DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

2014 Please Avoid List

my realistic dream scenario is wiggins and gordon(i prefer vonleh to gordon)

i dont really want mcdermott or hood

but like you said, who they take at 3 will probably decide what they do at 10

I don't follow college basketball so I don't know what's what but I do hope we get Wiggins or Parker. Embiid & the back injury we need to stay away from with out luck it will turn out to be a bad situation.

The guys I want to avoid at #10 are Nurkik, Harris, Payne, and McDermott.

Ideal scenario for me would be Viggins and Vonleh. I wouldn't mind trading Thad or #32 to move up from #10 to draft Vonleh.

In the 2nd round I would be happy with Bogdan Bogdanovic and Spencer Dwinwiddie are my ideal picks.

user-pic
buke reply to Stan on Jun 17 at 18:33
+/-

Did you see much of Vonleh this year? Since I'm a Big Ten fan I watched him closely for a few games. He could look great for a stretch of the game but had a knack for disappearing the rest of the time. Part of that might be blamed on Hoosier point guard Yogi Farrell's ball dominance but I don't think all of it can be. Since I don't know which side of him will show up in the NBA, I'm not a fan of picking him. I'd rather see Randle if the Sixers got a chance to pick either of them.

at #3, the only real threat is Exum, and since they are high on MCW, I don't really see them reaching here considering the risk of fit. so I am not worried.

at #10,
No McBuckets for me; he could work short term but long term he would not be able to start. That's too much to invest.
No Lavine at #10, maybe lower if we traded down. He is uber athletic, can shoot and seems to do not much after that. Too risky.
No Hood, Harris, Saric is a bad fit and too much of a project, Parker is the only tweener you draft high.
So basically Stauskas. Aaron Gordon if we draft Parker, I think he can play the 3. Trade down being the alternative; maybe with Chicago like deepsixersuede's rumor bit suggested get Hairston, Lavine, McDaniels, Payne. Any combination of those would be ideal.

For the 2nd rounders, Bogdanovic is the only one I think that may really have an impact, I doubt he leaves his foreign club for a non-guaranteed contract.

user-pic
Charlie H on Jun 16 at 18:13
+/-

I've been tempted by Aaron Gordon, but I really want offense out of this draft. I can't decide if he's Joe Alexander or Kenneth Faried. I suspect the former.

I would love to see McDermott on this team. Stauskas doesn't look like an NBA type to me, though I saw a tape where he hit about 80 shots in a row - there were cuts in the tape, of course, but still it showed 10 - 12 shots without a cut and he didn't miss. He appears slow and I don't know what else he can do. Consensus here though seems to be that Stauskas is clearly better than McDermott.

Totally agree about Gary Harris. A Tom Izzo creation. Izzo turns okay players into very good college players, hides weaknesses. I
don't want James Young at 10 either - I'd rather have Elfrid Payton than those two, based on what I've read. Zach Levine's stock is rising fast, would love to get him regardless of who gets picked at 3.

My please avoid list:

Harris
J. Young
Stauskas

Do you think they'll consider how the 2 players compliment each other on this roster and pick accordingly at 10? I think they'll pick best player regardless. You have to in the top 10.

Could Embiid be a Duncan-type 4? I think the Sixers might want him for that role and prefer him to Wiggins. I don't see Noel as a 4. It's hard to see it working, because both have to be the 5 and you want that guy to be the centerpiece of your team. When you have 2 of them, neither one is elevated to that position, or one is and the other has to be a role player, which is fine, but you don't want to pick a role player with the 1st pick in the draft.

The twin towers thing almost never works. The SF Warriors of '63-'64 are the history lesson - Wilt and Nate Thurmond on the same front line, but they were split up after 1 year. Olajuwon and Sampson worked well for a few years. Wilt and Luke Jackson were even better. Any others?

#3 I want no parts of Parker.

#10 I want no parts of one of the guys you brought up that you want: LaVine.

Also at 10 that I want no part of: Nurkic, Rodney Hood, James Young, Kyle Anderson.

This, except Anderson. I also think trading the #3 and Thad for Wiggins is kind of crazy. No Wiggins at 1.

why no love for Parker (at #3); does his lateral movement petrify you or you dont think his game will translate into successful production in the pros?
So then if Wiggins and Embiid are off the board, you would go with Exum or Vonleh?

What's he know? He picked the Heat in 6. Your guesses are as good as his.

Right. Anybody who has had an incorrect prediction is obviously always wrong. And clearly being able to predict whether Dwyane Wade will show up for the final 2 games is key to knowing how well Jabari Parker will translate.

I also never claim to be 100% right on draft prospects. I'm quite sure I will be wrong quite a bit. I just put in a lot of work to try to make my guess as informed as possible.

But hey, must be fun sitting on the internet anonymously doing nothing but taking shots at others. No chance of being wrong when you look at things in the rear view mirror.

So Dwyane Wade was responsible for your upside down prediction. I see. If you'd been paying more astute attention, you'd have realized he isn't turbo-driven anymore. 3rd worst WS/48 of 11 seasons in a pampered 54 G season. I've liked him too but his best days are gone. Old 32.

You get The Finals conversely wrong, why would your pronouncements on Parker's future be anything but dubious? A prediction corollary exists, even as you attempt to deny. Credibility, not assertion, is coin of the prognostication realm.

To your accusation: I contribute more than the making of fun and the taking of shots, though those offerings have their place and value. I'm an interested basketball observer and commentarian. Take my posts or pass 'em by.

Regarding internet anonymity: content speaks, not a screen name. You could be Derek of the Dominoes for all I know.

I don't doubt your work ethic or investment in basketball. Just your wisdom.

Call me finicky, but I expect more of "The Sixers best writer." ;-)

By the way, enjoyed your LB piece on Hinkie. Good work there.

Yawn. I mean this in the nicest way possible, but your type absolutely bores the ever living shit out of me. Have a good day.

You remind me of a refrigerator box. And I don't mean that as a slight to cardboard. Takes all kinds.

user-pic
Shipraider21 reply to Dollar Bill on Jun 21 at 16:56
+/-

Why come off with personal attacks? As none of us are paid by the actual decision makers I see everyone's opinion as more or less equal regardless of weather they picked the finals wrong. The correlation between picking a finals series between 2 strong teams and pickin the best future individual NBA prospects is not significant as those are two completely different avenues with different factors contributing to each.

Why not instead list reasons for why you disagree instead of directly attacking a person due to a basis that's pretty unrelated to the matter at hand? Like he said, most people are wrong more often than not. I'm quite sure he wasn't the only person who picked the heat, among them actual paid NBA decision makers and their opinions shouldn't be laughed at just because of that fact.

It's more his defensive awareness than his footspeed, although his footspeed is an issue. I think he's going to be a very poor man and team defender. I also don't think he's going to be very much of a shot creator for his teammates.

I don't disagree with the defense part, but I do find fault w/ not creating for others. If his efficiency is high, his presence alone will create for others even if he isn't a great passer and never looks for teammates. The extra attention and double teams will open things up.

The question is whether his efficiency will be high enough for him to become a disruptor on the offensive end. If he's average or below, there's a danger he has a Rudy Gay impact. If he's extremely efficient, the entire offense will benefit. My take is he's got a great chance to face a mismatch most nights at either the three or the four, and he's smart enough to avoid falling into the Rudy Gay trap of gunning bad shots.


If Wiggins ==> trade up for Randle or stay & get Stauskus or McDermott or Saric

If Parker ==> Gordon or Stauskus(or trade down with Chi for Grant & McDaniels)

If Embid ==> Stauskus or Saric

if Exum ==> MDermott or Saric

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 16 at 20:47
+/-

You know - here's something I don't understand

You've been banned, repeatedly. You aren't wanted here by the owner of the site (sorry no free speech arguments work here - only dolts use those to justify poor internet behavior - demonstrating ignorance in many areas of life at once) and keep figuring out ways to come back.

Why bother?

I haven't bothered with adding the latest IP to the banned list for a while. Faster to just delete every comment he leaves during the day when I don't have the time to get into the .htaccess file.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Brian on Jun 16 at 21:33
+/-

Sorry about replying to him - been that kind of couple weeks - stupid ruby on rails learning getting to me...

Don't worry about it. And drop Ruby, learn node.js.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Brian on Jun 17 at 10:58
+/-

Rails works for my brain set up - and incorporates javascript quite easily with the addition of coffeescript (which i need to learn). Javascript libraries are on the list next :)

I have to know Ruby because of how much we use Chef. My new toy is Go though.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Derek Bodner on Jun 17 at 15:10
+/-

Ruby is what I used when I built my modules to scrape the ESPN NBA Statistics (box scores, game flow, shot charts, play by play) but getting them into databases was always a pain cause the box score files are HTML and RegEx is a bitch. The shot charts were a bitch because every year ESPN treated free throws differently, sometimes easy to deal with sometimes not, and identifying 3 pointers is a bit difficult you gotta do it by x/y coordinates. I still want to be able to do it but damn if I don't always bit off more than one person with a full time job should try to chew :)

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Jun 16 at 20:54
+/-

Wiggins at #3 and a trade up for Randall is my favorite option. Adding a shooter in the late 1st or early 2nd and that is my ideal draft.

One thing that bothers me is Orlando having better assets to trade to teams at the 7,8, and 9 spot compared to us. Those teams seem to want established players and Afflalo and either Harkless or T.Harris may appeal more than Thad for different reasons.

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 16 at 21:00
+/-

The Bucks appear to be the only team with which Wiggins, Parker, Embiid and Dante Exum have all agreed to visit and work out, Chad Ford notes.

Is this true? And if so did Exum turn down the sixers or did they not ask?

Did Embiid say he'd work out for the Sixers? If he didn't, that could be the reason this statement is true.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Brian on Jun 16 at 21:31
+/-

I hadn't heard that he had turned the sixers down...I would think that would have made some rumbles...hey Derek?

user-pic
The Six on Jun 17 at 0:21
+/-

I agree on Harris 100%. He's is one guy I want no parts with at #10.

I go back and forth on Parker vs. Exum at #3 (if Wiggins and Embiid are gone). Bottom line for me is, if (the Sixers's feel)Parker can't defend the 4, I'll take Exum.


Oh I don't think Parker's going to be able to defend anyone, the hope is that his offense makes that a moot point and/or you can surround him with plus defenders to make up for it. There are plenty of stars who never played a lick of defense and caused terrible matchup problems for their team, two of them in this town as a matter of fact. Another just won the mvp. If you're looking for the perfect star, there are only two guys in this draft with a chance at that. Parker has a chance to be a one-way star, which is something you can build around, and build around easier than an all around very good player.

I think best case for Exum is something like a less-athletic Westbrook, and even the real thing isn't the centerpiece on a contender. Best case for Parker is a bit shorter version of Durant or Dirk, or Melo without the infatuation with long twos and sense of entitlement. A coachable Melo, which is something you could build around.

Another argument against wasting this pick on Exum is one I've made in other contexts previously. It's a pg-rich league right now. You can easily get a serviceable PG on the. heap, and a very good one in the $10M range. If you put some scoring talent around him and tell him not to take any jumpers, you might even have a decent pg already on the team on a rookie contract. I just don't see the logic in passing on a guy like Parker for the chance to maybe marginally improve yourself at the least important, or at least deepest, position in the league. If they hate Parker that much, I'd rather they take Vonleh or Randle than Exum.

I saw on an analytic draft guy's twitter that in last year's draft, we picked, at each pick, the best player on the board in EWP, an analytic prospect-projecting metric developed by a Timberwolves blogger. I doubt that Hinkie is using EWP or makes his picks solely by reference to any in-house metric, but it is worth noting that analytics guys generally prefer Smart, Exum, and even Gordon and Vonleh to Wiggins, that they love Jordan Adams and Kyle Anderson, and that they hate a lot of the guys we talk about at ten. The EWP model rates Lavine and James Young as late-first-rounders. It ranks Stauskas 32nd, McDermott 44th, and Payne 52nd. It says the players Stauskas is most similar to are Casey Jacobsen, John Jenkins, and Trajan Langdon, and finds that McDermott is most similar to Dan Langhi and Luke Harangody. (Kevin Pelton, for his part, has written that the only players in the NBA with equally bad steal rates as Stauskas in the last ten years were Jason Kapono and Joe Crawford.) While, again, I would not necessarily expect Hinkie to draft the guy who some model rates as the BPA at 3 or 10, especially given the weird names a lot of models are spitting out at the top (like Adams and Anderson), it would be pretty surprising if Hinkie drafted a player that the models rate poorly. Guys who could conceivably go at ten that the models like include Gary Harris, Kyle Anderson, Tyler Ennis, T.J. Warren, and K.J. McDaniels.

I also am not sure what to make of all the talk that Hinkie loves Wiggins and is considering trading up to ensure we get him, when this front office has been extremely closed-mouthed about everything it's done so far. For all we know, Hinkie wants Cleveland to think we think Wiggins is the best player in the draft because we think if they believe the sharpest analytic GM around loves Wiggins, they'll pick him and give us a shot at Embiid. That's a little conspiratorial, but not much less implausible than believing that the Sixers front office is telling Chad Ford who it wants.

Sharpest analytical GM around, huh? Kool-aid?

user-pic
Charlie H reply to Tray on Jun 17 at 12:19
+/-

He may want Cleveland to think he wants Wiggins because Cleveland will make the trade thinking they could still get Embiid at #3. Hinkie would then get his man, Embiid. This is the only way he can get him. The problem with this theory is that Cleveland would have to be convinced that Milwaukee would pass on Embiid for Parker, and they can't. I don't see any team passing on Embiid, and I think that's the reason Hinkie wants to move up. IMO the GMs see 3 tiers in the first 10 prospects: 1) Embiid, 2) Wiggins and Parker, 3) Randle, Vonleh, Smart, Exum, et. al.

