DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

Avery Bradley on the Radar?

I don't think he alone moves the needle all that much...not with this roster. But he does fit in with their long-term plans. If he does contribute to "too many wins" they can always make other moves to become worse if tanking is their primary objective this season.

Could anything they've done possibly point to a primary objective other than tanking this season?

If they're targeting Avery Bradley in free agency, what's to say they're not going to target others?

That's the only thing I can think of and hence why I used the conditional in my sentence.

To answer your question: NO. But, even someone like Hinkie who has demonstrated virtually no concern for the fans who actually watch the games may feel some need to throw them some small table scraps before the beginning of the season.

I bet it would take something like 4 years/$40M to get Bradley. No way they're committing that to him.

Wow! I was thinking of a starting salary of around 5 million. Yeah, anything over that and there's no chance at all that the Sixers would bite.

That might be high. His defense is his main selling point. He was way over-used in BOS last season, though. His PPG might carry some weight.

Could also possibly be that their primary objective was to grab the best players.

So your contention is that they are not tanking again this season?

Amazing how you read that into what he said...

True. I think it's not hard to make a case which was their #1 priority, but also hard to ignore that tanking was a definite priority. Of course, they could go out and sign a couple guys like Bradley and have the worst of both worlds. That would not make me happy. I'm pretty much doomed.

You asked primary motivation. I think the primary motivation is that they thought Embiid and Saric were the best long term talents left on the board.

I don't think losing this season bothers them, and they're not going to pass on someone because of a lack of immediate impact, but I think they would have takent Embiid and Saric if they were able to play from day 1 as well.

You can make the argument, certainly. I'd say it's more believable in Embiid's case. I don't think you could possibly deny they're tanking again at this point, though.

At this point I doubt they sign him. Boston gave him his 3.6 million qualifying offer and I expect they would match above that. At this point, it's hard to see Hinkie going much above that qualifying offer especially if the team intends on keeping MCW.

i doubt they sign him

rather use the spot to tryout guys from the d-league

@tmoore76ers #NBA source: #Sixers don't think Embiid's foot stress fracture is anything more than a one-off thing & no indications it'll happen again.

I'm less concerned w/ the actual foot injury. I think the doctors are capable of fixing it and giving him the guidance he needs to recuperate. What I'd like to know is why he's got two stress fractures after playing very little basketball.

i have seen this theory thrown out there, his body was growing so fast, he was putting alot stress on it by playing a pretty high level of basketball and since hes in college im sure he wasnt eating/training right, his body didnt know how to handle it all and now that he is in the NBA he should get proper training

That's one possibility. Another could be that his body can't handle the kind of pounding it takes playing 25 minutes/game...for 28 games. But I'm sure it'll hold up fine when he's playing 35 minutes/game for 82.

Did you guys read the Grantland piece about how there are only two bball courts in his entire country and they play on asphalt all the time?


it could well be that getting him out of, um, terrible conditions and into an actual NBA environment, being on the Brett Brown strength and conditioning routine during a redshirt year would minimize the injury risk going ahead

Could be. Could also be that Brett Brown's up and down style would be even harder on a guy who's prone to stress fractures and maybe there's something to that whole bone density thing. We'll find out in October 2015...maybe.

This makes sense to me. Going from not playing basketball at all, to all of a sudden High Level High School/Kansas is a drastic change and could really affect the body.

*not that I know I'm talking about, I'm not a doctor, physical therapist, or anything of the sort.

OK, so here's a fun bet. Who thinks Evan Turner gets more than a minimum contract?

Here's a more fun bet - who thinks Evan Turner is in the league past his 28th birthday?

He got a late start, so that's a tough one to judge. I'll say no. He's got Greece written all over him.

He'll probably have to go somewhere overseas to get much above the minimum.

I think he might - not much more - but more. I'd be willing to guess something along the lines of Lavoy's last Sixers contract - two years for 5 or 6 million.

My favorite prop bet headed into the season is (barring trades) how many games does it take rajon rondo and marcus smart to get into a fist fight AND who throws the first punch

The only free agents the Sixers are getting are the ones who will be overpaid or ones who are lucky to make an NBA roster.

