RealGM

He said he doesnt really like to dunk or shoot threes, likes to be in the post. Which makes since with Hakeem being his idol .



I think he has to find a middle ground as the previous poster stated.

If Embiid tried to play like Shaq these days hed be ejected every single game. Shaq used to use his elbow as a weapon in the post. Now you arent even allowed to take advantage of a mismatch down low. If a guard switches on Embiid the guard just flops down and its an offensive foul.

Where does Embiid currently rank among all time Sixers and where would a championship this season or in the next 4 years place him? Is he on our Mount Rushmore?

Phila Tough wrote:Where does Embiid currently rank among all time Sixers and where would a championship this season or in the next 4 years place him? Is he on our Mount Rushmore?

He's #6 right now. A championship in the next 2 years, gets him to at least #4, probably #3.

LloydFree wrote:

Phila Tough wrote:Where does Embiid currently rank among all time Sixers and where would a championship this season or in the next 4 years place him? Is he on our Mount Rushmore?

He's #6 right now. A championship in the next 2 years, gets him to at least #4, probably #3.

Agreed, although I started watching the Sixers in 2002, so I haven't seen much of the greats before that. Just curious, who would your 5 players currently ahead of him be?

Phila Tough wrote:

LloydFree wrote:

Phila Tough wrote:Where does Embiid currently rank among all time Sixers and where would a championship this season or in the next 4 years place him? Is he on our Mount Rushmore?

He's #6 right now. A championship in the next 2 years, gets him to at least #4, probably #3.

Agreed, although I started watching the Sixers in 2002, so I haven't seen much of the greats before that. Just curious, who would your 5 players currently ahead of him be?

1. Wilt
2. Dr J
3. Iverson
4. Barkley
5. Moses

Embiid really doesn't have to win a Championship to get past Barkley. Just needs to play about 6-7 years.

LloydFree wrote:

Phila Tough wrote:

LloydFree wrote:He's #6 right now. A championship in the next 2 years, gets him to at least #4, probably #3.

Agreed, although I started watching the Sixers in 2002, so I haven't seen much of the greats before that. Just curious, who would your 5 players currently ahead of him be?

1. Wilt
2. Dr J
3. Iverson
4. Barkley
5. Moses

Embiid really doesn't have to win a Championship to get past Barkley. Just needs to play about 6-7 years.

Those are the obvious 5 above him on the list right now.

I think he is already better than Iverson and Barkley. He just hasn't accomplished as much. In order to become number 2 on that list he will need to win an MVP and a title

LloydFree wrote:

Phila Tough wrote:

LloydFree wrote:He's #6 right now. A championship in the next 2 years, gets him to at least #4, probably #3.

Agreed, although I started watching the Sixers in 2002, so I haven't seen much of the greats before that. Just curious, who would your 5 players currently ahead of him be?

1. Wilt
2. Dr J
3. Iverson
4. Barkley
5. Moses

Embiid really doesn't have to win a Championship to get past Barkley. Just needs to play about 6-7 years.

Barkley before Moses, Por qué.

Eyeamok wrote:

LloydFree wrote:

Phila Tough wrote:
Agreed, although I started watching the Sixers in 2002, so I haven't seen much of the greats before that. Just curious, who would your 5 players currently ahead of him be?

1. Wilt
2. Dr J
3. Iverson
4. Barkley
5. Moses

Embiid really doesn't have to win a Championship to get past Barkley. Just needs to play about 6-7 years.

Barkley before Moses, Por qué.

Longevity with the team. And Barkley is one of those players who's numbers look better years later than they did when he was playing. He probably was underappreciated, in hindsight.

Barkley's advanced numbers are bonkers. It's too bad he doesn't believe in them.

LloydFree wrote:

Eyeamok wrote:

LloydFree wrote:
1. Wilt
2. Dr J
3. Iverson
4. Barkley
5. Moses

Embiid really doesn't have to win a Championship to get past Barkley. Just needs to play about 6-7 years.

Barkley before Moses, Por qué.

Longevity with the team. And Barkley is one of those players who's numbers look better years later than they did when he was playing. He probably was underappreciated, in hindsight.

The sixers teams were just not good enough to win with Barkley.

