Richaun Holmes

76ers · Post #21 » by **76ers** » Sat Dec 19, 2015 7:58 pm

Or Holmes could make others expendable. It's still tbd, IMO.

joyeuxnoel · Post #22 » by **joyeuxnoel** » Sun Dec 20, 2015 4:51 pm

holmes will be a nice big off the bench

hes one of the least expendable because hes cheap and noel is going to have to be paid soon

healthy embiid + okafor. saric as 6th man, and holmes as 4th big off the bench

if i had to trade one big, its noel. he doesnt have the range to play PF on offense while okafor has shown he has the potential to slide to PF and saric is a PF

KingKyrie1 · Post #23 » by **KingKyrie1** » Sun Dec 20, 2015 5:43 pm

joyeuxnoel wrote:holmes will be a nice big off the bench

hes one of the least expendable because hes cheap and noel is going to have to be paid soon

healthy embiid + okafor. saric as 6th man, and holmes as 4th big off the bench

if i had to trade one big, its noel. he doesnt have the range to play PF on offense while okafor has shown he has the potential to slide to PF and saric is a PF

I don't understand though, Okafor if we are looking at advanced statistics is the worst big in the NBA, how is that possible?

Mik317 · Post #24 » by **Mik317** » Sun Dec 20, 2015 6:34 pm

Holmes is the only big of the group (including Embiid and perhaps Saric) that does not have to worry about fit. He's a perfect smallball 5, while his jumper isn't money, he can stretch the floor and take people off the bounce so he can play the 4, his defense and rebounding needs work but he doesn't look useless there either.

Holmes may be the only guy on the roster than can exist in multiple styles.

Ericb5 · Post #25 » by **Ericb5** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 2:01 am

KingKyrie1 wrote:
joyeuxnoel wrote:holmes will be a nice big off the bench

hes one of the least expendable because hes cheap and noel is going to have to be paid soon

healthy embiid + okafor. saric as 6th man, and holmes as 4th big off the bench

if i had to trade one big, its noel. he doesnt have the range to play PF on offense while okafor has shown he has the potential to slide to PF and saric is a PF

I don't understand though, Okafor if we are looking at advanced statistics is the worst big in the NBA, how is that possible?

It shows the folly of advanced stats on a team this devoid of talent that loses by 20-30 every night.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

dorkestra · Post #26 » by **dorkestra** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:42 pm

I really like Holmes. Makes me feel better about the KJ McDaniels deal which, up until Holmes proving he was a player, seemed like Hinkie's only bad deal to me.

OleSchool · Post #27 » by **OleSchool** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:55 pm

dorkestra wrote:I really like Holmes. Makes me feel better about the KJ McDaniels deal which, up until Holmes proving he was a player, seemed like Hinkie's only bad deal to me.

Outside of KJ opening month he stunk.

dorkestra · Post #28 » by **dorkestra** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:56 pm

OleSchool wrote:
dorkestra wrote:I really like Holmes. Makes me feel better about the KJ McDaniels deal which, up until Holmes proving he was a player, seemed like Hinkie's only bad deal to me.

Outside of KJ opening month he stunk.

true, but i still view him as decidedly better prospect than canaan. i suppose it was always going to depend on how the pick turned out.

OleSchool · Post #29 » by **OleSchool** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 2:13 pm

dorkestra wrote:
OleSchool wrote:
dorkestra wrote:I really like Holmes. Makes me feel better about the KJ McDaniels deal which, up until Holmes proving he was a player, seemed like Hinkie's only bad deal to me.

Outside of KJ opening month he stunk.

true, but i still view him as decidedly better prospect than canaan. i suppose it was always going to depend on how the pick turned out.

Defensively and highlight dunks are the only thing KJ is better at

dorkestra · Post #30 » by **dorkestra** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 2:39 pm

OleSchool wrote:
dorkestra wrote:
OleSchool wrote:
Outside of KJ opening month he stunk.

true, but i still view him as decidedly better prospect than canaan. i suppose it was always going to depend on how the pick turned out.

Defensively and highlight dunks are the only thing KJ is better at

While Canaan is capable of nothing at all unless he happens to get hot from three. Can do literally nothing else and has subpar physical tools. With McDaniels, at least there is a role for a defensive wingman, even if he doesn't put it all together. I see Canaan out of the league soon. He's not an NBA caliber player.

roma258 · Post #31 » by **roma258** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 2:39 pm

OleSchool wrote:
dorkestra wrote:
OleSchool wrote:
Outside of KJ opening month he stunk.

true, but i still view him as decidedly better prospect than canaan. i suppose it was always going to depend on how the pick turned out.

Defensively and highlight dunks are the only thing KJ is better at

Other than occasionally getting hot from the outside what does Canaan actually do well? He's an awful pointguard and major liability at 2 because he literally can't stop anyone. Canaan defenders confound me.

roma258 · Post #32 » by **roma258** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:35 pm

I think the fact that poor man's Dana Barros is our starting shooting guard explains a lot about this season.

OleSchool · Post #33 » by **OleSchool** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:49 pm

roma258 wrote:
OleSchool wrote:
dorkestra wrote:
true, but i still view him as decidedly better prospect than canaan. i suppose it was always going to depend on how the pick turned out.

Defensively and highlight dunks are the only thing KJ is better at

Other than occasionally getting hot from the outside what does Canaan actually do well? He's an awful pointguard and major liability at 2 because he literally can't stop anyone. Canaan defenders confound me.