I was hoping that they would take a shot at Gordon Hayward but it looks like he's getting max money. Other FAs I want them to look at are
Chris Singleton, Ed Davis, Anthony Morrow, Greivis Vasquez, and Jimmer

Spencer Hawes is a sought after stretch four based on certain reports out there

detriot signs Jodie meeks to a 3 year 19.5 million contract according to woj

Holy fucking shit. I like Jodie, but $19 million over 3 years? Wow.

Funny thing is, I don't think Turner will see that much money for the rest of his career. So I guess this puts the Turner vs. Meeks debate to rest.

with the cap reportedly going up over the next couple of years, we could see alot of overpays

Hers the prop bet: how much more is Jodie Meeks going to make than Evan Turner in this contract?

I'll set the over/under at $9.5M more for Jodie. What do you have?


i think hes expecting a decent size deal and he wont get it

Remember his rant about how useless three point shooters are and how he's going to get paid? Hilarious.

It's kind if a sad state of affairs. Interest in Bradley would always have been something that excited me. I'd love to have a guy like him on the team...lessen his offensive responsibilities and turn him loose on defense and he's a definite contributor. Now, I hope they don't sign him. If you're going to tank, and are you ever, at least don't fuck it up again. I'd also like to see Thad moved for a future first before the season, if you can find a taker. I'd see if the Lakers would do Nash and an unprotected first for Thad (does LA own a first in the next couple of years?)

owe their 2015 1st to PHX(top 5 protected) and owe the magic a 2017 1st(at least two years after the L.A. Lakers conveyed a 1st round pick to Phoenix, then the L.A. Lakers' 1st round pick to Orlando protected for selections 1-5)

lol. I guess maybe Indiana?

Too bad NYK, Brooklyn, and LAC can't trade their 1st round picks next year.

Isn't the best prospect in this draft something like a less athletic Embiid? And most of the top five are big PF's? So drafting 6th might be fine.

The comparison I read for Okafor was Elton Brand

Oh gosh, even more special and promising.

That's the characterization I heard initially (top prospects are centers, PFs, and one point guard) but when you look at mocks there are some small forwards rated highly too.

a real pity that Embiid's foot injury essential ruined a fairly large segment of yhe fanbase. IMO had there been no injury then the Sixers would have drafted Wiggins, which would have been enough to keep many on board with the rebuild. I also think they would have moved up to get Vonleh had they drafted Wiggins, but that less of a sure thing.

Philly isn't really a great NBA town. A 50, 40, and a 20-win team would generate the same amount of excitement since neither team has a shot of winning a title.

What sucks for the hardcore fanbase is that next year's roster will have two young promising players, Thad, and the rest is absolute shit. I don't care to see KJ McDaniels or Tony Wroten.

My guess is that this is their last terrible year. I think they make the playoffs in 2015-16.

No town is a "great NBA town" when the team is irrelevant for a decade.

Depends on your definition of "relevance". No one seemed to care when this team made the playoffs.

In sports, teams (save for a few ridiculously popular even when they suck franchises in new york boston and dallas) are irrelevant - until they are not - then they go back to irrelevancy

The Buccaneers in the NFL are a great example, Hell boston was irrelevant until the summer Ainge pulled off those moves.

Hell, the heat weren't really relevant until they signed Lebron and Bosh.

Winning makes you relevant

I would bet against that and probably give you odds.

I also am a fan of Bradley. And I'm already done with rooting for losses..from what I'm hearing, this draft isn't anything to tank for and is heavy on the 4 and 5 anyway. I say make a play for A.B., even at around 4/36-40 range and at least force Boston to pony up even if the Sixers don't get him. Need a shooting guard either way and there's very few who can match Bradley on the defensive side of the ball. 39% from deep too. MCW, AB, Thompson/KJMcD, Thad, Noel. That's a good, defensively-oriented starting 5 that can shoot a bit and run. I can see them sneaking into the playoffs in the weak East and with the promise of Embiid and Saric providing reinforcements in a year and 2, I can start being cautiously optimistic again.

