DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

Summer League & Free Agents

I was disappointed we weren't the team the Bulls traded Greg Smith to (Smith's a cheap young backup center who played well at times for Houston the season before last), but no, I don't care that we weren't involved in the big cap-relief trades. As far as free agency, the only big name I might think about is Bledsoe. (No interest in Stephenson.) He's very good, fills a need (efficient perimeter scoring), could play in a backcourt with MCW, and would also serve as insurance against the possibility that MCW doesn't develop as we like. The only downside is our standings in the draft lottery, but I think that team would win 29 games tops, and the teams at the bottom this year aren't going to be too bad. Milwaukee will be a lot better, Orlando will be better with Frye, an improved Oladipo, Payton and Gordon, Utah was okay last year when Burke was healthy... Boston could be bad if they wanted to be. But I don't think many teams will try to tank this year in a weak draft.

Cooney is talking about the Sixers possibly landing Wiggins in a deal as part of a three-way deal for love(no specifics given). I just don't see how MN doesn't get Wiggins back in any deal for Love.

I read that too.
We both wasted 10 minutes of our lives.
It literally makes no sense.
The writer would probably admit that too. Eventually.

Just for fun...I would think a package would start with Noel and an unprotected 1st next year?

Actually, speculating about that doesn't sound like that much fun to me. At this point, I'd rather have Noel than Wiggins. Maybe I would feel differently in two years.

As a rule, if I am a GM, if I am helping a franchise get better by clearing up cap space for free agent signing, I gotta get paid real well for it.
If someone else wants to do it for you, I am also fine with that.
Plus Jeremy Lin does us no favors.

I am not a 100% positive the right situation turns up for us to exploit our cap space for a rich bounty from a desperate team but I would rather gamble on that than reap fringe assets.

Signing any free agents is counter-intuitive to our plan so I have no desires. Only 1 or 2 yr players with some shred of potential. None come to mind as being available.
Wait. And see. Is my approach.

"Signing any free agents is counter-intuitive to our plan so I have no desires."

This is kind of where I stand, as much as it pains me. I often think I'd like for them to look at this guy or even land this guy, but it just all seems for naught. The two lottery picks being who they were (and mostly their situations) just dampened my hopes and outlook on this upcoming season being more than another near shit-show. Every time a new name pops into my head, as mentioned in the quote above, my desires just fizzle.

But as mentioned in the first comment to this article about a big name being thought of (Bledsoe), again, if I even try to go there it just seems counter-intuitive so I don't even entertain the thought very long at all. But on that Bledsoe or PG note, one name I'd like to see us take a chance on is Ish Smith. You'd think Phoenix is going to cut him with the glut of PG's they have accumulated. He'd be cheap, he's very underrated to me, isn't going to move the needle that much in the W column, and presents a much different dynamic than MCW. Good backup potential.

(If Kilpatrick makes the team as I'm expecting, he may settle into management's role of backup point prospect that's cheap rendering the Ish Smith hope moot and I'd be fine with that because I think Kilpatrick can carve out a niche in this league with a chance)

Do the Sixers have the rights to Kilpatrick? I'm not sure they do. He might just be a summer league invite, but be able to sign with any team in the league.

He wasn't drafted by anyone so I would guess that no one has his rights at this point.

First of all, I don't think Kilpatrick can play the point at all. And second, I think that more likely than not he isn't an nba player. People think he's a shooter after one game, but he shot 34 percent from three last year and 30 the year before that. I'd much rather have a guy who's stuck around in the league for a couple years than waste a roster spot on a guy who may or may not stick, and who at best will be a team's fourth or fifth guard. So I like your Smith idea.

What 'people' think that after one game?

Yeah, I wasn't exactly saying he was a point but the way the front office signed and trotted out scrubs last year ala Darius Morris and Zo Brown and gave them roles that were position-specific (hence why I said "management's role"), I wouldn't be surprised if they tried it with Kilpatrick.

As for your stance on a player who may or may not stick and will probably be your fourth or fifth guy of his group, what the hell is their excuse for Brandon Davies then? I really can't figure that one out unless it's all tank-based, which would make the most sense to me yet frustrate the heck out of me at the same time (I'm ready for them to start using roster spots on guys that legitimately have a chance to develop into something, not Brandon Davies types).

No excuse for Brandon Davies. I guess Kilpatrick has a chance at being a serviceable bench 2-guard. McRae is more intriguing, but he's also pretty wispy and a poor shooter. Sign both if they don't pick up someone like Jimmer, I guess.

I liked McRea's aggressiveness though. Seems like he went to the line in the fourth quarter more than some of Collins' entire teams did in the closing quarter. He also made a couple of critical defensive plays in the final minutes. His shooting may not have been efficient but he was a big part of that comeback. He may be a 58th pick but he was willing to step up and take charge when it mattered.

I like some things about him but there's always going to be things to like about any fringe prospect. As talent-poor as we are at his position we might as well give him a shot but I think the chance we'll want to keep him after year one or two is less than even. I think Kilpatrick has a greater chance of sticking. Better shooter, better finisher (according to college stats), better body. McRae's already 23 and he's still just 180 at 6'5.

Kilpatrick might be a better prospect on paper and he shot better last night, but stats should be evaluated along with context and team performance. McRea faced more consistently good competition in the SEC than Kilpatrick did in the more uneven American Athletic.

Tennessee also won three games in the NCAA tournament as an 11th seed and McRea averaged just under 20 pts. a game over their 4 games (not an easy thing to do in the NCAA tournament). Cincinnati as a 5th seed lost its first game to Harvard.

I don't think the SEC is that great, but wherever you come down on that, McRae also played with an NBA power forward (Stokes, one of the best players in Orlando), while Kilpatrick played with just about no one. I don't care at all about team performance in the tournament.

I was actually considering this the other day - is the summer league more talented than the average D-1 college basketball team (and the sec as a whole was pretty average the past year). I mean in general you'd assume the guys picked for summer league have some sort of nba potential that teams see where the majority of college players don't make the NBA...or even get drafted.

The presumption that he faced better competition in a down SEC isn't a given to me...sure, don't get impressed with the summer league, but should i be impressed for what he did against a vandy or alabama either?

It's more talented than the average D-1 team, definitely... and I would say a good summer league team is more talented than even a very good college team, definitely with the exception of Kentucky and a few other teams like that. Duke last year might be more talented than a bad summer-league team, less talented than a good one. There's pretty huge variation in the quality of summer-league teams; some teams are playing a lot of second and third-year players, some teams don't seem to be seriously auditioning more than one or two second-round guys. The Sixers last night were mostly helping guys who could never play in the league show off for Euro scouts, but even a team of prospective Euro players is better than pretty much any SEC team that isn't Kentucky or, perhaps, Florida. And then there are individual match-up issues. Exum may turn out to be the best player in this draft, but his defense is horrible right now so it's pretty easy to look good if he's guarding you.

Summer league is better in terms of individual talent. Even those guys who weren't legit NBA prospects are older and more mature and have improved through playing in overseas' professional leagues or D League. The more elite college teams are often better in the way they play team ball because they have practiced and played more together and have had more consistent coaching in terms of game and player goals.

Going into the draft I actually liked McRae better than McDaniels, as well as his ability to handle and shoot over KJ's.

Honestly, you always have the weirdest player evaluations (Hood and Markel Brown being two of the best players in the draft, for instance). Liking McRae over McDaniels because McRae can shoot a bit better is pretty precisely analogous to the time Dick Vitale bashed us for picking Iguodala over Redick. McDaniels isn't as good a prospect as Iguodala was, of course, but McRae may not even be an NBA player.

It was way worse than that re: Vitale. He was crushing the Sixers for drafting Iguodala over Luke Jackson!

I still remember Jay Bilas ripping Vitale during that draft because Vitale kept pushing all of the 4-year guys over the underclassmen.

I saw a piece somewhere recently where Luke Jackson claimed he was injured his whole NBA career. It would explain things. There was no reason for him to be such a bust.

You're not remembering that correctly (or else you got it second hand). Redick was drafted in 2006. The player you're talking about was Luke Jackson out of Oregon who was picked right after Iggy. He had a great four year college career but didn't play much in the NBA. I remember Vitale's irritation during that draft program.

Actual happening or not, anything to spew his needless condescension and pompous shtick farther and wider. How dare anyone have a differing outlook. We should all bow down.

Well, Rodney, I could look the other way when people don't fact check their assertions but I believe that would have two detrimental effects:

1) reduce the sharpness of the people making the assertions; and

2) reduce the informational quality of the forum.

You don't want the forum to degrade into the Sixers' version of Fox News do you?

The opportunities for me to exhibit pompousness and condescension are just collateral fringe benefits.

And yes, the Vitale incident during the 2004 draft program happened just as I described it.

Not sure if you misunderstood or not, but my ire was directed at Tray's tireless arrogance shtick.

Sorry about my misunderstanding, Rodney. I guess I figure that if someone mentions the words "pompous and condescending" and I'm involved in the conversation, I figure they're talking about me.:)

Too damned egocentric for my own good!

Right, it was Jackson and Nelson. Especially Nelson.

Weird why? Just because they don't align with yours (or the masses)?

I really shouldn't even entertain such nonsense and spin you wrote, but I will say that I find it amusing that you somehow assume that a guy picked #32 is this sure-fire better prospect than another guy picked #58 just because you're so fond of him. Oh, and probably cause he's younger, don't want to leave that out.

You proclaim McDaniels is this for-sure NBA player while McRae isn't even one. How can you be so sure when neither has even played a game on that level yet?

McDaniels has shown no signs of being this so-called lockdown defender even in these summer league games so far. Not once has he looked comfortable on that end, on the ball or off of it. Ways to go for your pet.

"what the hell is their excuse for Brandon Davies then"

Maybe they they still have questions about his potential contributions. If he continues to play like last night, he should provide a conclusive answer to those questions.

I think a part of that was his role. He didn't have much help on the offensive side of the ball at Cincinnati. For example, 77.5% of his catch and shoot balls were contested. For a role player, this is usually ~20% contested. Even for high usage players, it's usually around 50-50 or 60-40 contested. He had virtually nothing created for him and faced double teams a lot. He can definitely shoot it IMO.

I agree with this post... Glad to see we didnt give up the cap space for that Lin deal. I thought Boston's deal was a good one but I don't know whether we could have gotten ourselves in there.

I'm fine with Fredette. I'd like to see at least some shooting on the perimeter because I do believe that will affect how McW develops.

Ed Davis is another guy I would take a flyer on. I definitely don't see him adding wins but he would at least give us some size to rotate with Nerlens and Sims.

I think this 2017 cba is really affecting things and I'm not sure i know enough to know who is best positioned.

I also like Ed Davis as a prospective free agent, but I wouldn't be surprised if this front office ended up with Boozer or Amare for a one year gig. If they did that, I don't think they would get another power forward in free agency.

So to date, I think Paul Pierce gets the award for most surprising free agent signing. Wonder if that was a money thing or a Sterling won't be gone by the deadline for the Ballmer sale thing (because you know, lawyers need to go on vacation)

its cute how the wizards want to keep their 2016 cap space cause they think they have a shot at durant

A year ago would you have said 'Cleveland has a shot at Lebron?'

Well, we all know for sure that YOU wouldn't have said that since you were so insistent about that message.

And what makes you think that they wouldn't have a shot?
They're an up-and-coming team and Durant hails from that general area. The last 30+ years haven't been kind to that franchise but it's not a commandment that Washington remain dismal.