Hinkie has to be thinking he'll have to settle for Parker at #3 and he wants more than that. (I have a feeling he'd be happy to settle for Wiggins.) But he also wants both 1st round picks in such a deep draft. I can only see him trading up to #2 because Thad and #3 won't be enough to sway Cleveland.

No Wiggins, Sam You Is. Pretty please with a healthy Embiid on top, the only gamechanger in the Class of '14. Kid 4Pts is much media bark, fair to middlin' bite. Wins swimsuit contest hands down. Keep him out of a Sixers uniform. If I want to watch a track star, Franklin Field in May does the trick. The home team needs ballers with both brains and balls. The Jayhawk wing is a little light in the loafers, basketballwise.

Picks 47 & 54 = 2 fried bologna sandwiches with a little mustard.

Gimme deep driller Doug McDermott at #10. His position is 'court'. Yeah, I know, he dances like a plowhorse but there are scads of bad defenders in the NBA. His being a coach's son makes me believe he'll give D a go; when applied, the mind can partly compensate. Averaged over 20 3 straight seasons. You don't do that without offensive acumen. When's the last time Sixers owned a dagger of a shooter?

user-pic
Tray reply to Dollar Bill on Jun 17 at 2:11
+/-

There are lots of very good shooters in this draft, but McDermott is probably the worst defender of them all. Possibly the most limited defender that's been seriously discussed for a lottery pick in eons.

He's also by far the best shooter in the draft (only Stauskas is close) and actually gives effort on defense which can't be said about a lot of players drafted in the lottery in the past.

My preference is simple:

At #3, i want whoever is left of Wiggins, Embiid and Exum. It's not that i don't like Parker, but i'd be disappointed if that's what we got from this draft.

At #10, i want whoever falls from the top 9 (Saric is on the same level as the other guys IMO) regardless of who is drafted at #3. I'd be slightly disappointed if it's Smart because he's a terrible fit, but you still have to take him because he is clearly better than the lower tier guys. If the top 9 somehow (highly unlikely IMO) all go 1-9, than i want Stauskas or McDermott at #10. Anyone else would be disappointing (Nurkic might be acceptable).

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Xsago on Jun 17 at 7:17
+/-

Would Vonleh surprise anybody at #3 if Embiid and Wiggins are gone? He is too raw offensively to have an immediate impact but could be a solid 2 way player.

I don't buy the C.Bosh comps because he could flat out score coming into the league. But what if he becomes an A.Horford type. Defends, rebounds and gets enough ppg. [15 to 18] to be a threat.

Is that more valuable than a Melo, as Brian described Parker. And what do you get at #10 if you go that route?

The eastern conference is about to get stronger with 7 possible picks out of the top ten also.

From what I've read and somewhat seen, I'm concerned about his lack of passing skills and he's also referred to as a 1/2 court type of guy. Seems to not fit with this Sixer teams plans. Could be an offensively challenged power forward/center tandem.

user-pic
Mike T reply to sfw on Jun 17 at 8:57
+/-

Passing skills and turnover prone would probably be a couple of his biggest weaknesses, but I like him over the other top PFs (Gorden, Randle). He's a good rebounder with great length, moves well for a big guy, apparently a strong work ethic and smart kid, and he has really nice shooting mechanics for a player his size that could stretch the floor.

I don't see him being offensively challenged at the next level. He also developed a decent low post game with a couple moves using either hand. Most importantly, he apparently picked all this up in just the past year or two which lends credence to his high "upside" (as much as I hate using that word).

He's definitely not a #1 option on offense, but if you can get Wiggins/Parker at #3 (Parker is a defensive liability whether he plays the 3 or 4, but I agree with Brian, that his offense alone should be able to compensate) and maybe trade up a couple spots for Vonleh while looking at SG later in the draft or FA the next couple years, to me that would be the best haul out of this draft.

user-pic
sfw reply to Mike T on Jun 17 at 11:54
+/-

I agree with the strategy. I'd like to come out of this draft by adding 2 starters. Would love the Sixers to move up from 10 to get whomever they prefer.

In theory Vonleh is a very intriguing prospect and i was very high on him initially. Now, however, i'm lukewarm on him. He's part of that second tier, no doubt, but i definitely wouldn't take him at #3. I'm really worried about his awareness on both ends of the floor and his basketball IQ in general. I just feel like he's too far behind in those areas to ever become more than a role player, even though he's very young. And at #3, i definitely wouldn't draft a role player with the current state of the Sixers roster, no matter how good he might become as a role player.

I also think his shooting ability is overrated. It's an extremely slow sample size and his release is slow. I wouldn't be surprised if a guy like Randle ends up being a better shooter than him. Saric is definitely a better shooter than Vonleh also. Only Gordon of the PFs is a lock to be a worse shooter IMO. Everything else is up in the air, yet Vonleh's supposed shooting ability is what makes everybody love him.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Xsago on Jun 17 at 19:08
+/-

Why would Sam take him at #3? My only logical reasoning is he is rated equally or close to Exum and Parker on their board and more importantly, Sam thinks he has a star already in M.C.W. . That is one thing we don't know.

Derek, would love your opinion on how close our two rookies are to who we take at #3. We all assume they want a star but WOULD they trade down to #4 and #12 to add 3 top 12 players rather than just 2?

Well. I'm not the worlds biggest MCW fan.

I think I would have him ranked below Exum and Smart at PG. I think I would take Embiid, Wiggins, and Parker over him. I would probably add Vonleh to that list. I think, after what he's shown his rookie year, he's in that group with Randle, Gordon, Saric, etc. So I would say ~7th.

Noel I have ranked a little bit higher. I would have Noel above Vonleh, and maybe Smart. So I'll say Noel 5th.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Derek Bodner on Jun 17 at 21:01
+/-

Derek, thinking in a vacuum, if you were starting a team from this draft, does your top 5 change? I value p.g. more and wonder where Smart goes. And Exum, as a 6'6" p.g. probably moves ahead of Wiggins to me , because of position.

I'm pretty much approaching the draft as if I'm building the Sixers from scratch. The only thing that might change is moving Smart up to #5. But for the most part, that's how my draft is ordered.

user-pic
buke reply to Xsago on Jun 17 at 19:12
+/-

He really had a pretty underwhelming freshman year at Indiana considering how highly touted he was. For stretches he could look pretty impressive but for longer stretches you could forget that he was in the game. I only got to see him for about three games this year but he didn't strike me as more than a role player at the next level.

user-pic
The Six reply to deepsixersuede on Jun 17 at 12:24
+/-

I watch him and I just don't see "Chris Bosh". I don't even see much in the way of athleticism. I think the best comp that I have heard for what I see is Tristan Thompson.

Tristan Thompson is probably a similar athlete (good but not super-elite.) But Thompson is a horrible shooter (to where he has changed hands to try and improve), is a bit shorter, has 4 inches less reach and has a smaller frame (20 pounds less when drafted.) So I really don't see them being a great comparison.

Part of the reason I am still really high on Vonleh is his frame. I see a big difference between an athletic, long, 6'9" 250 guy as opposed to the far more common 6'9" 225 players that you typically see drafted high in the lottery. Physically Vonleh is closer to where Dwight Howard and Favors were when he entered the league than Thompson. He will never be as explosive as Howard and I doubt he bulks up quite as much, but I do see Vonleh as developing into a wide-bodied big. And his shooting and ball handling promise is much better than Favors or Dwight.

He's also an elite defensive rebounder, which Thompson never was. He's gotten better, to where he's now passable, but he was brutal at Texas and his first year in the NBA.

Great defensive rebounder + great length + strong + improving range = really useful player. I'm not sure I see Chris Bosh level offense, but I think he's going to be a hell of a 3rd option on a team.

user-pic
The Six reply to Derek Bodner on Jun 17 at 16:14
+/-

Derek, how does he rate for you overall? 4th behind Exum in your book?

5th. I have Parker ahead of him.

I'm consciously trying these days not to project who I want to be drafted preferring instead to take a wait-and-see approach. I've learned that my wishes aren't a great barometer of the future. I shook my head in semi-disgust when King selected Thad with the 12th pick and he turned out to be a significant contributor in his rookie year once he got the chance to play regularly. I shouted "Glory Hallelujah" when they picked Evan Turner at #2. Obviously, that joy was unfounded. I was also pretty happy with the Speights pick (although I wanted Hibbert more) and he started out promisingly before settling into the mediocrity that he's maintained since his rookie year.

But I'll play anyway. I don't think there's much they can do to screw up the 3rd pick although I agree with Bryan that Exum could be their one chance. As for #10, I just can't get excited about Garry Harris (maybe that means he'll have a great rookie year). I'm not crazy about the choice of LaVine despite his athleticism. After starting out strong, I'd say Hood was underwhelming this college season. Gordon tests really well on body and athleticism but he seems to have some skill limitations at this stage of his career.

I'm fine with Stauskas or McDermott. I would take an optimistic wait-and-see approach on Saric and might feel the same way about Elfrid Payton. I like Julius Randle and would like to see him picked if they could manage to move up a few places.

I'm with you on Randle. Hated him up top, but if he slips would love to see them get him with their second pick. Wiggins/Randle might be my optimal combo right now, still having a problem putting Embiid ahead of Wiggins.

user-pic
buke reply to Brian on Jun 18 at 11:22
+/-

Yes, Randle started the season rated very highly but slipped when his young team's inconsistencies showed themselves. When it mattered in the NCAA tournament he performed well. The guy was a very good rebounder throughout the year. That's something that should be appreciated by fans of a team whose power forward has a career 5.5 rb/gm average.

I've been thinking about these Wiggins rumors and they're starting to worry me. If they're true, I'm fine with that, as you know . If they're gamesmanship, though, I don't like the underlying logic. If they're floated to misdirect Cleveland into trading #1 to them, that doesn't make sense because it would mean Wiggins to Philly, Embiid to MIL and CLE would get Parker. It's not like stating a preference for Wiggins would signal to CLE they could get Embiid at #3. The only way this works as gamesmanship is if they're actually targeting someone other than Wiggins and Embiid. Like they're worried someone will jump in front of them to get Exum (so they're misdirecting saying he will be there at 4), or they really want Parker and they're trying to talk MIL into taking Wiggins number two. If this is gamesmanship, it's either extremely misguided, they're relying on non-public info about MIL or CLE's intentions, or their ultimate target is Parker, Ecum or someone else. One other possibility is they could be setting expectations for a trade back. If Wiggins is off the board they've been leaking for months that he was their primary target so they're fine with trading back a couple slots rather than reaching, by their scouting, for someone there.

On the other hand, and this is probably more likely, the Wiggins narrative hasn't come from anyone in the know and it should be completely disregarded. I believe they are trying to move up, but moving up for Wiggins was pure supposition.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Brian on Jun 17 at 20:55
+/-

This time of year it is hard to separate the b.s. from the truth, between so called promises and who likes who. C.Ford is pretty damn certain, it seems, with his info. Derek has said numerous times Ford gets good intel.

But I can't believe anybody knows what the sixers will do. I hope any move up gets Embiid. To me he is the first tier. How do you rate the players tier wise? Exum seems to rate equally in a lot of peoples minds to Parker and Wiggins.

For me it's:

Wiggins, Embiid
Parker

Then the rest of the top (not including Saric and Gordon) in an order like this:

Vonleh, Randle, Smart, Exum

Then McDermott/Stauskus

If every one of those guys is gone at 10 I'd take Payne or Lavine if I couldn't find a trade partner, or take a shot on Saric. No way I'd walk out of this draft with Gordon, though.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Brian on Jun 17 at 21:56
+/-

B.Brown came from a team that had 2 ballhandlers [Parker and Ginobli] breaking down opposing defenses off the dribble who both became good shooters as they matured. Maybe he sees the same in an M.C.W. and Exum backcourt.

If this is a 4 player draft in Hinkies' eyes than draft night could really get crazy. I like Saric with either Wiggins or Exum but am not sure he becomes a great shooter yet.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to deepsixersuede on Jun 17 at 21:11
+/-

I don't give ESPN money any more - but I read somewhere that Fords most recent mock ha the sixers getting Wiggins, but I'm not sure if it was speculating on a trade or having him fall to 3.

user-pic
jfp reply to GoSixers on Jun 17 at 21:17
+/-

As usual, Ford has it both ways, but settles on Wiggims falling to the third pick.

He has us getting Wiggins at three, but says if he doesn't fall "the Sixers think Exum would fit nicely with MCW in the backcourt." Which would make me puke.

Derek
Could you compare Embid's game with next draft crop of bigs (i.e Okafor, Myles, K. Towns) ?
Because if the Sixers get a wing now, for sure next year they will look for a big to complement the front court with Noel.
thanks

Brian, generally speaking, on a scale of 1-10 what's your level of confidence in the Sixers front office that they will come away with two (or more) building blocks next week? If I had to guess, I would peg you at a 6.

I would be at an 8 or 9 myself. I have a lot of confu

user-pic
The Six reply to The Six on Jun 17 at 22:23
+/-

confidence. Fuck.

Building blocks don't really matter so much if you don't get the key piece. If they come away with two decent starters this whole thing has been a failure imo. Right now I'd say I'm at about a 7 that they'll do the right thing at three (or trade up). It would be lower, but I think it's about 50/50 that Wiggins is there at three and they won't fuck up in that situation. If Wiggins and Embiid are both gone, I'd put better odds on them getting cute than taking Parker. I'm fairly confident they won't screw up at #10. One of those top guys will probably drop.

