The sixers and building a winner

Status
Not open for further replies.

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Thanks for linking.
 
This is broadly the point I've had for a while. The coaching is good. The talent is still not there. They are taking the right shots, and I believe this improved again post MCW trade, just they need the right pieces. 
Brown has been really good. 
 

Statman

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2005
1,057
Los Angeles, CA
Chicken fingers, hot dogs and pitchers of Shirley Temples?  Who says no to that?  :buddy:
 
 
Embiid’s lax approach to his rehab and the circumstances surrounding the second foot surgery he needed this past summer — which appears like it will cost him the entire 2015–16 season — has caused the organization much anxiety. The simple task of getting Embiid to consistently wear his walking boot was a challenge for the franchise, and multiple sources suggested that some people in Philadelphia’s front office wonder whether a second surgery would have been necessary if Embiid had worn the boot as much as he was told to.
 
 
This type of disregard for instruction also extends to Embiid’s dietary habits. Per a source, the Sixers’ training staff was so concerned about what he was eating, they stocked the refrigerator in his downtown hotel residence each week with healthy food. When a staffer went to restock the fridge each week, most everything was uneaten and unopened, and they were throwing out the fruits and vegetables every week. When the team subsequently asked to see Embiid’s room service bill, they found that most days he was ordering junk food along with his signature beverage, a pitcher of Shirley Temples. Embiid also was frequently seen feasting on chicken fingers and hot dogs at and after games.
 
http://www.si.com/thecauldron/2015/10/16/philadelphia-76ers-sam-hinkie-joel-embiid-brett-brown-process
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
There's a lot of dodgy info in this and some is clearly just flat wrong but a lot of stuff is worrying. Esp on embiid.

That said he's a bust for injury not anything else it was always a risk, it's a real shame his talent is soemthing else. The nba would be better for having him in it. But will it ever?

Edit
I rely think anyone who criticises the embiid pick is pure hindsight. He was and is the best talent in the draft, it was a gamble but people saying anyone should have been taken are silly.

Same for the mcw trade. The guy isn't clearly even a starter and you are getting a extremely valuable pick. Could have come next year likely comes next and is high.
Who wouldn't make that trade???

The pace comment is interesting but last year they didn't have many big slow guys. Noel is not slow. Who else was slowing the pace?

And I note no comment on the outright thievery that was this offseason kings trade.

The Sixers have not had a lot of luck. I'm sure some think that's karma.
But they haven't got really any luck in the lottery balls so far.
In a year of three potential stars, one gets hurt and then the injury heals poorly. Without the embiid injury they might have Wiggins. Or with lottery like the same.

Last year they could easily have got the Miami pick and got Winslow. Pure bad luck. Got the Lakers pick with some luck and could have got the thunders pick in the 20s.

There's not been a lot of luck or help. Yet look at the Sixers today vs two years ago it's a different level of roster.

Covington, Okafor, stauskis, Covington and noel all look like real players. There are some interesting bench players embiid could still be a factor next year. As could saric.
Next year they should have 2 high picks (their own and the Lakers plus the kings swaps) two mid to late picks (Miami and thunder).
They have no commitments to anyone.

When hinkie took over they had nothing. Not even their own pick from the Bynum disaster. Anyone angry is dumb.
You can be angry at embiid for being a child. Sure. And mad the Sixers couldn't manage him better. That's fine. Most everything else is very weird.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Embiid is good for the league.....he's funny, naïve, and hilarious on social media. Joel once propositioned Kim (or Khloe) Kardashian on Twitter only to retract is with a follow up tweet apologizing that he didn't know she was married. You don't get this shit from Kelly Olynyk.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Here's a good piece on this
http://www.libertyballers.com/2015/10/16/9550017/sixers-joel-embiid-michael-carter-williams-sam-hinkie-the-cauldron
 
I like this blog a lot.
 
Anyway several outright errors in the article are shown here eg, the editor has already retracted an apologized about bad info on the Saric contract.
 
and
 
Scott O'Neil is not the team president and has not been since he was brought to the franchise in 2013. O'Neil is the CEO of the team, with the official designation "Executive Officer and Chief of Business Operations." You could check his LinkedIn profile for this information. The actual president is...
Sam Hinkie, whose title is General Manager and President of Basketball Operations. 
 
And I kind of agree on the criticism of the Popovich coaching tree being odd, as it includes some pretty decent successes (like Kerr). 
 
The Embiid stuff is clearly bad, and fits with something odd happening with how the injury was found and announced. So this may all be on point, but the basic errors later do more harm than good for the whole piece, making it appear like someone with an agenda, which is sad as the Embiid stuff alone was important and interesting, and damning.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Okafor with an impressive 24 points vs the Cavs last night, and joins a VERY short list of big men to have scored 60 points in their first 3 games.
His defense is clearly still a work in progress, but frankly nearly every rookie's is, and it's rotations etc the typical culprit, which again is normal- as opposed to him just getting killed one on one.
The rebounding wasn't great BUT he boxed out very well regularly leaving the rebound to the guards who came in clean. His conditioning still needs work, b ut there's no lack of effort. He's a big boy already, absolutely muscled Love and Thompson on a couple of plays, which given he's still 19 and filling out bodes awfully well for the future.
 
Looks promising and the Laker fans are already crying about, esp as Kobe won't let Russell touch the ball.
 
After the pre season I was thinking he'd need more time to be a force, but 24 points of 21 shots is tasty. Could be a fun ROY race Oak vs KAT
 

DannyDarwinism

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 7, 2007
4,883
LondonSox said:
Okafor with an impressive 24 points vs the Cavs last night, and joins a VERY short list of big men to have scored 60 points in their first 3 games.
His defense is clearly still a work in progress, but frankly nearly every rookie's is, and it's rotations etc the typical culprit, which again is normal- as opposed to him just getting killed one on one.
The rebounding wasn't great BUT he boxed out very well regularly leaving the rebound to the guards who came in clean. His conditioning still needs work, b ut there's no lack of effort. He's a big boy already, absolutely muscled Love and Thompson on a couple of plays, which given he's still 19 and filling out bodes awfully well for the future.
 