Too bad Danny manning blew out his knees in 1994-1995 season. I think the suns were 38-10 at that point and clearly the best team in nba at that point. Charles would have gotten a title with that team. And yes. Suns were better in 1994-1995 with Danny manning as key addition and Kevin Johnson a much better player even with Barkley on the slow decline

Anybody seen any pictures of him this Summer, is he looking slimmer, or is he still about 20 pounds overweight? Thanks in advance!

TeZag wrote:Anybody seen any pictures of him this Summer, is he looking slimmer, or is he still about 20 pounds overweight? Thanks in advance!

Think he just finished or is still at NBA Africa...

Think his summer has been, working on his weight, going to China with his gf and under armour, and now NBA Africa... Guess we'll be seeing videos of him training in the next month or so.

LloydFree wrote:

Eyeamok wrote:

LloydFree wrote:
1. Wilt
2. Dr J
3. Iverson
4. Barkley
5. Moses

Embiid really doesn't have to win a Championship to get past Barkley. Just needs to play about 6-7 years.

Barkley before Moses, Por qué.

Longevity with the team. And Barkley is one of those players who's numbers look better years later than they did when he was playing. He probably was underappreciated, in hindsight.

Ok longevity for Charles. But I would place Moses over him for the simple fact that Moses helped deliver a championship to philly. And philly probably held on to Charles a lot longer than Moses because of the terrible trade sending Moses to Washington. According to Wiki they traded him for terry catlidge and some bad knees. Awful trade.

And it's funny the window of opportunity to win a title is so small. And injuries always play a large part in things. After winning a title the 76ers got swept the following season in the playoffs and then the following season Moses had some injuries. You have to go for your championship while you can. Nothing is guaranteed.

Eyeamok wrote:

LloydFree wrote:

Eyeamok wrote:
Barkley before Moses, Por qué.

Longevity with the team. And Barkley is one of those players who's numbers look better years later than they did when he was playing. He probably was underappreciated, in hindsight.

Ok longevity for Charles. But I would place Moses over him for the simple fact that Moses helped deliver a championship to philly. And philly probably held on to Charles a lot longer than Moses because of the terrible trade sending Moses to Washington. According to Wiki they traded him for terry catlidge and some bad knees. Awful trade.

And it's funny the window of opportunity to win a title is so small. And injuries always play a large part in things. After winning a title the 76ers got swept the following season in the playoffs and then the following season Moses had some injuries. You have to go for your championship while you can. Nothing is guaranteed.

No, it was Moses, Catledge(the previous years 1st round pick) and picks for Jeff Ruland and Cliff Robinson. It was a bad trade but it looked much worse than it was because Ruland immediately got hurt and never played. Ruland was a Nurkic/Horford hybrid, and was a good player. Cliff Robinson wasn't a star, but was considered a good player back then, and would be a stretch 4 today.

The reason they made the trade, was similar to the reasoning behind moving Butler for a seemingly lesser player. It was for a better fit. Moses, Doc and Barkley couldn't play together at the same time. Even back then, there wasn't enough space for three (3) low post players. All of them wanted the ball down low. Ruland was a high post Center. They traded Moses and built around Barkley, because he was much younger. They thought Ruland fit better than Moses, with Barkley.

LloydFree wrote:

Eyeamok wrote:

LloydFree wrote:Longevity with the team. And Barkley is one of those players who's numbers look better years later than they did when he was playing. He probably was underappreciated, in hindsight.

Ok longevity for Charles. But I would place Moses over him for the simple fact that Moses helped deliver a championship to philly. And philly probably held on to Charles a lot longer than Moses because of the terrible trade sending Moses to Washington. According to Wiki they traded him for terry catlidge and some bad knees. Awful trade.

And it's funny the window of opportunity to win a title is so small. And injuries always play a large part in things. After winning a title the 76ers got swept the following season in the playoffs and then the following season Moses had some injuries. You have to go for your championship while you can. Nothing is guaranteed.

No, it was Moses, Catledge(the previous years 1st round pick) and picks for Jeff Ruland and Cliff Robinson. It was a bad trade but it looked much worse than it was because Ruland immediately got hurt and never played. Ruland was a Nurkic/Horford hybrid, and was a good player. Cliff Robinson wasn't a star, but was considered a good player back then, and would be a stretch 4 today.