With a really good backcourt, and they play in a lousy conference where Durant would at least be guaranteed conference finals appearances every year.

if durant leaves OKC it would be to win a title

i dont think he sees that happening in Washington

by win a title i mean go to a title contender which Washington isnt

Cleveland wasn't a contender on Thursday
They were on Friday
If Beal continues to get better, wall continues to evolve and then suddenly they had Kevin Durant, why wouldn't they be a contender in the east.

(And Lebron would be 2 years older, and Derrick Rose probably suffered at least one more season ending injury)

I don't think Cleveland can win the Finals next year. How could that team beat the Spurs if they're still healthy, or the Thunder, or even the Clippers? Their third best player is who? A declining, rarely healthy Varejao? Rookie Wiggins? Tristan Thompson? They need a center, Wiggins to develop into a reliable third scorer, and they need some shooting. And the LeBron-Kyrie fit might not even work.

You don't believe that Cleveland's roster is a finished product at this point, do you? If not, why are you trying to make predictions based on it?

You misunderstood. He said they were a contender, now. They're not. Maybe they will be in the future, although I don't think they're likely to become one this offseason simply by adding Mike Miller and Ray Allen (the only free agent names they're being linked to right now). Maybe if they trade for Love.

Well, it's much 'easier' to make the finals in the east than the West and getting there is like half the battle.

The Lakers are trying to position for Durant reportedly as well, but some folks like to report that Durant prefers small town life and wouldn't do well in the big spotlight.

Heck, Lebron might be on the market again that year as well :)

I think they'd be a very good team, but making the Finals isn't quite half the battle. I think an Eastern team needs to be about as good as the second or third best team in the West to have a real chance of winning the Finals. There are no huge Finals upsets, really.

"i dont think he sees that happening in Washington"

Sounds like you know him well. Do you two talk regularly?

Look, face it. You don't know what's going to happen two years from now. Once you come to that realization, you might find it quite liberating.

Yes I'm glad the Lin deal fell through although I was intrigued by it at first. Based on his decent rotational performance at the end of last year and his gutsy performance in Orlando, I'd rather see Ware battle it out with someone else for the backup spot.

If the Sixers need a quick fix for getting close to the salary floor, they can always get Boozer or even Amare. Amare might fit next to Noel fairly well for a year. Yes I know the salary floor doesn't matter, but based on last year, I believe these guys would be opposed philosophically to giving roster players a freebie bonus. To paraphrase Don Corrado Prizzi, "You don't give nothing."

I hope the front office isn't averse to adding a helpful supporting player or two just because they could contribute to the team winning enough to have the fourth worst record. There's nothing wrong with beginning this year to build a cadre of four or five players for the future rotation. Like a number of others here, I believe Fredette could be the right kind of player to get.

Personnel Evaluation 076
Multiple Choice Quiz:

Jimmer Fredette's "ceiling" is: _____

A) Scott Brooks
B) Scott Skiles
C) Scott Wedman
D) Scott Tissue

Do your own work.
Remember the process of elimination.
Submit when finished.

Good luck.

He's too short for C).

Scott Skiles was a great comparison for his college career as both were fearless scorers in college who could keep their teams competitive with higher rated opponents just by their sheer will. I doubt he ever racks up the assists in the NBA like Skiles though.

I'm going to have to go with Scott Brooks, which is plenty good enough if he can get there.

Exum was flat out impressive last night. Great point guard instincts, one on one quickness, and even strong finishes at this hoop. Sure it's one game but I don't see him being a bust. I look forward to watching that guy develop. Disappointing Nerlens isn't playing right now.

Here are Exum's highlights for people who missed the game. He looked quite a bit more promising than either Wiggins or Parker did Friday. So far I've been most impressed by him and Noel in summer league play.


I only caught the fourth quarter last night, but I agree that Exum looked pretty good. He didn't have the game stats of Gary Harris or Otto Porter yesterday, but he looked good while doing what he was doing. He looked more physically mature than I expected. He appeared pretty skilled for his age and experience (just turned 19 within the last couple of days) and appears to have sufficient athleticism at this point. He seems pretty confident and fairly unfazed considering this summer league is a big jump in competition from what he's faced.

I didn't see McDermott yesterday but the announcers mentioned how McDermott was impressed by how much faster the game was and admitted that this will be an adjustment for him. Exum probably felt a bit that way, too, but he didn't show it too much.

Does that surprise you? McDermott's slow and Exum is one of the super-quick athletes who guys like McDermott have to adjust to, or attempt to adjust to at least.

Also, the impressive thing about Exum's speed is that while he has it, he doesn't always or even usually go fast. Compared to other quick young rookie point guards, like a 19-year-old Parker his rookie year, or John Wall, he has much more of a sense of pacing. But he isn't overly deliberate either.

You've badmouthed McDermott a lot based on pure hunch. If he manages to be a good player this year, you can be sure that I will throw it back in your face and ridicule you for your typical presumptuousness. Unlike many posters who are only focused on their own words, I actually do read what others say and I have a long memory.

I might be on of the rare guys here who like bothe athletes and analytics guys AND McDermott. I'm with you, i think McDermott will be good in the NBA. He's too good of a shooter not to.

Xsago, the truth is that I don't know whether McDermott will be a good player, very good player, or fall well short of expectations. I'm pretty confident that he won't be a Adam Morrison type bust and fairly confident that he won't have Larry Bird type of success but that still leaves a lot of potential variation for his career outcomes. I just find it irritating that a fair number of fans are willing to write-off one of the greatest scorers in college history simply because he doesn't fit their vision of a difference maker in today's NBA.

I've witnessed the kid exceeding expectations since his high school days when he frequently outplayed teammate Harrison Barnes and he certainly found a groove in his second summer league game. Until he has an extended period of performing below expectations, I don't see any reason to doubt his ability to adjust to his new environment.

It was funny how quickly people got on McDermott after one summer league struggle as proof that he can't adjust, then he goes out and drops 31 on insane efficiency the next day. I'm fully on board with taking Saric over him, I had McDermott probably ~11th-12th on my board, but I'm fairly high on McDermott's chances of becoming a long time contributor in this league. He'll probably be top 10 from the draft in terms of overall contributions, IMO.

I was intrigued by Saric before the draft and would have preferred him over McDermott, but I'm not on board with taking him in this draft because the two year wait is too much to ask of fans when they also have to wait a year for their top first round pick. I'd rather see them start developing three or four members of their future rotation this year with the goal of returning to the playoffs by 2016-17. The 2017 pick could have been obtained through a future trade or we could have done what Denver did after drafting McDermott.

Nikola Mirotic is finally coming over after being drafted in 2011. We'll see if he was worth the wait.

Orlando is going to regret passing on Exum. Nothing against Payton who played rather well after the first game, but Exum was very impressive.

Agreed. I'd add Giannis to the impressive list. Exum, Noel and Giannis are the only guys who have shown flashes of a potential superstar in the making in the very limited time they were on the court so far.

P.S. I may never get over passing on Exum for Embiid...

Nerlins was interviewed after the game last night and said he is playing on Monday.

That's big of him.

Yes, I found it a bit irritating that he didn't play last night considering that he played only three games over 7 days in Orlando after not playing for a year and a half. My guess is that these sit-outs aren't all his decision, though. I actually found the Sixer's win in the Orlando championship game more compelling because there was no Noel, no McDaniels, and no back up point guard.

You'd think he'd be healthy and rarin' to go at every chance after a year and a half rest. You're probably right that the decision isn't fully his. He no doubt has some influence though. :)

Big dollars involved all around. Doctors and therapists like those extra visits from which they can bill and benefit. "Let's give it another couple weeks." Coaches are coached into condoning caution. "I want him to be 100%; we've taken pains to this point; there's no sense in rushing." One can never be too careful with geese that lay golden eggs. Athletes that matter and special privileges/blind eyes, a longstanding tradition. "All varsity basketball players are to be excused from class at 1:00 for an away game with Pipsqueak Prep."

I think it's all or almost all the team.

Nah, these young kids are just lazy - 17 months of - a major injury - not being in game shape - he's just being lazy

Ask Isiah

Who's been the worst summer league announcer so far, him, Kendall Gill, or Clyde?

Clyde and Joel Myers were an abomination last night.

Haven't heard Clyde yet, I have that game on the DVR - but I really think Clyde is one of the worst announcers in all sports, made up words, the need to rhyme, the perfect example that just because you were a great player doesn't mean you have a great understanding of the whole game...especially as it evolves and you don't

Isiah Thomas. Couldn't stand him.

None of the Orlando guys except for Grant in limited minutes played against Utah. I think it was half about not being familiar with the other players as they weren't part of the Vegas camp and saving them for the week ahead, there's a good chance they'll play in 3 or 4 consecutive days. They need them as fresh as possible (and there's no way they will all play every game, Noel especially will sit again IMO).

An August tickertape parade down Broad Street for the twin titles SummerSixers? Lemin' wooder ice for all!

Luol Deng agrees to a 2 year (player option on the second year) with the Heat.

I like that team. Everyone in the frontcourt (Bosh, Deng, McRoberts) is at least a threat from three. They should be solid defensively. I think Bosh can be a very efficient 20-plus ppg scorer. They could possibly be back in the Finals.

They'll be in the playoffs but a lot will depend on Wade's health. The East is wide open and unpredictable right now IMO. Miami, Indiana, Chicago, Washington, Atlanta, Cleveland will all have a shot at he finals as of right now. And who knows what happens in Toronto, Brooklyn and Detroit. There's plenty of talent there too.

Brian Roberts with a 2-year, $5.5M deal with the Hornets. He's a very good backup point.

woj says the rockets will not match on chandler parsons

Exactly what makes Chandler so special? He's one of a fairly large number of players who can shoot and otherwise meets the athletic requirements to play on the wing. Ariza seems like about 80 to 90% of the player for a little over half the annual salary (about 8 million a year for Ariza, 15 million for Chandler on his new contract). And even that might be underselling Ariza, who's a superior defender. Of course if he has one of those years where he can't shoot, you've got a problem, but last year he shot almost 41% from three.

i think it was more him being on a cheap contract that might of gotten him a tad overrated but hes a good player and shouldnt be paid 15 million per year

I agree - I would gladly take Thad and Ariza for their combined salary versus Parsons at 15 a year.

Moreys strikeout does show the issue with getting too cute... Luck plays a big role in all of this. I actually don't think he made bad decisions, as his calculated risk was extremely close to landing him Beverley harden parsons bosh Howard with jones off the bench with a multi year window with that team.. Instead he got really stuck here. I can't blame fans if they are pissed.

Clippers lost in free agency, wouldn't be shocked to see Thad dealt there.

id rather root for a team whose GM takes a shot at something and is willing to miss than a GM who doesnt

The Morey worship cracks me up. $15m for parsons or $8m for Ariza isn't the question. It's $8m for Ariza or $960k for Parsons. Morey crewed the pooch and the only thing he gained by doing it was the right to match Parson's ridiculous offer.

yea he messed up by mis reading the market parsons had

I don't think anyone saw such a ridiculous offer coming, though.

Really? There was plenty of open cap space out there and talks about the cap rising in the future. He should've foreseen it.

But you're hatred of so many things the sixers are doing isn't ridiculous at all?

It's ironic that you'd make this claim in the comments of a post where I commended Hinkie for not making the Lin deal. I also find childish deflection amusing, so thanks for that.