Looks promising and the Laker fans are already crying about, esp as Kobe won't let Russell touch the ball.
 
After the pre season I was thinking he'd need more time to be a force, but 24 points of 21 shots is tasty. Could be a fun ROY race Oak vs KAT
 
Unless Towns gets hurt, Okafor and Porzingis are playing for second. But that speaks more to just how amazing KAT looks so far. Okafor is as advertised- the most polished offensive big man to enter the league in many years. His footwork is incredible for a guy who's not even 20 yet. Add that to his size, excellent touch, and plus passing skills and it's pretty clear he's going to be a force and a really fun guy to watch for a long time.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
DannyDarwinism said:
 
Unless Towns gets hurt, Okafor and Porzingis are playing for second. But that speaks more to just how amazing KAT looks so far. Okafor is as advertised- the most polished offensive big man to enter the league in many years. His footwork is incredible for a guy who's not even 20 yet. Add that to his size, excellent touch, and plus passing skills and it's pretty clear he's going to be a force and a really fun guy to watch for a long time.
Fair towns has been amazing. But the sixers have to be delighted. He's clearly got areas to improve in but as you say the footwork is astonishing for his age. His counters are silly.
I also think the mid range jumper has looked much much better than I and I think most expected which bodes very well for one of his bigs question marks, the free throw shooting.
Also I don't think he's been as bad on d as people were saying. He's got a lot to learn that end though. But again 19!
If he can do this and generate double teams this team finally can start moving forward.

Clearly the lack of a point guard is an issue. But they aren't going anywhere yet anyway.

Reports that embiid is recovering better than expected, pinch of salt.
Saric said he fully intends to come to Philly next year.
Noel and oak playing just fine together too. And stauskis has looked better in two games than all of his kings tenor.
Plus the lakers look like a pretty damn good shot for a high pick too
 

losangelessoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2003
356
LondonSox said:
Fair towns has been amazing. But the sixers have to be delighted. He's clearly got areas to improve in but as you say the footwork is astonishing for his age. His counters are silly.
I also think the mid range jumper has looked much much better than I and I think most expected which bodes very well for one of his bigs question marks, the free throw shooting.
Also I don't think he's been as bad on d as people were saying. He's got a lot to learn that end though. But again 19!
If he can do this and generate double teams this team finally can start moving forward.

Clearly the lack of a point guard is an issue. But they aren't going anywhere yet anyway.

Reports that embiid is recovering better than expected, pinch of salt.
Saric said he fully intends to come to Philly next year.
Noel and oak playing just fine together too. And stauskis has looked better in two games than all of his kings tenor.
Plus the lakers look like a pretty damn good shot for a high pick too
 
I wouldn't neccessarily call the Lakers' start a good thing for Philly.  Too many more losses, and they'll be really looking to tank and keep a top 3 pick.
 
I think it's a little tough to judge the numbers Noel/Embiid put up.  Scoring 20 per game on a team that wins 15 games isn't nearly the same as doing it on a title contender.  Somebody has to put those shots up, and opponents will ease up for long stretches against the Sixers.  Philly has yet to play a competitive game.  Those stats are empty.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Er ok. The Sixers were leading the cavs, legitimately, at the half. Until they forced Lebron to start putting some effort in, in the second half.
I think MCW stats are hollow, pure usage but never efficient. Okafor was pretty efficient and Noel too so far. The bigger issue is that there isn't really a point guard on the roster right now.
If he is scoring 24 on 21 shots, that's fine. Especially in his third frickin game. 24 on 30+ shots? not so much. 
 
If the lakers finish with the worst record there is still what a 35% they drop out of the top 3, I don't think they are the worst team in basketball unless they deliberately attempt it. They are bad though and blowing games through hero ball from a fading kobe is fine with me. Obviously the ideal situation is that the lakers end up with the 4th pick, the sweet spot for that is that they finish with the 3/4 worst record. Not sure why a bad start is anything but good. Your own comments suggest you think the sixers are worse, the Nets look awful too etc and injuries will always derail someone.
 

losangelessoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2003
356
LondonSox said:
Er ok. The Sixers were leading the cavs, legitimately, at the half. Until they forced Lebron to start putting some effort in, in the second half.
I think MCW stats are hollow, pure usage but never efficient. Okafor was pretty efficient and Noel too so far. The bigger issue is that there isn't really a point guard on the roster right now.
If he is scoring 24 on 21 shots, that's fine. Especially in his third frickin game. 24 on 30+ shots? not so much. 
 
If the lakers finish with the worst record there is still what a 35% they drop out of the top 3, I don't think they are the worst team in basketball unless they deliberately attempt it. They are bad though and blowing games through hero ball from a fading kobe is fine with me. Obviously the ideal situation is that the lakers end up with the 4th pick, the sweet spot for that is that they finish with the 3/4 worst record. Not sure why a bad start is anything but good. Your own comments suggest you think the sixers are worse, the Nets look awful too etc and injuries will always derail someone.
 
By your own admission, Lebron wasn't putting any effort in the first half, which is what I mean by better teams having lapses in effort for long stretches against a team like Philly.  I didn't watch the game, but anytime a team's best player "doesn't put in any effort" in the first half, then turns it on as his team cruises to a win in the 2nd half is not competitive in my opinion.  It can make it difficult to evaluate who you have, because teams don't take you seriously for the whole game.  During the Celtics' miserable '06/'07 season, Tony Allen had a stretch where he around 20 points per game on 13 shots.  Is there anyone that would call him a good offensive player now?
 
And Noel is averaging 12 points per game on 36% shooting so far.  Sorry, that is pretty damn inefficient, especially for a big man.  I actually like Noel and recognize that more of his value comes on the defensive end.  But to say he has been efficient offensively is really too much.
 