The move would confuse me. I like Bradley, and similar to Brian, this move would have excited me with at a different stage for this team. I am just not sure that signing him would make much sense, unless you really think you are going to get a discount (which I don't expect) and he can be locked up for 4-5 years. My guess is that its just to test the market. I think Bradley denied a 4 year/24 mn deal this season so thats where I would expect the market to be? Something like 7/year.

Anyone see Embid's tweet at Lebron today? Asking him to come to Philly. I don't know what to think of it but chuckle. I think he is going to need some PR guys to give him a filter because he is quite the candid character right now.

One final point. When you look at San Antonio's big 3....are any shooters? I'd venture to say Saric is similar to Ginobli at similar points in their career. Parker was a weak shooter but developed a modest midrange game and depended on his floater. They found guys to space the floor (Green, Bonner, Diaw, etc.) through free agency but built their core around smart playmakers (Parker, Ginobli, Duncan and now Leonard). I think the way SA has developed shooters is unprecedented, so lets see what Brown and his shotwitch doctors can do.

My guess is if Embid pans out and MCW/Noel live up to half their abiliy (lots of if's) then we would target a guy like Bradley Beal. That is who I'd hold out for.

Yeah, I think Ginobili is a shooter now... and certainly was much more of an athlete when he was Saric's age than Saric is.

I love what Embiid did. You can already tell this kid has a big personality. And I do believe that he'll be healthy enough to put this team back on the map. Just my gut feeling.

Philly is going to love this kid.

gortat back to the wizards for 5 years 60 million

Sean Livingston to golden state

3 years 16 million with the 3rd year partially guaranteed for Livingston

Ah Washington - over paying to stay mediocre

I think the theory here is that the youngest backcourt in the league continues to grow, and eventually they contend on the strength of those two guys.

That sound fair given he is a decent center in his prime. It is not like they could go out and get better on the open market. I'm surpised they went to 5 years though, as he is 30. I also thought you can only give certain players on your team a 5year deal. Wall also got 5years.

Those poor fans. Imagine being forced to watch a team on the rise. And what a sad front office, signing a big man who can play...and one who isn't even injured! It's like they're trying to win, or maybe even provide a good product for their customers. Rank amateurs.

What would you say is that team's upside? Maybe, possibly an ECF appearance in the next year or two depending on what happens with Miami this off-season?

How many years did they flat-out suck before this past season? If I'm not mistaken, they hadn't made the playoffs since brace-face was their coach. Their signing of Gortat has more to do with the fact that they swung and hit a couple of doubles (and a strikeout here and there) in the lottery, and the FO feels they are ready to win some games.

Or, and I know this is crazy talk, just maybe they think by fielding a legitimate team they'll be able to lure a guy like Kevin Durant when he becomes a free agent. Maybe showing a guy like that you care about things like, I don't know, winning, is a better way to sell him that you'll continue to care about winning if he signs with your team, rather than the team that's been tanking for a half decade and celebrating how much they've sucked.

Still, the point remains that they sucked first for a number of years before they got better. Albeit, unintentionally tanking, which has more to do with the fact that their FO is more like the Bobcats than the Spurs.

When (and I know some people are probably thinking if) the Sixers field and develop a legitimate core of draftees and are ready to build around these players, at that point in time they will be ready to pitch their offers to the Kevin Durants of the world. At that time I'm sure he'll care more about who is on that team that can help him win a championship and less about the fact that they recently tanked in order to become good.

Let's say the Sixers' future core is an average age of 24-25 by the time they are ready to contend. You have six to seven years of having a legitimate chance to win a championship with this team (possibly longer) as opposed to the '08 Celtics that had two years, The '09/'10 Lakers that had three or four years, the '11 Mavs that had one year, and the current Heat that will have had four years if they fall apart this summer.**

I'll take being a legitimate championship contending team for a longer span of time if it means we have to tank for a couple of years. And I'll take this any day over the teams that I mentioned above that on average had a shelf-life of a few years of being legitimate contenders.

**I'm including only finals appearances

Woah... a lot of unsafe assumptions contained in your "six to seven years" projection.