The reason they made the trade, was similar to the reasoning behind moving Butler for a seemingly lesser player. It was for a better fit. Moses, Doc and Barkley couldn't play together at the same time. Even back then, there wasn't enough space for three (3) low post players. All of them wanted the ball down low. Ruland was a high post Center. They traded Moses and built around Barkley, because he was much younger. They thought Ruland fit better than Moses, with Barkley.

1986 sixers trade (s) sept the sixers back for 10 years. I have no reason why they traded the number 1 pick. What is the point of picking up Roy Hinson who played same exact position as Barkley.

If they didn’t think moses and Barkley couldn’t play together. Adding Hinson didn’t help either.

Just dumb trades.

kuclas wrote:

LloydFree wrote:

Eyeamok wrote:
Ok longevity for Charles. But I would place Moses over him for the simple fact that Moses helped deliver a championship to philly. And philly probably held on to Charles a lot longer than Moses because of the terrible trade sending Moses to Washington. According to Wiki they traded him for terry catlidge and some bad knees. Awful trade.

And it's funny the window of opportunity to win a title is so small. And injuries always play a large part in things. After winning a title the 76ers got swept the following season in the playoffs and then the following season Moses had some injuries. You have to go for your championship while you can. Nothing is guaranteed.

No, it was Moses, Catledge(the previous years 1st round pick) and picks for Jeff Ruland and Cliff Robinson. It was a bad trade but it looked much worse than it was because Ruland immediately got hurt and never played. Ruland was a Nurkic/Horford hybrid, and was a good player. Cliff Robinson wasn't a star, but was considered a good player back then, and would be a stretch 4 today.

The reason they made the trade, was similar to the reasoning behind moving Butler for a seemingly lesser player. It was for a better fit. Moses, Doc and Barkley couldn't play together at the same time. Even back then, there wasn't enough space for three (3) low post players. All of them wanted the ball down low. Ruland was a high post Center. They traded Moses and built around Barkley, because he was much younger. They thought Ruland fit better than Moses, with Barkley.

1986 sixers trade (s) sept the sixers back for 10 years. I have no reason why they traded the number 1 pick. What is the point of picking up Roy Hinson who played same exact position as Barkley.

If they didn’t think moses and Barkley couldn’t play together. Adding Hinson didn’t help either.

Just dumb trades.

Trading the #1 pick is a separate issue and you'll get no argument from me except that again, Roy Hinson shot from the elbows and top of the key, which was about as "stretch" as big men were back then. He wasn't glued to the Post like DrJ and Moses were.

Either way, I would have effd that too. Because I was a Len Bias fanatic. I would have picked him #1, and Barkley might have been packing his bags. LOL

LloydFree wrote:

kuclas wrote:

LloydFree wrote:No, it was Moses, Catledge(the previous years 1st round pick) and picks for Jeff Ruland and Cliff Robinson. It was a bad trade but it looked much worse than it was because Ruland immediately got hurt and never played. Ruland was a Nurkic/Horford hybrid, and was a good player. Cliff Robinson wasn't a star, but was considered a good player back then, and would be a stretch 4 today.

The reason they made the trade, was similar to the reasoning behind moving Butler for a seemingly lesser player. It was for a better fit. Moses, Doc and Barkley couldn't play together at the same time. Even back then, there wasn't enough space for three (3) low post players. All of them wanted the ball down low. Ruland was a high post Center. They traded Moses and built around Barkley, because he was much younger. They thought Ruland fit better than Moses, with Barkley.

1986 sixers trade (s) sept the sixers back for 10 years. I have no reason why they traded the number 1 pick. What is the point of picking up Roy Hinson who played same exact position as Barkley.

If they didn’t think moses and Barkley couldn’t play together. Adding Hinson didn’t help either.

Just dumb trades.

Trading the #1 pick is a separate issue and you'll get no argument from me except that again, Roy Hinson shot from the elbows and top of the key, which was about as "stretch" as big men were back then. He wasn't glued to the Post like DrJ and Moses were.

