chimed Darel Carrier. "No way," added Bob Verga. "Hell no," exclaimed Jeff Mullins. "Gotta find net bottom," concluded Dick Snider.

Spelling correction: It's Duke Snider (the former Lord of Flatbush) but it's Dick Snyder, mid-60s twine-tickler of Davidson College, along with Fred Hetzel, former Sixer non-great. (Why is the name Fred out of style? It beats Jabari.)

Exum or Parker?

I have no idea who the suffers will... or should... pick at #3. Fortunately there is a lot of talent on the board.

anomiemnemonical reply to tk76 on May 26 at 21:28

Suffers would be a good name for this team

Sometimes my phone keyboard chooses worse things to describe them. Suckers often seems apt.

More on Parker from Ford(Insider):

"Parker reminded us all on Friday that he also is still in this mix to be the top pick. In fact, I thought Parker's workout was the most impressive of the three that I saw. Here's why: Parker is the most skilled of the top three players in the draft and he attacked that workout like it was a national championship game. Not only did he go harder than Wiggins or Embiid, he went harder than anyone else I've seen in a workout this year. It reminded me, a little, of the great workout Damian Lillard did in Oakland a few years ago. Aggressiveness and competitiveness show in things like this, and Parker passed those tests with flying colors."

He also talked about how the group in CA is working on getting Wiggins lower to the floor when he dribbles:

"Wiggins has also been working on his ballhandling. While Wiggins has a solid handle, he plays very upright which gives him an unusually high dribble that's easy to pick off. Hanlen and the folks at P3 have been working on his hip flexibility to get him playing lower to the ground. At his size (he measured 6-foot-8.75 in shoes, with a 7-foot wingspan and an 8-foot-11 standing reach at P3), he's going to have to get lower to the floor to be able to attack the basket the way he did for KU during the second half of the season. The training seems to be taking, as Wiggins was playing much less upright in the workouts here, improving his quickness and explosiveness on both ends of the court."

Stan reply to The Six on May 27 at 17:58

Would Danny Granger (pre-injury) be a good comparison to Parker? If so i'm not really sure how I feel about that.

Tray reply to Stan on May 27 at 18:21

No, I think Granger was basically a volume shooter. Parker's shot distribution will look more like Pierce's.

eddies' heady's reply to The Six on May 27 at 21:20

His drive and will to become better and compete is a trait that distinguishes the great ones from the very good ones. He is so coachable too, he just needs someone to teach him the fundamentals and aspects of individual defense and how to mesh that with team defense. Man, I hope like hell we get Jabari.

Doesn't sound like that is going to happen if he keeps standing out in these workouts. Chill, #3 is where you want to go young man.

Zach Lowe chats with Turner, not-so-subtly mocks him:

Evan Turner is another fun character to watch. He’s the no. 2 pick from the 2010 draft in a contract year who just kind of sits there and observes everything with a weird smile on his face. He even wanted to ditch the team bus after one practice and walk home alone; he asked me how long the walk would be to his hotel.

He said he is not frustrated with his lack of playing time, or worried about his contract. “When it comes to money, pretty much everyone in the NBA is set,” he said. “I just want to get back to playing basketball — to playing in big games and all that fun stuff. I felt like in Philly this season, I was starting to define myself as one of the better wings in the game.”

He reminded me that he was posting up Ray Allen not long ago (“It seems like that’s long forgotten, huh?”), and that he came to Indiana late in its building process. “What is this, Year 4 for them?” he asked. “I just don’t want to be a distraction. Some people would sit around and scream, ‘I should be playing!’ But I’m just here for support.”

GoSixers on May 27 at 21:11

Interesting note I read today (forget the true source) on one of the rumor aggregators, that teams will share physical information if agents won't.

With regard to the Exum conversation or actually we can extend to the top 4 in this draft (with Exum being 4): are these guys going to go one-on-one(not necessarily against each other) in workouts for any teams? I mean will the Sixers be allowed to bring in Parker and be able to put him against Randle, Vonleh or other PF's and see how he defends? Will Exum and Wiggins also have to actually work out against their peers or do agents just say "ahh....don't think so".

I guess Exum is the most interesting. Doesn't he have to show SOMETHING before draft day? I get that these organizations probably have as good a book as possible on him, but he hasn't played in awhile.

If I was Exum's agent, I wouldn't let him do anything right now. His floor is like #6 without even lacing up his shoes. There's no way in hell I'd let him workout against Smart, that's a tough task for anyone. Maybe run through some 1-on-0 drills and take measurements. I'd like to see Parker with Wiggins defending him, actually.