Of course there were - It was nothing more than a hypothetical. The point was if our future core is ready to contend at a younger age than recent, older teams I mentioned than we can contend for much longer. At the very least, the Sixers will increase their chances of winning a championship over a longer period of time.

Lots of faith based thinking there.

1) How do you know an "intentional" tanker is bound to end up with better results in the long run than an "unintentional" tanker? Furthermore, how do you clearly distinguish them most of the time? I guess it was easy to distinguish Hinkie last year because no GM in history has been as brazen about it.

I would guess that free agents in demand right now would view Philadelphia as no less of a ridiculous destination than Milwaukee.

2) You assume that championship contending teams achieve that from a particular set of cohorts with a very narrow window of opportunity. But, the best franchises simply reload. Although Dirk was common to both, the Mavs had a championship appearance in 2011 with one set of players and an appearance in 2006 with another. I think they have a decent shot of getting there within the next year or two if they can attract one high quality free agent. Miami's recent run included only two players (Wade and Haslam) common to their 2006 championship.

Seems only fair as the opposite seems prevalent here now...the certainty that failure is going to happen with Noel, Ebiid, Saric and any other move that Sam Hinkie has made. The certainty that the new ownership are just carpetbaggers...the inability to comprehend how long it really takes to rebuild an NBA team and to think that after one year it's all done.

Again, you resort to bi-polar (and false) characterizations of positions. I expect at least 4 straight years out of the playoffs and at least 3 under Hinkie's leadership. But I feel as fans we should see progression each year, something like this:

1) 19-63;
2) 26-56;
3) 38-44.

Baring better free agent signings than we have any current reason to expect, I don't see a year 2 that good. Partially in consequence of that, I don't see a year 3 that is close to .500 either unless Hinkie starts really feeling some heat after the upcoming season.

Of the four first rounders obtained by Hinkie in his first two drafts, only two will take the court during the first two seasons. Only three will take the court during his first three seasons. He'll get another good draft pick next summer so he should have four on the court for his third year (hopefully). If the Sixers hit on their draft picks the way the Thunder did and Hinkie signs some sold supporting players, then everything should work out great. But, if that doesn't happen, they might be no better than the Pistons. Recall that they drafted two highly regarded young big men too. They also have a scoring oriented point guard who can't shoot.

Did i say you by name, I'm almost certain I didn't, though you were one of the ranters who demanded the sixers be better next year and make moves to be better next year.

As for your need for name calling, fuck off you twat

Read that post again. I don't see any name calling there. I said bi-polar "arguments" (those that characterize positions as one extreme or other).

But, since you brought it up, I will respond in kind here: dick head.

So why do you expect 26 wins, what's that about? What if Saric and Embiid are really great and help us win a whole lot in a few years, will you be mad that we didn't pick different guys who could have helped us immediately reach your 26-win target?

The explanation should be obvious, but I'll elaborate anyway.

1) You don't go from 19 (or 22 or 23) wins to 48-52 wins in one year unless: 1) you are incredibly lucky in the draft over consecutive years (name another team in memory that was as lucky in the draft over three years as the Thunder), 2) you manage to get a top 50 all time caliber player (Shaquille, or Sampson followed by Olajawon in consecutive years; Cavs had a 18 win improvement after drafting Lebron); or 3) you spend to assemble a group of stars (Celtics, Miami).

The most likely way to have an immediate turnaround is #3. Even the Bulls took a few years to get good after drafting Jordan (he was hurt during his second year). Rookies, even really good ones, need a little time to adjust. Saric will go through that adjustment two years from now (if he comes) instead of this year.

2) We'll see if the group of fans supporting the strategy of "tanking as badly as possible for at least two years, or maybe longer, to get the highest draft picks we can" is as large next March as it is now if this team goes through another season as bad as this past one. It's one thing to feel this way in the offseason, it's another to feel this way after 60% of a miserable season following one of the most unwatchable seasons in franchise history.

After the first tank season, OK City had two stars in place: Durant and Westbrook. The Sixers don't have anything close to that ready for the second season.