I'm also confident Hinkie will make a couple of trades, interested in seeing if he's moves up from 10, moves down or just makes a bunch of meaningless deals for/with second rounders. I wouldn't be shocked at all if he moves down from three and picks up a 2015 lottery pick in the process if Wiggins/Embiid go 1/2. In thAt situation, I bet Utah would pay a king's ransom to get Parker. Maybe #5 and an unprotected 2015 pick, then Hinkie takes Exum, Smart or Vonleh at five.

and if they do fuck it up we get to do this again next year!

user-pic
buke reply to das411 on Jun 18 at 10:57
+/-

I suspect we'll do this again next year no matter who they pick. The only difference is that the pick may be a little lower and a solo one.

But a lot more interesting product with Noel, #3, #10, MCW and a bunch of other new additions.

I don't mid watching a bad team if it has promise to develop into something over time. I'm much more excited for next year than I was the year after Brand/Iggy/Miller lost in the 1st round of the playoffs.

user-pic
buke reply to tk76 on Jun 19 at 11:16
+/-

I agree that new and different are usually more interesting than more of the same. That would also be the driving force behind infidelity over the ages.

Don't know yet whether I agree with you on next year's team vs. the Miller-Iggy ones (technically, Brand didn't get to play very long with Miller before being injured). I liked those three guys, though, especially Miller. I don't know whether I'll ever think as highly of MCW. I'll just have to wait and see about the others.

The Hinkie Sixers and Greta Garbo: "I want to be alone!"

"The story of my life is about back entrances, side doors, secret elevators and other ways of getting in and out of places so that people don't bother me." ~ Greta Garbo

"My talents fall within definite limitations. I am not as versatile an actress as some think." ~ Greta Garbo


She's being too hard on herself. Remember that she did manage to laugh well in Ninotchka. I didn't know she was so self effacing about her abilities.

Hinkie could also be compared to President Martin Van Buren who was said to "row towards his object with muffled oars."

Good reminder. Let's just say Garbo's sense of humor was subtle. Like Antartica. She was an interesting individual. Refused all work with The Three Stooges.

"The Red Fox of Kinderhook" (NY). U.S. PG, 5'6". Utterly political gent (his father owned a tavern that was patronized by Aaron Burr, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay); used everything in his toolbox. During Marty's unsuccessful 1840 reelection bid, the Whigs called him Martin Van Ruin and chanted "Van, Van, he's a used-up man." Shook hands with William Henry Harrison and went home.

Oar quote. A good one. Attributed to John Randolph of Roanoke, "the most venomous speaker of his (or any other day)." [Time Magazine, 1976, Special Report]

and who did you vote for in 1840?

Funny you should ask. Abstained on principle.

I am wondering when Players can announce if they will opt in/out of contracts? Is it before the draft? I was hoping we could nab the 26th pick from the Heat for taking Udonis Haslem off their hands, they sure could use the extra cap space.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to ojr107 on Jun 18 at 12:03
+/-

From reports concerning Lebron and Carmelo and a few others, I believe the deadline isn't set by the league but it's defined in their contract itself.

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 18 at 12:27
+/-

I just realized that the last time I remember so much talk about 1 & 3 switching so much, it also involved the sixers and a 7 footer.

Sadly it was because the sixers were so fixed on Sean Bradley as opposed to the two talented players they could have chosen (Penny / Weber) in 1993 that Orlando and Golden State could confidently work a deal, knowing the sixers were making the wrong pick (I hated that pick so much).

Here's hoping this year works out better for the sixers than 1993

Bradley was tall, but mean as a napkin. Became a utility worker for the Mavs.

I remember a story about someone stealing his custom golf clubs.

Is this draft supposed to be deep overall, or just at the top? This might be unrealistic but (unless we can trade up and get someone really good) a part of me wants to try to trade back with that second pick and get an extra second rounder and then package those 2 second rounders to jump up a bit into the first, giving us 3 first rounders. This basically give us more chances to get a good player and more depth.

Also, i was listening to a scout on 97.5 last night who said Noel is more ideal as a power forward, as he is good at coming to block shots from the side. I see some centers projected there in the teens.

IMO it is deep overall. In terms of franchise talent, you could say it has only one. Compared to last year though, it's better up top.
I think that strategy of 3 mid 1st round picks will net you 3 solid role players. That's a loss in anyone's books. We should be grateful we did not fall out of the top 3.

If Noel could shoot the ball, that would be even a start. Projecting him as a forward is extremely generous. I'm itching to see him play though.

user-pic
Greg reply to jkay on Jun 18 at 22:28
+/-

I'm not sure if i was clear on this but i was was not suggesting we trade the number 3 pick. I was suggesting we could trade back the number 10 pick.

For example, i don't rely know pick values, but let's say we traded number 10 for number 14 and 27. Then we trade 32 and 27 for number 20. i don't know if those values are realistic, but that would shift the picks around to numbers 3, 14, and 20. We'd have the same number of players drafted but one pick would be lower and the other pick higher. 2 mid first round picks and also the number 3 pick. Then we could take one of those european centers at 14. I don't know if this would work but it's just an idea

There are reports that Chicago offered #16 and #19 for #11. So that would be the type of move that could be an option. Then they always could move back up a couple of picks if they had another target.

Right now I'm for staying at #10 and grabbing the BPA regardless of fit. There are enough minutes available at every roster spot to accommodate 2 players who might have fit issues. I think there are enough minutes for:

MCW/Exum or Parker/Saric or Embiid/Noel or Parker/McDermott or Wiggins/McDaniels

I am not saying I want any of those pairings, but I can see the team finding 30+ minutes for each of them. Then if in a year you have a pair of good players that don't fit you can always trade one. Good players on rookie deals are valuable. Average players on rookie deals (that happen to fit) are not.

To me, this is one of those in a perfect world theories, but in reality when you assemble a bunch of redundant parts and bad fits you wind up devaluing them because they look like crap on the floor, and stunting their development because you're creating an environment of failure rather than setting them up for success. Sure, you can find 30 minutes for each of Exum and MCW, 30 minutes with no floor spacing, clogged driving lanes and inflated turnovers. Then maybe you get fifty cents on the dollar two years down the road when you finally admit you can't play them together.

If we were talking about a clear drop off in talent from prospect a who is a terrible fit to prospect b who is a good fit, then fine. But if you're splitting hairs (or going out on a limb which would be the case with Exum) to declare someone the BPA, then fit is and should be considered the deciding factor. Otherwise you care more about your religion of theories than winning.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Jun 19 at 0:21
+/-

I think both of our points are valid, and you have to find the right balance between fit and BPA. Like you said, it comes down to the talent drop off between the available players. But at #10 I think there is a good chance that there will be a clear BPA (at least in Hinkie's mind) and that player might be a bad fit. And if Embiid is available at #3 then you again have a claer BPA.

Overall, I just hope Hinkie can get the players he really wants. That will help us determine quicker whether he is the right GM. That is partly why I don't want to see them drafting Parker at #3 because he is the BPA but might not be the type of franchise player Hinkie wants.

It is sort of like the Eagles. Chip Kelly has wisely modified his system to accomidate Nick Foles. But it would have been interesting to see how he would do with a dual threat QB of similar quality. The current situation shows that Kelly is a good coach who does not put his sytem befoer the players. But we still don't really know how his preferred system would look in the NFL.

If he's hung up on the type of franchise player he wants, he's already the wrong GM. Franchise players are exceedingly rare, he should be hung up on getting one, period. And if he passes on one to take a guy who better fits his ideal player profile, we're doomed.

user-pic
Rodney reply to Brian on Jun 19 at 9:49
+/-

So true. Hinkie resembles the new Evan Turner for some fans it seems. Sip the Kool-Aid before stirring up the sugar still settled at the bottom. Doesn't taste all that well ala Turner's premature lovefest.

The inverse is also true.

user-pic
Rodney reply to Derek Bodner on Jun 19 at 23:07
+/-

Inverse of what exactly? Not sure what you're referring to specifically.

But what I said was the opposite.

I think they will take the BPA, especially if that player has star potential. All I added was I hope that it is a player who fits with what the organization is trying to do, because a lot of their future decisions will be effected by their franchise player.

For example, you may want to implement a Spurs system that is built around motion and open 3 pointers- but if Parker turns out to be a player like Melo who thrives off of isolation and long 2's then you likely will be forced to implement a different system based on personnel.

I am not saying Hinkie will or should pass on Parker. I hope he is in a position to acquire the right pick for this team.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Greg on Jun 19 at 8:35
+/-

Your forgetting our biggest asset, caproom. They can get a pick in the 15 to 20 range using their capspace and a non guarenteed 2nd rounder to a team like Chicago, that probably doesn't want to sign 2 1st rounders.

I expect them to acquire either a 1st rounder in this draft or a future 1st using this method.

I wonder how much our owner is willing to pay for this to happen though. Would he eat Boozers' 16 million or does Thad have to go [9 mill.] to offset the cost.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Greg on Jun 18 at 21:21
+/-

Depth is relative

There are 'tiers' of the draft...there's a top 3 tier...then there's the next tier which goes anywhere from 5-9 depending on who you believe (lakers beat guy on the radio today said the lakers think there's no difference between #7 on their board and #10 on their board, but after 10 there's a drop off)...

I don't know that the draft depth quality is worth risking moving back at this point...2 second year players (one of whom never played in his first year)...2 this year, and maybe a third in the lower portion by pairing some of the seconds...i believe you can have too many rookies at once :)

user-pic
Greg reply to GoSixers on Jun 18 at 22:50
+/-

Yea i guess we need to aim for the stronger parts of the draft. At the same time everyone is saying to take best player available, and i would like them to try to build a team of quality players that can function together.If the guy they really like isn't available, maybe they can get good value from other teams trying to trade up.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to GoSixers on Jun 19 at 8:43
+/-

I wonder who everybody's top 5 would be as far as star potential? Mine would be Embiid,Parker,Wiggins,Randall and either Smart or Saric.

Exum as a p.g. could be one because of his size but as a s.g. [here] I am not sure.

And Saric may be there at 8,9, or 10. That is why I don't trade back. He is the one variable up top to me starting at #4.

As I understand, a big drawback with Saric is that it's not certain that he is committed to entering the NBA right away if drafted. For the Spurs, Splitter might have been worth the three year wait, but they're the Spurs. Our team is the Sixers and they need all the help they can get as soon as possible.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to buke on Jun 19 at 11:44
+/-

Actually, if they have to wait 3 years for a guy to be ready to come over - and thus mature his game while still coming in on a rookie deal - that might be a benefit. The sixers aren't going to be winning in the next year or so anyway, this is a long term process.

Reports out there are that Saric's decision to stay in Europe or come to the NBA may be directly related to the team that drafts him...so the whole thing is up in the air and different teams will get different answers.

I just worry that these Euro's all get more hype because of limited available footage against limited competition. I mean these guys are given tons of hype while most of them are averaging low minutes for whatever Euro League team they work for because of short bursts in international tournaments. It's a lot like judging a guy purely by his NCAA tournament performance in my mind.

PS - report today indicates that the great red auerbach vetoed drafting tony parker cause he wanted joe forte

user-pic
buke reply to Greg on Jun 19 at 15:03
+/-

I would say mostly deep at the top. Otherwise it looks like most any other draft to me.

TRADE EVERYTHING YOU HAVE TO GET NERLENS NOEL. AND I MEAN EVERYTHING.

user-pic
Charlie H on Jun 19 at 8:39
+/-

Does this organization have a PR department? The tone-deafness of this cabal of hedge fund whiz kids is astonishing. Apparently, it's a state secret that the Sixers are interested in drafting one of the consensus 3 best players in the draft with the 3rd pick.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/the-philadelphia-76ers-apologize--kind-of--for-keeping-potential-draftee-andrew-wiggins-away-from-media-220825559.html

I'm getting tired of feeling like following this team requires the skills and resources of an investigative reporter. You just can't treat your customers like this. Throw us a bone for God's sake.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Charlie H on Jun 19 at 8:41
+/-

They over reacted as there were also throngs of folks seeking autographs - mainly mostly just to sell them - and didn't bother to distinguish between the two.

This was barely news in Philadelphia...let alone something worth publishing on any 'national' web site...

1) It was mostly PCOM. Sixers told PCOM it was a closed practice, with no media or fans. PCOM then enforced their own rules on their own private property.
2) I don't think Sam Hinkie really cares about fan interest. Because, ultimately, if he wins, fans will care. If he doesn't, fans won't. So he's going to make his policies based around what helps him win. And keeping his thoughts on draft prospects a secret is an advantage. They could move up. They could acquire a second top 5 pick. One of these prospects could fall. One of these prospects could struggle in their rookie contract and become available. Tipping his hat on who he liked in any of those scenarios decreases his leverage. It might only decrease it by a fraction of a percent, but he wants that fraction of a percent.

I have full season credentials now. I can go to all the games. I can go to all the open practices. I'm directly impacted by this policy more than anybody on this site. But I don't really care. I want a front office that's focused on doing everything they can to make the best decisions that they can rather than the dog and pony show. We tried the biggest t-shirt canons in the league before. I'd prefer a different approach to PR.

I don't really care how tight-lipped they are, the tighter the better. It would be nice if they could work out a prospect without coming off like complete amateurs, though. For some reason every other team in the league can hold a workout without having security corral the press off the premises.

Every other team in the league (I believe) have their own premises and hire their own security. That's the amateur part of this whole thing.