Well.. Would you rather have that parsons for 940k an lose him next year. Or the chance for him tied up with bosh for 3-4 years with harden and Howard. I respect if the one year of parsons is your choice but you had a legit chance to create a big 3 with parsons for multiple years... I'd take that. Now he got stuck and I don't like the ariza signing at all.

Having him this year wouldn't have precluded them from re-signing him next summer. Like I said before, if anyone should've been aware of the pitfalls of restricted free agency it should be Morey. That's how he got Asik and Lin. It was stupid, it wasn't bold it was Morey trying to be cute.

They couldn't him next year if bosh had signed. It was a unique situation where the cap hold wouldn't hit until they resigned parsons.... I think Morey thought right but missed it and it blew up in his face. I agree the ariza digit was a terrible reaction but i don't know what the right one was.

The right to match wouldn't have mattered next year. If they needed an advantage they could offer more money and more years with bird rights. If they picked up the option it wouldn't have impacted their cap number this summer, they could've gotten bosh then used bird rights to re-sign Parsons next summer. Cute and stupid.

Are you sure about this ... I thought it was a situation where they couldn't sign bosh unless under the current cap, parsons on a non matched deal wouldn't meet the guidelines. If you're right then I agree ... Ultimately it's getting too cute - if it were the restrictions that I agree to then worth it - if I'm misunderstanding then not

Brian is correct as far as i know. It was all about Morey not willing to give up any choice on the matter to the players. He's a control freak. And he got played by Cuban and co.

It really is interesting the Morey hate, and really the hate of anybody viewed as an analytically minded GM or owner, on this site. As if every GM who tries to use restrictred free agency to their advantage is a control freak who won't give the players any say in the matter.

To take the step from good team to true championship contender, you sometimes have to take calculated risks. Morey's goal was to end the offseason wit a big 3 + Parsons locked into long term contracts so they could build a contender around those 4. He knew that if he was successful in luring Bosh here this offseason, that if a pissed off, unrestricted Chandler left after this offseason that he had no resources left to lure another player of Parsons caliber. So the best way to lock up a big 4, for not just this year but long term, was to let Parsons enter free agency as a restricted free agent.

Did Parsons get more than he probably projected? Yeah. And was there always a shot that their FA target (Bosh) would spurn them? Yeah, that's why it's a risk, although from all accounts it was as close as possible to becoming a reality. But it was a gamble worth taking because the chances of doing so in the future weren't that high. And if Bosh signs, and he has those 4 locked up long term, I don't think Morey's too worried about Parsons being paid a lot.

Also, news flash, any owner or GM in this league has an ego. They've had enough success that it's virtually guaranteed, and it's not just relegated to those who have a background in mathematics.

Don't lump me in as an anti-analytics person. I've always been in favor of analytics in the front office (and any conversation here). Your defense of Morey here doesn't make sense. Morey could've executed his plan this year with Parsons on the minimum contract, then offered him a max deal next summer if he was willing to overpay to keep his core intact. Having him on a minimum deal would've kept a ton of options open, whether he landed bosh or not. Looking at it now, and the final result, I think he had a really good plan, but the parsons decision was stupid. So was signing Lin in the first place. The Lin + Asik deals basically amounted to paying $30m to swap spots with New Orleans in this year's draft. That doesn't seem so great to me. I find it hard to believe that people are defending Morey for the Paraons thing, it was a stupid move no matter how it played out. The best case here was Parsons signing a cheap three-year deal or something, but Morey should've known better than to think that was going to happen.

Anyway, Houston has probably a top three offensive player and a top two defensive player, I'd be trying to fit the rest of the team around those guys rather than going for a third star and a bunch of filler. Ariza definitely fits that mold, the next step should be a stretch four or an upgrade at PG. They really need a big pg who can switch with Harden on defense when needed and distribute.

Morey has that team in great position, now isn't the time to get cute, IMO.

This is what I mean. I understand why he wanted to keep Parsons a restricted free agent, but I can understand saying he shouldn't have declined the option. I think there's a rational argument to be made. It's the calling it "cute", "ego", "control freak", etc implications that I don't agree with.

"I find it hard to believe that people are defending Morey for the Paraons thing, it was a stupid move no matter how it played out."

Let's say the Bosh thing works out. They have Harden, Bosh, Dwight. I think Parsons is an incredible fit between them with his spot-up shooting and passing.

If Parsons walks next season, they have nothing, because their cap flexibility is gone. Yeah, you have him on the cheap this year, but if he walks, you have very little assets (in terms of cap space or worthwhile draft picks) to replace him. It's the situation Miami found themselves in: 3 great players but struggling to fill out their roster (outside of aging vets) because they don't have anything to offer. Locking Parsons up long term now was a way to solve that.

I think:
1) Parsons signing, say, a 4 year, $45m contract this offseason, after signing Bosh, would be perhaps the best possible outcome, and better than Parsons playing 1 year at $900k, then becoming an unrestricted free agent
2) There was a better chance that, with Parsons restricted and scaring off teams from tying up their cap space for 3 days, and with everybody focused on LeBron/Bosh/Carmelo, that they had a better chance of locking him up long term at a reasonable contract than they would next offseason as an unrestricted free agent.

With both of those true, I can't fault him for the decisions he made. It was risky, but it was the best chance to propel them to greatness, and by all accounts it was very close to happening.

But, again, I understand the counter-argument. It just seems like it's personal to a lot of people and they attribute it to things other than a risk that didn't pan out.

It was an unnecessary risk, that's the point. If your point is they had to get that fourth player, they could've done that in unrestricted free agency just as easily. They could've offered him more years and more money than anyone else. To me, that's a better protection against losing the guy than the right to match any offer. Or it's at least of equal value. You have the added benefit of only paying the guy $960K this season, and the extra flexibility that allows you.

Disagree. I think their best chance at locking Parsons up to a reasonable deal was to go the route they did. But I'm pretty done arguing about it at this point, and like I said, I understand the counter-argument. It's more the way that some are presenting it that I disagree with.

I have to disagree with the logic here.

1. Having Parsons on the minimum for another year didn't preclude signing Bosh. In fact his cap hold was bigger than his contract so it made it even more difficult.
2. If Parsons was truly treated well in Houston AND Houston got another star like Bosh, they probably would be the prohibitive favorite for the title going forward. If all of this is true, there's no way Parsons was going to decline a mac offer in unrestricted free agency.

I actually think it's quite the opposite to what you are saying. It's the way the guys defending Morey's decision are presenting it that is the problem with me. It's simply not true that they needed to make Parsons a restricted free agent in order to have a chance at a Harden/Howard/Parsons/(Melo or Bosh) core. So the whole point that Morey had visions of a "big 4" and that's why he did it is moot. The chance at a "big 4" was never at risk as long as he was willing to pay Parsons and treat him well. And here's where Morey's treatment of his players is a little questionable with a roster turnover of 40+ players over the last 3 years in a situation where they are becoming a contender and need continuity.

This confuses me. I take it that you and Brian think Houston could have signed Bosh this year, let Parsons get into unrestricted free agency, and then use his Bird rights to "treat him well" and go over the cap to retain him. Now, we don't know anything about the internal dynamic with Parsons and Houston; maybe he'd really rather go elsewhere and that factored into the RFA decision. But I'll assume that he'd take Houston's offer. What I don't get is what makes you so sure that ownership is completely okay with giving Parsons a ridiculous overpay and hamstringing their future flexibility. If this is what Parsons got in restricted free agency, how much it would have cost to outbid other teams in unrestricted free agency? Dallas's offer plus a Bird rights premium has to be a ridiculous amount. And if anything happens to Howard or Harden or Bosh, like injury or major decline, you're not a contender anymore and you're in cap hell for a third option that doesn't defend well.

Except by making him a restricted free agent in this market with so many teams with cap space and not enough high end players out there he essentially made it even more possible that Parsons will get overpayed. Restricted free agents get overpayed far more often than unrestricted ones (for obvious reasons). It makes no sense to make him a restricted free agent if you don't plan on retaining him.

If ownership had a problem with paying PArsons what others would pay, than that's an even bigger reason to at least milk another season on the cheap from him, because he was virtually guaranteed to get overpayed and Morey should've realized it going into FA if he's so good at evaluating the market.

I thought - maybe this is wrong - that restricted free agency drives bidders away more often than it generates overpays. Even in the cases of Hayward and Parsons, there was just the one offer. Not just one offer sheet - one offer. And one could very easily have been zero, as it often is.

1. Who says there was only one offer? The player can sign only one offer that's why only one is reported. And both Parsons and Hayward signed the offersheets before the Lebron move to Cleveland. There' would've been more offers from the teams that didn't land anyone.

2. It only takes one team. And with this market and the rising cap it was practically inevitable for such a young and good player.

3. Rarely does restricted free agency drive away bidders. What it does in most instances is create a situation where opposing teams are motivated to get creative when structuring the contract for maximum damage to the incumbent team.

I was responding to Derek saying they didn't care if they overpaid him. If they were just looking for a bargain, then again it was silly to think no one would offer him a good contract. Silly because he screwed two teams who wanted to keep their RFAs by offering silly contracts. If they didn't really care if they lost him, then why not just keep him for another year on a cheap deal?

My theory is that he wanted to keep him, but only at a reasonable price - say, 12M a year. I don't know why it was silly to believe there was a good chance that restricted free agency would deter a crazy offer. Bledsoe has no offer yet. Monroe has no offer. Isaiah Thomas put up numbers that few players in the league do, and he got an offer from one team at 6.7 million a year. No one offered Patrick Patterson, a very proficient stretch four, or Avery Bradley or Greivis Vazquez. If you make an offer and it's matched on day 3, you can't do anything with that cap space during the 3 days it's pending; meanwhile you miss out on other free agents. This seems to deter teams more often than not.

Ehh, how do you know Monroe and Bledsoe haven't gotten an offer so far. They might just be posturing to get more i.e. they want the max too.

As for Patterson, Vasquez, Bradley... They all got overpaid to begin with. No point in someone offering even more.

The only relative bargain so far is Isaiah Thomas and only because he's very small and noone trusts him to be able to play on a contender. Deng got 10 million per year, but has been sharply declining and is like 50 in basketball years after what he went through in Chicago. Lowry was nowhere near as good as he was last year for his entire career. Everybody keeps valuing him according to his performance in a contract year. And with so many quality PGs out there 12 million is not a bargain.

We'll see what Bledsoe (10 worth), Monroe (12-13 worth) and Stephenson (7-8 worth) will get paid, but i'm almost certain they will be overpaid as well. FWIW, Parsons was worth 10-12 million anyway. 12 million wouldn't have been an overpay at all.

P.S. Couldn't they negotiate an extension with Parsons after year 3 as well just like all the other rookies? Extensions are the way to go if you want avoid an overpay recently.

Rockets GM Morey: 7 seasons. Team made the playoffs in 3 of them. Only 1 playoff series win.

I don't think it's hate. I think it's a rejection of hype or "early fawning."

He took over a team that was led by Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady. He lost both of those players to career ending injuries in his first two seasons as GM (they would play on, but never at their former level). To then turn around and build a 54 win team around Dwight and Harden, without ever having a losing season, is quite remarkable.

Also, they've been in the playoffs 4 of his 7 years (2007-08, 2008-09, 2012-13, 2013-14, missing in 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2012-13)

"Quite remarkable" is your reflection. I recall one uptick season that really oiled the hype machine, when even Von Wafer came to dinner and ate his vegetables. On the whole though, effortful/active but in vain. Results not out of the ordinary despite his being "Money Ballsy" and containing a "Revolutionary Spirit In A Risk-Averse Mind" and "Discovering Hidden Gems [Shane Battier!!! He was hidden inside the 2001 Naismith College Player Of The Year Trophy.]"

