SixerFan1976 Offseason Thread (Update Pg 73)

PhilasFinest · Post #1601 » by **PhilasFinest** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:25 pm

EugeneBWhitaker wrote:
PhilasFinest wrote:Chicago was the best rebounding team in the league. They did it to alot of people.

I agree with you tho chamberlain, we need to improve on the glass all around.

The sixers have bigger problems than improving rebounding.

Of course they do. IMO We need scoring, shooting, size, shot blocking and rebounding.

Post #1602 » by **HartfordWhalers** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:39 pm

PhilasFinest wrote:
EugeneBWhitaker wrote:
PhilasFinest wrote:Chicago was the best rebounding team in the league. They did it to alot of people.

I agree with you tho chamberlain, we need to improve on the glass all around.

The sixers have bigger problems than improving rebounding.

Of course they do. IMO We need scoring, shooting, size, shot blocking and rebounding.

And we still haven't resolved our mascot.

ChuckS · Post #1603 » by **ChuckS** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:42 pm

Kobblehead wrote:Eugene, you got selective memory bro. Sam requested like 5 different trades that year and by the time Doug got hired, he wasn't even on speaking terms with the front office.

As an out of towner I do not know how accurate this is, but if true it makes sense. The front office, for two years, had been screwing with Sam's minutes and giving them to Marreese Speights. It was just one more example of Stefanski's glorious dream of sacrificing good veterans to create a team of prepubescents, who would grow together into an ominous force of mediocrity. I still think that trading Dalembert was just one chapter of this wet dream.

The year prior to his trade was the worst. Sam sat at the end of games while we were playing teeny-bopper matador while being unable to stop anyone even using AK-47s. Our problems have not been acts of God, but man made. Everyone thought Sam was stupid, but if he did indeed force a trade, we might have been wrong.

I would feel better with that period beyond us, if I didn't suspect a variation of such this year with the treatment of Nocioni and the sacrificed offense of Iguodala. I've been following this team for *# (censored) years, but am gaining acceptance of the reality that I am a dinosaur who cannot understand the beauty of making a team unwatchable so as to ultimately become great. At least when I last felt this way I had the awesome 73 Knicks to help me survive. I pray that my man Melo can ultimately turn that mess around because, while good basketball is still beautiful to watch, I would prefer to see it from teams I have followed since childhood. After Miller left I had to watch Portland, and realized I was too old to stay up that late.

Chamberlainship · Post #1604 » by **Chamberlainship** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:11 pm

Better double-down when the collection plate comes around if you're praying for Melo to turn around the Knicks. (Actually, I think Amar'e is more the problem there.)

EugeneBWhitaker · Post #1605 » by **EugeneBWhitaker** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:20 pm

Chamberlainship wrote:Better double-down when the collection plate comes around if you're praying for Melo to turn around the Knicks. (Actually, I think Amar'e is more the problem there.)

Carmelo is the problem because he doesn't fit with amare, he's a ball stopping ball hog who would rather shoot 30 times to get 20 points than to create for his team mates - he has no interest in playing defense.

Amares contract was a bad idea, because of his knee issues, and lack of insurance, but Carmelo compounded that mistake.

The knicks are screwed, and as a sixer fan i love it

sixerfan1976 · Post #1606 » by **sixerfan1976** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:49 pm

in utah talks, Millsap's name has also come up. Not a deal where we would get both....but as part of the interchangeable parts. I asked about Favors and they apparently will not be moving him.

I do not think the Sixers trade up. They seem to be keying on Ross at 15 if he is there.

phil e moose · Post #1607 » by **phil e moose** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:54 pm

Millsap would be a completely uninspiring move. I can't get on board with that.

mybestfiend · Post #1608 » by **mybestfiend** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:00 pm

I like Millsap but for Iggy? Ehh.

Gsraider · Post #1609 » by **Gsraider** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:11 pm

sixerfan1976 wrote:in utah talks, Millsap's name has also come up. Not a deal where we would get both....but as part of the interchangeable parts. I asked about Favors and they apparently will not be moving him.

I do not think the Sixers trade up. They seem to be keying on Ross at 15 if he is there.

Thanks for the update and it's good to see a post from you, particularly after seeing what this thread has devolved into during your absence. Milsap for Iguodala seems pretty foolish even though Milsap is a good player. I would have some interest in him if Iguodala wasn't the piece PHI was trading, but I assume Utah is interested only in him. Too bad on Favors though.

sixerfan1976 · Post #1610 » by **sixerfan1976** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:14 pm

on vaca so been out of pocket a bit. saw how many pages were posted here and i thought someone else posted as me or something:) we asked about millsap. i wasnt sure if it was only andre trades....i shoulda asked for more clarity about that one.