Isn't the underlying issue here the fact they didn't communicate this was a private workout to the press beforehand? How security handled the reporters is beside the fact, if the team had communicated properly, they wouldn't have even been there. You can't blame previous ownership for that.

anyway, this whole thing is meaningless. This week can't go by fast enough, I'm dying for something tangible to talk about.

The team my have bungled things, but on the flip side I just hate hearing the media complain about teams/players making their lives difficult. They make it sound like it is this huge injustice and how it is hurting the fans. When reality it is just the media whining about their jobs. You hear this type of complaint all of the time from beat writers for all of the teams, whether it is a particular player who is not media friendly or whether it was the Eagles closing practices. I remember the media complaining about Schmidt and Carlton 30 years ago, when the fans were more than happy to have Carlton as a dominant hermit.

The press knows that every draft workout is a private workout. When Clark saw Wiggins at the airport, editors got on the beats to get down there and get anything they could anyway.

"It was mostly PCOM" - - Did you communicate with PCOM officials for their version of the botched situation? Or have you relied upon the home team, the Philadelphia Seventy Secrets.

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 19 at 11:08
+/-

Remember when the sixers drafted Andre Iguodala and it wasn't really common knowledge that they had even worked him out until after they drafted him.

No one whined about that being secret.

Gotcha journalism, 24 hour news cycle, desperation for clicks to keep your job, all these things lead to garbage being presented as news.

Iguodala wasn't common knowledge. And rightly so. If only he had stayed a secret. Ah, it's a dog's life near the Schuylkill.

user-pic
buke reply to GoSixers on Jun 19 at 11:33
+/-

I seem to recall interest in Iguodala being reported prior to the draft. I remember not being at all surprised when the Sixers' 2004 pick was announced. Far more surprising were the Thad pick (never read Billy King talking about him) and the Harkless pick (that really came from left field). Jrue's pick was a bit of a surprise, too, and only seemed to happen because he unexpectedly fell to them.

I do agree that the best policy might be to not become too invested in any potential pick and just wait and see who is picked and how he performs.

Boy, was he a grafitti artist early in his career. My eyes still hurt from that.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to buke on Jun 19 at 11:41
+/-

What I recall from then is that the sixers had secretly worked him out just the day before the draft...but I was a bit farther away from Philly.

Still remember the moment the Raptors made that awful draft pick of Araujo

user-pic
buke reply to GoSixers on Jun 19 at 15:23
+/-

Yes, Araujo was quite possibly the worst first round pick of that draft although I didn't realize it at the time. Although that draft was pretty good, two other terrible picks of big white guys on the first round joined Araujo: Pavel Podkolzin and Robert Swift. Swift was a veritable poster child for the delayed entry policy and the other two probably made a significant contribution to the greater skepticism about drafting foreign big men highly that we see today.

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 19 at 11:39
+/-

ESPN is reporting that Embiid has a non specific (as of yet) foot injury. he cancelled his workout with the Bucks. His agent is talking double speak, as agents are wont to do...it's like the NFL gets every medical record of every player since they were 5 years old but somehow the NBA can't get complete physicals of their potential players...again agents with too much power.

Depending on the severity of the injury and long term implications if any and a back check out, this could cause him to be more likely to be available at 3 like Noel slipped last year with teams more worried about the immediate (next season) future picking at 1 and 2

user-pic
Mike reply to GoSixers on Jun 19 at 11:55
+/-

so basically Sixers are fucked unless Cavs or Bucks take Exum

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Mike on Jun 19 at 12:06
+/-

That's a matter of some debate, and until the full details on the foot are released...I think it could work to the sixers advantage.

I know the immediate reaction of many if they drafted the guy with the injured foot a year after drafting the guy who missed the entire season...but if they have a medical staff that gives him close to 100% chance (nothing is 100%) of a complete recovery but he misses part (or all) of next season, you still take him.

Drafting to me is a long game, not an immediate game, just look at the spurs, who draft guys who sometimes won't even play for a few years, because they believe in the long term it's going to make their team better for a long while

if your 7 ft prospect injured his foot just working out for the draft, that doesn't bode very well for his durability in NBA action. Especially when the bane of big men is always below the waist (knees, foot etc.)
I dont think he goes top 2 now. The possibility of the Sixers drafting Dante Exum is much realer now. I'm not comfortable with that either.
So throwing caution to the wind (if the physical checks out fine) we take another big man who will miss almost a season in the conservative precaution we showed with Noel. Noel plays, gets a year to get accustomed to NBA action without any worry about a big man logjam. We suck again, end up with a top 5 pick hopefully while avoiding the record books.

So Noel gets ROY votes and value for trade if necessary, top 5 pick in tow, Embiid healthy ready for take off in 2015/16 season. Could work. The season may not be unwatchable if we draft a shooting wing or Randle.

correction: reports unsure as to when he sustained that injury.
Might have been carrying it for a bit, who knows?
Who knows what this means. Sixers should be reading the report from Cleveland now. I guess this pick will truly reveal what kind of GM Hinkie is.

cant read the report if CLE(or MIL) dont give it to you which they have no reason to

I see. My impression is that there would be a gentleman's agreement with that kind of a thing.
Makes sense for the Cavs. Not Milwaukee though.

They should probably take him anyway, but I mean how many red flags can a guy with this little experience have before you pass? He couldn't stay in the floor when he was healthy, then he misses over a month, he comes back for one-on-none workouts and needs surgery on his foot. How many minutes did he even play this year? Limited action resulted in two pretty serious injuries. I don't know whether to call him Bynum or Oden.

I think it's safe to say that at this point Embiid is no longer considered the de facto #1 pick. The back was a lingering suspicion. Now a foot? Too risky. Wiggins gets bumped to 1. Who knows where Embiid lands. Heck we might nab him at 10.

Just my prediction. I'm not going to pretend I know anything about this process or what's in the minds of GMs.

Hinkie should pick up Anthony Bennett. He's a sleeper.

He's sponsored by Serta.

Then that Sealys it. He's Serta-fied.

"Philadelphia has been intrigued with the possibility of drafting a point guard with one of its picks in the draft, closely studying Dante Exum and Marcus Smart, sources said. Smart wouldn't be selected with Philly's third overall pick, sources said, but Exum does become a candidate for the Sixers at No. 3. Philadelphia has had discussions with teams about gathering an additional pick between its two current choices at No. 3 and No. 10."

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources--joel-embiid-awaiting-final-analysis-on-a-possible-fractured-right-foot-180140657.html

user-pic
GoSixers reply to sixerfan1220 on Jun 19 at 14:48
+/-

Combine that with Exum's so called desire to be in LA and #7 looks tasty - but what else can the Lakers offer (their 2015 draft pick is a lottery pick I bet, probably high lottery, Kobe most likely hurts himself again - karma I now believe in you)

I would love it if Tellem was faking Embiid's injury cause he wants to come to Philly :)

user-pic
Mike T reply to GoSixers on Jun 19 at 15:05
+/-

Lakers don't have anything of significance to offer that I'm aware of. Didn't they trade away their 2015 1st rounder in the Nash deal?

yes

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Mike T on Jun 19 at 15:14
+/-

Didn't know that - crap

Oh well

‏@WojYahooNBA Joel Embiid has suffered stress fracture in right foot and slated for surgery on Friday, agent Arn Tellem says.

That could possibly result in neither Wiggins nor Parker being available at #3 and Brian's nightmare scenario of the Exum pick being realized or maybe an even darker horse candidate like Smart.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to buke on Jun 19 at 16:26
+/-

Exum than Gordon and Brian pulls the plug on the blog!!!

Simmons:
>>
I watched every Finals game in San Antonio with Doug Collins from our set behind one of the baskets. He’s an old-school guy who gravitates toward gritty, competitive, relentless players — basically, anyone he would have loved to coach. And when he’s watching games, he’s usually thinking out loud, so he’ll get super-excited about a player from time to time. And as we became buddies over the last eight months, I realized that Doug had something of a hierarchy of praise that went like this.

Level 1: “Coach, that guy is tough.”

Level 2: “Coach, that guy is a BITCH.”

Level 3: “Coach, that guy is a [12-letter word].”5 - Doug calls everyone “Coach.”

Level 3 didn’t happen that often (and never in mixed company). And if it happened, he’d usually nudge me and whisper, “Coach, coach, that guy is a [12-letter word].” There was no higher praise from him. During Game 5, Doug blessed Kawhi with Level 1 and Level 2, then something else happened (I think it was one of those big Kawhi 3s) and Doug briefly lost his mind, pounding my arm, breaking Level 3 code and yelping, “Coach, that guy is a [12-letter word]! He is a [TWELVE-LETTER WORD]!!!!!!” That’s right, Kawhi Leonard single-handedly created Level 4 on the Coach Collins Hierarchy of Praise. That was my favorite moment of the 2014 Finals, hands down. I wish everyone loved basketball as much as Doug Collins does.

http://grantland.com/features/24-lingering-questions-from-the-nba-finals/

user-pic
deepsixersuede on Jun 19 at 15:37
+/-

It sounds like panic is setting in. Cleveland is trying to get Exum in for a workout now.

Read on hoopshype that a 'sleeper deal' of the #8 pick and I.Thomas for E.Bledsoe was offered by Sacramento. Forgive me but free agency isn't upon us yet and those 2 players can't be traded on draft night.

I know these types of deals may happen but don't they have to be kept quiet?

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 19 at 16:24
+/-

Dear resident MD TK76 - what is the navicular bone - what does it mean that it has a stress fracture and is that easy to break or hard to break?

Guess I can answer this as well (I'm a sports doc) - the fact that he's getting surgery isn't a good sign since it means it's probably a complicated fracture (which means it has dislocated from the joint and is rubbing around damaging the cartilage). Normally a stress fracture isn't that much of a big deal, some rest, a cast and decent rehabilitation and you're good to go in a month or so. This will probably take longer, but if the cartilage he should be ok for a long career. I guess he pushed himself to the limit to get that #1 spot and now is paying the price.

A lot of typos there, but you get the idea. I'm on a 4 hours sleep a day week and I guess my brain is shutting down! Sorry!

IIRC, the navicular bone can have issues with regards to having a good blood supply. But Overall, I'd be much more concerned about this type of injury in a 7 foot athlete as opposed to a more typical athlete. The dynamic forces are so much more extreme in someone that height (think of levers and pi-R-squared in terms of forces transmitted.)

Exactly right, but besides avascular necrosis and osteochondral lesions and with proper healing there should be no problems in the future if he fixes eventual biomechanical problems of his technique. I'd even take it as a good sign - his work ethic is clearly in the right place. I'd be more concerned with tibiotalar lesions.

I would puck Embiid at #3. Why not till the dice (again) on a potentially dominant big?

#3 in a two man draft. Fucking awesome. Trade back and get an unprotected lottery pick in 2015.

Good thing Hinkie held on to Hawes and Turner to maximize their value. Shit like that never comes back to haunt you.

This couldn't have happened 10 days from now after Cleveland took him?

He probably drops to the Lakers or Celts and completely realizes his potential now while we watch Exum and MCW ruin each other for the next five years.

Karma. 63 hellbent losses. Hinkiestink. Boomerang.

No way! The Sixers won't lose more than 60 games next season.

Bright guy like yourself knows 63 was last season's loss total. Looking ahead, hard to put a number on an unformed team - - 'bout 6 - 8 losers under contract, so you may not be far off.


The Spurs must really be due for some bad Karma after tanking for Duncan after the Admiral went down. And the Heat who tanked after Wade got hurt (and only ended up with Beasley for their efforts.)

Clearly Karma is waiting for the right moment to strike both Finals teams.

Nice try, but neither of your examples compare to the fruitcake of a team that shepherd Hinkie presented for consumption, beginning to end. I know you're of his flock so you've met expectations with you're comment.

correction: 'your', not 'you're' (regarding my reply to yer comment of teams of yore)

If you were posting here 4 years ago you might remember my constant pleading for Stephanski to trade away Iggy and Brand, not extend Miller and do a real rebuild from the ground up- which should have been done at the time of the Iverson trade in '06.

But I also was a fan of the Bynum trade (had he been healthy) which was not a rebuild/tank type move.


I think the difference between our views is that I look at Hinkie's moves through the lens of the state of the team post Bynum disaster when he took the job 15 months ago. The team had no talent and no futire draft picks. So given they were hosed for the next 3 years, I agreed with Hinkie's approach of trying to turn lemons into lemonade by stockpiling picks through full out tanking.

While I get the impression that you are opposed to tanking more on a moral/philosophical grounds. I think this partly stems from your being a fan during the age of Philly entitlement with the Sixers and Flyers. I grew up at the tale end of that era- and the mentality around the teams was similar to how the current Laker/Celtics fans view their teams. They just figure they can always be good and the teams that suffer through years of losing are just suckers following second class franchises.

Yes, our views regarding Hinkie's handling of personnel (and other matters) differ.

It's simple to me: teams owe it to fans to try their best to field a competitive team EACH YEAR. Do you care a whit about the 2017 Kentucky Derby today? Neither do I.

Sixer fans are in a similar predicament, though Hinkie acolytes - bless their patient, hopeful, esoteric souls - would say watching the basketball version of larvae hatch is dandy entertainment.

I don't believe in the hype of most of these 18 to 20 year old shoe contract candidates. Don't show me your bling and your jive; show me your sound, versatile and team-focused game - optimum ball. Then I'll stand and cheer to the roof.

I'm hardly a fan carrying a sense of entitlement.

Went to Flyers games in their first half-filled season in which part of the Spectrum roof blew off and they played their home playoff games against the Blues in Quebec (they struggled to win for 5 years). Doug Favell Forever!

Have watched rookie Doug Collins, an almost Olympic hero, team up with "Mad Dog" Carter, Freddie Boyd and frenetic purpose to find and nail mid-range Js with frequency, when he didn't blow out the side of his sneakers.