To put that in perspective, Billy King had 9 seasons, 6 playoff appearances, and 6 series wins during those appearances. I don't recall any fawning over Billy King.

And Larry Brown to caddy for. It just may have been one of the reasons the press didn't gather at his piggies. I don't know, d'ya think?

Different time, team, city, set of circumstances. But what's that matter.

That's not adding perspective. That's adding taint. Do I get credit for thinking about what you've written?

Moral: Do not mix olive oil with transmission fluid.

All true, but another difference is that GMs just weren't the story for the press in the past; players and coaches were.

Maybe part of that is peculiar to the Sixers who haven't had much going on the court worth reporting. Still, the summer league performances have given fans a bit of a booster shot but that's all overshadowed by articles on what Hinkie has done, what Hinkie is thinking, what Hinkie might do, and what Hinkie should do.

First of all, i'm not a Morey hater, nor an anti-analytics guy. Couldn't be further from the truth actually. What i do think though is that he isn't the best GM in the league, which is what a lot of guys who have recently heard of analytics think of him. He has weaknesses and a much bigger ego than the average GM is one of them.

My point was more about the fact that he completely miscalculated the state of his team IMO. And for 2 reasons:

1. Adding another superstar was always going to be a long shot.
2. The Rockets didn't really need another superstar to become a legit perennial contender.

And this is where i think he made a huge mistake. What the Rockets needed were a couple of high end role players that will fit well with the core already in place. Players like Thad Young, A.Johnson, Frye, Ilyasova, Thomas, Harris, Bradley, maybe even George Hill. Add 2 of these guys to last years core and a legit backup C like Koufos or why not Hawes (Asik clearly had to go because he wanted to be a starter). That's all he really needed IMO outside of a better coach. Instead he decided to risk almost all of the complementary players for a long shot at another unnecessary superstar. I mean even if they did manage to complete their plan A (Melo) it's debatable if he would've even improved them when you consider their strengths and weaknesses.

Instead he's back to the drawing board and unless he an come up with a miraculous trade soon, there's a decent chance that he'll waste Howards prime without ever becoming a legit contender in the West.

Isn't it possible, though, that he ends up doing what you say he should have been doing all along, just by accident? Ariza is a distinct improvement over Parsons in the three areas at which Houston's weakest - perimeter defense, rebounding (Houston's a terrible rebounding team at pretty much every position but center), and turning teams over. That team badly needed a good defensive wing. And, they have money to spend now; they could get Thad, or someone like him.

It definitely is. It's going to be far more difficult now though, because they replaced Parsons with an overall slightly worse player (they really needed Parsons creating ability as a secondary creator with Beverly at PG), lost 2 key rotation players in Lin and Asik and swapped a future first rounder for the chance at a better first rounder at the risk of losing it entirely. That's a major step back. They need a starting PG and PF who fit well with the rest and a legit backup C at the very least right now. That's not easy to pull off with the current cap and assets situation they are in.

Parsons was making practically nothing (by NBA standards). The Rockets could have signed Ariza and still kept Parsons. If they didn't want to pay what Parsons was demanding they should have traded him at the draft. I bet they could have landed a couple of picks in the top 20 or packaged him along with Lin for another player. Morey gambled by thinking that no team would offer what Parsons was looking for. It was completely foolish of him. A lot of teams have cap space, the free agent market is dry, and Parsons has the shooting skills that teams are looking for. OF COURSE Parsons was going to get overpaid.

Of course he'd get overpaid? Why did Lowry get just 12 million a year then? Why did Deng get 10? Why did Ariza make 180 threes last year while shooting 41 percent and get 8? Besides Parsons, who else has even gotten a crazy deal? Meeks, but even that deal's half the price of Parsons for a guy who's more than half the player.

"1. Having Parsons on the minimum for another year didn't preclude signing Bosh. In fact his cap hold was bigger than his contract so it made it even more difficult."

That was never my argument. My argument was to get all 4 locked up into long term deals, and minimizing the risk that Parsons leaves, because once Bosh is signed and Parsons leaves, they have little to no resources to replace him.

"2. If Parsons was truly treated well in Houston AND Houston got another star like Bosh, they probably would be the prohibitive favorite for the title going forward. If all of this is true, there's no way Parsons was going to decline a mac offer in unrestricted free agency. "

Again, not my argument. Yes, if he goes into next offseason an unrestricted free agent, and Houston is willing to pay whatever it takes to not only re-sign Parsons, but then use all of their exceptions to try to finish the rest of the roster, Houston's ability to offer more years at higher raises makes them the favorite. But I don't think Houston has an unlimited budget, and Morey needs to be cognizant of that, and this was his best chance to get the 4 of them locked up long term in a way that they could still build a team around financially. Using Bird Rights as your upper hand in contract negotiations almost always leads to drastic overpays (except when talking about obvious max-level guys).

"It's simply not true that they needed to make Parsons a restricted free agent in order to have a chance at a Harden/Howard/Parsons/(Melo or Bosh) core. So the whole point that Morey had visions of a "big 4" and that's why he did it is moot."

Again, that has never been my argument. My argument was the best way to get the 4 of them locked into long term deals.

But prior to this offseason Morey was basically the only gm who made ridiculous daredevil rfa offers, so the fact that he's made some wouldn't necessarily warn him that someone was likely to give Parsons one. I think most people thought it would be riskier to let him get into unrestricted free agency - which of course it is, by definition. No right to match, more teams willing to make offers.

Ok, so "I'm the only one smart enough to steal a restricted free agent..." That's being cute, no?

But prior to this offseason Morey was basically the only gm who made ridiculous daredevil rfa offers

I don't believe that's true, I believe that's just short term memory

Riskier, sure, but he could still have him on a minimum for a year and be able to offer him a longer more lucrative contract going forward. If Parsons was treated fairly in Houston and Houston was winning why on earth would he leave after this year?

It was a mistake that had a good chance of backfiring even when it was made with very little upside. This was all about Morey being a control freak IMO. Just look at the roster turnover on his team on a year to year basis. It's ridiculous for a team trying to contend. Continuity matters.

Yeah, he should've retained him on the minimum. I thought when making him a restricted FA his goal was to ensure Parsons can't go anywhere by matching whatever he is offered. Instead it turns out he wasn't prepared to give whatever it took. Bad mistake for Morey that coupled with the suddenly pointless trades of Lin and Asik will very likely cost the Houston a chance to contend in the near future.

With all the analytics talk Morey feel in the same trap as the other GMs: dreaming of more and more superstars instead of rounding out your roster with pieces that fit. Houston already had a good enough core. They didn't have the coach and the role players.

With all the cap room they created by moving Lin and Asik - room which was large enough to sign a max guy - can't they add some other pieces now? I'm not sure what's really left out there besides guys they can't quite afford or wouldn't want (Bledsoe, Stephenson), but still. They also got that Pelicans pick in the Asik deal, so they have some stuff to trade with.

How did the Clippers lose in free agency? They opted for continuity and got 2 very capable backups in Hawes and Farmar. I think the Clippers had one of the better offseasons among the contenders.

Parsons can create a bit more than your regular 3 and D guy. But i agree that 15 million is too much for him. Personally, i think Hayward is a better player than Parsons and he isn't worth 16 million per year either.

Not that anybody should care now, but I took a gander at the measurements from the LeBron James skills camp on Draftexpress. Since the sixers are looking at another lottery pick, I have my early eye on Kelly Oubre. 6'7 w/shoes and a 7'1.5 wing span. Going to Kansas so I'll be watching. Let's hope is awkward looking jumper works. But he's an early favorite for me.

Enjoy Brian...LOL(I am kidding).

really liked his game at the Nike Hoop Summit. Am looking out for him as a lottery wing prospect. Uber-athletic.
It all depends on how much his offensive game develops; ability to create and shoot, because right now I think his game resembles a KJ McD type, who might top out as 3 & D.

Also, Bennett is looking good. If the Sixers are going to facilitate a Love deal to CLE, I would not mind taking a shot at Bennett as part of the compensation. I think he could be salvaged.

I have this suspicion that even a well-conditioned Bennett is basically this era's Antoine Walker.

Knowing the Sixes, they would have him take a year off to work on his conditioning...

Noel doesn't have the frame to be an NBA center. See cut but narrow shoulders in picture at top of thread. No base, but ups and quickness of hands and feet. How many rebounds will he average? The longer he endures tangos in the paint, the higher the number will be. But first he has to attend. Coach Brown will have to imitate a beach lifeguard and whistle him back towards the general population.

yeah. at this point i am just happy to not have MCW be the leading rebounder on our team. Smh, that's the baseline of a 6er fan.

Brown and his crew did a good job with working on other things with Noel during his redshirt season. Hopefully they can duplicate the effort with Embiid; get him to watch some tape, or rehab the back to strengthen it, or just get him off Twitter.

Yeah, apparently Brown helped him with his stroke. (Haven't noticed since his 7-7.) I'll believe it when I see it in NBA games. Confidence is a fragile thing.

Embiid is a happy guy, enjoyin' life; generates smiles.

The late Manute, Dikembe, now Joel... extra tall Africans heritage in Philadelphia: spicing it up, naturally.

I see Noel and McDermott in the same light (although I am more confident about Noel.). Both players have certain skills that are elite even at the NBA level that guarantee them some level of success. But they both lack some basic prerequisites for their positions as well. So it will come done to how special their elite skill is to determine whether they will be a role player or a star, because they are unlikely to be a solid starter.

Some guys like AI and Barkley are dominant enough to where there lack of fit at a traditional position does not bold them back. It is possible that Noel and McDermott are talented enough to where they similarly overcome. But if they don't adequately separate themselves from their peers then they will be stuck as super role players in a Korver or Henson type of way.

Noel has already showcased some freaky defensive attributes- especially in his ability to cover ground and get steals from even guards. While McDermott is both a scorer as well as a shooter and measured to be a whole lot quicker and faster than Korver. I actually would have been happy with a projected Embiid/Noel/McDermott/MCW core, although I was fine with the Saric pick.

I also see much more offensive upside in Noel than most. He seems to make quick, decisive decisions with the ball to where you can involve him in the offense. He has a good first step and nice touch with his left hand. Sort of reminds me a bit of Thad at the same age. I think his defensive game is so far ahead of his offense because he is an infinitive defender. But he has some tools to become a scorer and passer, and the length to be effective in the post even without ever establishing great position. His man might muscle him out of the post, but that would open some space for Noel to blow by his man.

He seems to make quick, decisive decisions with the ball to where you can involve him in the offense

Definitely agree.
The 2nd summer league game, they had him in the high post a lot, maybe to open the paint up, but I was really impressed with the accuracy and quickness of his passes, also on loose balls. That's why i keep thinking PF.

I generally agree with this. Really when you consider everything the best projection for Noel is a more athletic Noah with a thinner frame. It's impossible to tell right now, how much his elite athleticism will help or how much his relatively weak lower body will hurt but if he can have a Noah-like impact, he's very close to a superstar. Noah is essentially the Bulls franchise player and he's probably more important to their success than Rose.

The combination of rim protection (and general defensive ability) and various forms of passing ability at the C position is incredibly valuable in the modern NBA. Just look at the impact Noah and Gasol have on their teams.

I think they'll both make dents quickly. Should be fun to watch. Fast twitch forward and fast gun coach's son. Rookie ups and downs, a given. 2 assets (word found in Hinkie & Wagnall's dictionary).