Again, if you don't watch the games much anyway and all that matters to you is the vision of some glorious playoff future, I guess this line of reasoning is pretty irrelevant. Obviously a number of us look forward to watching these in-season games, don't believe that a season of 82 games should be considered pointless unless you're a championship contender, and would like to see a little more incentive to watch this year. I buy League Pass each year solely for the opportunity to watch the Sixers and I don't believe I watched a game past the middle of February this past season.

I don't see why we need to jump to 48 wins in two years. I do like the concept of a glorious playoff future, but I also like watching young talent, whether they're on competitive teams or not. I really look forward to Noel's summer league debut Saturday, for example.

No, my preferred result is 48 wins in four years:

19, 25, 36, 48.

What I was saying is that a team is very unlikely to be able to jump from that Year 2 figure to that Year 4 figure unless some exceptional things happen. Those things happened to OK City, Boston, and Miami but very few others. For most others a progression takes place but you need key players in place for that.

I enjoy watching young players develop, too, but not if the resulting records are like the Sixers string in the nineties or the Timberwolves current string.

Let's play another hypothetical. Kevin Durant finally decides he's going to leave OKC. He's going to leave the team that hit a home run and three triples in three consecutive lotteries, did the impossible and put three great players together on the back of "tanking to get better." Then, when it came time to keep that team together, instead of paying the tax, they traded away one of the three for pennies on the dollar. See, even when they became contenders, they would never really commit to putting them over the top because, well, they're cheap. Like, maybe they liked it better when they were paying their players the minimum, and now they certainly aren't going to be paying the tax just for maybe a couple more playoff games. Where's the profit in that?

That's where Durant is coming from. Now is he going to choose to go to another franchise being run like that, or is he going to choose to go to the franchise that puts out a little money to keep valuable players, like Gortat? I love how OKC is the model everyone talks about, and OKC does exactly what I'm saying Harris is going to do with this team, if they're ever lucky enough to reach that level. The OKC model is to buy a shitty team, bottom them out, move them, then spend no fucking money on them when they have a chance to get over the top. That's your dream scenario...and probably your realistic best chance. But keep drinking the koolaid, keep drinking it. #HinkieGod4Eva

Disclaimer: I don't have a Hinkie shrine like some people do, but I do believe their strategy is sound as long as it leads to developing and keeping a championship-caliber team.

Speaking of which, the idea that the sixers will follow in the tracks what OKC did with Harden is nothing more than speculation at this point. It's ignoring the fact that Philadelphia is in a much bigger market (even if they have to compete with three other sports) and it's mostly ignoring that this ownership group made moves in the past that would indicate that they're not cheap (i.e. cutting Brand while still having to pay him 16 million, offering Jrue a fair-market contract...it was Hinkie's decision to move him, investing in a practice facility).

To me it seems more likely that they've looked at the past ten years of the franchise and considered going in a different direction. Does it make ownership happy that they don't have to spend as much? Sure, but it's going to raise a few red flags if they stay this way for too much longer...as it's already doing with some people.

Isn't it all faith-based? Is there a guaranteed, proven method to winning a championship?

1.) I think you answered your own question here, but further evidence can be seen with potential trades that franchises attempted to make during their losing seasons. Of course you also have teams like Cleveland and Detroit that tried to be good and failed miserably.

2.) Your definition of "reload" seems a bit loose here. Were the Mavs really a viable championship team from '06 to '11 or did they just happen to assemble the right players in the '10-'11 year when Dirk was still talented enough to carry them through the finals? I'm talking about teams with a window to win a championship every year. These windows are typically only for a few years as seen in recent history.

My point is, again, if the sixers can establish a championship-caliber roster at a younger age than the aforementioned teams their window can be larger.

I'm not sure I agree with you that Cleveland and Detroit "tried to be good." I think they tried to do what the Sixers are trying to do, just less blatantly. Recall that Cleveland wanted to trade Varejao last year but he got injured.

If tanking to get good draft position is the primary goal, then no one could do that better than Cleveland. Bennett looks like an idiotic pick but, for the most part, they've used their picks as might be expected. Maybe Waiters was a bit of a reach but he's improving too.