Gsraider · Post #1611 » by **Gsraider** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:24 pm

sixerfan1976 wrote:on vaca so been out of pocket a bit. saw how many pages were posted here and i thought someone else posted as me or something:) we asked about millsap. i wasnt sure if it was only andre trades....i shoulda asked for more clarity about that one.

I wonder if Utah is only interested in Iguodala or if Turner might also be someone they like to fill the swing man role they need help with. As for Milsap, if Iguodala is the one going back, I would have to hope that it includes another one of Utah's big men as well or that one just does nothing for me.

EugeneBWhitaker · Post #1612 » by **EugeneBWhitaker** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:26 pm

Gsraider wrote:
sixerfan1976 wrote:on vaca so been out of pocket a bit. saw how many pages were posted here and i thought someone else posted as me or something:) we asked about millsap. i wasnt sure if it was only andre trades....i shoulda asked for more clarity about that one.

I wonder if Utah is only interested in Iguodala or if Turner might also be someone they like to fill the swing man role they need help with. As for Milsap, if Iguodala is the one going back, I would have to hope that it includes another one of Utah's big men as well or that one just does nothing for me.

If Iguodala is the piece going to Utah, the salaries don't match - but they match if you throw in Devin Harris - just saying

Is utah under the cap ?

ProcessDoctor · Post #1613 » by **ProcessDoctor** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:00 pm

sixerfan1976 wrote:in utah talks, Millsap's name has also come up. Not a deal where we would get both....but as part of the interchangeable parts. I asked about Favors and they apparently will not be moving him.

I do not think the Sixers trade up. They seem to be keying on Ross at 15 if he is there.

I don't know which part is more upsetting in this statement. I wish we could rebuild the right way and trade into the top 7 instead of getting another player whose potential is reached and has no potential of becoming a superstar.

Gsraider · Post #1614 » by **Gsraider** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:08 pm

EugeneBWhitaker wrote:If Iguodala is the piece going to Utah, the salaries don't match - but they match if you throw in Devin Harris - just saying

Is utah under the cap ?

I only meant as centerpieces, but including Harris to make salaries match doesn't exactly put me over the top either. Harris is a good, solid PG, but he's around 30 and while it would mean Philly would have excellent depth at the position, it would just mean that they are a deeper, somewhat above average team again next year. It isn't a move that excites you. Milsap is a good PF, albeit undersized (again) and Harris is a good PG, but aging and nothing special. If Philly deals Iguodala to Utah, my first preference would be to go after Kanter or Favors. I'm a little less excited about Jefferson than the first two, but would prefer him over Milsap. If Utah isn't interested, I'd just move on.

As for the cap, as far as I can tell from Hoopshype, they should be under the cap next year. Not sure what the cap is supposed to be next year, but if it is $60 million (just to pull a round number out), they would be around $11 million under the cap with 9 players under contract, assuming they don't pick up the team option on J. Tinsley.

sixerfan1976 · Post #1615 » by **sixerfan1976** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:08 pm

getting a player at 7 doesnt make you any better necessarily than a guy at 15.

The Sixer Fixer · Post #1616 » by **The Sixer Fixer** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:09 pm

Anyone in the mood for a laugh?

From a chat he's having...

Comment From Rlsd
Greatest big-man of all time? Also, do you see yourself becoming (or already) one of the premier big-men in the league? I've enjoyed watching your progression to this point. You gave it everything you had in the playoffs!

Spencer Hawes: Tim Duncan is the greatest in my opinion. He's also the player I try to emulate and hopefully with continued hard work, I can develop into one of the top centers in the league.

EugeneBWhitaker · Post #1617 » by **EugeneBWhitaker** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:10 pm

sixerfan1976 wrote:getting a player at 7 doesnt make you any better necessarily than a guy at 15.

Getting a player at 7 and at 15 gives you more building blocks for the long term.

If new ownership has handed the keys to collins, then the long term success of the franchise is doomed anyway, if they're serious about winning a title, they need to start over

if they believe this roster can win a title with slight tweaking - I feel they are deluded - especially if that tweaking involves trading your best player for lesser players

ProcessDoctor · Post #1618 » by **ProcessDoctor** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:10 pm

sixerfan1976 wrote:getting a player at 7 doesnt make you any better necessarily than a guy at 15.

I think if someone like Drummond is there at 7 then it is a big difference.

KrazySixersD · Post #1619 » by **KrazySixersD** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:11 pm

seriously... can we please use iguodala to trade up in this draft rather than do something STUPID and remain a 6 or 7 seed for years

The Sixer Fixer · Post #1620 » by **The Sixer Fixer** » Thu Jun 21, 2012 8:15 pm

sixerfan1976 wrote:getting a player at 7 doesnt make you any better necessarily than a guy at 15.

Draft history would suggest that a player you can get at 7 will have a much higher success rate than who you can get at 15. Then again, if you are saying...

Iguodala + #15 is better than #7 + #15, then yes, that could be argued for sure.