I think the difference is McDermott's got the one elite skill, and Noel's elite at everything but rebounding and scoring and passing, and defending bruising post players, I suppose. But he's really great at defense generally, not just shot-blocking. That's not an elite skill, it's being elite at a whole half of the game. McDermott's offense outside of shooting is probably below-average, though better than Korver's or Novak's. Of course, getting shots matters too, and I don't know if McDermott's quite as good at moving off the ball as a Korver or a Danny Green.

I like Noel, so this isn't me ripping him, but if you aren't good at rebounding or defending position are you really elite at a whole half of a game?

I'd bet serious money that McDermott will have a much, much better NBA career than Saric. I'd even put it in an escrow account.

KJ and noel are playing

please let KJ guard wiggins

Tuned in just in time to see Wiggins completely bitch McDaniels. Blew by for the and-one. Next possession he hit a step-back on the baseline, which I'm not a fan of.

Those were more or less his only baskets the entire game. McDaniels pretty much owned defensively when he was on the floor. Than again, you really can't expect Wiggins to create much at the NBA level before he improves his handle. It's mostly step back jumpers, putbacks and catch and shoot opportunities right now.

*owned him

They're building two houses out there. I think I called Davies an NBADL player last year, I owe an apology to the players in the NBADL.

Usually players with NBA experience have an advantage in summer league over rookies, but Davies is just one of those exceptional players.

McRae = poor man's Batum? I'd be happy with that

Grant is really explosive. If he can slow down a bit and develop a jumper he could be fun to watch.

Noel got hurt on that turnover. Twisted ankle.

Noel coming back in.

Nice post move by Wiggins didn't drop, sandwiched by a couple of bad fouls by him.

Make that three bad fouls, he charged w/ a six-point lead and 53 seconds left to play.

Decent comeback by the summer league team. This team has a bit better guard depth, but the front line isn't as athletic or as capable on defense as the Orlando group.

That's two gutsy games from McRea. Another pretty good game from Nerlins. I'm going to enjoy watching Jermi develop. I thought Wilbekin played the point pretty well in that last quarter. Too bad he has no personal firepower.

Wish the team had Roberts again instead of Davies.

I miss Jakarr Sampson too. Unlike Roberts, who's with Miami (and started for them tonight), he's not with another team in Vegas. I'd like to see both in training camp.

Sampson is a jaw dropping athlete. I think front court athleticism on defense is the biggest difference between that Orlando team and this one. This team turned on the defensive pressure a number of times with some success over the last two games but they just didn't have quite the same levels of quickness and athleticism on defense as the Orlando team.

If Sampson improves his shooting and some other aspects of the game, he could really be something.

I agree.
They had to go to a full court press tonight to ratchet up the defensive intensity in order to get back.
In Orlando, a bunch of their offense came off fast-breaks and semi-fast breaks.
We definitely miss Roberts.
Sampson reminds me of Kenneth Faried.

Roberts and Sampson for Davies and Yarou is a hugely negative trade, on both ends really. What's exciting is that even those guys don't make the team, we're going to see lineups in the regular season that replicate the Orlando team's athleticism. We probably will, for example, give McDaniels a fair amount of minutes with Noel, Thad and MCW. Grant's on track to make the team as well. Then there's Wroten. McRae has a good chance of making the team.

Thought all of our drafted players showed well tonight, although I'm still not sold on McRae (sold enough to give him a roster spot, but not sold that he's necessarily an NBA player). Noel's offense continues to be farther along than expected, maybe thanks to all that player development last year. Grant looks like a lot more than just a project leaper. McRae has an interesting slashing game, but I don't know if it's good enough to make up for his poor outside shooting and iffy shot selection. To me it feels like he's somewhere on the bubble between D-League All-Star and backbench NBA sub. K.J. hit one of his two threes (that gets him to 6 of 11 in summer league play), had a nice dribble drive, made a tough basket on a post-up, and I thought he contained Wiggins, who did most of his damage on other defenders. Kilpatrick looked very ordinary, but he didn't play much. As for Wiggins, otherworldly athlete who continues, largely, to either settle for jump shots and passive play or be forced into it because of his weak handle. His shot is just okay, though at least he can get it off over anyone. He can/will defend though, and I think playing next to LeBron is a really ideal situation for him. We would not have been, though.

I only watched the second half, but Wiggins' handle was good enough to leave McDaniels glued to the floor, and he's a lock to be a superior defender in the league.

was probably that great first step.

Thought McDaniels was pretty lackadaisical in the second half, much better in the first. You need to dvr these games.

Kevin Pelton saw it the way I saw it, at least:

"As at Kansas, however, Wiggins' offensive contributions have come and gone. His scoring totals have gone down each game, from 18 in Friday's debut to 13 on Sunday to just 10 points Monday. Philadelphia rookie K.J. McDaniels, the No. 32 pick, took defending the No. 1 pick as a personal challenge, keeping him from seeing any airspace in the half-court offense. (When Wiggins shook free for the dunk [a highlight dunk in the second quarter], McDaniels was on the bench.)"

Kevin Pelton is celebrated for grading players on summer league box scores, and McDaniels was the one guarding him in the third when he got smoked off the dribble.

That's one play. How about the rest of the game? Even guys like Iguodala and Tony Allen get smoked occasionally.

Game 2
Cavs team was running crisp offensive sets.

Ware - over-matched physically.
Wilbekin - to the rescue with marginally acceptable point play.

Jeremi Grant- exciting to watch crash boards and strong drive to the hoop.

McRae - aggressive on offense and defense. not necessarily efficient on either.

Kilpatrick- ok

McDaniels - Needs to informed that he does not have a guaranteed contract. Auto-pilot mode.

Noel - great footwork and quicker hands, didnt box out.

Davies - Should not be playing in SL

Wiggins - spry, smooth, effective and somewhat passive. good defensive presence.

Anthony Bennett - unique skillset; great handles and surprising explosiveness. 5-12 with 5TOVs though..

Wish we could play more polished teams like the Cavs who are 3-0 now, as this helps weed out a lot of quirks in the players' games for assessment but most likely we will get a couple of Utahs where everyone looks good.

This would be a good time to have Pierre Jackson, Micic or anyone who could provide some stability.

These quotes from Parsons will probably confirm your view of the hotly debated Morey/Parsons fracas, whatever view that is:

"Honestly, I was offended by the whole process," Parsons told Yahoo Sports on Monday in a phone interview. "They publicly said that they were going out looking for a third star when I thought they had one right in front of them. I guess that's just how they viewed me as a player. I don't think I've scratched the surface of where I can be as a player and I think I'm ready for that role.


"[Dallas] really showed how much they cared for me," Parsons said. "They didn't want me to wait for Bosh. They didn't want me to wait for 'Melo. They came forward first."


"We got a chance to win. Coach Carlisle is the best coach in the NBA. It's the perfect situation for me. I'm ready for more leadership. I'm ready for a bigger role. They came at me with a high max offer and viewed me as a franchise player. That's what I wanted."

Parsons played a strong role in convincing Howard to sign as a free agent with the Rockets last summer. They could be free agents in 2016. And if things go well in Dallas, don't be surprised if Parsons tries to convince Howard to join him.

"I'm the best recruiter in the NBA," Parsons said. "Whatever Mark and the Mavericks need, they got me to do that."


As I read all this, Morey was almost certainly aware when he made Parsons a restricted free agent that Parsons was after a "high max offer" and views himself as a franchise player, star, Bosh and Melo's equal, best recruiter on the planet, etc., and thought that Parsons would be less likely to get that "high max offer" - which Houston was unwilling to give, this year or next - he was looking for in restricted free agency. But obviously this also supports the narrative about Morey being excessively disinterested in continuity, not treating his players well, being a jerk, etc.

I guess this is another reason that I couldn't possibly fathom. Morey alienated the guy so much he knew the only chance had at keeping him was indentured servitude. Of course, they could've had him for a song for another season, got their third star then seen what the market said about his value before losing him, instead of losing him this year because the market overvalued him.

Whether he's a max guy, or just one of the four pillars as was said before, he would've been a huge bargain this season and no one would've blinked an eye, including Parsons himself, had they just picked up the option. In fact, they could've picked it up and kept him happy by telling him he was their fourth star for an entire year, maybe sold him on staying in Houston instead of saying "it's not like anyone else is going to pay you."

I wonder if the next time we go to use restricted free agency as a way to keep salary in line with production whether it'll be refereed to as indentured servitude then.

His quotes (and general out-of-touch) just make me more convinced that the only way they were going to get him locked up long term at a reasonable rate was to go through restricted free agency. The only way they would lock him up in UFA was max years, max starting salary, and max raises. ick.

The next time we do anything to actually improve the product on the floor will probably be three years from now, but I'll play along. Yes, I will call it indentured servitude if we have a guy who doesn't want to be here and we don't pick up an option on his contract for the sole purpose of making him sign a multi-year deal with us.

And here's a question, is 4-years/$46m a crazy contract for Parsons? Because that's what it would've been if they didn't decline the option and then gave him a three--year high max extension. Parsons is playing for a rival this season because Morey got cute. He's playing for a rival when he could be playing for Houston for the minimum. This isn't an argument about RFA vs. UFA. This is about giving up a season of a $15M player on a minimum deal for a stupid plan he should've known was going to fail. Ick.

I think that it is incredibly unlikely that Parsons, coming off of another year where he feels that he was drastically underpaid, as an unrestricted free agent, and with less marquee players drawing attention elsewhere, would settle for a 3 year deal. I think more teams would have been vying for his services.

By the way, Mudiay's possibly going to China is great news for us, if you like Mudiay. Teams will likely pass on him because of the poor competition and inability to see him play in a structured setting (Chinese basketball is horrible), as well as the question marks about his eligibility and the poor judgment shown in picking China. If Exum could go 5th after Aaron Gordon, this guy could go 5th after Stanley Johnson.

Too bad for the kid. I was looking forward to seeing how his game developed over a season under Brown. But it sounds like the NCAA was ready to cause some problems regardless.

The only reason to watch these games is for the rare moments when a guy does something that's translatable. Like when a guy makes a really good move and you say, "that would've worked even if an NBA player was defending him." Or the opposite, "that carp isn't going to cut it when guys on the other team are actually being paid more than a toll collector to play defense." So when I say someone impresses me, it's because he's made a couple of the former. When I say I don't see anything from someone, it's because productivity has come from the latter (at least when I've been watching). So far, Hollis and Grant have shown me the most on offense. I can see Noel's tremendous potential on defense, and a little bit of hope that his athleticism will create enough garbage opportunities on O to make him a slight positive, but I worry his aggression will turn into too many risks taken on defense and he'll have to be hidden on offense. Still optimistic, but maybe crossing my fingers more than I'd like to be. McDaniel really hasn't impressed me at all. He seems to be the worst combination of disinterested and glory seeking on the defensive end. Doesn't move his feet to keep his man in front, seemingly content to get blown by for the opportunity to pound his chest if he gets a block from behind. He's got the size and athleticism to be a good perimeter defender, and he does have a shotblocker's mentality which is rare in a wing, but he's going to need to be coached up to be an impractical defender and I fear he doesn't have the requisite focus nor desire to do the work. On offense, he's a wooden mess. No handle at all, lackadaisical when he's making cuts, if he ever makes them. Content to float around on the perimeter and only truly motivated to move if he thinks there might be an easy opportunity for a thunderous dunk. Again, if he's reachable, a good coach might be able to pull something out of him, I just don't know if he's reachable (and I don't know if Brown is the type of coach who will be able to break through to him).