I am also curious as to what you think about the rest of the roster outside Okafor/Noel.  Carl Landry is the only player on the roster with more than 3 years of experience right now.  If my memory is correct, Jason Richardson was the only player with more than 2 years at the start of last season.  Do you think that loading up the rest of the team with a bunch of undrafted players and 2nd round picks with no experience is good for the development of Okafor and Noel? 
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
I don't care about the veteran leadership nonsense. The coaches lead and teach. The big issue is the lack of a point guard who can do pick and rolls and entry passes into the post. I actually think Stauskas is an interesting option for the pick and roll (was a major part of his play at college).
The young hungry/ desperate players on the back of the roster work super hard, because they know if they can't stick here they can't stick anywhere. 
I think the Sixers have two clear talents, Noel and Okafor and two potential pieces Covington and Stauskas. 
I think Cross is interesting, but distant. Most everyone else are likely hope they develop, eg Grant. 
 
Personally, I think Noel while learning a new position putting up 12/10 with 2 blocks and 1.5 steals per game and showing ability to defend the rim and stretch 4s is really very interesting. He's exceptional defensively, the offense is secondary. And on the efficiency comment I was looking at the cleveland game where he was 7/13 I didn't realize how bad he had been against Utah actually.
 
People love this veteran leadership stuff, I don't think it hurts but I'd rather try a guy with talent for nothing than have a bad veteran there just because. 
 
I'm not quite sure what you're saying re Allen. Do you think Okafor is tony allen offensively? Or that he's bad offensively? In the history of the league only 10 centres have started they rookie season averaging 20 points, and one of those games was against one of the best interior defences in the league. I don't disagree that high usage by average players can lead to silly comments, I as yet dont' see that here. MCW is that player, which is why getting the LAkers pick for him seems amazing. 
 

losangelessoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2003
356
LondonSox said:
I don't care about the veteran leadership nonsense. The coaches lead and teach.
 
This is a pretty fundamental point that I disagree on, and it's a major reason why I don't believe in what the Sixers are doing.  I am a big believer in young players learning from their teammates in a competitive and positive environment from veterans who know the league.  At the moment, the environment Okafor, Noel and Embiid have is one where they lose horribly every night and play with a bunch of guys who are barely making it in the NBA.  It is probably something we'll have to agree to disagree on, because it is obviously difficult to prove either way.  But I will say that, it probably wouldn't have killed the Sixers' to bring in a couple veterans who have been around and can show the young players what it takes to make it, rather than another guy from the Idaho Stampede.  For example a Brandon Bass, who was available this summer, wouldn't have commanded a huge salary, and probably wouldn't have even taken away too many of the ping pong balls that the Sixers covet so much.
 
 
LondonSox said:
I'm not quite sure what you're saying re Allen. Do you think Okafor is tony allen offensively? Or that he's bad offensively? In the history of the league only 10 centres have started they rookie season averaging 20 points, and one of those games was against one of the best interior defences in the league. I don't disagree that high usage by average players can lead to silly comments, I as yet dont' see that here. MCW is that player, which is why getting the LAkers pick for him seems amazing. 
 
I didn't make my point well, but I'm not comparing Allen to Okafor offensively.  What I am trying to say is that these losing environments can make it difficult to evaluate what you have. If the Sixers are still losing when their contracts are up, who do you pay?  Who should you trade?
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Well on the front line they have two good young players, two freshly picked up players who flashed in pre season and a veteran.
I think they looked for a point guard but failed to find one which is why it's a bit crap. Then on the wings they have two young potentially good players (Covington and sauce) and a few players who have shown a skill and have upside are cheap and controlled for years at no risk.
Covington was just such a player last year and now he's a 3 and d wing with a chance to be pretty good who the sixers control for years for nothing.
I say if grant or Thompson or Jakarr or whoever else they try there makes a Covington leap that's surely worth more than veteran leadership. Basically they would rather have the lottery tickets and young super hard working players giving it all to make the nba than veteran.

I think that is worth trying. I think the veteran thing is less important not more on a team like this as it carries risks. If the veteran gets pissed at the losing what happens? Shout at the kids? Mouth off etc? I don't know but it surely more likely than for a young player.

Personally I value veteran experience, playoffs high pressure etc. So I want some vets when I'm winning to help deal with extra pressure and media and so on. I don't need them to teach the basics, the little finishing touches maybe.

I respect the view you have I just disagree. Or rather I value it less than the cap space plus the chance to try to strike gold (eg a vet or giving white side a shot last year) and I think the risks are higher for bad attitude to the losing etc too.

As for who to pay. I'm sorry are you saying playing the kids less so veterans could play would help you know who to pay better than playing them? Or that the veterans would help identify who is worth paying somehow?
I think playing them developing them and seeing who performs and improves (eg Noel last year huge second half improvements). Use them see who can do it. I don't know how you can judge better than playing them in real games.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
So last night showed again the potential find value of using those last roster spots for young guys.
 
TJ Mcconnell started at PG and nearly had a triple double (7 points, 9 boards 12 assists and 1 turnover) That's now 24 assists to one turnover in around 30 mins a game over the last two. And it's not a surprise that the Sixers have been more competitive in those games. Canaan is not a remotely good PG. Marshall is a similar passing PG but with better overall skills than TJ but the difference having a PG who is half decent is pretty clear. TJ likely starts until Marshall is back, and then is potentially a similar style back up. When TJ was out of the game, it just wasn't pretty. 
 
Efficient game from Noel 17 points 12 boards on 8/16 shooting
Okafor 9/13 shooting for 21 and 6 (really like to see the rebounding pick up, but the 3/3 FT shooting is again a really pleasant surprise)
 
The plus minus for the game show the Sixers story right now. The starters all positive +/-  the bench all -16 or worse. I would like to see Wood getting some minutes and I'm ok with Holmes struggling some as a rookie. 
It increasingly seems like Hollis Thompson is what he is and isn't much. Jakarr Sampson is more difficult, but I still hold hopes for Grant.
 

losangelessoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2003
356
Sixers get hammered tonight by Charlotte for their 13th loss in a row. I would love to see them win some games, so they can challenge the Nets a little, but it's just not happening. Looking at their upcoming games, they have 5 in a row on the road. They could pretty easily match that 18 game losing streak record to open the season. The game after that is at home against the Lakers, the best chance to get a win.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,462
I don't see the potential on the Sixers.
I mean, Covington/Stauskas look like 7th men upside at best, with some lovely Ricky Davis padding going on. Noel is a 1 way player whose defense regressed, and Okafor is what I thought he was (a guy with Al Jefferson as a ceiling) which isn't bad, but isn't a star. He is on his way to setting a record for most shots blocked (his own, not by him) in a season and his defense is abysmal.