And have clapped for the efforts of Phillies Ed Bouchee, Pancho Herrera, Johnny Herrnstein, Dick Stuart, Roy Sievers and Costen Shockley plying their trade with varying degrees of effectiveness at 1st Base and at the plate.

Still can't decide between Rice's King Hill (#10) and Boston College's Jack Concannon (#3) as Norm's back-up. But I know ol' Sam Baker (#38) can punt us out of trouble and toe 3 pts. from 40 in.

No fair weather sports fan am I. Guaranteed.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Dollar Bill on Jun 20 at 12:08
+/-

Well let's see

1. Teams owe you nothing, that's a sense of entitlement that's ridiculous, like when a fan uses 'we' to refer to a team they root for.

2. Some of us don't consider 'losing in the first round of the playoffs every year competitive'. That's pointless head banging. Figure out how to contend for a title.

3. Some of us also understand how the NBA of today works as opposed to harkening back to 50 years ago when the world and the NBA were very different places.

4. Guys been on the job barely a year and some people already think they know better and that he doesn't know what he's doing. He took over a house that was rotten down to the foundation and somehow that should have been rebuild to former glories in under 12 months. That's a childish expectation.

PS - How much money have you spent on the sixers in the past years? Go to a lot of games? Buy Gear? Watch them on league pass? Just curious how much money you give the sixers for all that they 'owe' you.

1. your opinion, I disagree

'we', a simple expression of identification with and connection to team, nothing more; without it in spades, a team relocates

2. when did fans like you start to feel entitled to championships and trophies, as you've rashly given testimony to? 1 wins, 29 lose; 30 should try

3. my reciting of former fan-days was in direct response to tk76; of course you feel entitled to inject your own spin based on your own bias and preconceived notions

I live alertly in 2014, just as you do; don't misinform yourself with delusions of superiority

4. and some people insist Hinkie knows what he's doing from the gate based on a 'we' connection of intellectualism and overarching arrogance, not a resume of any sustained NBA success; results of his executive decisions will take time to play out and read

former glories in 12 months? it's not my expectation

p.s. you ask me about money at the end of your attacking post - what are you, an imbecile or a Californian?

user-pic
buke reply to Brian on Jun 19 at 18:35
+/-

OK, but how do you feel about a three guard lineup with MCW, Exum, and Gary Harris? :)

I hope Cleveland falls in love with Exum and decides Thad + Exum puts them in the playoffs this year, that's basically the only hope. Then take Wiggins at #1, trade MCW and #10 for #5 and draft Smart or Embiid if he's still there. That would probably make me happy.

user-pic
Gosixers reply to Brian on Jun 19 at 20:14
+/-

Yes, utah wants more point guards who can't score.

The sixers should take Embiid at 3...i'm fine with it

I keep reading they want a PG with size to play alongside Berke (or Burk, they have one of each). So give them MCW, let them figure it out.

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 19 at 21:04
+/-

Brians favorite CNN affiliated sports site has their new adjust mock up - Parker Exum Wiggins is their order - so that's probably guaranteed not to happen

I'm not lucky enough to have Exum go in the top two (unless we trade up and take him at #1).

It would be awesome if they took Embiid at 3 and Randle at 10. They could just stockpile gimpy bigs forever, it'll prove how smart Hinkie is!

at this point in the conversation, this question needs to come up;
Trade Up to get Wiggins at #1? If so, would it be worth it, as opposed to the alternative available now?

user-pic
anomiemnemonical reply to jkay on Jun 19 at 23:02
+/-

Do you realize how much more expensive that pick just got with the Embiid injury. We're at #3 in a two player draft. Give me your idea for what Cleveland would accept for that #1 pick now so they get to choose between an awful pairing of Exum with their pg or the broken 7 footer who has only played 4 years of organized basketball and has been nagged by injuries in 2 of them.

here's a possibility: #3, #10 and Thad could do it for them. Reason being Cleveland can pick Joel Embiid at #3. Take advantage of the shock and pick the guy you want ANYWAY. I am still not convinced they don't want him. Turn the extra risk into more assets.

user-pic
anomiemnemonical reply to jkay on Jun 19 at 23:19
+/-

You would do that if you're Cleveland? Give up a potential franchise player for a package of Greg Oden 2.0, Thad Young on a 1 year deal, and Gary Harris?

I wouldn't even do it if I were Philly. I suppose I'm just higher on Exum than others on here. And I wouldn't hate taking him and moving MCW for another top 10 pick in this draft. Watching Exum screams PG, not SG. You could try the dual PG strategy, but that's an awfully big gamble with overlapping skill sets and risking both players' growth. I'd rather have one or the other if it comes down to it and I wouldn't trade so many assets just to get the #1 to take Wiggins. I think he'd be a perfect fit here, but not if you have to give up a solid trade asset (Thad) and #10.

to me, there are no more franchise players. the only one available is now an injury risk
I suppose the difference in our thinking is that you rule out Embiid as a top 3 pick. The possibility just dived but it's far from improbable. Draft stock and stuff like that is all perception. I think what ends up happening Thursday will be surprising for subscribers of conventional wisdom.

Two questions for everyone:

Does anyone think Exum's ceiling is higher than Penny Hardaway?

Does anyone think a team with Penny Hardaway as its best player could truly contend in the NBA today?

Best case scenario, we're still fucked after suffering through that abortion of a season if all we have to show for it is Exum and someone at ten who doesn't even project to be that good. More of the same next year.

Now is when you call Cleveland and beg them to take 3, 10 and Thad for #1 and pray they're stupid enough to do it, because there are two guys left walking who have a chance to change things, and what's left at 3 and 10 don't matter unless you're of the belief that 7-footers suddenly get healthier when they play 82 games and get beat to hell for the first time in their lives. If Cleveland will do that deal, you pull the trigger immediately.

You believe Wiggins or Parker can be your best player?
Not disagreeing with your point but you may want to apply that reasoning in the other direction.

Noah Vonleh fans?

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/sixers/20140619_Indiana_s_Vonleh_a_backup_plan_for_Sixers_.html

Yeah, I do believe Parker and Wiggins can both be that, Wiggins with a better shot at it than Parker. No way a PG with no jumper will be, though. Even a PG with a jumper won't be. Magic was the last PG to headline a meaningful team, and in the league today good pg's are a dime a dozen. You need a big, or a transcendent wing. Parker has a shot to score like Durant or Dirk. Wiggins has the athleticism and size to dominate on both ends. Exum or Vonleh would be such a pitiful outcome. Stockpiling middling prospects is about as productive as holding on to Turner and Hawes to maximize their value.

user-pic
buke reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 13:02
+/-

Well there was Isiah with Detroit.

I don't agree that good point guards are a dime a dozen. They're not common enough for the Sixers to have one. Perhaps a point guard is unlikely to be a franchise player, but nailing down that position is a great place to start. Maybe the Sixers will draft their franchise player next year or maybe #10 turns out to be closer to that than expected (after all, that happened to Indiana).

user-pic
Mike T reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 0:03
+/-

Peak Penny (2nd-4th season)? Yes. Very similar.

If they stand pat at 3, take Exum, and can translate MCW into some package for another top pick (let's assume Vonleh with a bit of Hinkie magic), would you rather have:

Noel - Vonleh - McDermott/Stauskus - SG/SF (depending on McD/Stauskus pick) - Exum

or

Noel - PF - Wiggins - SG - MCW


Don't get me wrong, I'd love Wiggins on this team above all else, but I think 3, 10, and Thad is too much.

I'd rather have Wiggins and absolutely nothing else than the five you proposed. The Sixers don't have enough assets to overpay for a top two pick at this point unless you start including future first rounders. You do whatever you can to move up #1, if that fails you take Embiid and pray for a miracle. Playing it safe and drafting marginal talents with limited upside is a great way to top out at 41 wins.

user-pic
Mike T reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 0:19
+/-

Ok fair enough. Again, Wiggins is my #1 choice, but i don't consider Exum or Vonleh marginal talents.

user-pic
Mike T reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 0:25
+/-

Ok fair enough. Again, Wiggins is my #1 choice, but i don't consider Exum or Vonleh marginal talents.

+1

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 8:11
+/-

How can Wiggins and Parker be the only players in this draft to become stars? We don't know if either will be twice what Thad is now.

Brian, you seem to think the gap between Exum and both those guys is huge and we don't know that.

Looking at draftexpress's new mock has your worst nightmare [Exum and Gordon] coming here. Although I believe Saric would be the pick at #10.

What intrigues me are the 2nd round options, and Brian, according to you they don't matter but having a choice of C.Early or G.Robinson at s.f. to add to Exum and Saric would make me feel good about this draft.

Getting a star is done in 3 ways in this league, free agency, trades [caproom?] and drafting so our g.m. may have to work harder but it is not the end of the world.

You are correct. This development isn't the end of the world.

Why is no one mentioning Marcus Smart?

The answer to the first is YES. The second is irrelevant because of the answer to the first question.

Besides putting ceilings on players has proven many times to be pointless. The best players in the league somehow end up better than their projected ceilings all the time.

Oh and btw i fully disagree with any trade up except maybe #3+Thad. Exum is the real deal. this was a 4 player draft, that just became a 3 player draft. I'm just hoping Parker won't be the guy at 3 as he is the type of player that would work in a more ISO-heavy system and i would hate that.

For me, Exum or Wiggins all the way.

P.S. Exum is really more of a scorer than a classic PG anyway. If you want to talk about realistic ceilings it would be something like a cross between Rose and Ginobilli or Harden with much better defense but worse 3 point shot. He absolutely has the potential to one day become a top 10 player.

user-pic
ojr107 reply to Xsago on Jun 20 at 12:22
+/-

I agree. One huge advantage Exum has over Wiggins is great ball handling skills, which to me is more important than raw athleticism.

user-pic
buke reply to ojr107 on Jun 20 at 13:09
+/-

I like players who can handle the ball, too, but remember that Turner is a pretty good ball handler but that ability hasn't provided adequate compensation for his other deficiencies.

user-pic
ojr107 reply to buke on Jun 20 at 13:45
+/-

fair point- I'm hoping his athleticism allows him to be able to finish at the rim unlike Turner.

The best ones are the ones that have a great handle AND are very athletic and coordinated in their drives to the basket AND have the size to actually finish their drives. Exum looks like he has all of that.

If he can improve his jumper to a respectable degree, he absolutely can become a top 10 player.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 7:56
+/-

The best description I have heard for Exum was by a Libertyballers commenter; He is a 6'6" Tony Parker.

user-pic
Charlie H reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 11:01
+/-

I guess the answer to the first Q is no, because I have no idea what his ability is other than what I read.

#2 - Definitely not. He just wasn't that good, even in his best years. Didn't drive well, always on the perimeter, low assist numbers (fewer APG than Iverson). Excellent shooter, All-Star caliber, but not even close to an alpha dog. Remember the year the Sixers beat Orlando in the playoffs? He was pitiful.

That rumored Lakers/Sixers trade looks awfully good for the Lakers. They get 2 young starters, get rid of the Nash contract and give up a so-so pick. Nash would never play for the Sixers of course; he'd be bought out.

Move up for a stud with no left hand, so-so J, rough finishes at rim and in need of assertiveness training? Doesn't sound like a bargain to me. Is he Marques Johnson or Marcus Liberty?

I saw Marcus Liberty as a high school junior and senior while he was playing for Chicago King. He was extraordinarily good. Unfortunately he seems to have peaked then.

Yeah, much ballyhooed. Played 2 seasons at Champaign, 2nd was strong. Didn't translate to NBA though. Denver & Detroit; done at 25. Who knows. Sometimes the right spot & the right coach, or the converse, determines fate. Most often it's player composition though.

This draft is being brought to you by Mack Sennett and Frederico Fellini.

Now is that slapstick combined with neorealism or later period artsy fantasy? I can believe slapstick and fantasy from Hinkie but he doesn't strike me as artsy.

i understand why they might not but i would still take embiid at 3 if wiggins and parker go 1,2

user-pic
eddies' heady's reply to sixerfan1220 on Jun 20 at 8:24
+/-

The injury that Embiid has is the same one that ended Yao Ming's career and kept Bill Walton on the sidelines for much of his career, right? Also severely limited big 'Z' of Cleveland for much of his early career. Only played 29 games in the next three seasons after a pretty good rookie year if I remember correctly.

If it is the same injury, I wouldn't touch that guy anywhere in the lottery. It just isn't worth it. Not today, not tomorrow, never. At least for me.

After tearing the team down to nothing, you'd basically have a good chance at drafting next to nothing. This seems a clear case of risk exponentially outweighing reward. By a mile. I'd pass.

Bill Walton and Yao Ming? Those two names should scare anyone away.

The Sixers are the last team in the world who should take this chance given that they acquired two injured big men in the last two years and if the latest one really is healthy they don't have much of a need for Embiid anyway. If they are drafting him for another team, then that's a different story.

also im under the opinion that they arent going to be good next year and a top 6 worst record is likely

I wouldn't bet against you.

@ryenarussillo More Embiid fallout. Lakers could move Nash and #6 to Philly for MCW and T Young. 76ers would take Exum at #3.

huh, interesting

7 not 6

user-pic
GoSixers reply to sixerfan1220 on Jun 20 at 9:06
+/-

Is that a sourced thing or just something made up?

i took it as something sourced

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Jun 20 at 19:01
+/-

I saw a sourced Lakers/us report somewhere. But just preliminary.

Pretty sure this would have to happen after they make the pick. They can't trade their #1 away prior because they don't own their 2015 first-rounder.

