Sixers Offseason Thread Part 2

[ExplosionsInDaSky]

I actually think I'd rather have Zach Lavine than Ingram because he's a really good scorer and because the Bulls front office is clueless you'd probably get at least one 1st round pick for taking on that contract, if not more than that. And I think if he comes to Philly, stays healthy and puts up his usual 25 ppg and is productive, he'd give the Sixers another go to scorer, and if he's not the perfect fit, you could probably flip him later if you need to when he rebuilds his trade value a year removed from the knee injury.

Zach Lavine + 1st and 2nd round pick > having to give up picks for Ingram.

The only way I would want LaVine is if Chicago included a pick for us having to take on his albatross of a contract. The one thing I do like about Zach LaVine is that he can play on or off the ball as opposed to Ingram who cannot. There are qualities about LaVine that make him an intriguing player, but his contract is beyond toxic and there's also a question of durability with him. He's also a terribly lazy defensive player and I'm not even sure Nick Nurse could get him to buy into playing defense. I don't think LaVine is a Nick Nurse type of player. As I said, he's got a lot of redeeming qualities on the court and he can be the best in the gym on any given night, but the bad outweighs the good with him in my opinion. Despite that, I would take him if Chicago came off of a first round pick.

[mjkvol]

Reading through the dizzying amount of speculation and proposals here and elsewhere, one thing that to me seems to get lost sometimes is the idea that we are building a team from scratch around two guys who are expected to be the linchpins of whatever is constructed here over the next 2-3 seasons at least.

If Embiid and Maxey aren't good enough to build around with solid role players to make up a 6-7 player rotation that can compete for a championship, and we need a "3rd star" type to pick up their slack, then what are we really saying about our two stars? Boston has a deep roster of good role players around two 'stars', as do Denver and Dallas. The Lakers won their bogus title with two stars and a bunch of good role players.

If we need an extra max salaried 'star' to bolster the two we already have, is there really a chance to seriously compete with a top heavy roster led by guys we aren't sure can carry the load of what will be a thin roster made up of mostly vet mins? Is the crazy idea of just tearing it down now while the value of our superstar is at its highest and we have a clean slate not the better alternative?

I'm just asking the question, not advocating for anything beyond what I've been all along, which is building a deep roster around the two guys we are ostensibly counting on to take us to the promised land.

[Kobblehead]

You're on the money.

That's why ultimately I just want to load up on big athletes that are willing shooters to put around Embiid and Maxey. They don't even have to be a star level. Guys like Miles Bridges and Kelly Oubre are more than enough, in my eyes.

This team is about two players. Embiid and Maxey.

[the_process]

Reading through the dizzying amount of speculation and proposals here and elsewhere, one thing that to me seems to get lost sometimes is the idea that we are building a team from scratch around two guys who are expected to be the linchpins of whatever is constructed here over the next 2-3 seasons at least.

If Embiid and Maxey aren't good enough to build around with solid role players to make up a 6-7 player rotation that can compete for a championship, and we need a "3rd star" type to pick up their slack, then what are we really saying about our two stars? Boston has a deep roster of good role players around two 'stars', as do Denver and Dallas. The Lakers won their bogus title with two stars and a bunch of good role players.

If we need an extra max salaried 'star' to bolster the two we already have, is there really a chance to seriously compete with a top heavy roster led by guys we aren't sure can carry the load of what will be a thin roster made up of mostly vet mins? Is the crazy idea of just tearing it down now while the value of our superstar is at its highest and we have a clean slate not the better alternative?

I'm just asking the question, not advocating for anything beyond what I've been all along, which is building a deep roster around the two guys we are ostensibly counting on to take us to the promised land.

Bingo. And deep down, we already know the answer to the question, too.

[Negrodamus]

Depending on price, I’m actually warming up to Julius Randle as an option. I think by virtue of getting traded to a team that has two established stars, he’d have to concede his alpha role. That said, he’d Hager his shots off whenever Embiid wasn’t on the court, which might be more frequent if we hope to preserve him for the playoffs. His aggressiveness driving and rebounding would fix two major issues we’ve had for years. Fill the other two spots with flamethrowers from outside and we’re in a good spot.

[the_process]

I honestly think Jimmy Butler is going to be a Sixer within the week.

Time to start worrying about Morey overpaying.

[Embiid P]

The only way that signing a third max player can work in today's NBA is if you have a bunch of young players on rookie contracts who are contributors. Sadly we don't have that luxury. Hell, even if we go the multiple role players route, it's still nice to have young contributors on rookie contracts.