I think Noel is a project, but one with a decent chance of succeeding because I think he's got the tools, attitude and fortitude to be able to succeed. I don't see anything but the raw tools from McDaniels, and it's not like he's some young kid, either. You'd expect to see more than this in terms of polish from a guy who played three years in college.

Mavs have 5'7" Yuki Tagashi of Japan playing for them. (Organist Cuban pulls out all the stops.) A rebounding news find the day after learning 5'7" Louis "Herm" "Red" Klotz's set shots would be no more... the former Villanovan, Philadelphia SPHA (South Philadelphia Hebrew Association) and Baltimore Bullet lent form and dignity to an estimated 14,000 Washington Generals losses around the world. Mr. Klotz was a pioneer and ambassador for basketball. He beat the Globies, 100-99, with a buzzer- beater (in 1971), a feat few can claim.

Notice of Tagashi reminds me of 5' 7" Wataru "Wat" Misaka, former Utah Ute, who played for the Knicks in '47-'48. 7 career points, but there's more to the story. I have to admit to some ambivalence and jaundiced heckling while wearing his #15 replica jersey back in the day.

From a front row vantage point at the vintage Villanova Fieldhouse, saw 5'3" Muggsy Bogues - shortest ever NBA-er - attack every Philadelphia Aces ballhandler like a favorite meal one summer night. Guy was amazingly quick and tough. I consider having seen him play a privilege.

"Short people got no reason to live"
~ satirist songwriter Randy Newman

That's a mighty high dribble by Nerlens. Chris Paul or Rajon Rondo would soon own that ball.

To put it another way, Nerlins would definitely steal that.

You need the new app; "auto-spell, crazy names edition."

Goes to show that even the best designed machine cannot save us from ignorance or incompetence.

Don't be so hard on yourself. You just need to brush up on spelling of Hinkie's Heroes-in-utero.

After Pa Joad's 'losing the farm 19-63' and mirage drafting of two European runway models who prefer their catwalks close to home, he's gonna need supporters like yourself, particularly in the next 2 seasons. Dust bowl days. Dreams of Californey.

Micic will have his hands full against the Garmisch-Partenkirchen Yodelers and the Oberammergau Grandfather Clockers. And he'll have to do more than punch the clock against the Hamburg Low Germaners.

Well this sucks. And the worst part is it sounds like he's taking a step down in competition. The "stash" part of draft in stash is going to take more time than I initially hoped for Saric and Micic.

Question: How much do the Sixers (or any other team for that matter) get a chance to sit down with these guys or their reps and discuss their future plans? They are obviously free to do whatever they want, and they make plenty of money over seas, but the step down in competition bothers me if that's true of the league. I guess it's only a second rd pick for Micic at least. Probably worth the gamble.

He was at the press conference, so I assume they had ample time to talk with his agent.

Good to know.

It might be because the Sixers are high enough on Wroten as a back up PG to not have available PT for Micic. I'm not sure that is the right decision, but it would explain the team being good about pushing off his NBA contract 2 more years while they wait and see how Wroten develops.

It's not a step down in competition. His new team is stronger and will play in the Euroleague (the strongest competition in Europe). The rest of the games will be in the national German league which is comparable to the Adriatic league.

It was the right decision and an expected one at that.

Btw, Hinkie's preference may have been to keep him oversees for a while too. It's not like Micic declined to come over right away.

From Lowe:

"No one directly involved with the Parsons negotiations will confirm it, but it is widely suspected around the league that Dan Fegan, the lead agent representing Parsons and Howard, made it clear that accelerating Parsons’s payday was an unofficial part of the Howard contract...

Both Parsons and Daryl Morey, Houston’s GM, have told me that Parsons had asked if it were possible to get an immediate raise over the last two years of his contract, so he was clearly frustrated working on perhaps the best bang-for-the-buck contract in the NBA."

Maybe people can stop psychoanalyzing Morey now and saying what a control freak he is on the basis of one of his free-agent moves.

If true, this makes some sense. Of course, this also backs up my argument that doing it in the first place was fucking stupid. Morey would tell you it was fucking stupid from a basketball perspective, he just got strong-armed into doing it. So everyone here who's been applauding this shrewd shot for excellence...well, there you go. Stupid fucking move, but the cost of doing business if you lie down with dogs...

Yeah, this just proves that it was the wrong move. The only difference is, he did it for somewhat legit reasons.

Well no, it doesn't prove anything. You can be strong-armed into doing the right thing. All it shows is that the point was to help speed up Parsons's being paid, but speeding up his being paid could also, given how restricted free agency works, increase the chance that Houston would keep him at a non-absurd price. All it does prove, if it's true, is that Morey didn't do this because he's a control freak, or indentured servant-master, or just a really mean guy who mistreats his players and doesn't care about roster continuity.

I think RFA was the only way Hou could have retained Parsons. After forcing him to take another min year there is little chance Parsons would have chosen to resign with Houston, as he was clearly angry at them as it was. It turned out that Dallas was willing to overpay him, so HOU loses him a year early. But as a RFA, at least HOU had a shot at keeping him, it just did not play out for them.

Morey did the right thing, if Lowe's info is legit, and it was a stupid decision basketball-wise. Without the strong arm I think he would've been smarter than that.

He's a good player making too much money on a pretty short contract. The Dirk window might have a year or two left, I think it was a pretty good move for Dallas. Odds are they won't have to pay someone a first rounder to get rid of him in two years.

Bulls amnesty Boozer

Well that is one less chance for the Sixers to use their cap space to pick up assets. They have already missed out on several transactions where they could have received a late first for taking on a contract. I hope they are not left holding the bag. I guess they still could get in as a facilitator for a Love deal. I'd much rather them get a good asset in a big deal than last years' haul of lots of minor moves(Furkan, Wroten, second round picks.)

The problem is that teams who want to clear space like NY and NJ have already been picked clean of assets, while the teams with extra picks like Houston and Boston don't need to clear cap and have competent management

Boozer was never a realistic option. It was just some Sixers fans fantasizing about a salary dump. The Bulls were never considering a salary dump.

But they could have gotten #16 and #19 from them if they had wanted to trade back from #10. Although that might not have been the right choice.

The point is that there are less options to utilize there cap space, which means their return might be weak.

I guess the benefits of being terrible and having a bargain basement roster just aren't what they used to be. Maybe the Sixers will have to settle for taking Amare in exchange for a 2018 second rounder, signing a low cost shooter, and calling it a day.

The trade the Sixers made was much much better.

Here's an interesting question, though. Did Morey have to move Lin to create enough room for Ariza? I don't see how. If they would've had $22m to give Bosh, they should've been able to sign Ariza and hold on to Lin (and that pick). Then if another deal presents itself, you do what you have to, but if there isn't another move out there, they could've just kept him and the pick.

And for the record, I think Morey has that team in really good position and it's a miracle he got Howard and Harden. The Parsons situation was idiotic without the strong arm factored in and all the manufactured apologies were ridiculous. The whole "if Morey did it, it must be smart" thing cracks me up. The guy is both doing a good job and fallible. That's my point.

I think big picture everything hinged on Bosh. When that fell through everything else was sort of a mess.

I can't fault go after a lineup of Beverly/Harden/Parsons/Bosh/Dwight. That would have been tremendous. But Bosh was the lynchpin.

"The Parsons situation was idiotic without the strong arm factored in and all the manufactured apologies were ridiculous."

Love you too bro.

And, for the record, I thought it was the right move to try to lock him up long term to a sane contract. I would have said that regardless of the GM, and I say that regardless of whether it worked out or not. I don't think I've ever gotten into a debate about a situation Morey was in on this site before, so I don't know how it could be blindly making an apology, but hey, project whatever you want.

If you weren't simply defending Morey, and I'll take your word on it, I still find your position ridiculous. If he's truly delusional about his value and pissed at Houston, he's not going to settle for a reasonable contract from anyone, let alone settle for a reasonable contract he knows you're going to match. If he's capable of being reasonable about his value, then you keep him and concentrate on extending him or signing him as a UFA next summer while reaping the benefit of having one of your pillars on a minimum deal this year.

I'd love to see the reaction if Billy King made this move, from everyone. Not just you.

no noel tonight


Hope the ankle didn't stiffen up.

Nah, my guess is they're planning on him not playing many back-to-back's during the summer. Probably ramp him up for preseason and go full speed when it counts.

IMO, Noel's wind looked better last night than it has all summer. Slowly getting into game shape.

Would love to see Grant get some more run tonight. He didn't play at all until the second half yesterday and brought a ton of good energy when he was in there.

They are playing 3 games in 3 days, right?

Actually depends on what seed they end up. Some teams get a bye.

Depending on how things play out it might even be 4 games in 4 days IIRC from the schedule.

the sixers said he isnt injured and its just rest

no KJ or ware also

TJ Warren
Doug McDermott
Dario friggin' Saric

As bad as we need wing scoring
damn Hinkie

is the goal to better this year or in 3-5 years?


I don't think Warren gets you there in either timeframe, but that's not really the point. I don't think Saric is ever going to make this team better, but maybe I'm in the minority.

I don't know why you only focus on potential franchise players. You need 12 active players on a team and 5 on the court at any one time. They can't all be stars and that might not even be a good idea if it were possible. George Lynch, Eric Snow, Theo Ratliff, Tyrone Hill, and Aaron McKie were never regarded as stars, but Iverson never equaled the success he had playing with them during the rest of his career.

Noel might be a star, so might Embiid. Maybe we'll be lucky enough to draft another one next summer. In the meantime, that leaves 9 roster spaces (only 8 if you count MCW as a "fixed" component of the core). That 10th pick might have filled one of them nicely. Maybe he could have developed into an Eddie Jones, or Jason Terry, or a Joe Johnson, or a Caron Butler (all "good" but not "franchise" 10th picks). Instead we'll have to wait and see what emerges from Turkey in two years (assuming Hinkie doesn't trade him by then).

Assume you meant to reply to someone else, I've never been pro-Saric.

I know that you are not pro-Saric. My point was that you often appear indifferent to choices that don't involve projected franchise players and your prior post projected somewhat of a "whatever" attitude to the choice of McDermott, TJ Warren, or Saric . Getting an important supporting player now versus getting one in two years is one that matters to me.

Both. Not sure why is has to be an either/or.

TJ and McDermott accomplish both. Saric, not so much, if ever.

Keep in mind that McDermott will probably look a lot better on a good Chicago team than he would have on a horrible Sixers team.

Sorry, but I just don't buy this line of thinking. McDermott dropping buckets is McDermott dropping buckets, no matter the quality of team he's on.

But, if that's the thought, and he wouldn't look good on an admitted horrible team, why not take him then? What can he hurt?

Isn't the goal to be better in approaching years anyway with Hinkie waving his magic wand? So why does it matter how McDermott looks this year or the next? As mentioned, McDermott still is dropping buckets in whatever year they're hoping this mess all comes together.

The GM clearly feels that Saric at 22 years old (when he's expected to debut) will be a better fit for the team he is trying to build. I'm OK with letting him have at it. It really doesn't matter how many baskets McDermott makes this year. And I don't dislike McDermott. Yes he would score on this bad Sixers team too. I think he's a great fit in CHI. But I'm OK with Saric.


Why would Saric be a better fit after two years of playing in Turkey than he would be after two years of playing here?

That reasoning doesn't make sense.