That being said, I'd be in favor of the trade. I'd be much happier if they took Smart at #7 than Exum at #3, though. Maybe the Exum hype will trick CLE or MIL into taking him. He is a 6'6" Tony Parker, after all.

user-pic
Mike T reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 14:12
+/-

If Smart at 7, who would you want them to take at 3?
Vonleh?
Roll the dice on Embiid?

I'd like that trade. Sixers would have three picks within the top ten and one of the best pure point guards in history to mentor a rookie and maybe play part of the time.

user-pic
Stan reply to buke on Jun 20 at 18:47
+/-

Nash would demand a buyout.,He's not spending the twilight of his NBA career as a mentor.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Stan on Jun 20 at 19:44
+/-

he's currently spending the twilight of his career on a team that sucks because their has been star is being grossly over paid...I'm not sure how playing here with something to actually do would be worse (not to mention with his health concerns it'd be a shock if he dressed for 41 games)

this isn't exactly encouraging.

user-pic
jfp reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 10:19
+/-

The other piece from Dr. Mark Adickes is more encouraging. However, until the word from the docs comes in after surgery AND I get my MD, I'm not sure which to put more stock in.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 10:52
+/-

Surgery and our understanding of human anatomy change constantly. The LA ESPN radio has a MD that does this kind of stuff they talk to constantly (even has his own show on the weekends) named Dr Clapper. He was saying that the location of the fracture is pretty important to determining the long term impact of the injury. I doubt that will be made public but hopefully the sixers have good doctors who can assess these things.

BTW - if Ilgauskis was in this draft, and you knew the career he'd have, the great play when healthy but the injury as well, where do you think you'd be willing to take him?

What did he miss, the first three seasons before he started playing? I'd take him in the second round, I guess. #32.

Oh my fucking goodness!!! Brian you must kidding right? You were ready to have Kenneth Faried baby in '11. He's basically the same style player and physical size as A. Gordon entering the draft but you see Gordon as a "stay away" player. And you wanted Faried to play along side E. Brand and T. Young as our starters which would never have worked. GTFOH!!!

You're as bad as the troll at this point. Contribute something or base your idiocy in what resembles a fact or just go back to your sad life in silence.

I choose to participate sporadically simply cause I hate guys that take shot at one another online. Kinda like you just did. I made a basketball comment. A comment that criticized your opinion (and please don't think this is the first time in 4 months that I've disagreed with a comment posted on this blog). It's a FACT that you were a huge Faried fan correct? You resounded with a personal attack against me. Who sounds like the sad idiot?

Show me an example of where I was "all over faried."

"I'd be comfortable taking him at #16, depending on who else is on the board."

Who said that about Keneth Faried? Sounds like I almost blew a load, huh? Fucking troll.

we were picking I think #15 at that time, and looking to add to the Iggy team, so Ken Faried at that time has a different context from Aaron Gordon now, when we are bare cupboard rebuilding.
They are similar, but I dont like to compare them because Faried is more of a power forward and Gordon is undersized. The latter is better, less one dimensional and more skilled IMO.

Through the threads, everyone has their own favorites and convictions and they are all varied. This is coming from a guy with an unhealthy obsession with KJ McDaniels' game. So this should not preclude you from commenting since this banter will one day be meaningless and wholly incorrect.

What makes Exum so different from Smart, or MCW? They both seem to do the same things well, same size too.

How can someone say Exum will develop outside shooting when the other two are considered almost lost causes? Is age all it is, or is there some shot doctor who verifies?

I like Exum, but the body of work is so limited that it's hard to see how to project how he pans out with any type of confidence. For example, in his mixtape or scouting video he looks video-gamish, but in a game against team USA at the same FIBAs, he just looked ordinary.

Smart and MCW have a body of work against decent competition, Exum doesn't. That's the big difference. People who tend to start with an unreasonably high opinion of amateur athletes, then come back down to earth, will have an opinion of Exum above where it should be IMO. People who start w/ low expectations of amateur athletes until proven wrong, will probably have an opinion of Exum below where it should be. I fall into the latter group about him personally. How I feel about him personally doesn't really have as much to do with passing on him at #3 as the position he plays, and how I feel about the two guys at the top of the draft.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 16:25
+/-

There's a third group I think you fall into...you dismiss these youth international competition that guys like Exum showcase their selves in as inferior to NCAA college basketball, which, honestly, you criticize constantly as being unwatchable.

How many of these international games have you sat down to watch...well I don't believe it's the right way to do things, many countries put kids into academies when they're like 13 to fully focus on their sport full time (sure we do the same thin in the US but we pretend that they're still 'students' whereas other countries just dismiss it out of hand)

Honestly, you can get better younger playing sports in other countries than you can here because they don't bother with the charade of needing an education if you excel at sports

I'm going off what I've seen, which is a 6'6" guy looking like a giant on the floor playing against a bunch of slow-footed kids. The advantage to scouting guys like MCW and Smart is they've at least faced each other. Or at least been on the floor with guys who will be in the NBA in a season or two. Do you really think Exum has played against the same level of competition? I also didn't really think his footage was that amazing. I'd bet Wiggins played against better in the high school footage I've seen of him.

user-pic
buke reply to Brian on Jun 20 at 17:29
+/-

I chuckled as I watched a video of Exum's highlights for the first time today. The defense against him made Evan Turner's efforts look positively ferocious by comparison.

user-pic
buke reply to GoSixers on Jun 20 at 17:05
+/-

I'm not saying that you are wrong, but besides Tony Parker, I can't think of another international point guard who didn't play US college ball who was worth drafting at #3. Steve Nash would have been worth that but he did play US college ball. Ricky Rubio is only 23 and may yet demonstrate that he was worth picking that highly but this season wasn't so promising. Dragic has had one good and one great year over the last two years but he's 28 and may not continue with that level of success much longer.

Of course, as they say in the investment commercials, past performance is no guarantee of future success and Exum could be of Parker's stature or better. I just know I wouldn't take the risk.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to buke on Jun 20 at 18:46
+/-

They also imply in those investment commercials - no risk no reward...the nba draft is a crap shoot - everyone knows that - the fact that agents control the process make it even more of a crap shoot than the NFL draft (the MLB and NHL drafts are not comparable due to the minor league systems). It's one of the reasons I'm pro a second college year as opposed to those who want them to remove the restriction all together. A second year in college would expose a player more and allow for more scouting.

Very rarely are there any guarantees in the NBA draft, so you gotta draft with risk to get the reward...the best you can do is make it a calculated risk (and I wouldn't discount a head coach who spent a lot of time in Australia and probably knows the level of competition better than most in the league let alone those of us on a blog)

And really, we're judging you tube videos now?

(PS - if the sixers draft doug mcdermott i'm going to vomit - his defensive ability is somewhere near or below Kyle Korvers)

I'll bite.

1. Size - Exum is actually bigger than Smart and has a frame that suggests he will be much stronger than NCW who will most likely always be fairly skinny.

2. Age - Exum is 18, Smart is 20, MCW is 22

3. Jump shot - All 3 need significant improvement on their jumpers. Considering Exum is 4 years younger than MCW and 2 years younger than Smart (might be 1.5, not sure about that) AND Smart's mechanics are the worst of the three i think it's far more realistic to expect Exum to significantly improve his jumper than the other 2.

4. Exum's scoring instinct/touch around the basket looks much better than MCW's and he looks quicker/more athletic than Smart in his drives.

5. From the few interviews that i've seen from all 3, Exum is more intelligent than both Smart and MCW.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not trying to say Exum is definitely going to be better than either of them, but here are 5 legitimate reasons why he's rated as a better prospect than Smart/MCW. The fact that he's less proven than the other 2 goes both ways - he might be worse than he looks in his strengths or weaknesses, but he also might be better.

P.S. The draft is all about risk and understanding the available data (film, stats, interviews etc.). Lets not act like 30 games from Wiggins, Parker or someone else against mediocre competition (only a few of those games were against good organized athletic teams with serious NBA talent) make them safe prospects or that they are perfectly proven.

Side note:

On that same U19 tournament that is largely dismissed here, and where a lot of the US draft prospects played too, Exum made the allstar team along with Gordon, Okafor and Saric. Not sure who was the fifth one, but it may have been Smart (i think it was an american guard). And Exum was 17-18 at the time (significantly younger than Smart and Saric, similar age to Gordon and Okafor). Gordon was the MVP, mostly because he was the best player on the team that won the title (better than Smart, Payton, Okafor and the others).

1) I'll give you that his frame is bigger, wingspan and all.

2)Age is a factor but also factor in that right now Exum is not a better player than either MCW and especially not Smart. So the foundation/floor of your projection is not that high.

3)For the jump shot, if you make that case about age, I will start to pull my Aaron Gordon train out of the terminal. After all he's the youngest player in the draft, surely we can fix his mechanics.
I have no idea how to tell when a shot is broken or just cracked. This is pretty subjective.

4)Exum does have better body control. Not sure about touch yet.

5) I think this one is partly irrelevant and highly subjective. Not sure what correlation intelligence has with playing basketball. As long as you are not an idiot, and have a great work ethic...

3 out of 5 I can agree with.
Exum is a huge wild card. If only someone could come up with more evidence than 'Can you imagine what this guy could become?'.
I still cannot forget Evan Turner's mixtape.
Just check it out again https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUaWPo1vn5E
; this stuff scares me. Context is important, that's why the large sample size is helpful.

That said, because of the inside access that Brett Brown might have, I would trust the pick a bit more if the Sixers made it.


user-pic
YoungGun13 reply to jkay on Jun 21 at 21:18
+/-

it was projected for turner to be a below average athlete and a questionable shooter though. All of the management knew that Turner's jumpshot mechanics would have to be altered once he got to the league. In Exum's case he has pretty good mechanics. Turner also was 21 i think when he was drafted so i don't think that ít's a fair comparison

user-pic
buke reply to YoungGun13 on Jun 21 at 21:36
+/-

Well I'm not sure how "below average" Evan Turner was projected at the time. His regularly stated comparable was Brandon Roy. By NBA Draftnet ratings, Exum is a 95, Smart is a 96, and Turner was a 97. Wiggins is a 99.

I know that these ratings are far more art than science, but Turner was projected highly at the time and he was the overwhelming consensus for #2.

I was not comparing. I inserted him to illustrate the importance of context. Turner looked good against non-NBA level athletes, That was the context of his college game, most of it anyway. His game looked so good in that context. In the NBA, it became a different story.
Exum's scouting video consists of games fro the FIBA tournament and the Nike Hoop Summit (I think), and that's it!
I wonder what sort of context that is. Some of those Fiba guys moved like Kelly Olynyk.

user-pic
Tray reply to jkay on Jun 21 at 22:57
+/-

FIBA and Hoop Summit talent is a lot better than Big Ten talent. Of course they're not all NBA players. Only the NBA has all NBA players. But there were a lot of prospects in these events, and Exum played as well as any of them. In any event, given that Exum would be one of the quickest point guards in the league at 6'6, to say nothing of how quick he is for the two, and that he has a pretty advanced set of dribble moves, I just don't see why he would shrivel against better defenders. Of course there is some risk here given how few games there are to look at, but it's comparable to the risk in picking a really great high-school player before the one-and-done rule, albeit a little lower because at least Exum does have a strong track record in limited international play. Don't you think Derrick Rose would have been a top 5 draft pick out of high school had the one-and-done rule never been enacted? Would that have been a risky move?

"given that Exum would be one of the quickest point guards in the league at 6'6, to say nothing of how quick he is for the two"

How is that a given? I mean, are you basing it on his numbers from the combine? He basically had the same times as Eric Maynor in agility and sprint. I count 20+ guys in the league w/ better agility times than Exum.

Now typically I don't look at combine numbers as gospel because you see weird results (like Jimmer's agility time, for example), but there isn't enough other info out there to say something that hyperbolic. Even in the video below where he's playing against short, slow kids he doesn't exactly look like Rose with the ball.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udv_mlTycf0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAdbE72z2VE

user-pic
buke reply to Tray on Jun 22 at 11:25
+/-

I'd say that depends upon the team and the "level of talent" isn't everything. Are the Spurs really more "talented" than the Thunder or do they have better coaching, team play, and a better system for developing and utilizing their players?

As someone who actually watches the Big Ten conference, my guess is that Exum would have found playing against Wisconsin tough going particularly this season. Michigan State with everyone healthy wouldn't have been a breeze either.

Are the "slow footed kids" his high school competition, or the under 19 world Championships?

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 20 at 21:29
+/-

Exum vs Smart this Sunday for Sixers Brass

user-pic
GoSixers reply to GoSixers on Jun 20 at 21:31
+/-

Great first impression from young Mr Smart, from a Keith Pompey article, quoting Smart

“I think I will fit in well. You know the Sixers are slacking in some areas and the point guard role is one of them. They are looking for that type of leadership and toughness that will come in and handle it and take control of it.”

Shall we talk publicly about all the areas you slack in Mr Smart? Your agent for instance, is slacking in teaching you how not to come off as a putz

awesome, hilarious! this guy may give Turner a run for his money.
Doesn't change my opinion of him though; that attitude is also what fuels his game.

Good sign that the Sixers pushed for this, surprised Exum's agent agreed. Wish I could be a fly on the wall, best case Smart demolishes him and that convinces Sixers brass they need to trade up

They're not playing against each other. They're having 2 separate individual workouts.

Heh. That's what I get for giving the benefit of the doubt. Exum vs. a chair, should feel right at home.

I know you hate Exum with an irrational passion, but no top prospects work out against each other. Agents haven't allowed that in years.