Now they could get a superstar in this draft, and maybe he's enough to catapult them Lebron-style (along with hitting on at least 1 other first) but I just don't see the path to this team being a contender. Their players have shown a tendency not to improve, probably in part because the team as a whole is terrible, and there are no vets to learn from, and no accountability for playing poorly. And by the time they start to hit their prime, you have to start letting some go, add in that it is such a mess that Saric has to consider waiting out another year (bypassing the rookie scale and getting a much bigger contract) and I don't see this turning around to even a playoff team before say... 2020?
 

losangelessoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2003
356
I think the Sixers challenging the loss record both last season and this season is actually a pretty good indicator of just how piss poor that roster really is. During this part of the season, teams usually want to get out of the gate strong, so you are getting a better effort from a lot of teams. During the middle of the season, there will be a downtick in effort, more teams tanking, etc. Because they have so many guys who are one step away from the D-League, I would imagine the Sixers can get a more consistent effort year around, and can steal some wins. So these starts to the season show where the Sixers really are, IMO. Can adding a couple more 19 year olds next season rectify what is looking like a historically bad team? It would be hard, no matter who these kids are.

Another problem the Sixers face from when they drafted Noel and Embiid (both of whom they knew would be out for an entire season when they were drafted) is that they automatically lose 1 year off the rookie scale of their deals. Not only does that hurt with the salary cap, but it forces them to make a decision on what to do with these guys sooner. With Embiid, it will be 2 years off his rookie deal before he plays a single game. They are going to have to make a choice on what to do with Noel fairly soon.
 
Last edited:

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Ok well let's remember the Sixers ARE bad but are missing their "best" two point guards so far all season, and Covington has missed most of the season too.
Stauskas has been a real disappointment but I'm not sure I believe that the guy suddenly can't shoot given his college history. Maybe he has lost it forever, but seems early to completely give up on him.

Okafor has Al Jefferson as a ceiling? really? He's 19 and putting up 20 easy points a game as a rookie. He's been fantastic offensively. He's been poor defensively but most rookie big men are bad, they are asked to do so little at lower levels it's a lot to adjust to. He looks like a legitimate building piece. Noel has not regressed that much defensively, he's regressed offensively esp shooting and he and Okafor look like a really ugly pairing. This is true. But saying Noel is not a good player is just foolish. There are not a lot of big men ever who have had a start like Okafor. These seem odd things to complain about.

Next year is the key year, I don't get what is so hard about this. Their pick, the lakers, the kings swap, the thunder the heat picks AND Saric and hopefully Embiid is potentially the largest young infusion of talent to a team ever. This could go to shit. Don't get me wrong, they could miss out with their own pick and the Lakers could end up using that top 3 protection. That would suck and be a real problem for Hinkie.

As for no one improves? Noel made HUGE improvements last year, look at his first half second half splits! 8 to 13 points, 7 to 10 rebounds, more assists, steals and blocks. He's adjusting to playing the 4 (which may not be a fit) and his offence is suffering a LOT.

It's also been a very tough schedule so far, it's really on the last coupel fo games (like the 30+ turnover game vs the pacers) that have been AWFUL

IT's funny this is when people are giving up on the sixers, this is potentially the last awful year, and NOW people are giving up. Look hypothetically if they get Simmons, Murray, Saric, Embiid and two mid to late 1st round guys on top. They keep Marshall, Stauskas and Covington, and maybe Grant and maybe Cross or Holmes.
Anyway that's actually a roster.
C/ PF Noel, Embiid, Okafor, Cross
PF/ SF Saric, Grant, Simmons
SF/ SG Stauskas, Covington
PG Marshall, Murray
Plus whoever else they draft who could be ok (or packaged for a better third guy). I mean they can't even keep all of these guys!

You tell me that isn't an interesting young roster, with the most cap space in the league on top. Trades possible of course for Noel etc. This (obviously) might not remotely work out, but to suggest they are a lost cause seems like a weird time.

They were FAR worse 2 years ago, where there wasn't any real talent on the roster, last year there was almost none, this year there are two good players who don't seem to play together very well at the moment, but the trades have put them in place for a windfall this year.

As a markets guy this cracks me up. This team was AWFUL for two years and now the path to real improvement is there and NOW people get down on them. This is when you buy the stock, not where you sell it
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,462
I was always down on them. It was a strategy predicated on a great deal of luck, and on remarkably quick progress from a large number of players at once. It also made the assumption that you can develop individuals without developing the team, which I'm hesitant on. Players don't get better playing in situations where their teammates aren't NBA quality players, it takes away a portion of development when nobody can reliably run a defense or offense. I think some of that is being borne out this year where the team just looks lazy, the turnovers and defense are at least partly due to poor effort levels. A great opposite is the Celtics. Kelly Olynyk has really stepped up his defense by learning how to play within the team's defensive structure and make the best despite limited physical skills, he wouldn't have been able to do that in Philly.

Sure it could be that they hit on a few picks and get stars, and those stars come out of the gate hot, but that's a big ask. I don't think it's crazy to say they'll be a playoff team in 2017 or 2018, but contenders will be tough.

Okafor/Al Jeff is I think a great comparison. Jefferson was really good, and All-Star but not a 1st (or probably 2nd) best player on a true contender. Okafor's scoring is a pointless Ricky Davis stat. He's the #1 option on the worst roster in the league. What I look at is a guy who has real trouble finishing inside, his shot gets blocked an obscene percentage of the time, but he also doesn't stretch the floor. His rebounding is near the bottom of the league for a center, his defense is attrocious.