From a fan perspective, the only plausible argument for picking him is that he is so much better of a choice than any other available player that the two year wait for him is worth the sacrifice to have his signing rights.

Well, we'll see.

Oh, wait, there was also that 2017 pick.

Meanwhile, most of us now lean towards Noel being a power forward more than a center (just like his KY predecessor, Anthony Davis). So a team with holes almost everywhere drafts a power forward with the 10th pick who won't play for two years when they seem to have the power forward of the future already on their roster.

Two Things:

First, I am speaking from what I believe was the GM's thought process(which I am OK with) when I say that the Sixers felt Saric would be a better fit in two years. I feel that with all of the trips overseas Hinkie made to personally watch this kid develop over the past 3-4 years, that he's has a good idea of who this kid is versus McDermott. So I believe that Hinkie felt that Saric would be the better fit when he finally gets here. Hell, he may end up being the best player on the team and it's not even about his "fit" per se, but rather how others fit with him. I am very much OK with this pick.

And I would not get to hung up on PF versus SF or C when talking about Embiid, Noel, and Saric. If/when these guys actually start playing together, all that will work itself out.

I'd like the team to be "better" immediately. If you can wait 3 to 5 years for this team to be "better" than it was this past season, then you don't sound like the Philly fans I grew up with.

Now, if you're talking about how long is reasonable to wait for the team to be "good," then maybe that 3 to 5 year team frame is fair, but I'd rather it be closer to 3 than to 5.

That's the question ain't it, though that's not really the right way to ask it (in my opinion). It's not about being better next year or in 3-5 years per se, it's about building towards something, and next years record is kind of irrelevant towards the building process as long as the pieces they've obtained improve. The demand for more wins next year and maybe getting (and still losing) that 8 seed by signing mediocre talent in free agency doesn't make any sense to me.

The firm declarations of absolute certainty about who and who won't be a successful 2014 draft pick in the long term are based purely on opinion, and nothing else, not a single one thing else, with limited to know actual knowledge of the player because that's what we as fans can get, limited to actual knowledge.

And the seeping irrational anger and bitterness from the top is permeating, almost to the point of making LibertyBallers and their juvenile attempts at humor being more entertaining (almost), but if it keeps up, I figure by the time the regular season starts, they'll be nowhere to read intelligent rational discussion.

Maybe that overly wrought 'see you next year' tantrum was a good idea

"..... next years record is kind of irrelevant towards the building process as long as the pieces they've obtained improve. The demand for more wins next year and maybe getting (and still losing) that 8 seed by signing mediocre talent in free agency doesn't make any sense to me...... but if it keeps up, I figure by the time the regular season starts, they'll be nowhere to read intelligent rational discussion."

As far as raising the intelligence level of the site, you might consider posting less. Let's consider a couple of obvious contradictions and errors in logic contained in the edited (without loss of informational content I would add) version of your passage.

1) When you have "improvement" in personnel, more wins normally follow. If the team has 19 wins next year, then undoubtedly it will be every bit as miserable to watch (not an issue with you, of course) as this season's edition. In Iverson's first year, the team had 22 wins. In his second, the team had 31 wins. Hence, we can conclude that the team "improved" fairly significantly. During that second year, three cornerstones of the successful core (Ratliff, Snow, and McKie) were also brought to the team.

2) I can't imagine anyone posting here believing that any normal draft picks or modest free agent signings would deliver the Sixers into the playoffs with the 8th seed this year and I've never read anyone advocating that. As usual, you prefer the easier arguments against fictional positions of your choice to the actual ones. Of course, pointing that out to you won't make a difference because you appear to be hard wired that way.

Eh, i can't agree with this. McDermott is going to be good i have no doubt about it, but i can't see how Warren's game will translate to the NBA. His entire game is getting garbage buckets around the basket off hustle plays, being able to finish reasonably well in transition and make nice floaters. A lot of that is simply not going to be possible in the NBA, when he needs to face Howards, Noah, Davis and Noel instead of Drew Gordon and Brandon Davies at the rim. He lacks defensive ability and athleticism to really earn a smaller role with the team and he also doesn't have 3 point range which is really the nail in the coffin. To be honest his game reminds of Thad when he plays SF, without the fringe 3 point shooting, defensive ability or elite athleticism. I just can't see how that will translate into a good player in the NBA.

And more importantly, Saric is a better prospect than both. Just because he can't come over immediately shouldn't be a factor. What i'm trying to say is, i'm 95% certain that Saric will be better than Warren in 3 years and 70% certain that he will be better than McDermott.

P.S. FWIW, i had Saric at 6th or 7th on my board, McDermott at 10th and Warren in the late 20s early 30s IIRC.

We'll just agree to disagree then.

Your take on his game just isn't based in actuality to me. His defensive ability and, more importantly, instincts are being way underrated. His offensive game isn't "entirely" what you say it is either. Not close.

It reminds me of some debates on here regarding Ty Lawson and how I felt at the time how ludicrous it was that the argument's made were he wouldn't be able to get his shot off in the NBA due to his height and the initial positioning at the beginning of his shot mechanics being kind of low.

Guess TJ will just have to prove you wrong along with many others. But I'm sure when he does, there will just be arguments thrown around such as "oh, it's just that Suns system" causing his success.

As for your "P.S.", Tony Parker, Manu, etc. wave "hi". As for you having Saric in single digits, Evan Turner peeps his head up too.

I'm not saying Warren won't prove me wrong. He might end up being successful. I'm just skeptical about it and stated my reasons why. Sometimes i'm right, sometimes i'm wrong. I would assume, not all of the guys you liked or disliked in previous drafts turned out the way you thought did they?

Also, these are my personal rankings. Tony and Manu and the rest have nothing to do with them. I didn't track the draft back when they were drafted. And FWIW, i didn't like Turner at all before that draft. I was all about Favors at #2 and Monroe if we had stayed in the mid lottery in that draft.

Personally I don't know who will be the best player. But I prefer to have a GM who is willing to wait 2 years for a guy he is convinced is a star. Too many GM's are by choice or circumstance too focussed on the near future and are afraid to take a big risk. It goes back to the Thad Young vs Thornton draft decision.

I'll watch all 82 games either way, and prefer to be in it for the long run.

If it seemed like Saric would translate (and be a moderately workable fit with the cornerstone you picked previously) I'd agree with you. IMO, that isn't the case here. Looks like a wasted pick on a guy who can't contribute for two or more years, and won't contribute after that. I'd hope for more out of the #10 pick. And this team is going to be closer to the post-trade deadline than pre version from last year in terms of results and competitiveness. 82 doesn't seem like a remote possibility in my case.

Ah...no...Thad played for the Sixers directly after being drafted. As I recall, he was also first team all rookie so if he was less ready than Al Thornton it wasn't by much.

Unless you're projecting that Saric will be a David Robinson like talent, then I don't think he should be considered worth waiting for. San Antonio could afford to wait for a player like Splitter since they were chugging along with a highly competitive roster anyway. He was also picked 28th rather than 10th.

I wouldn't have cared if Saric were less ready than McDermott or Warren or someone else if he played immediately, but I would have passed on him since the team had critical workforce needs and there were other qualified applicants available who were willing to go to work.

Yea if Saric is anything sort of the freaking admiral in terms of talent then the two year wait is just too much. If he somehow morphs into a European clone of Scottie Pippen then the two year wait won't be worthwhile. Solid point. More of this please.

OK, if he's a European clone of Pippen, he might be worth the wait too, but if he's the second coming of Boris Diaw (the comparable listed for him on some mock drafts) then I still won't be a fan of this choice. I would feel the same way if he were the second coming of Toni Kukoc.

If Saric turns out to be the modern version of kukoc then the pick would be worth the wait. Toni first played at the age of 25 and had a very good stretch with the bulls. 14, 5, and 4 is nothing to sneeze at... he could facilitate and kept defenses honest out to the arc. Plus Saric seems to have some fire in his belly. Wouldn't be too shabby for the tenth pick in a draft. I liked the pick but only time will tell.

To me it is really basic. If Saric is the best player on the board at #10 then he is the right pick, and having to wait 2 years to have him join the team at age 22 does not enter the equation. In fact, waiting those 2 years in some ways is a positive in terms of his value, pushing his rookie deal more into his prime. That means if he is a star you get 2 extra years of his prime at 2.5M instead of 12M, and you use the difference to bolster your team, which is good at that point. But as I said, I really don't know if he was the best player available. But time will tell, and I'm willing to wait given the way the roster is structured (already waiting for Embiid.)

As for Young/Thornton, I'm referring to the discussion at the time they were drafted. The consensus was that Thornton was more NBA ready by far, and teams would have to wait 2 or 3 years for Thad to reach his potential. Obviously it played out very differently. But the discussion is the same regarding Saric in terms of waiting for promise vs a player who helps you today.

No, this situation is not the same as Thad/Thornton. Thad played. Even if he was a lesser player his rookie year, I still would have preferred that to stashing him overseas for two years. I already stated that I wouldn't have cared if Saric was less ready than some others as long as he played.

Are you sure about the continuation of rookie terms into future years for foreign stashed prospects? Neither Pekovic nor Splitter began in the NBA on rookie type contracts. I think the opposite could occur. If Saric's value rises over the next two years, he could squeeze more out of the team than he could have if he would have been signed to a rookie contract. Furthermore, if his value goes up, that means he might have been doing good things here if he had the opportunity. If his value goes down, then we'll be lucky to get one of Hinkie's special seconds for him.

IIRC it is a bit complicated the longer a player stays in Europe. But for Saric, the team retains their rights to sign him to a rookie contract for 1 year beyond his Euro contract... and he has a 3 year contract in Turkey. So it is very likely he will be on the rookie scale when be comes over in a couple of years. I see nothing wrong with having him as a rookie at age 22.

As for Thad and Thornton, I was referring to the discussions that were had before the draft, and not how the players turned out and not when they started playing in the NBA. And again, I personally don't grade a player lower because you get them 2 years later at age 22 no more than I would grade down a player you draft at 22 vs 20. I see it just as if you were drafting a guy after his sophomore year and you don't get him until he has graduated. But I can see how it could bother you or others.

I am disappointed we won't have the fun of seeing these guys play for the Sixes right away, but don't think that should be part of the equation for the front office. I want them drafting the players they think will be the best 2 years from now and beyond- even more so given the current prospects of the team.

Lance Stephenson to the Hornets for 3 yrs 27 mil. Seems like a heckuva bargain.

Is Saric playing in the world cup of basketball this summer? I know playing well in international competition doesn't always translate well to the NBA, but I'm excited to see what what he can do overall several games.

I'd be more excited to see what Saric could do here over this summer and the next two years.

Yes he will.

I also don't get all the Mcdermott love. I get that he will be a good outside shooter, floaters ect, but He all his other statistical indicators are from bad(rebounding) to horrifically terrible(steal rate, block rate) and his defense is by all accounts awful.

Dropping 31 does that to blogging talent scouts who vacillate in opinion on a 'wind blowing' basis.

If you can play, you can play. Fundamental knowledge and its application, along with passionate interest and superior shooting ability, breeds success. Hinkie, smart man, was dumb in passing on the solid kid from Creighton... my conviction on draft night.

That said, averaging 20+ in a few glorified summer league pick-up games does not an all-star make, though its mildly auspicious. Bulls are happy no doubt.

One should mention that the Sixers have a player who is doing that in Vegas, too: Jordan McRea. He's been one of the few bright spots on an otherwise dismal team.

One should. One did. One thank you.

At this early juncture, how do you see his overall game and prospects for future?