I don't hate Exum, I hate the idea of the prize for the 82 games Hinkie and Harris just put us through being Exum. I actually might've felt a little better about it had there been a showdown between he and smart head to head.

Except you only feel that way because you have him ranked as a far worse prospect than Wiggins and Parker. If you thought he's a very similar prospect to them or better prospect than them you would've been perfectly fine with him being the prize of this 82 game season.

And having him ranked as a far worse prospect can be easily seen as hate by others who have him in the same tier as the other 2 guys or higher.

I think the supposed mystery that gives pause about Exum to you and many others goes both ways. It's not just his weaknesses that haven't been picked apart enough, it's also his strengths that haven't been displayed to the level that could have made him an unconditional #1 pick.

Eh. I would be okay if Brian's comments were mostly based around evaluation. I don't think having a different evaluation is really hate, at least not a negative kind.

My annoyance comes from attacking Exum for stuff like not working out against Smart, when he darn well knows that agents do not allow that anymore. Wiggins wasn't working out against Parker, Randle wasn't working out against Vonleh, Smart and Payton weren't going to go head to head. It's disingenuous to act like this is kind of any negative mark against Exum, his confidence, or his ability. And I'm pretty sure that Brian knows this.

That, combined with such complete confidence in a player Brian has likely seen almost none of, I find annoying. Sure, he might not have the body of work that a college freshman does, but we spent a decade drafting high school players in the lottery, and we did so at a fairly good success rate. This assumption that he wouldn't be a good pick because there hasn't been as much film to pick apart is an interesting one. If anything, it should make Brian less sure of himself, but instead it's done the opposite.

My criticism of Exum really had nothing to do w/ whether he's working out against Smart or not. I got a bit excited when the original comment suggested they were going against each other, then I was disappointed when you corrected it.

My feelings on Exum as a prospect have about 20% to do with him playing against terrible competition, 60% about how I feel about Wiggins and Parker (who have faced legitimate competition and performed very well imo) and 20% to do with my feelings toward the PG position right now. Drafting a PG high in the lottery is like bringing sand to the beach, or drafting an RB early in the first round in the NFL. There are so many good PGs in the league right now, you can acquire one via trade or free agency very easily, not to mention the fact it's a position where you can absolutely build a winner with a serviceable guy manning the point. There's also a strong argument to be made that you cannot build a winner (or at least it hasn't been done much) with a scoring-focused PG.

Anyway, if they stick at three and Wiggins/Parker are off the board, I'd take Exum. It just sucks that we're in that position.

user-pic
Stan reply to Brian on Jun 21 at 14:10
+/-

You want Andrew Wiggins but you think he'll be a slightly better version of Paul George. That's not much of a prize IMO.

I honestly don't think there's much of a drop off between Wiggins, Exum, and Parker. It's not you're going from wondering whether Wiggins can reach his full potential to wondering if Randle's lack of height, wingspan, instincts, and shooting touch will prevent him from being a serviceable NBA player.

As far as Exum goes the potential is there. He seems to be physically gifted and he seems to be fundamentally sound. He's not physically limited like Evan Turner, he's not raw like Michael Kidd-Glichrist, and he's not an emotional baby like DeMarcus Cousins.

user-pic
Tray reply to Stan on Jun 21 at 15:55
+/-

The thing about Exum is that I'm unaware of any draft experts, whether they're traditional scouting people or analytics people, that don't think Exum's an elite prospect. There are at least a fewserious basketball people who are down on Wiggins, Parker, Gordon and Vonleh, but no one has the doubts about Exum that you see some fans express. As between people like Derek who've watched his game tape, and amateur draft handicappers who've just watched a few youtube videos, I defer to the experts.

That's kind of my point. The draft experts, given ample meaningful material, found holes in the games of Wiggins, Parker, Vonleh etc. Those holes, or supposed holes, were exposed when they played against legitimate competition, and each other. In Exum's case, you've got limited tape against weaker competition. And how many of those experts have rated Exum higher than Wiggins and Parker even given the exposure of their flaws (I know Derek has had Exum ahead of Parker)?

It doesn't really matter. I believe the Sixers will take Wiggins/Parker over Exum, which is really all that matters to me. If they're both gone at #3 and the Sixers can't/don't move up, they'll probably take Exum and I'm fine with that. I'd rather have him than Vonleh and Smart, who are the next two on my list, I guess, and I wouldn't consider Embiid at this point. My disappointment stems from:

(a) Exum represents a redundant part, so we've now used 2 of the 4 lottery picks in a two-year span to fill the PG position, which is the by far the easiest position to fill in the league right now. There's no way Exum/MCW work together in the back court.

(b) I have serious doubts Exum can be the best player on a legitimate contender, I don't think his ceiling is that high, and I also don't think you can build a contender around a scoring point guard

(c) I'm really sick of drafting perimeter players who can't shoot and hoping they'll learn on the job.

Mostly, I just hoped the payoff for the season we just endured would be a franchise-transforming talent, but it turned out that ship sailed when Hinkie thought maximizing Turner and Hawes' value was more important than the # of ping pong balls he'd accumulate.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Brian on Jun 22 at 8:10
+/-

I agree with some of your thoughts on Exum but would like to know what position is most important, in your mind, when starting a basketball team.

You keep saying point guards are "a dime a dozen". To me it is the most important position in basketball. I agree about your scoring p.g. comment sorta, but the league has been leaning towards them for a while now, with San Antonio, our possible comp as a franchise, leading the way.

As far as Exum being close to Wiggins in upside, the best I can come up with is Milwaukee supposedly having Parker and Exum atop their board , before Embiid's injury, with Wiggins available at #2.

Do you think the friendship between Noel and M.C.W. and the relationship between B.Brown and Exum come into play at all if they are close talentwise? Does B.Brown have a lot of say in getting his biggest building block as far as what he thinks he will become?

Besides Brown's employment commonality, how is San Antonio a comp to Philadelphia? Spurs have a culture: playing smart and hard, keeping traps shut, winning championships and raising trophies. 76ers have a culture: losing with dopes and castoffs while dreaming to become San Antonio. The divide is vast.

The 76ers neighbor the Knicks, geographically and in front office perspicacity and execution.


user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to Dollar Bill on Jun 22 at 11:17
+/-

I believe you strive to be the best and feel their [Spurs] run is the best in N.B.A. history, excepting the 60 Celtics.

Of course agree with your first position.

I like the Showtime Lakers '79-'91 (McKinney-Westhead share to Dunleavy's 1st) over Pop's Spurs... 12 straight seasons of 54 or more wins, 5 Rings to SA's 17 seasons, 5 Rings. Then you have the Minny Lakers '48-'54, 5 Rings in 6 seasons (1st was BAA title), and the '90-'98 Bulls with that baldheaded gunner/master of hangtime, 6 Rings in 8 seasons.

All 5 runs - Celts (11 in 13!), LA Lakers, Spurs, Minny Lakers & Bulls - exemplary.

"Mostly, I just hoped the payoff for the season we just endured would be a franchise-transforming talent, but it turned out that ship sailed when Hinkie thought maximizing Turner and Hawes' value was more important than the # of ping pong balls he'd accumulate. "

To be completely honest, I don't think that talent, with the exception of a healthy Embiid, exists in this draft. I think Wiggins has the potential to do that, but his handle has to improve not just substantially, and the development of that is a much bigger concern than the refinement of a jump shot.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Jun 22 at 14:42
+/-

Exum has holes that scouts have identified. His jump shot's inaccurate and flat. Right now he's only a potentially good defender. He may be somewhat turnover-prone. He can't handle really big and active defenders like Smart very well - or at least, he couldn't a year ago at 17. Maybe college ball would have revealed still more weaknesses. But college ball also can distort and exaggerate a player's weaknesses, and/or exaggerate a player's strengths. I feel like we know about Exum roughly what we knew about LeBron, Kobe, T-Mac, Monta, Lou, etc. when they were drafted. High school players busted out much less frequently than college players do, so it seems quite possible to project a player's future on the basis of limited information.

user-pic
Tray reply to Brian on Jun 22 at 14:51
+/-

As far as redundancy, I think it's somewhat unclear. They'll be redundant if neither develops a jump shot; I think the chance that neither one does is somewhere below 50 percent. Exum's looks somewhat promising and he is really young. Most of the guards in his mold - Rose, Westbrook - have developed into decent shooters. But if that's a concern, I think Exum's a big upgrade over MCW and that you trade MCW for 7 or 8. I don't really love McDermott or Randle, but in theory there's nothing wrong with drafting someone to fill a position we already have filled if we flip the incumbent for a good starter at another position.

user-pic
Jeff reply to Tray on Jun 22 at 15:26
+/-

From a fan standpoint it would be nice to see them draft for position (say, SF and PF) and develop this young core and quickly as possible so as to avoid many more losing seasons.

However, I doubt that's their primary objective. They'll likely go with best player available in the hopes that he can become a star in a few years. If it happens to be "redundant" with MCW and Exum, and they can't play well as a tandem, then adios to the weaker link.
Again, it's not what the average fan wants, but I think this franchise is willing to be patient until they "get it right".

"Heat in 6." Some expert. And he thought Wade was gonna rock the Casbah in Gms 6 & 7. With intelligence like that, who needs Pee-wee Herman? Access to tape and practices only gets you in, not on.

"My Luncheon with Sam" is the delayed sequel to "My Dinner with Andre"... the double feature is sure to draw 76 to the Ritz. In any given month.

As someone pointed out above, projecting a player's future is a very different, and possibly easier skill than projecting what a player or team will do in a few games. Wade looked pretty good in the playoffs until a couple weeks ago.

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 20 at 21:32
+/-

One more - someone asked about ETO dates...turns out there is a fixed date in the new CBA but some folks are still under the old CBA which was a different date.

The most recent CBA set the date for players to decide on their Early Termination Options (ETO’s) by June 29th, but the Heat‘s “Big-Three” of LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh are grandfathered in due to signing their deals prior to 2011, so they have until June 30th to decide,

crazy idea. Could MCW, Thad and the 10th pick get you the 1st or 2nd pick in the draft(with some salary in return)? Milwaukee needs a point guard and He could play along side Irving.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to sfw on Jun 21 at 8:14
+/-

I think that is giving up too much. I hope they sit at #3 and take the B.P.A. . Without moving up and if the Laker offer is true,[M.C.W. and Thad for #7] than take Exum or Smart at #3, Randall or Vonleh at 7, and trade back from #10 and get 2 midround picks [Pheonix or Chicago].

Randle
K.J.McDaniel
Noel
G.Harris
D.Exum

In my scenario, we'd have the 1st or 2nd and the 3rd.

I won't say that he is right, but I don't feel that he is wrong either. I would be OK with dumping MCW for Smart.

However, I will note that despite all of the claims about Smart's leadership and intangible qualities, he couldn't manage one win in the NCAA tournament during his two years.

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 21 at 17:45
+/-

That untradeable #7 Lakers pick is now rumored to be in the Kevin Love sweepstakes as a piece traded to GSW for Klay Thompson (when does the cap reset, cause the lakers can't make that deal until all contracts expire right?)

Never seen an untradeable (at this point) pick get so much attention.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to GoSixers on Jun 21 at 17:50
+/-

Michael Carter-Williams has not been included in any of the rumored trade discussions between the Lakers and the Sixers, tweets Eric Pincus of the Los Angeles Times.

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Jun 21 at 19:41
+/-

That's sort of ambiguous; is Pincus confirming that non-MCW-involving discussions between us and the Lakers have actually occurred? He calls them rumored.

If Wiggins is a defensive demon on the wing, raising all kinds of hell for opponents, why did the Iowa State Cyclones score 94 points on Kansas in a Big 12 Semi-Final Jayhawks L? Yeah Embiid was out, but if Wiggins is a dominator (as has been premised) 94 scoreboard credits is NOT allowed, unless he's subject to the Fred Hoiberg hex.

And if he's a dominating player as opposed to a remarkable physical talent, why did the rash of Stanford Trees/Sequoias/Cardinal nee Indians (10th Seed), shrivel him (1-6 FG, 4 pts) in the Round of 32 eliminating loss?

By that standard a player is not a good defender of their team every have up a lot of points. I doubt any player stands up to that measure. Oe did Alvin Robertson's team never give up 110 points on a loss?

Not in college. And not in big games. You just all over Hinkie and Wiggins like white on rice.

Holding an opponent to less than 94 in 40 minutes of play is NOT a high standard.

If Wiggins was truly a good defender he would be able to guard five players simultaneously.

user-pic
buke reply to Jeff on Jun 22 at 11:56
+/-

If you're going to resort to mockery, at least make it a creative or intelligent one, especially against the board's greatest wordsmith.

I think Dollar Bill's point about Wiggins throughout multiple posts is that he may be an elite talent, but his freshman season revealed evidence that was sufficient to cast meaningful doubt among those who have regarded him as a slam dunk. That evidence should give serious pause to the idea of giving up two top ten picks to get one.

If Wiggins is around at #3, then the decision should be made without concern for possible remorse. My guess is that the probability of Wiggins flopping like Turner is very low, but just think how much easier the Turner pick would have been on the collective Philly pysche if the team also could have picked up either Greg Monroe, or Gordon Hayward, or Paul George in that draft.

user-pic
Jeff reply to buke on Jun 22 at 12:12
+/-

I'm really stupid, and my counter-point is moot. Thanks, buke.

His mastery of the English language aside, the logic was absurd, and I did nothing more than point that out.

Despite your unnecessary, emotional outburst, I actually agree with the rest of your response. I don't think anyone in this draft is a slam-dunk, and I would bet that we come away with the best player even if we stay put. I would prefer they keep #3 and #10 rather than trade up (if that's even possible to do).