Now you seem to think Al Jefferson is an insult, but it really isn't, it's just that a big man who can't finish and isn't an elite scorer inside or outside has a pretty set ceiling on him if he isn't an impact defender.

Noel, I think is a perfectly good defensive big, but I don't see where he improves offensively to become a star, he's pretty bad there, and defensively he's very good, but I don't know that I see an ELITE defender. He seems to me like he's a rotation player that you hope gets to the point of being the defense only starter on a contender.
 

losangelessoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2003
356
Ok well let's remember the Sixers ARE bad but are missing their "best" two point guards so far all season, and Covington has missed most of the season too.
Stauskas has been a real disappointment but I'm not sure I believe that the guy suddenly can't shoot given his college history. Maybe he has lost it forever, but seems early to completely give up on him.
Weren't you pumping up TJ McConnell just about a week ago? Stauskas looks to me like somebody who won't make it past his rookie contract. He has been abysmal in basically every part of the game.


As for no one improves? Noel made HUGE improvements last year, look at his first half second half splits! 8 to 13 points, 7 to 10 rebounds, more assists, steals and blocks. He's adjusting to playing the 4 (which may not be a fit) and his offence is suffering a LOT.
I was a fan of Noel's last year, but he has shown zero improvement over the offseason. The first offseason is generally an important one for an NBA player's development, so it's not such a good sign. Robert Covington has absolutely sucked this year. MCW did not improve at all during his time with the Sixers.

They were FAR worse 2 years ago, where there wasn't any real talent on the roster, last year there was almost none, this year there are two good players who don't seem to play together very well at the moment, but the trades have put them in place for a windfall this year.

As a markets guy this cracks me up. This team was AWFUL for two years and now the path to real improvement is there and NOW people get down on them. This is when you buy the stock, not where you sell it
I was never a supporter of "the process", so I definitely not just giving up now. But in what way could this team possibly be better than last year or the year before that? They have zero wins. They couldn't possibly have played worse than they have been this year. The NBA is nothing like the stock market. I don't know why anyone should look at this start and think to themselves "Well, they sure do suck this year. All the more reason to think they will be great later." The way this season has gone is an indictment of the players they have and their impact. If Noel and Okafor were so fantastic, then their impact on a game should be a little better than what amounts to an 0-13 record. That stock market analogy is a real head scratcher to me.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,724
Also, forgetting about everything else, Okafor and Noel can't be on the floor at the same time in today's ever shrinking NBA, and Embiid can't play alongside either one of them if he ever makes it back. It'd be a lot easier to "trust the process" if they didn't keep drafting centers.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
So what would you guys have done differently?
The Sixers hinkie took over were horrendous and with no upside and having given away their picks in things like the Bynum trade

This team was horrendous, they now have assets. Players are tradable as are picks and trades like the stauskas one you do 99/100 even if he's a total bust (which I still think seems early)

There's lots of philly plan is doomed but I never see anyone suggest a better path. The Celtics were never as bad as the Sixers got and there are only so many nets trades in life.

If things work out this year then it'll be time to see the next stage if not I agree it's on life support.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Look don't get me wrong the season has been worse than expected there are issues which I didn't expect and issues I did

For example the idea was covington and stauskas would be creating space for Okafor but one has been brutal and one has been hurt

The Okafor Noel combo has really struggled together which is a bigger issue but I would like to see them playing with a shooter at SF not grant who hurts the spacing even more.

Tj has been a pleasent surprise but he's bench filler baring a miracle. If he's starting you're not winning much

I do think that Okafor has a lot to work on but his footwork and moves are harder to teach than defense and he boxes out well so rebounds will come. His shooting is better than expected and ft shooting improving already. He's a hard worker and seems to care about it. He's 19 he's very much a potential core player on a good team.

The coaching is the final issue. I don't see brown doing enough. There aren't enough plays designed to use who he had. Way too much standing around when they feed Okafor in the post. Not enough ball movement generally and as you say I'm not seeing any adjustments being made.

So I'm disappointed overall on the season just to be clear. I am pleasantly surprised by Okafor overall the blocks issue is interesting to watch. But I see a team that hasn't had much luck in the draft lottery Eg Miami gets one pick from having to give us the pick and gets a really good player. It's unfortunate the best player available has been a centre three years in a row but they are tradable and it's hard to argue with Noel at that pick not embiid nor Okafor esp given embiid injury woes.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,500
So what would you guys have done differently?
The Sixers hinkie took over were horrendous and with no upside and having given away their picks in things like the Bynum trade

This team was horrendous, they now have assets. Players are tradable as are picks and trades like the stauskas one you do 99/100 even if he's a total bust (which I still think seems early)

There's lots of philly plan is doomed but I never see anyone suggest a better path. The Celtics were never as bad as the Sixers got and there are only so many nets trades in life.

If things work out this year then it'll be time to see the next stage if not I agree it's on life support.
Here's an interesting article comparing the rebuilding paths taken by the 76ers, the Cs, and the Magic. http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/25253002/different-paths-to-rebuilding-a-view-of-the-sixers-celtics-magic.

It will be interesting to see how - if - any of them get into contending status.

To me, while it's hard to theoretically argue with what Hinkie is doing - which is trying to get as many chances as possible for a transformative talent - it's also hard to agree with him. As the article says, even after three years of tanking, the player who is supposed to lead PHI into contention isn't on the team yet. and even if the 76ers end up with Simmons plus this year, they still have to add guys who can actually play in the NBA and at he same time figure out how to AND who to pay out of all of these high draft picks.

The Magic are an interesting comparison that no one ever talks about. They currently have enough talent to be competitive but if one (or more) of Oladipo, Elfrid Payton, Aaron Gordon, Harris, or Hezonja doesn't take "the Leap," they are going to be stuck being a fringe playoff team and then what are they going to do?
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Look don't get me wrong the season has been worse than expected there are issues which I didn't expect and issues I did

For example the idea was covington and stauskas would be creating space for Okafor but one has been brutal and one has been hurt

The Okafor Noel combo has really struggled together which is a bigger issue but I would like to see them playing with a shooter at SF not grant who hurts the spacing even more.