GoSixers reply to The Six on May 28 at 23:28

Agents tend to limit anything that might expose their guys weaknesses or a bad workout in the draft process. Be surprised with these guys locked in so high to see them work out against anyone.

Might see some of the next tier guys (especially those power forwards) do some working out to try and jostle - depending on on their agents.

Another point on the drafting of Exum. I am still a believer that Hinkie views the team as a portfolio of assets (including draft picks). I think putting Exum next to MCW in the backcourt may work over time, but it would hurt their individual value in the short term.

This obviously leaves the MCW trade as a possibility, but I would be really surprised if we did that.

GoSixers reply to Rusty on May 28 at 23:31

I wouldn't be surprised to see Michael Carter Williams traded...he's an asset who might be seen as over valued and that's the best time to get rid of them.

I've heard folk say 'can't trade him he's the rookie of the year'.

I wonder how many would have said 'can't trade Jrue, he was an all star' last year.

If the offer is right, you move him.

Probably less than a handful of guys in the league you consider untouchable unless they're being traded for each other.

A poor shooting rookie of the year in what is seen as a weak class missing the perceived best talent in that same draft is not untouchable.

The Six reply to GoSixers on May 29 at 1:03

Agree with most of what you say, and I was definitely surprised by the Jrue trade. Obviously it was the kind of deal that just doesn't come along that often. That being said, I think an MCW trade highly unlikely. Not because I don't think he can be traded, I'm just not sure the return is going to be more valuable than keeping him. Does he get packaged with say Thad for a bigger deal? Maybe. I like Thad on this team so it would have to be quite a deal IMO. And I'll admit, I like MCW more than most who comment on this site. I think he'll only get better and I love his size.

In the end, Hinkie has a lot of "GM capital" with me. He and Chip Kelly are about the only two team leaders that I would go along with just about any move they would make at this point. I have haven't had this much faith in a couple of coach/GM's since....I don't know, Larry Brown (the coach - not the GM)? So if Hinkie traded MCW, I would trust the move. But it would really surprise me. I think they like him a lot.

The Jrue trade showed that Hinkie is willing to make a bold move, but otherwise I don't see the MCW and Jrue situations to be comparable.

1. Jrue was due 44M over 4 years. MCW is a bargain for 3 more years where he will make less total than Jrue makes in a single season.

2. Jrue was not a player picked by Hinkie.

3. With Jrue the team was headed for 30+ wins in a year while Hinkie wanted to tank/rebuild. While MCW is the only player in place who can supply some stability in implementing Brett Brown's system with a ton of new players coming in.

Like all GM's, Hinkie is on the clock and knows he has only so many years to turn things around. I am certain he would trade MCW in a bigger move that brings back a superstar. But right now I think he wants to compress the rebuild into as short of time as possible. The Jrue trade enabled them to both blow things up and accelerate the rebuild with 4 lottery picks in 13 months. While swapping out MCW at 23 for a 19 year old will extend the rebuild in a way that would not be in Hinkie's best interest. he already will be adding a ton of really young players whose growing pains will likely eventually put heat on Hinkie.

GoSixers reply to tk76 on May 29 at 12:15

I didn't say they were 'comparable' - I said that no one would have expected Jrue to be traded because 'he was an all-star' - that's all I said.

Players are assets, regardless of what they make, if you feel you can do better moving the player then you move them...making an all star game or winning an award shouldn't affect whether you consider trading them (similarly the all star / mvp bonuses in the CBA are asinine).

The point was that no one should say 'don't trade Carter Williams' as a declarative because he's not one of those franchise changing pieces...everyone on the roster (including Noel if someone offers a good deal) should be available, it's not like the sixers are close to doing anything significant

Rusty reply to GoSixers on May 29 at 13:26

I think his value as a player may be as high as it ever will (considering contract as well), but doesn't "organizational philosophy" come into play at some point?

I am a huge advocate for capitalism and business in sports, but I am not sure what message Hinkie would be sending by trading McW. Thad dealt with it last year and has the personality to deal with it, but I don't think that's the case for everyone.

I think MCW plus asset other than 10 for #4 would be a great trade for the sixers from a player sense but 1. I don't think we could actually do it and 2. I wonder if you risk the philosophy issues. Those issues are with fans and with players. Maybe we aren't at that limit yet but seems like we would be pushing it.