Don't put yourself down. Your self-awareness is impeccable.

And you were partly right: "[you] did nothing"

An astute point.

May your medication keep you alive and ticking long enough so that we may enjoy many more years of literary wizardry about how certain players suck because they lack the heart and grittiness of Jameer Nelson.

Thanks for the generous approbation, buke. I remind you of the pressure of each post being a brand new season. FWIW: I don't plan on attending the banquet; feel free to have my fruit cocktail.

My point about Wiggins is: he's overvalued, though one must calibrate the new NBA for what it's become: 3-and-spree. While his eyes may on occasion play parallel to the glass, he doesn't clean it especially well. And while future dunks may excite throngs, scorekeepers will afford him only 2 points. Will he be any better than Albert King (who was much heralded in pre-NBA days but a disappointment) or the late Derek Smith (who earned his keep with toughness and a versatile game) or the late Orlando Woolridge (who could jump high and throw it down with a flourish but whose teams didn't win)?

I am not all that high on Wiggins. And I have an open mind regarding what Hinkie is trying to do. I think Wiggins is a better match for the type if team the Sixers seem to want to build. I hope they get the players they want so we can learn whether they will succeed. I don't have a strong opinion on how the top prospects will turn out. I think they all have their plusses and minuses.

Yeah, it's a morass, a rugby scrum. Washington at 46 is in the catbird seat. :)

The 3rd pick: some encouraging odds from past NBA drafts

mynbadraft.com has a nice feature where you can get the history of each pick since 1980. By my quick and dirty categorization, I could list these players as follows:

THE GREATEST PLAYERS:

Michael Jordan
Kevin McHale
Dominique Wilkins
Grant Hill

THE NEAR GREATS:

Deron Williams
Carmelo Anthony
Penny Hardaway
James Harden
Pau Gasol

GOOD TO VERY GOOD PLAYERS:

Al Horford
Derrick Favors
Ben Gordon
Baron Davis
Chauncey Billups
Raef Lafrentz
Shareef Abdur_Rahim
Jerry Stackhouse
Christian Laettner
Buck Williams
Bradley Beal

SERVICEABLE STARTERS:

Enes Kanter
OJ Mayo
Mike Dunleavy
Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf
Benoit Benjamin
Sean Elliot
Billy Owens
Charles Smith
Rodney McCray

MISSES AND OUTRIGHT DUDS:

Adam Morrison
Darius Miles
Dennis Hopson
Chris Washburn

NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION:

Otto Porter

Dropping Otto Porter from the list gives us 33 players. Of those 33, 9 (27.2%) are in the great or near great categories. 20 (60.6%) are in the categories of good or above. Only 4 (12.1%) are outright duds and only 9 (27.2%) I would categorize as just serviceable starters.

We could argue about some in the GOOD TO VERY GOOD category as Davis had problems in his career and Gordon and Lafrentz (and maybe Abdur Rahim) flamed out quickly. Bradley Beal's sample is small but I think he belongs here based on the evidence so far. I didn't include Kanter here but he might grow into this category.

I say the Sixers should stay put at #3. Chances are quite good that they will get an above average starter or better. Obviously the pickings lately haven't been as good as in the earliest years of this sample, but there still pretty decent.

user-pic
Jeff reply to buke on Jun 22 at 16:06
+/-

If I'm not mistaken, hasn't the third pick produced better results than the second pick over the past few decades?

user-pic
buke reply to Jeff on Jun 22 at 16:44
+/-

Ignore Toll. His sentiments aren't mine.

As far as the second pick, counting backwards from the present until 2002, you have the following:

Oladipo, Kidd-Gilchrest, Derrick Williams, Turner, Thabeet, Beasley, Durant, Aldridge, Marvin Williams, Emeka Okafor, Darko, and Jay Williams.

It's too soon to tell about Oladipo but I think he has the potential to be in the GOOD TO VERY GOOD category.

There is one all timer (Durant) and one current star (Aldridge) there.

My standards for calling someone a MISS OR OUTRIGHT DUD are strict, but I would include Thabeet, Darko, and Jay Williams there (health issues don't make missing any better for the drafting team).

All the rest I would say are only serviceable starters. Okafor might have been in the good to very good category if he would have had better health. So, of 10 included players sans Oladipo, only 2 are above serviceable based on performances so far.

The record of the 22 second picks before those is better. I would put Jason Kidd, Alonzo Mourning, Gary Payton, and Isiah Thomas in the GREATEST or NEAR GREAT categories. Maybe Marcus Camby and Terry Cummings belong there too. There aren't many DUDS in this earlier period (I would say only Len Bias because of his accidental suicide). Shawn Bradley, Sam Bowie, and Stromile Swift were disappointing but not outright duds.

user-pic
Jeff reply to buke on Jun 22 at 18:30
+/-

Certainly Kidd-Gilchrest, Derrick Williams, Turner, Thabeet, and Beasley and Darko leave a bad taste in anyone's mouth.

But just looking at the players presented from the last twelve drafts it looks like the #3 picks have seen more success.

It's likely coincidental, but if I had to come up with a couple reasons, they could be:

-There's more pressure on a #2 pick

-Teams are more likely to go for higher upside at #2 (despite slightly higher bust potential)

Anyway, the past shouldn't be an indicator of what's to come on Thursday, but if anything is sure it's that the draft is a crap-shoot (unless you're drafting Lebron).

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Jeff on Jun 22 at 18:33
+/-

I think the key is that coincidence doesn't equal causation...relative strength of said drafts should be taken into account...basketball intelligence of said people making the pick (i.e. there was a loud contingent that felt Thabeet at #2 was a terrible idea)...

Correlation does not imply causation is always important to remember

user-pic
Jeff reply to GoSixers on Jun 22 at 20:15
+/-

Yep, just fun to look at past drafts and try to recall why team X decided to go with player Y instead of play Z in the #2 and #3 slots (like the 2003 draft for example).

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 22 at 16:25
+/-

I'm not sure since I usually get this stuff wrong, but isn't this the textbook definition of irony?

user-pic
Jeff reply to GoSixers on Jun 22 at 16:30
+/-

I have yet to understand why he comments here other than:

1.) He's been banned from every other blog for trolling

2.) See #1

user-pic
GoSixers reply to Jeff on Jun 22 at 16:33
+/-

I mean, he is a philadunkia writer right? The worst sixers blog out there that used to be part of the ESPN Blog network but for some reason was exiled and is now part of msnfoxsports - which - does anyone look at their web site?

(They were replaced by Hoop76 which proudly states they've been writing about the sixers for an entire year)

user-pic
Jeff reply to GoSixers on Jun 22 at 16:38
+/-

Hey look, Nestle Volt, er um, I mean Steve Toll, I actually did some research and look what came up?

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1215191

I suppose this partly explains why he's so angry at the world.

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 22 at 16:42
+/-

Via Hoops Rumors, Bob Cooney says the sixers are still pretty interested in Embiid at 3.

Hopefully they will be able to get copies of x-rays and talk to the surgeon (and their own surgeons) regarding the foot.

http://www.hoopsrumors.com/2014/06/sixers-interested-embiid.html

thursday cant come soon enough

user-pic
Jeff reply to GoSixers on Jun 22 at 18:34
+/-

Hopefully our doctors are not the same as those who checked Bynum's knees.

You sound like you should be involved with professional wrestling or the black metal scene. Those arenas are appropriate for your style. This one isn't so much.

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 22 at 17:47
+/-

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Sincerely

Inigo Montoya

I couldn't care less about the merits of anything you wrote, Mr. Toll. That's a point that always seems to escape you. When everyone despises the messenger, the message becomes irrelevant.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to buke on Jun 22 at 18:00
+/-

You'd think so - but look at the 'talent' like Stephen A Smith or Woody Hayes still on ESPN - being despised means people pay attention - and if people pay attention - positively or negatively - sometimes it works for people.

The only real solution for such folks is completely ignoring them - they just want people to respond in anyway - to feed their insecurity and ego - ignore them and they fade into the sunset - maybe with an aborted comeback that is shortly lived - but in the end - they're gone like Arsenio

user-pic
buke reply to GoSixers on Jun 22 at 18:15
+/-

I do think there is a difference between television or other audio visual media and just print. What works in that type of media often doesn't work at all in print. I don't despise Steven Smith because I think he is somewhat entertaining when one figures in the voice and visual aspects of his communication. I probably would be more disgusted by someone like Steven Smith if all he did was write that way.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to buke on Jun 22 at 18:23
+/-

A troll is a troll is a troll in my mind - ignore them and they go away - there's different kinds of trolls (Maury Pauvich for instance) but in the end - once you ignore them - instead of having 'car wreck' fascination with them - they starve and die (metaphorically, lest anyone think I'm wishing death on someone here)

user-pic
GoSixers on Jun 22 at 18:59
+/-

It’s generally assumed the Philadelphia 76ers will pick guard Dante Exum with the third overall pick. But a person close to the Sixers said Indiana forward Noah Vonleh is drawing keen interest as well.

here

I keep seeing 'reports' concerning the Sixers; a source inside the Sixers said they are interested in (fill in the blank here).

From Exum, to Smart, all while taking into account the necessitated trade of MCW.
Also it seems Embiid is still in play according to Bob Cooney.
Now it's Noah Vonleh.

Here's what I think, as Chad Ford reported, the Sixers, gameplan and leverage having been destroyed by Embiid's injury, call the Cavs and offer the bounty of #3, #10 and Thad Young for the #1 pick. The best offering of the lot of teams (unless you consider Derrick Favors to be a starter) and the Cavs balked. Shocked and stunned, Hinkie floats a million different rumors and makes a million different phone calls about different scenarios possible all in an effort to say;
"Here look, even if you don't give us #1, we are still ok doing this, or this, or this". The purpose is 40% preparation for alternate scenarios and 60% trying to get the Cavs to take the bait and not demand a bigger price tag.
They want Wiggins now, not necessarily because he was always #1 on their board but for the fact that you just tanked a season and you sure as hell do not want to come away with ok or good players, you want to draft a potential star.

user-pic
deepsixersuede reply to jkay on Jun 22 at 20:56
+/-

How would everybody feel about a M.Smart/K.Thompson backcourt? If the laker rumor was true does moving #7 afterwards for K.Thompson make Smart a good option at #3?

I would be OK with Smart at #3. I would prefer him over Exum because I feel he is more ready right now. He may have to lose around 20 lbs. but I don't think that's too unlikely between Brown's regimen and the grueling season.

It goes almost without saying that MCW should be traded if Smart is drafted. I would be fine with Klay Thompson but I've heard the Lakers are interested in him and I'm not sure he would want to be here. If the Sixers manage to get a #7 from the Lakers I think I would rather that they draft somebody and keep him. I honestly don't mind watching a team with four or five rookies. It would be more interesting than watching the rotation after Hawes and Turner were traded last year.

user-pic
GoSixers reply to buke on Jun 22 at 21:51
+/-

Why would you someone being ready 'right now' matter...the sixers aren't going to win right now or for the new few years.

I have issues with Smart in attitude on and off the court, and his play, and his upside is more limited than others...right now should not be a consideration for a team rebuilding from the ground up.

user-pic
buke reply to GoSixers on Jun 22 at 22:42
+/-

Because If someone is more ready right now, there's a good chance that person would be more ready in a year or two than someone who isn't as ready right now.

I don't have that much of a problem that he went a little overboard with some ornery old fat redneck Texan who taunted him. Fat old rednecks should know better than to agitate a 20 year old who is built like an NFL tailback when he's in the heat of battle. Besides the kid took his lumps and is probably the wiser for it.

As far as "ceiling" that's mostly a cliche. I don't know what that is for any of these players, and more importantly, I don't know which of them will reach it. I'd rather lean on George Allen for wisdom: The future is now.

user-pic
Tray reply to buke on Jun 22 at 23:40
+/-

I read a good piece favorably comparing Exum to Smart on, of all places, bleacher report.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1947256-why-dante-exum-is-safer-2014-nba-draft-prospect-than-marcus-smart

More generally, I don't really agree that if someone's more ready now, there's a good chance he'll be more ready in a year or two. A 20 year old player with 80% of the talent of an 18 year old player is generally going to be more ready than the 18 year old player. And a guy who's already bulked up to NBA size will always be more ready than a somewhat more talented player who has the ability to bulk up but hasn't yet. Obviously it doesn't follow that when choosing between two players with similar talent levels you should always take the older guy or the bulked up guy. I would say Payne is more ready than Vonleh, and quite a few guys in the draft are more ready than Wiggins. I bet K.J. McDaniels will have more of a defensive impact from day one than Wiggins, and he might even show up a bit more on offense at first too. But that really says nothing about which of the two you should pick first.

user-pic
buke reply to Tray on Jun 23 at 0:33
+/-

You should read the comments below that article. Even the Australians admit that their amateur basketball is crap compared to higher level D1 college ball. When I watched Exum's videos, I saw him gliding effortlessly through indifferent defenders who would not have ruined their pressings if they had been playing in tuxedos. I also saw video of him eaten alive by Smart and Payton and another kid who was still in high school during last year's U19 world championships. Maybe the kid will be good and maybe he won't, but he'll have to grow up a lot more quickly than Smart will over the next two years.

Thanks for the article but I take these things with a grain of salt while remembering Bill Maher's famous words: "The internet is a bathroom wall."

Sounds intriguing and a good tandem, and they both have great size. I'd bet my next paycheck Klay Thompson doesn't move unless it's for Love. So no way we could swing him anyway.

Registration is required for commenting from here on out. Apologies, but I'm just sick of the troll.

user-pic
Brian reply to