Tj has been a pleasent surprise but he's bench filler baring a miracle. If he's starting you're not winning much

I do think that Okafor has a lot to work on but his footwork and moves are harder to teach than defense and he boxes out well so rebounds will come. His shooting is better than expected and ft shooting improving already. He's a hard worker and seems to care about it. He's 19 he's very much a potential core player on a good team.

The coaching is the final issue. I don't see brown doing enough. There aren't enough plays designed to use who he had. Way too much standing around when they feed Okafor in the post. Not enough ball movement generally and as you say I'm not seeing any adjustments being made.

So I'm disappointed overall on the season just to be clear. I am pleasantly surprised by Okafor overall the blocks issue is interesting to watch. But I see a team that hasn't had much luck in the draft lottery Eg Miami gets one pick from having to give us the pick and gets a really good player. It's unfortunate the best player available has been a centre three years in a row but they are tradable and it's hard to argue with Noel at that pick not embiid nor Okafor esp given embiid injury woes.
I know that you aren't a believer in veteran leadership and that it is the coaches who lead which I vehemently disagree with as the coaches are with the players at the arena on the floor. The players eat, travel, hangout, and spend time in the locker room with the younger players who can observe and pick their brains aside from learning how to play like a veteran on the floor.

I'll give you an example: Avery Bradley has began shooting 100 3-point shots following every practice session and was the first player on either the Celtics or Nets Friday night to be on the floor during halftime 5 minutes before everyone else (Isaiah and Lee showed up early too) being fed 3-point shots. He has acknowledged that he is adopting the post-practice shooting from Ray Allen who also was out there during halftime before anyone else getting up shots. Players learn habits from players......a coach can tell him to do this or that but it is FAR more effective when a successful player is emulated. I'm going to go out on a limb and say nobody on the Sixers is performing the Ray Allen drills......because none of them had Ray Allen to learn it from. The results have been more 3FGA (and less long 2's) and hitting them at 41%.

Another thing is that it is extremely difficult to remain motivated and positive when you are not only losing but not being competitive because your teammates are so awful. There is an old adage that I learned from my college coach when he would frequently rotate end of bench players into the final rotation spot......"If you spend enough time at the back of the bus you begin to feel as though you belong there." This is not good for Noel's development or Okafor's.....or anyones.


Finally, a big concern regarding Hinkie are the reports of him alienating other GM's and Agents who are the two most important relationships for a GM in building a team. There was also a leak about Coach K telling someone to stay away from the Philly situation as they are being terribly managed. Personally I don't see how he survives this......I have always been offended as a purist by his strategy (I'm fine with a one-year complete tank job but this is a slap in the face to the league and to the consumer) but have also always given him credit for selling his plan to Josh Harris. He could still have lost a lot and received multiple high lottery picks without threatening the integrity of the game and alienating those who he must have relationships with to get the plan to work.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,462
Thinking about the 76ers, there are good and bad parts to their rebuild strategy.
I agree with the idea that you shouldn't try and be a mediocre veteran team at the expense of good draft position.
However I think the way they went about it is a weird one, in two ways:
1. They treated it as if basketball players are static assets in a way, they make the assumption that high upside players will develop the same no matter what the situation, which to me is crazy.
2. They talked about treating it like investment, but then invested heavily in only high risk assets. I think the thought proccess is that once you get a franchise player you can fill in the rest. However as a number of teams including NO have shown, it's harder than you might think to build the roster around a stud from scratch.

There are a bunch of individual moves I don't really get. One of those is the Embiid/Saric draft. If you take Embiid who is huge upside but hurt, I don't get why you then take Saric (well trade for), getting nothing out of that draft the first year, and maybe not getting Saric for up to 3 years means there is no growth in the team, you were going to be terrible no matter what rookie you get out of the Saric slot, but you would be developing a core if you take someone else, and Saric projects as a PF on team where your only two assets are big men.

Beyond that, the more concerning thing to me is their sheer unwillingness to fill out the roster with decent NBA players. They don't have a G on the entire roster who would even play decent bench minutes elsewhere, they have no veteran leadership, and can't run an offense because their best PG is Tony Wroten. You have to spend to the floor anyway, why not overpay a fringe starter PG to help develop the kids? It isn't going to give you enough extra wins to make any real difference in the lotto odds. Instead the bumbling incompetence develops terrible habits and stunts growth.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
I'm concerned with issue 1, I agree. Maybe they think it doesn't matter, but I don't know why that would be. I've never seen any studies on this, but it would be counterintuitive if there was no developmental value to having good players around you. The selection biases make this basically to disentangle however.

Issue 2 I'm less concerned with. New Orleans is having trouble surrounding Davis with talent, but New Orleans hasn't really shown much in the way of front office competence. They were relevant because they were bad enough to win the #1 pick, and land Anthony Davis. Bad GMs struggle to build rosters. Good GMs do not.

Depth isn't free, but I suspect Hinkie can build a decent roster pretty quickly once he wants to.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,462
I'm concerned with issue 1, I agree. Maybe they think it doesn't matter, but I don't know why that would be. I've never seen any studies on this, but it would be counterintuitive if there was no developmental value to having good players around you. The selection biases make this basically to disentangle however.

Issue 2 I'm less concerned with. New Orleans is having trouble surrounding Davis with talent, but New Orleans hasn't really shown much in the way of front office competence. They were relevant because they were bad enough to win the #1 pick, and land Anthony Davis. Bad GMs struggle to build rosters. Good GMs do not.

Depth isn't free, but I suspect Hinkie can build a decent roster pretty quickly once he wants to.
Of course one wonders if Hinkie is actually a good GM in that sense. He's made some nice trades to acquire draft picks, but I don't know that there is any indication yet that he and his team are good talent evaluators. Also he's alienated agents, and the sheer stink of the tank makes it harder to get players to agree to go there.
 

losangelessoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2003
356
London,

I apologize for how my last post was written. I re-read it, and did not want to come off the way I probably did.