Either way, I would have effd that too. Because I was a Len Bias fanatic. I would have picked him #1, and Barkley might have been packing his bags. LOL

1986. Sixers management probably thought their window was closed to win. Especially with Boston showing no signs of decline. (Ironically Kevin mchale injured foot the following season and bird back acted up shorted after)/rise of the pistons

They knew dr j was at the end. I mean I get the trade for jeff ruland trying to get younger. But Moses wasn’t that much older than ruland and been much healthier (31 years old vs 27 years old)

It’s like the equivalent of trading a 27 year old Joel
Embiid who would have had 2 injury plague seasons playing a combined 70 games during ages 25 and 26 for a declining age 31 shaq. U take 31 year old decling Shaq over a broken down 27 year old Joel embiid.

LloydFree wrote:

kuclas wrote:

LloydFree wrote:No, it was Moses, Catledge(the previous years 1st round pick) and picks for Jeff Ruland and Cliff Robinson. It was a bad trade but it looked much worse than it was because Ruland immediately got hurt and never played. Ruland was a Nurkic/Horford hybrid, and was a good player. Cliff Robinson wasn't a star, but was considered a good player back then, and would be a stretch 4 today.

The reason they made the trade, was similar to the reasoning behind moving Butler for a seemingly lesser player. It was for a better fit. Moses, Doc and Barkley couldn't play together at the same time. Even back then, there wasn't enough space for three (3) low post players. All of them wanted the ball down low. Ruland was a high post Center. They traded Moses and built around Barkley, because he was much younger. They thought Ruland fit better than Moses, with Barkley.

1986 sixers trade (s) sept the sixers back for 10 years. I have no reason why they traded the number 1 pick. What is the point of picking up Roy Hinson who played same exact position as Barkley.

If they didn’t think moses and Barkley couldn’t play together. Adding Hinson didn’t help either.

Just dumb trades.

Trading the #1 pick is a separate issue and you'll get no argument from me except that again, Roy Hinson shot from the elbows and top of the key, which was about as "stretch" as big men were back then. He wasn't glued to the Post like DrJ and Moses were.

Either way, I would have effd that too. Because I was a Len Bias fanatic. I would have picked him #1, and Barkley might have been packing his bags. LOL

Maybe Barkley packing his bags would not have been such a bad thing. We could have got of the Barkley train and gone in a different direction earlier. What really bothers me about Barkley is when he was here I was a big fan. But after he left I began to look at him differently. I remember Scottie Pippen basically said Barkley did not have what it took to be a lead dog. Pippen would say we have to hit the gym early to lift weights and Barkley just did not have that mentality. And then when MJ was killing the Suns in the finals. Barkley was more interested in showing the world they were friends. And on TV he always seemed to have it in for Philly. Yeah they traded you, but that happens. Anyway all that combined is why I place Moses over Barkley.

Maybe I am too in my feelings.

Well I hope Joel ellipses all of them except Dr. J. He can be on par with the Dr.

Eyeamok wrote:

LloydFree wrote:

kuclas wrote:
1986 sixers trade (s) sept the sixers back for 10 years. I have no reason why they traded the number 1 pick. What is the point of picking up Roy Hinson who played same exact position as Barkley.

If they didn’t think moses and Barkley couldn’t play together. Adding Hinson didn’t help either.

Just dumb trades.

Trading the #1 pick is a separate issue and you'll get no argument from me except that again, Roy Hinson shot from the elbows and top of the key, which was about as "stretch" as big men were back then. He wasn't glued to the Post like DrJ and Moses were.

Either way, I would have effd that too. Because I was a Len Bias fanatic. I would have picked him #1, and Barkley might have been packing his bags. LOL

Maybe Barkley packing his bags would not have been such a bad thing. We could have got of the Barkley train and gone in a different direction earlier. What really bothers me about Barkley is when he was here I was a big fan. But after he left I began to look at him differently. I remember Scottie Pippen basically said Barkley did not have what it took to be a lead dog. Pippen would say we have to hit the gym early to lift weights and Barkley just did not have that mentality. And then when MJ was killing the Suns in the finals. Barkley was more interested in showing the world they were friends. And on TV he always seemed to have it in for Philly. Yeah they traded you, but that happens. Anyway all that combined is why I place Moses over Barkley.

Maybe I am too in my feelings.

Well I hope Joel ellipses all of them except Dr. J. He can be on par with the Dr.

Barkley was a lead dog all throughout his prime. Pippen saying that stuff is sour grapes to me.

He was an MVP officially in 93, and was very close a couple of other times.