If I recall, last summer the Pistons acquired Josh Smith in free agency and Brandon Jennings in a sign and trade. The Cavs acquired Luol Deng and Bynum. This signals teams trying to be good and get to the playoffs.
Furthermore, wasn't Dan Gilbert stressing for his team to make the playoffs since Lebron left? I wouldn't classify that as surreptitious tanking.

On an off-note, I thought Tristan Thompson was a bit of a reach as well. It's a lot harder to swing and miss with the #1 pick, but their top 5 choices have been a little head-scratching.

Brian, I think I get your anger/disappointment at this team, and it seems reasonable to me. I was hoping to enjoy watching them this year too. That said, the armchair GM in me thinks that, starting year 2 of our rebuild, it still makes more sense to be trying to gather more talent long-term than to try to win now. My question for you is: let's say it's last Thursday night and you're the GM. What would you have done? (I know you've said in the past that you've have traded Hawes and ET earlier -- agreed.) But that aside, as it stood last Thursday night, what would you have done differently?

I would've done everything in my power to trade up for Wiggins or Parker (and apparently, they didn't). If that didn't work, I would've settled for Embiid because Exum was always a garbage prospect at a stacked position. At #10 I wouldn't have taken Saric. Probably would've taken McDermott and maybe moved him, not sure. The Saric pick was inconsequential salt in the wound of Embiid, to me.

Beautiful sarcasm. Keep up the good snark! It's not like the Sixers haven't earned it. And operating in 3 states now for our convenience!

Mentioned I wished we would sign Patty Mills, maybe Hinkie will be interested in him now since it's announced he'll be out seven months with injury. Round 'em up Sammy!

The Philadelphia Seventy-Staggerers!

@SteveBHoop: Celtics have agreed to terms with restricted free agent Avery Bradley, according to source

Idiots. Who signs players that could help now?

four years $32 million contract

The Boston Celtics. One of the better brands in sports. Along with the Green Bay Packers. The St. Louis Cardinals. And the California Golden Seals (oops).

Not even the most popular sports team in their own city (and the Bruins are pretty popular as well)...not sure what you mean by better brand, but seems like you mean the archaic way a guy Buzz Bissinger looks at sports as neither of the teams you mentioned are one of the most popular in their own leagues.

According to the Oregonian, the Sixers are one of the teams "tracking" Spencer Hawes. He has plenty of interest around the league, including from the Blazers.

He'd probably take less to go to the Blazers. Unless he's one of those darn greedy Republicans.

His politics aside, I think that Hawes probably did earn more than the mid-level with his performance last year (for two teams no less) and has improved to the point where he should be able to command more. This contract likely is his peak one so his agent should try to talk him into a better one.

sixers offered 10 and 2 2nd rounders for 8


skip to 6:20

A decent offer, and one that adds more credence to the idea that Stauskas was their man(and went for BPA once he was taken).

Don't blame Kings for not bitin' on that. They got their preferred player and can pick up some 2s anytime at a Hinkie yard sale if they get the itch.

Buuuuut I thought we passed on McDermott and didn't try harder to move up because we wanted to take a guy who can't play for two years and lose games while saving money.

Anyway, I think that's a pretty fair offer. K.J. alone might be worth the difference between 8 and 10.

moving up to 8 and taking stauskas or vonleh wasnt going to make them any better to make it matter

Yeah, of course. I was being sarcastic. Some people think we picked unavailable guys because they're unavailable.

I thought second rounders were awesome assets.

the kings owner is in love with stauskas

hes mentioned him multiple times in the previous episodes

2 years 9 million for ben gordon from the magic

2 year is a team option

Orlando should really be tanking. They have a nice young core of athletic plus defenders who are limited on offense.. and Vucevic, but they really need a franchise player. Of course they may be able to attract someone in free agency, but they might as well play the 2015 lottery.

Rumors that the Cavs will offer Gordon Hayward the max in hops that Utah won't match it.

Giving him a max deal would take up 25% of the Cavs salary cap according to Hoopsrumors.

Hey, at least they're trying to win right? Maxing out Kyrie Irving and Gordon Hayward definitely guarantees, um, what exactly? With a healthy Derrick Rose and no Carmelo the bulls are still better than them which makes them at best, the third best team in their division, and close to half their salary devoted to Kyrie Irving and Gordon Hayward.