I think that value wise, most of their trades are pretty good. But the major problem I have with what the Sixers are doing is that I don't think they are putting any of their guys in a position to succeed. I don't see the point of having all these high end prospects if you aren't putting them in a good spot to reach that upside or at least make them look good enough to trade if you don't want them. As others in this thread have noted, the Sixers seem to just treat these guys like static assets instead of NBA players who need the right environment to improve.

I pretty much agree with what Baker said about veteran leadership, and adding veterans around is one of the major changes I would make. I think it's no mistake that Minnesota's young players are looking so good. There also seems to be a lack of accountability by the Sixers. The message they seem to send everyone is that it is good to suck this year and lose as many games as they can. When they have Player X next year, they will be great. If they can't get player X, they can suck for another year. I can't imagine how difficult it probably is for a player to stay motivated and to learn winning basketball in that kind of culture. Finally, they spent all of their top picks so far on this mish-mash of front court players whose games don't compliment each other well. Now, I get that they were going after the best players available. But it still another another obstacle for Noel, Okafor and Embiid to overcome.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
Of course one wonders if Hinkie is actually a good GM in that sense. He's made some nice trades to acquire draft picks, but I don't know that there is any indication yet that he and his team are good talent evaluators. Also he's alienated agents, and the sheer stink of the tank makes it harder to get players to agree to go there.
I agree we don't really know. They haven't tried to build a roster with depth guys yet, so we've yet to see how well he'll do it. It ends up being circular however: if he's a good GM, then his strategy is a good one. If he's a bad GM, then his strategy is a bad one.

I tend to think he's probably going to be fine at this however. This is more or less exactly the thing all analytics teams, in both NBA and MLB, are good at: acquiring undervalued, average-ish players on the cheap. It would be weird if Hinkie's team couldn't do that. That's the low hanging fruit.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
I think this is all fair criticism, and I'm not against the right veteran guy, for sure. I don't think it can hurt to waste some small short term money on a vet or two who has great character and has been around the game for a while.
IE you don't want a Kobe type attitude, but having some great character vets who know exactly what they are getting into (mentoring/ last pay check tail end of the career type deal) I don't think it can hurt.

This year is the first year the effort and performances are slipping quickly, and this is a concern. Brown has not impressed that much this season, and his insistence on lineups that can't and don't work is baffling. IF you're not going to give these kids you have put on the roster time, why not indeed have that veteran presence?
 

Remagellan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
They've played a number of good games this season despite their record. It's clear what they need is a guy who can be the focus of their offense at crunch time, and Okafor is progressing but is not there yet. Staukas, either because of injury or ability, has been a disappointment, and they have guys like TJ McConnell who would make fine bench players playing first team minutes. The results are not there but they are getting better.

I don't know if Okafor took last night's game as a personal challenge because of his slipping from first to third in the draft, but he dominated Towns whenever they were on the court together, which wasn't much because he got Towns into foul trouble.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Nice to see him seemingly angry to be honest, he utterly manhandled KAT, which I was not expecting at all, I was expecting some KAT blocks etc.
Noel and Okafor not being able to play together is really depressing though, because other than Covington (and I'm not giving up on Stauskas but clearly he's not right now) those two are really the only real players. It kind of sucks that your only two NBA starter calibre players can't really play well at the same time.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,724
Noel and Okafor not being able to play together is really depressing though, because other than Covington (and I'm not giving up on Stauskas but clearly he's not right now) those two are really the only real players. It kind of sucks that your only two NBA starter calibre players can't really play well at the same time.
This is why they shouldn't have drafted Okafor even if they thought he was the best talent on the board, as now their best move is trying to trade him for a genuine perimeter player.

And again, if Embiid ever comes back, he can't play alongside either one of those two, it's hard to imagine a dumber strategy than stockpiling centers with no outside shot in today's NBA.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
I didn't like the Okafor pick because I liked other prospects more, but I disagree that you pass on him if you think he's the best talent on the board. It's only a problem if Okafor and either or Noel/Embiid develop into franchise guys. That could happen, but it's not especially likely. And even then, you're not sunk or anything, you just have two franchise pieces who don't fit.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
I'm not sure who you think was better than Okafor pre draft, Porzingis or one of the overseas guards I'm guessing? I respect the ability to scout these guys from afar, but I really think it's hard to say with any conviction it was the wrong pick. At best it was marginal, but that certainly wasn't consensus.
I think Porzingis was in the discussion. I have no quibbles with the pick in and of itself, best player available. As well as Porzingis has played and the better fit with Noel I think that would have been a better pick given what we know now.
 

bowiac

Caveat: I know nothing about what I speak
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,945
New York, NY
I wasn't thinking of Porzingis, no. I had no idea what he was going to be. Nate Duncan compared him to Myles Turner at the time, which seemed as good a comp as any. He'd obviously be the #2 (or maybe #1?) guy in a redraft now, but I wasn't smart enough to see that coming.

I would have taken Mudiay, Justice Winslow, and Stanley Johnson ahead of him (in that order) however. Okafor was a strange pick to me, in that stats models weren't particularly fond of him as an offensive prospect, and the scouts weren't especially keen on him defensively.
 

LondonSox

Robert the Deuce
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,956
North Bay California
Winslow really hurts given how close the sixers were to that heat pick. They lost the last game and the sixers get 11th and maybe Winslow doesn't drop to 11 but I'd like to think the sixers would have had a shot at him or moving up. I liked him a lot.

I don't know re okafor I thought be would be a stud. My concerns were a lack of althleticism and shooting. His vastly improved (very very fast) shot is encouraging and he's been a pleasant surprise at the ft line. He's also been able to drive better than expected and that footwork is amazing and it's own form of althletic skill.