Well, right now I like McRea well enough to hope that he takes Wroten's roster spot. OK, I guess that isn't so much of an endorsement.

More seriously, I don't feel qualified to project players' futures (frankly, I don't get much enjoyment from it either). I do feel he is more "NBA ready" than the majority of the players I've seen in summer league this season. I think he is capable of coming into a game and playing hard on both ends of the floor and making things happen (maybe both good and bad). He's played big minutes in Vegas but he battles hard the entire time he's on the floor. If he played 15 minutes per game for the Sixers as a rookie, I think he could average between 5 and 6 points a game while also playing hard on defense.

Noone is really asking him to be a dominant defender. His steal and block rates are almost irrelevant in the scheme of his role in the NBA.

He'll be a good enough shooter to be worth hiding defensively even if he's really bad at it. And his rebounding is perfectly fine for a wing, which is what he will be in Chicago.

Its not that him blocking shots and getting steals is vital to his NBA success, its just that having such unbelievably low blocks/steals rate in College correlates to a guy that doesn't translate in to the NBA. He had 14 career blocks and 34 career steals... over 4 years. And only 1.5 assists a game, just from a statistical perspective, there is a ton to worry about. Watching him play, I think he's going to be an really bad defender. With that being Said, I love his shot(obviously), quick release, how he move without the ball, seems like a hard word worker, good kid, ect. So I'm somewhat torn on him. I just can't fault the Sixers brass for going with Saric/2017 First/2015 second over him because I think Saric can be a complete player and I think there is really good reason to believe McDermott is going to be really one dimensional, although maybe he proves me wrong.

If Saric comes over at 22 or 23, is that really so bad? Its not like him helping us win next year is important. Its not like he can't continue to develop his shot and other aspects of his game while playing in the Turkish/Euroleague. I'm not going to get into how good I think he can be until I see him play this summer, but I don't think a guy not coming over for 2 years is a reason not to take him.

2 vacant years: a fairly polarizing fact.

Differing viewpoints will differ on the wisdom of taking him at 10 in a supposedly stacked draft, as needs abound NOW. But this is Harris and Hinkie's Chia pet (water and wait).

Thanks, Buke. Good capsule. Wouldn't know him if I fell over him. Will keep on eye out. 'Play hard, with a clue'... a good starting point.

random thoughts on discussions:

I think McDermott will be just fine in Chicago; he has great tools as a player that could only be maximized in a situation with some structure. The Sixers do not have that.

TJ Warren will also fit well in Phoenix since they love their mobile forward tweeners (the Morris' weren't enough) but I won't lose sleep over him. Ditto Rodney Hood, who by the way, is looking good on offense through the SL.

Foremost i was impressed with Giannis; his ability to create and floor vision. I was concerned that his game was becoming too ball dominant, not necessarily a bad thing but ideally you'd want a traditional PG in your finished product as per Milwaukee. Parker also needs the ball to maximize his ability too. With this in mind, I came across this article
Part of it is ridiculous, Giannis cannot play or guard at the 1, but it'll be interesting to see how he develops, or what they want to develop him into.

Summer league game tonight at 10:30 vs. Lakers. i hope I dont have to watch McRae have to toss up 10+ shots.

not sure if the game is on TV tonight

@BobCooney76 McDaniels and McRae out for tonight..

both have ankle sprains

This schedule shows it will be on, so good news:


good stuff

For those in the LA-area like me, we may not get it. Does not appear to be on time Warner Sports either.

I hope it happens for next year. Maybe we'd make a run at Bledsoe at a bargain price.

I can't wait to see the team with the worst record wind up with the #7 pick. That would be fucking awesome.

Agreed. I hope the new provision is nicknamed the "Sixers Rule."

I sort of like the changes. To me the problem has not been tanking, but the trap of mediocrity that encourages tanking as the only way out. Currently, if you win 30-35 games you have little shot at getting a top 5 pick, and are unlikely to be on a course to contention unless you already have some young stars on your team. Getting a late lottery pick just helps cement your mediocrity by adding good but not great talent to a subpart roster.

But giving better odds to 30 win teams gives them a realistic chance ofdrafting a star without having to drop back to being a 20 win team. So I'm good with more Cleveland like top picks... assuming it happens to teams other than just Cleveland. It give weaker teams that are not brutally bad some hope.

This doesn't discourage tanking, it just removes the incentive to tank to the bottom. You'd still much rather pick 5th than 13th or 14th.

Yeah, you will actually have more tanking given the bottom 7 records are now about as good as the bottom 3 records are now. But my point is that you don't need to do Hinkle like roster decimation in the offseason when it looks like you are headed for 30 wins. A 30 win team will have a reasonable shot at drafting a franchise altering talent, as opposed to being essentially locked into a #10 pick that is unlikely to move the needle in most year.

So they won't get rid of in season tanking, but they will reduce the incentive for a mediocre team to try and get worse in the offseason.

I don't know if there's much we'd have done differently under this system. You'd still do the Jrue deal. You'd still trade Hawes and Turner for anything you could get, unless you wanted to re-sign Hawes. Would we sign some marginal free agents?

The Jrue trade was a unique opportunity. The point is that there would have opened up another way to build from 30 wins that is not currently available. If something like the Jrue trade presents itself then it will be the best option, but blowing up a mediocre young team will no longer be the only option.

Let's remember, though, that Hinkie didn't blow up this team by himself. Part of it was blown up in the Bynum fiasco and other moves the season before. Hawes probably wouldn't have resigned here and Turner probably had to be cut loose one way or another.
The Jrue trade really was a pretty smart move for rebuilding.

Hinkie's unique contribution was doing absolutely nothing outside of the draft to rebuild it and he's even taken his sweet old time at that. I hope that the rule change is implemented by next summer and he ends up with the 9th pick for the third worst record.

Well, maybe it's not just what Hinkie "did" but what "he didn't do" that might have changed. Consider that he signed no free agent of any merit in last summer's bargain free agent market. Consider that we've heard almost nothing about him pursuing anyone in this one. All he wanted last year was temporary bottom of the barrel players and picks. He didn't care what happened on the court. He just wanted stuff to trade on draft night. It didn't matter how badly the team finished, the worse the better.

The ESPN announcers shook their heads at Philly on draft night and said that management had announced that "we were terrible this year and we're going to be terrible again next year." One of them also said something that has some truth: "You couldn't get away with this back in 1982. The internet chattering has changed everything." Now lots of fans would rather be fantasy GMs instead of basketball watchers. They should start selling posters of Hinkie.

Eh, after last season's draft Chad Ford and those same ESPN announcers were just about blowing Sam Hinkie for the moves he made (especially post draft), but you didn't seem to agree then. Now they're credible?

Actually I loved last season's draft. I thought Jrue's value might never be higher and I didn't particularly like him as a point guard (not crazy about MCW as a point either but that's another story). The chance to get the player who might have been the #1 without injury and another potential lottery pick for a player I considered overvalued was a great move. I even liked the Kazemi pick at the time because I thought he was impressive in the PAC 12 and NCAA tournaments.

I was OK with the first lottery pick this year (even happier now that I've seen Noel play) but couldn't stand the second one under the circumstances.

By the way, some people interpret gratuitous vulgarity as a sign of disrespect for the person you are talking to. I'm one of them. So, unless you actually intend to disrespect me, don't use words like "blowing" when you are conversing with me.

Like I suggested below, this assumes that absent the current lottery system and under this new, somewhat flatter system, we would spend just enough money to be a 26-win team instead of a 19-win team. Under this new system, you're still hurting your draft chances if you win 30 games. Now, I'm not sure why Hinkie would spend money just for the sake of being a little better than awful. It would seem that in order to do that, what you do is sign some mediocre players, or maybe some really good low-usage role players, but no one who's both good and plays a lot of minutes or takes a lot of shots. So you do something like what Orlando's doing now; in addition to playing a lot of young players, you add a Ben Gordon and a Channing Frye and a Luke Ridnour. But that's just not very smart, whatever the lottery looks like. You're tying up money in mediocrities and bit players. Take Frye - a very useful player on a contender, but Orlando doesn't have a chance at contending until maybe the last year of his contract, and in the meantime you tie up 8 million a year that could have been spent on attracting a max guy who wants to play in Florida, or renting out your space to teams who will give you young players or picks for it.

You ever seen Arjen Robben get tapped on the shoulder, act like he just took a Billy club to his mandible, and start doing an imitation of a crocodile death roll while screaming bloody murder? If not you should go watch a clip because that's you sometimes.

I really enjoy reading your opinions on basketball players and what they can do on the court. But guess what? It's not 1982. Everyone who reads this site knows that you wish it were. Fans becoming more informed about their team and the league as a whole haven't "ruined" anything. The nba is approximately a billion times more popular now than it was in 1982. There's a billion times more information available to consume now, we can watch entire games of players who don't even play in this country. Once fans start focusing on what jersey color is best for the team, or what the mascot posted on vine, or some other inane detail that doesn't effect the product on the court then you'll have a point. Until then quit being so dramatic. The league and it's fans are in much better shape than the early 80s.

Um, who is Arjen Robben (yeah yeah I could look it up but I'm curious to just hear why you would have brought him up)

Liked the rest of what you said too

He's a talented Dutch soccer player who plays for the powerhouse German club Bayern Munich. A marvelous forward but his diving (flopping) is quite theatrical.

And yes, I'm quite aware that sixers fans in the eighties would call me a Nancy boy for watching soccer. The horror....

Hey, FWIW, i loved the Arjen Robben comparison :)

OK, fair enough, and probably good advice. The NBA may be more popular now but a few teams every year these days are trying to be as bad as possible and I hope the league does address that. It's bad for the fans, bad for the integrity of the sport, and really, really bad for those who depend upon interest in those teams for their livelihoods.

There are not teams tanking every year...that's a straw man argument - and some of those 'tanking' teams this year didn't even plan it - Milwaukee didn't think they were going to suck going into the season - they just built a terrible roster - there's a difference between rebuilding and tanking (though it's ignored) and a difference between tanking and just building a bad roster.

I have a hard time believing that Milwaukee's performance was purely unintentional.

I'm actually OK with what Orlando did last year. They decided to put a cadre of young, inexperienced but potentially good players together quickly and let them grow and take their lumps together.

Bad for the integrity? Yea, I get that.

Bad for fans of tanking teams? Yea, I get that as well. But sports is a form of entertainment. If basketball is your favorite form you can get any particular team's game the night it's on air. I didn't watch as many sixers games last year because they were atrocious and rather depressing. But my God the SPURS, Durant, LeBron, the clippers, curry and Thompson, Phoenix, the Blazers, so much good basketball to watch. I'd love for the Sixers to be on that list and I hope the team is being built in an optimal way. We'll have to wait and see

And whose livelihood am I supposed to feel sorry about when a team does poorly? Do teams start laying off arena staff? They'd be the ones I'd feel sorry for, but scalpers? Vendors when they are charging 5 bucks for a hot dog and 8 for a light beer?

The concerns for those who are economically tied to the popularity of the team is something I got from an interview with Larry Bird. As a fan who is far removed from that economic interest, it is not a concern I considered before that. The interviewer commented how serious and businesslike Bird always was about winning. Bird answered that you have to be serious about the job because "lots of people depend upon us" and then went on to elaborate. After that interview I was struck by the contrast between Bird's concern for the other stakeholders and the Sixers management's apparent indifference.

Yes, there are entertainment substitutes. One bright spot of the dismal Sixers' season is that I rediscovered a joy of college basketball.