[mjkvol]

Depending on price, I’m actually warming up to Julius Randle as an option. I think by virtue of getting traded to a team that has two established stars, he’d have to concede his alpha role. That said, he’d Hager his shots off whenever Embiid wasn’t on the court, which might be more frequent if we hope to preserve him for the playoffs. His aggressiveness driving and rebounding would fix two major issues we’ve had for years. Fill the other two spots with flamethrowers from outside and we’re in a good spot.

Your argument is a solid one, but he is just a guy I've always seen as a 'losing player', the kind of Tobias-esque player that perennially losing teams always seem to have. Is it a coincidence that the Knicks really gelled this year only after Randle went down?

The other galling part of trading for Randle is doing the Knicks a huge favor and giving them the space to improve on a team that is already on the way to being a serious contender, allowing them to keep Hartenstein and add more useful parts.

[ProcessDoctor]

I honestly think Jimmy Butler is going to be a Sixer within the week.

Agreed. Fingers crossed with the price though. It’s wild to think of all the times he’s been traded, this might be the most lucrative package he goes for. Morey sure as hell better make sure it isn’t though.

Two 1sts is really pushing it. The way I would look at it though is we basically traded James for Jimmy. Still can’t believe we got two 1sts for him when no one else wanted him.

[ProcessDoctor]

I have a feeling Paul George is going to be a Knick next year with Randle+ headed back to LAC.

We get Jimmy and try to round out the roster with mins. Could and should be a much better East next season.

[the_process]

I honestly think Jimmy Butler is going to be a Sixer within the week.

Agreed. Fingers crossed with the price though. It’s wild to think of all the times he’s been traded, this might be the most lucrative package he goes for. Morey sure as hell better make sure it isn’t though.

Two 1sts is really pushing it. The way I would look at it though is we basically traded James for Jimmy. Still can’t believe we got two 1sts for him when no one else wanted him.

With the 2 year max extension you have to give Jimmy after trading for him, that should count for a first right there. So two is the max I would go. And not the Clippers 2028 1st either.

[ProcessDoctor]

I honestly think Jimmy Butler is going to be a Sixer within the week.

Agreed. Fingers crossed with the price though. It’s wild to think of all the times he’s been traded, this might be the most lucrative package he goes for. Morey sure as hell better make sure it isn’t though.

Two 1sts is really pushing it. The way I would look at it though is we basically traded James for Jimmy. Still can’t believe we got two 1sts for him when no one else wanted him.

With the 2 year max extension you have to give Jimmy after trading for him, that should count for a first right there. So two is the max I would go. And not the Clippers 2028 1st either.

Agreed, I'd do #16 and one of the 2026s with protections. #16 only to create more cap space to round out the roster. We'd be left with $15 mil cap and the $8 mil room exception to get our other two starters.

Going for Ingram with a similar package would give us another $9-14 mil to spend on rounding out the roster.

[Arsenal]

If we get Jimmy Butler we have to stay over the cap so we can resign our other FAs. Trading to take him into open cap space will totally gut our depth.

Turn it into a sign and trade with Tobias and Melton as the outgoing salaries to match. Then we can resign Batum and Oubre with bird rights, plus add a guy w/MLE and another w/LLE. Potentially keep the #16 pick also to add another piece.

That would be a team with stars and depth to make a legit run at a chip.

[ProcessDoctor]

If we get Jimmy Butler we have to stay over the cap so we can resign our other FAs. Trading to take him into open cap space will totally gut our depth.

Turn it into a sign and trade with Tobias and Melton as the outgoing salaries to match. Then we can resign Batum and Oubre with bird rights, plus add a guy w/MLE and another w/LLE. Potentially keep the #16 pick also to add another piece.

That would be a team with stars and depth to make a legit run at a chip.

Why would Miami agree to that? If anything they're doing this to duck taxes and the apron.

[Kobblehead]

There are useful aspects to both Julius Randle and Zach Lavine, but make no mistake, both players are negative assets that their respective teams are actively trying to unload because they think they're better without them.

I wouldn't give up a single asset for either player and we would need to be getting a 1st round pick back to even be worth considering.

[youngcrev]

If we get Jimmy Butler we have to stay over the cap so we can resign our other FAs. Trading to take him into open cap space will totally gut our depth.

Turn it into a sign and trade with Tobias and Melton as the outgoing salaries to match. Then we can resign Batum and Oubre with bird rights, plus add a guy w/MLE and another w/LLE. Potentially keep the #16 pick also to add another piece.