Defensively I don't think he'll be great but I think he will actually be ok. He works hard and has a great attitude he just has a lot to learn. From what I read duke to nba is a big adjustment to learn and he was protected even more at duke than a normal star. He was really asked to just do the minimum and stay out of foul trouble a lot. We shall see. He clearly isn't a Noel but he has that footwork and size and works. His fitness isn't ideal but will improve too. I think he should be a good post defender but will likely be a disaster vs the small lineups.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,724
I wouldn't have taken Embiid or Okafor, Embiid because I already had Noel and because it's impossible to play those two together (plus the injury issues), Okafor because I still think he is a young Al Jefferson and I don't think that is a guy to build around in today's NBA.

I would have taken whoever my scouts deemed to be the best perimeter player in both of those spots, most centers are role players in today's NBA, hurting the team on one end or the other and often being benched down the stretch for a smaller lineup. We just saw a similar situation play out in Detroit with Drummond, Monroe and Josh Smith, and the latter two there are much more flexible position-wise then any of the three Philly guys, but that still failed miserably.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,724
Also I just went back and read the June posts in this thread, none of this is second-guessing, it was obvious before the draft and was discussed here quite a bit at the time.
 

Remagellan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I wouldn't have taken Embiid or Okafor, Embiid because I already had Noel and because it's impossible to play those two together (plus the injury issues), Okafor because I still think he is a young Al Jefferson and I don't think that is a guy to build around in today's NBA.

I would have taken whoever my scouts deemed to be the best perimeter player in both of those spots, most centers are role players in today's NBA, hurting the team on one end or the other and often being benched down the stretch for a smaller lineup. We just saw a similar situation play out in Detroit with Drummond, Monroe and Josh Smith, and the latter two there are much more flexible position-wise then any of the three Philly guys, but that still failed miserably.
Then they just would have wound up with a lesser player, and I don't know how anyone could argue a team would be better off doing that. Remember that once upon a time Portland didn't draft Michael Jordan because they already had Clyde Drexler. You take the better asset and figure out the rest later, because none of the guys even at the top of the draft is a given.

For the present circumstances, one thing Brown has to do is stop playing Canaan at the end of games when they have a lead. The guy is a bad shot/turnover waiting to happen. If they need a 3 because they're behind then he should be in at the end since he can shoot. But if they have a lead, they'd be better off with TJ on the court because at least he knows to get the ball to Okafor.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,462
Then they just would have wound up with a lesser player, and I don't know how anyone could argue a team would be better off doing that. Remember that once upon a time Portland didn't draft Michael Jordan because they already had Clyde Drexler. You take the better asset and figure out the rest later, because none of the guys even at the top of the draft is a given.

For the present circumstances, one thing Brown has to do is stop playing Canaan at the end of games when they have a lead. The guy is a bad shot/turnover waiting to happen. If they need a 3 because they're behind then he should be in at the end since he can shoot. But if they have a lead, they'd be better off with TJ on the court because at least he knows to get the ball to Okafor.
I don't know that either Embiid or Okafor is significantly better as a prospect or player than the other available options at those picks. Embiid had serious health concerns, and everyone knew Okafor was going to be a terrible defender and was a bad pairing for Noel. I don't know that one each out of the Exum, Smart, Randle? group, and the Porzingis, Hejzona, Mudiay, Johnson, Winslow group, is any worse at the time or now.

I'm not sure McConnel is the guy you want on the floor late, his turnover rate is disgusting, second highest in the league among 20+ MPG players.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,724
Then they just would have wound up with a lesser player, and I don't know how anyone could argue a team would be better off doing that. Remember that once upon a time Portland didn't draft Michael Jordan because they already had Clyde Drexler. You take the better asset and figure out the rest later, because none of the guys even at the top of the draft is a given.
What Cellar Door said, but also Jordan could have played alongside Drexler at SG/SF, that was just Portland liking Sam Bowie (who was super-talented admittedly but incredibly injury-prone in the end) too much.

But the main point here, which I feel like somehow not everyone understands still, is how dubious of an asset almost every center is in today's NBA (not the NBA of 10 or 20 years ago, today's NBA). Even someone as talented as Drummond or DeAndre Jordan has issues in crunch time because they can't hit foul shots (neither could Shaq, but he was so dominant it didn't matter too much usually). Rolling the lottery dice on one guy who can only play center is fine, but doing it with three top picks in a row is insanity IMO. Tyson Chandler in his prime can help you win a title (as he did in Dallas), two Tyson Chandlers in their prime can't play together in today's NBA. Two guys at any other position can.

And I think the argument that you take all three and see which one blossoms is flawed also, as you can't give them all anywhere near the court time they need to blossom. It's a perimeter player's league now, as best exemplified by the GS crunch-time lineup of Green/Iguodala/Barnes/Thompson/Curry. That is four guys between 6'6" and 6'8" plus Curry at 6'3", that is the lineup that won GS a title last year and is off to a historically dominant start this year. I'm not saying you don't need guys like Bogut and Ezeli and Speights for matchups over the course of a season or for stretches in the first 3 1/2 quarters. But that is the formula for winning in the NBA these days, not drafting center after center who can't shoot from outside.
 
Last edited:

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,849
Video starting to appear online of Okafor in a fight outside a bar after the game last night.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,462
I love the statement from the PR firm. Umm.... we're watching the video, try and make your lie about what happened come a bit closer to the visuals maybe?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Then they just would have wound up with a lesser player, and I don't know how anyone could argue a team would be better off doing that. Remember that once upon a time Portland didn't draft Michael Jordan because they already had Clyde Drexler. You take the better asset and figure out the rest later, because none of the guys even at the top of the draft is a given.
Portland's problem was drafting a guy who had broken his legs about 17 times by the time they drafted him. Bowie's bones were so brittle they were doing bone grafts. Had they drafted Sir Charles no one would have blinked.

Anyway, Jon's point is that Philly already had a center and that in the new pace oriented league Okafor may not be any better than an offensive roleplayer now. He might be a good one, but there's a pretty good shot that Porzingas, Mudiay, Johnson, and Winslow turn out to have more productive careers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.