Im not a Canaan defender, cut him today for all I care. Im just saying that it was a good trade that Hinkie made when he traded KJ.

roma258 · Post #34 » by **roma258** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:53 pm

OleSchool wrote:
roma258 wrote:
OleSchool wrote:
Defensively and highlight dunks are the only thing KJ is better at

Other than occasionally getting hot from the outside what does Canaan actually do well? He's an awful pointguard and major liability at 2 because he literally can't stop anyone. Canaan defenders confound me.

Im not a Canaan defender, cut him today for all I care. Im just saying that it was a good trade that Hinkie made when he traded KJ.

I'm gonna go ahead and disagree, but whatever. I like Richaun Holmes, hope he continues improving.

Kobblehead · Post #35 » by **Kobblehead** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:01 pm

dorkestra wrote:I really like Holmes. Makes me feel better about the KJ McDaniels deal which, up until Holmes proving he was a player, seemed like Hinkie's only bad deal to me.

K.J. is in the D-League playing (-2.1) OBPM ball for the Rio Grande Valley Vipers. 3 years and $10 million for that?

His positionally rare shotblocking was fun, but it's not like we're missing out on much. The Rockets would void that trade in a heartbeat if given the chance.

Skates · Post #36 » by **Skates** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:19 pm

Canaan can play a Jodie Meeks-ish role in the league, not saying that is a good thing, but he has gotten paid pretty well since leaving us. Holmes is a guy I really like, so that trade has worked out really well. I did not follow him in college much and have been very pleased with his play and skill and ability set.

KJ got more money going to the Rockets, but I wonder if he would have developed his game more staying with Philly or a young team. He was already leveling off or declining from his hot start last year when traded, but he has some tools and athleticism enough to make him a solid NBA rotation guy if he develops his strengths and at least becomes adequate in his weak areas. Though I guess Bill Simmons must consider KJ completely underpaid given the max deal Bill was sure he would get.

dorkestra · Post #37 » by **dorkestra** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 5:46 pm

Kobblehead wrote:
dorkestra wrote:I really like Holmes. Makes me feel better about the KJ McDaniels deal which, up until Holmes proving he was a player, seemed like Hinkie's only bad deal to me.

K.J. is in the D-League playing (-2.1) OBPM ball for the Rio Grande Valley Vipers. 3 years and $10 million for that?

His positionally rare shotblocking was fun, but it's not like we're missing out on much. The Rockets would void that trade in a heartbeat if given the chance.

Using a single advanced stats in D League in his second year is quite a random way of trying to assess someone as a prospect. The rockets would void the trade only because of Holmes. No one is taking Canaan over KJ as a prospect. That would be silly.

Kobblehead · Post #38 » by **Kobblehead** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:00 pm

dorkestra wrote:Using a single advanced stats in D League in his second year is quite a random way of trying to assess someone as a prospect.

What's random is someone getting upset about this deal and thinking it was a poor move.

He was a 1 dimensional flawed player that you had to re-sign in the offseason. It's not like he was on a team controlled deal and we still elected to move him.

dorkestra wrote:No one is taking Canaan over KJ as a prospect. That would be silly.

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm talking about the totality, here.

K. McDaniels, re-signed to a 3 year, $10 million contract

or

Isaiah Canaan and Richaun Holmes

Pretty easy to see who got the better of that deal. And it was a win at the time of the trade, as well, since we knew K.J. needed to be re-signed and hadn't shown that he could be a good player for us. Holmes is not the only reason they would void the trade. They would also void the trade because they spent $3.3 million on a D-Leaguer that's not contributing to their team.

dorkestra · Post #39 » by **dorkestra** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:12 pm

Kobblehead wrote:
dorkestra wrote:Using a single advanced stats in D League in his second year is quite a random way of trying to assess someone as a prospect.

What's random is someone getting upset about this deal and thinking it was a poor move.

He was a 1 dimensional flawed player that you had to re-sign in the offseason. It's not like he was on a team controlled deal and we still elected to move him.

dorkestra wrote:No one is taking Canaan over KJ as a prospect. That would be silly.

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm talking about the totality, here.

K. McDaniels, re-signed to a 3 year, $10 million contract

or

Isaiah Canaan and Richaun Holmes

Pretty easy to see who got the better of that deal. And it was a win at the time of the trade, as well, since we iknew K.J. needed to be re-signed and hadn't shown that he could be a good player for us.

Who is upset? I was just pointing out the flawed premise of your post. 3 million a year in today's cap environment is nothing. I would take KJ on that deal versus Canaan on his rookie deal any day. An unknown second rounder wasn't enough to make up the difference. We lost the trade at the time, but Holmes has righted that wrong for us.

Kobblehead · Post #40 » by **Kobblehead** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 6:24 pm

The only flaw here is your perspective on the trade.

'14-'15:
- K.J didn't contribute for the Rockets when they acquired him. He played 33 TOTAL minutes in 21 games. He was a playoff DNP, coaches decision.
- Canaan instantly became our best offensive player, averaging 25 minutes a night over the final 22 games.

That's a win for us.

'15-'16:
- K.J. signed a three year extension over the summer. Still can't crack the rotation. Is sent to the D-League where he's playing marginal basketball.
- Sixers draft a promising big that is performing on both ends through the early going.
- Isaiah Canaan tailed off a bit from last year, but is still one of your three best offensive players.

Margin of win on the trade is even more widened.

At what point was this ever a bad move?