Hayward is a pretty unremarkable player, I don't get it. He's like a small-time Granger. That said, if Wiggins develops like Brian thinks, Hayward would make a nice third option. How that's max material I don't know.

I have been amazed since the rumors started that Hayward was going to get a max deal. He can't shoot. I would never offer/match a max deal for him. No way.

I can't imagine that they actually will unless it's something very short term or front loaded just to achieve a short term objective. Remember that Nick Collison got 13 million one year.

Wow if that's true I think I would be surprised, but not entirely as they are the Cavs, afterall.

This is exactly the type of thing desperate teams will do. I predict a furious battle for the fourth seed between the Wizards and Cavs this year and thereafter until one team is crowned the new-era Atlanta Hawks.

Current rumor has Sixers talking with Houston about taking Lynn's contract if Houston can get one of their high priced free agent targets. Supposedly, these conversations began during the draft period.

I think Carmelo will go to Chicago or New York, LeBron will stay in Miami, and Houston won't move Lin. Unfortunately, because we could pry a pick or a player from them.

dont think anything gets done without the pelicans pick and i dont see houston trading that

also alot of the lin stuff reminds me about the asik stuff in that its to seem like there is another bidder

Reminds me of how we took Royce White to facilitate the Harden deal. Hinkie's done more to help Houston than Philly, he'll probably get a 2nd rounder and some stashed scrub.

You're getting to be just as bad as your worst commenters. You'll lose all your readership if you keep this up. You can reasonably disagree with the last couple drafts, but taking players who were #1 on everyone's boards until they suffered injuries that our medical staff have determined to be non-chronic is not a crazy strategy; at most it's a more patient, or less risk-adverse strategy than you'd prefer. And when anyone defends this really reasonable strategy of drafting the most talented players available, and putting ourselves in a position to acquire these extremely talented players on prices and terms we'd never get in free agency, you say they're in the tank for Hinkie. People like Hinkie because they think he's done a really good job; it's not like we see a guy who went to a good business school and automatically assume he's doing the right things.

Has it been stated this medical staff is different from the one that cleared Bynum? I haven't read/heard anything about a new medical staff being brought in, have you?

And if you don't care for my reactions, that's fine. Feel free to stop reading. I barely write anymore, this franchise has turned into such a joke it's more of an annoyance than entertainment. The thing that angers me is the amount of rope Hinkie's apostles are giving him, and the state of the "rebuild" after two drafts and the worst season in the history of professional sports by any non-devotee measure. What saddens me is my son is getting to the age where he could watch games with me, but I'm not subjecting him to this filth.

You're a good father.

You're a good father.

Kids love rooting for lovable losers, and they learn valuable lessons from doing so - e.g., patience, that doing things well takes time, that long-range planning is a virtue, that some things in life are more important than a meaningless 8th seed (like loyalty, or having a plan beyond praying that some sustained mediocrity will attract Kevin Durant), that even if you're not the biggest or the most naturally gifted at what you do, you're not a failure if you try hard. As this team will.

As far as describing this team - a team that's already assembled a decent amount of exciting young talent and is waiting for the best big man prospect in a decade to return from a foot injury - as "filth," that's just deranged. Were the Sonics, in Durant's rookie year, when they went 20-62, filth, unfit for children to watch? I don't think we'll be much worse than that team; 2 through 12 we'll have more talent than they did. Would you have skipped out on Durant's rookie year if you were a Sonics fan, then? What would stop this team from being filth, in your eyes? Would we not be filth this season if we traded away our best picks to draft Wiggins? The guy who he's most often compared to accrued just 2 win shares and averaged just 7.8 points a game in his rookie season, at an older age, with more size. McDaniels - one of the guys we might have lost out on drafting had we packaged picks to move up - could easily do that this year. Maybe what you're upset about is our trading the league's most middling point guard for the best player in last year's draft and a pick that got us this year's top international prospect and another first-rounder. That's a lot more than what Minnesota will get for Kevin Love. What in the world is so difficult about accepting that for just a few years out of the decades you've spent watching the Sixers, the Sixers won't field a team that can contend for an 8th seed in the NBA's JV conference, with the end result very possibly being that we'll be better for a long time than we were at any time in the last ten years?