That would be a team with stars and depth to make a legit run at a chip.

They don't have bird rights on Oubre since he signed a 1 year minimum. You'd need to spend that MLE on him, and then you'd be hard capped at the 1st apron, so it actually limits you more.

I think their best options in the event of adding a max cap space guy are:

1: trade 16, cut BBall, pay Batum, use remaining 8-10M on another player (or don't pay Batum and spend 16M on a single player), resign Oubre to the room

Or

2: keep 16, don't cut BBall so that he can be traded for a player making up to 15M, give Batum remaining cap space, resign Oubre to the room

[AI_Efficiency]

Reading through the dizzying amount of speculation and proposals here and elsewhere, one thing that to me seems to get lost sometimes is the idea that we are building a team from scratch around two guys who are expected to be the linchpins of whatever is constructed here over the next 2-3 seasons at least.

If Embiid and Maxey aren't good enough to build around with solid role players to make up a 6-7 player rotation that can compete for a championship, and we need a "3rd star" type to pick up their slack, then what are we really saying about our two stars? Boston has a deep roster of good role players around two 'stars', as do Denver and Dallas. The Lakers won their bogus title with two stars and a bunch of good role players.

If we need an extra max salaried 'star' to bolster the two we already have, is there really a chance to seriously compete with a top heavy roster led by guys we aren't sure can carry the load of what will be a thin roster made up of mostly vet mins? Is the crazy idea of just tearing it down now while the value of our superstar is at its highest and we have a clean slate not the better alternative?

I'm just asking the question, not advocating for anything beyond what I've been all along, which is building a deep roster around the two guys we are ostensibly counting on to take us to the promised land.

Bingo. And deep down, we already know the answer to the question, too.

Jrue Holiday made a few all star teams and signed a $135 million extension when he went to Boston. It isn’t the $40-$50 million that is being thrown around now for some of the guys we are looking at, but it isn’t too far off. Tatum had a bunch of games these playoffs where he needed other players to pick up the slack. I don’t think it is an indictment on either Joel or Maxey (who is still only 23) that they can’t win without non-trivial help (looking at you 0 points Tobias). That said, if you want to tell me that $25 million for player X and $25 million for player Y, is better than $50 million for an aging star, I can certainly be convinced haha.

[ExplosionsInDaSky]

I agree. You simply build the team around Maxey and Embiid. You certainly need a third guy, but it doesn't need to be Paul George. You'll get Maxey, Embiid, Paul George and just not enough beyond that. I'd rather field a team built around Maxey and Embiid surrounded by 7 more playable options in the playoffs. Sign Miles Bridges, brick back Oubre, Batum, and Hield. Let Council get into the rotation, bring back KJ. After that, see what the trade market offers. We have to be smart about this. Keep the draft picks too.

[Negrodamus]

Depending on price, I’m actually warming up to Julius Randle as an option. I think by virtue of getting traded to a team that has two established stars, he’d have to concede his alpha role. That said, he’d Hager his shots off whenever Embiid wasn’t on the court, which might be more frequent if we hope to preserve him for the playoffs. His aggressiveness driving and rebounding would fix two major issues we’ve had for years. Fill the other two spots with flamethrowers from outside and we’re in a good spot.

Your argument is a solid one, but he is just a guy I've always seen a 'losing player', the kind of Tobias-esque player that perennially losing teams always seem to have. Is it a coincidence that the Knicks really gelled this year only after Randle went down?

The other galling part of trading for Randle is doing the Knicks a huge favor and giving them the space to improve on a team that is already on the way to being a serious contender, allowing them to keep Hartenstein and add more useful parts.

Yea, they’re losers until they aren’t though. Wiggins, Butler, Booker, even go farther back to Garnett, Bosh. Guys put up big numbers then move to a contending situation where they fall in line.

If I’m the Knicks, I’m more concerned about Randle becoming a self-aware efficient 3rd guy more than the Sixers are concerned about giving the Knicks room to insulate their 6’0 franchise player. If Embiid were healthy or if we substituted Tobias for a healthy Julius Randle, the Knicks would have been completely fried by us.

[FireMorey]

If you could somehow afford both Derozan and Anunoby that wouldn't be a terrible fallback option. Neither are perfect players, but if you could have a lineup of Embiid, Maxey, Derozan, OG... that's pretty good. Not sure you could afford both though, it would be cutting it really tight.