Gotta agree with Tray here Brian. There really is no reason to keep your son from watching this team if you feel he'll enjoy basketball. He's going to learn about the game just as well watching this team grow over the next few years.

Also, your doom-and-gloom reaction with regard to Hinkie, the draft, and the future of this team, I guess I'm a bit surprised by it. I think you are a reasonable person and there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with the picks and the general philosophy of the GM. Hell, a lot of people do. But you've gone crazy. All the sarcasm and negativity...it's like you've thrown reason out the window for good. Is there no possibility in your mind that this "plan" is the right one?

I think I'll pass on the whole having my kids learn life lessons from the TV thing, but thanks anyway. And if the lesson I'm looking for is "You should always try your hardest," I hardly think the Sixers are a shining example.

Or how about just a second rounder to use on a stashed scrub? Are there any Estonian wings of interest out there? How about a Finnish point guard? We haven't drafted one of those since 2007.

If Melo is willing to sign with Houston, then I think taking Lin's contract off their hands is worth at least their 1st which would be in the 20-25 range. A couple of 2nd round picks for a $7 million cap hold and $15 million in cash payout is too much for some 2nd round picks.

Getting NOP's 1st round pick would be awesome. That would me that we own their 1st rounder and their 2nd rounder for next year.

I bet Hinkie would give away a 2nd round pick to Houston in exchange for Lin.

I agree. Taking Lynn off their hands is worth a low first. Actually, I would be willing to give them MCW for Lynn, their first rounder, and maybe some supporting player who isn't worth much right now. I don't believe in MCW or Lynn but, like Mae West, when given the choice between two evils I always pick the one I haven't tried before.

C.J. Miles got 4 years, 18 million with the Pacers. Seems like a lot for a guy with career averages of 9/2/1 and a career 35% shooting percentage from three, which is his best skill (although his last couple seasons have been in the 38s and 39s).

Unlike last summer, the free agent funds seem to be more freely flowing this season. The team who invested in free agents last summer had good timing.

Hinkie on Noel and his FT shooting:

"If he shoots even 60% from the line he will be wildly helpful to us" - so he won't be an auto-foul.

Dream big, Morey's booty call.

Sixers express interest in Kent Bazemore, famed Warriors towel-waver who showed signs of being a productive NBA player in LA last season. He's already 25, but that's something I could see happening.

That's fantastic. He could be this year's James Anderson!

Unlike James Anderson, though, he played well the one year he got playing time.

Looks more like half a year to me, but I won't quibble. I would agree that his "upside" may well be above Anderson's.

By the way, I do have some agreement with your view that children can have some enjoyment from "lovable losers." When my son was young, he watched a lot of sports, knew that some teams and players stunk, and got some enjoyment from watching them. I remember him giggling when the Bulls' announcers asked if the famous Jack Haley should now be able to play when the Bulls passed the 70 win mark in the 95-96 season.

Lowry re-signs with Toronto - four years, 48 million. I think that's pretty reasonable. Cleveland will not make Hayward a max offer, or any offer, because they believe that Utah would definitely match and they don't want to temporarily tie up cap space when they could be recruiting LeBron. Spurs re-signed Mills for three years, 12 million. He'll miss much of next season with a shoulder injury. Orlando is recruiting Patrick Patterson to potentially be their starting power forward.

Good for Lowry. He really turned himself into a quality player over the course of his career.

The only interesting thing is that because of the structure of the CBA his contract is not that far from what "max" players get after their rookie deals, but it is well below what older vets are eligible for. So it sounds odd when they talk about someone like Hayward getting a max deal... when Hayward's max is probably only 60% of what someone like Melo will make.

Lowry is a fascinating example for me. To be honest i'm not really sold on him at that price. Guys who outperform what they've done in their career in a contract year always scare me. I'm just not sure he'll ever be able to replicate his performance from last season.

At 8-9 million i would've been fine with him, he will be a good starting PG, but at 12 i think there's a decent amount of risk there.

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment