Welcome Paul George!

[phillynative]

He's been worse than the infamous Tobi which is right on cue for the cursed franchise.

[phillynative]

Clippers fan here, Congrats on getting Paul George. Great shooter and defender but horrible passer. PG will be fine as long as he's not running pick and rolls with Embiid. A lot of what Dan Dikach said was true back in 2017 video below. I had to witness it as a Clipper fan to believe it.

Watch on YouTube

PG proving this guy right so far

https://youtube.com/shorts/UFW8AvOpajE?si=yom2rVJelbur8Et7

And the bust was so right I think he read the script before this season came out

[Peak Brunson]

Fans of a team always try to only see the positives and ignore almost all the negatives when their team signs a player that has a good amount of hype, it's like they try to convince themselves about how good said player will be even if deep down they don't believe it.
Here we had this Clipper fan that was only telling the truth and nobody even cared to listen to his arguments.
I don't understand how signing an aging 34 years old max player to a multi year max contract could be seen as good or even decent business. And the thing is, most fans liked the idea back then, as seen in this same thread. Furthermore, it's not like Paul George was a Top player in the league, he was a good player, but never THAT good. So if signing a player like Giannis at 34 years old to a 4-year max deal could be seen as bad business, doing that with George is just ridiculous. There are deals that don't even need hindsight at all to know how bad they are, this is one of them.

[zaz102]

Fans of a team always try to only see the positives and ignore almost all the negatives when their team signs a player that has a good amount of hype, it's like they try to convince themselves about how good said player will be even if deep down they don't believe it.
Here we had this Clipper fan that was only telling the truth and nobody even cared to listen to his arguments.
I don't understand how signing an aging 34 years old max player to a multi year max contract could be seen as good or even decent business. And the thing is, most fans liked the idea back then, as seen in this same thread. Furthermore, it's not like Paul George was a Top player in the league, he was a good player, but never THAT good. So if signing a player like Giannis at 34 years old to a 4-year max deal could be seen as bad business, doing that with George is just ridiculous. There are deals that don't even need hindsight at all to know how bad they are, this is one of them.

First, there are a lot of fans on here that do not only see the positives and did not like the PG signing.

Second, I think there are very few fans who thought PG would be great for all four years.

Third, he had a very good season this year. Last year's PG and Embiid would have had this team as a contender.

Fourth, the other options were overpaying assets for players that were not as good as PG last year (Ingram, Butler) or overpaying for role player like the Warriors did.

Fifth, I would argue with as terrible as it's been, I'm not sure if PG is seen as the negative contract as fans see him as yet. Per reports, the Warriors were inquiring about PG and I presume were going offer a similar package to what the Heat got for Butler.

I guess you could argue they should've went the Warriors route, but even they ended up trading those role players for an aging "star" who they extended. The truth is, it doesn't really matter what they did as long as Embiid can't play full strength and I'm just happy they didn't trade more assets for this mess.

[ExplosionsInDaSky]

Fans of a team always try to only see the positives and ignore almost all the negatives when their team signs a player that has a good amount of hype, it's like they try to convince themselves about how good said player will be even if deep down they don't believe it.
Here we had this Clipper fan that was only telling the truth and nobody even cared to listen to his arguments.
I don't understand how signing an aging 34 years old max player to a multi year max contract could be seen as good or even decent business. And the thing is, most fans liked the idea back then, as seen in this same thread. Furthermore, it's not like Paul George was a Top player in the league, he was a good player, but never THAT good. So if signing a player like Giannis at 34 years old to a 4-year max deal could be seen as bad business, doing that with George is just ridiculous. There are deals that don't even need hindsight at all to know how bad they are, this is one of them.

Wow! Mad props to you for seeing the truth while the rest of us are completely blind to what's really going on! I mean...Hell....ALL of us on here thought Paul George should have been a starter for the all star team! We thought for sure he would be in the running for MVP. Thanks for helping us all see the other side.
I would only trade him for another superstar like Drew Eubanks at this point, but again....You've shown us all the light.

[Skates]

Waiting impatiently for the future Paul George Appreciation thread…also remembering that we drafted Evan Turner over PG when it might have mattered.

[Peak Brunson]

There is this weird premise that our only option was overpaying for George or for some other old "star", but that's not the case at all.
If the options are bad, then you just don't do anything, it's that simple. An ever-injured player that never got past the second round in Embiid is not worth mortgaging your future. Seriously, just not signing Paul George and just keep running Embiid + Maxey would've been perfectly fine, because there was no need to do anything at all.
It's not about chasing old media hyped "stars", it's about trying to find your Norman Powells that should be the priority.

[zaz102]

There is this weird premise that our only option was overpaying for George or for some other old "star", but that's not the case at all.
If the options are bad, then you just don't do anything, it's that simple. An ever-injured player that never got past the second round in Embiid is not worth mortgaging your future. Seriously, just not signing Paul George and just keep running Embiid + Maxey would've been perfectly fine, because there was no need to do anything at all.
It's not about chasing old media hyped "stars", it's about trying to find your Norman Powells that should be the priority.

Your point is weak. They found Yabusele and McCain (and Edwards) this year. If you swapped PG with Norman Powell this team would still be bad. To borrow a line from The Simpsons, Embiid is the cause of and solution to all the Sixers problem.

[Peak Brunson]

The point is the difference in the contract. One mortgages your future, the other does not. For teams with not good player FA attraction, the max money route is not a good strategy, it is much better to search for less coveted players with much lower contracts and hope for the best.
We just did Embiid FOMO here, that's not a good strategy, just doing something for the sake of "we need to try to win with Embiid or bust".

[zaz102]

The point is the difference in the contract. One mortgages your future, the other does not. For teams with not good player FA attraction, the max money route is not a good strategy, it is much better to search for less coveted players with much lower contracts and hope for the best.
We just did Embiid FOMO here, that's not a good strategy, just doing something for the sake of "we need to try to win with Embiid or bust".

But how could it be considered mortgaging the future when Golden State was reportedly trying to trade for him and they traded no assets for him. They apparently could've gotten off the contract if they wanted to.

[Ferry Avenue]

Fans of a team always try to only see the positives and ignore almost all the negatives when their team signs a player that has a good amount of hype, it's like they try to convince themselves about how good said player will be even if deep down they don't believe it.
Here we had this Clipper fan that was only telling the truth and nobody even cared to listen to his arguments.
I don't understand how signing an aging 34 years old max player to a multi year max contract could be seen as good or even decent business. And the thing is, most fans liked the idea back then, as seen in this same thread. Furthermore, it's not like Paul George was a Top player in the league, he was a good player, but never THAT good. So if signing a player like Giannis at 34 years old to a 4-year max deal could be seen as bad business, doing that with George is just ridiculous. There are deals that don't even need hindsight at all to know how bad they are, this is one of them.

It all revolves around the "we just need one more piece to build around Embiid" fantasy. This has been going on for years. Anybody with a name is "the missing piece."

[FlyingArrow]

Fans of a team always try to only see the positives and ignore almost all the negatives when their team signs a player that has a good amount of hype, it's like they try to convince themselves about how good said player will be even if deep down they don't believe it.
Here we had this Clipper fan that was only telling the truth and nobody even cared to listen to his arguments.
I don't understand how signing an aging 34 years old max player to a multi year max contract could be seen as good or even decent business. And the thing is, most fans liked the idea back then, as seen in this same thread. Furthermore, it's not like Paul George was a Top player in the league, he was a good player, but never THAT good. So if signing a player like Giannis at 34 years old to a 4-year max deal could be seen as bad business, doing that with George is just ridiculous. There are deals that don't even need hindsight at all to know how bad they are, this is one of them.

It all revolves around the "we just need one more piece to build around Embiid" fantasy. This has been going on for years. Anybody with a name is "the missing piece."

Usually, Embiid himself is the missing piece. He's never been 100% for the playoffs. This year, he's not been healthy all year.

[Ferry Avenue]

Fans of a team always try to only see the positives and ignore almost all the negatives when their team signs a player that has a good amount of hype, it's like they try to convince themselves about how good said player will be even if deep down they don't believe it.
Here we had this Clipper fan that was only telling the truth and nobody even cared to listen to his arguments.
I don't understand how signing an aging 34 years old max player to a multi year max contract could be seen as good or even decent business. And the thing is, most fans liked the idea back then, as seen in this same thread. Furthermore, it's not like Paul George was a Top player in the league, he was a good player, but never THAT good. So if signing a player like Giannis at 34 years old to a 4-year max deal could be seen as bad business, doing that with George is just ridiculous. There are deals that don't even need hindsight at all to know how bad they are, this is one of them.

It all revolves around the "we just need one more piece to build around Embiid" fantasy. This has been going on for years. Anybody with a name is "the missing piece."

Usually, Embiid himself is the missing piece. He's never been 100% for the playoffs. This year, he's not been healthy all year.

The Sixers are 5-3 in playoff games in which Embiid didn't play during his career.

The correlation between Embiid's number of points in playoff games and the Sixers' scoring margin, game-by-game during the playoffs in Embiid's career, is a mere 0.23. 95% of the variance in the Sixers' scoring margin in the playoffs during Embiid's career is unrelated to Embiid's scoring.

If you measure Embiid's "health" during the playoffs in terms of his scoring performance, the Sixers' playoff performance as a team during Embiid's career has very little to do with his health.

When Embiid scores more in the playoffs and thereby demonstrates his relative "good health," the Sixers' performance as a team in the playoffs isn't affected by it to a significant degree. They're about as likely to lose as they are to win in the playoffs when Embiid is in "good health."

[zaz102]

So I think Jokic has been the best player for the last six years or so and a much better player than Embiid.

That being said, if you take the one championship run out and his playoff record is 28-32 whereas Embiid's playoff record is 29-30. No matter how good one player is, it's not necessarily easy to build a championship team.

It does look like Embiid's time has might have run out, but it's not as simple as some make it out to be.

[phillynative]

Fans of a team always try to only see the positives and ignore almost all the negatives when their team signs a player that has a good amount of hype, it's like they try to convince themselves about how good said player will be even if deep down they don't believe it.
Here we had this Clipper fan that was only telling the truth and nobody even cared to listen to his arguments.
I don't understand how signing an aging 34 years old max player to a multi year max contract could be seen as good or even decent business. And the thing is, most fans liked the idea back then, as seen in this same thread. Furthermore, it's not like Paul George was a Top player in the league, he was a good player, but never THAT good. So if signing a player like Giannis at 34 years old to a 4-year max deal could be seen as bad business, doing that with George is just ridiculous. There are deals that don't even need hindsight at all to know how bad they are, this is one of them.

It all revolves around the "we just need one more piece to build around Embiid" fantasy. This has been going on for years. Anybody with a name is "the missing piece."

Sounds like a made up fantasy to me

[Iverson Armband]

So I think Jokic has been the best player for the last six years or so and a much better player than Embiid.

That being said, if you take the one championship run out and his playoff record is 28-32 whereas Embiid's playoff record is 29-30. No matter how good one player is, it's not necessarily easy to build a championship team.

It does look like Embiid's time has might have run out, but it's not as simple as some make it out to be.

You can’t just “take out a championship run”. Careers can be defined by one run sometimes.

Embiid has never got out of the SECOND ROUND. If he had even one finals appearance, we’re likely not having a lot of these conversations today regardless of how screwed up everything is.

[zaz102]

So I think Jokic has been the best player for the last six years or so and a much better player than Embiid.

That being said, if you take the one championship run out and his playoff record is 28-32 whereas Embiid's playoff record is 29-30. No matter how good one player is, it's not necessarily easy to build a championship team.

It does look like Embiid's time has might have run out, but it's not as simple as some make it out to be.

You can’t just “take out a championship run”. Careers can be defined by one run sometimes.

Embiid has never got out of the SECOND ROUND. If he had even one finals appearance, we’re likely not having a lot of these conversations today regardless of how screwed up everything is.

I'm not taking it out at all. Jokic's legacy is much greater than Embiid's and he is the better player. My point is that even the best players can struggle in the playoffs as well and need help and sometimes just the right situation.

The problem is Embiid is made of glass and it looks like his time to be healthy enough for a run like Jokic has run out.

[Iverson Armband]

So I think Jokic has been the best player for the last six years or so and a much better player than Embiid.

That being said, if you take the one championship run out and his playoff record is 28-32 whereas Embiid's playoff record is 29-30. No matter how good one player is, it's not necessarily easy to build a championship team.

It does look like Embiid's time has might have run out, but it's not as simple as some make it out to be.

You can’t just “take out a championship run”. Careers can be defined by one run sometimes.

Embiid has never got out of the SECOND ROUND. If he had even one finals appearance, we’re likely not having a lot of these conversations today regardless of how screwed up everything is.

I'm not taking it out at all. Jokic's legacy is much greater than Embiid's and he is the better player. My point is that even the best players can struggle in the playoffs as well and need help and sometimes just the right situation.

The problem is Embiid is made of glass and it looks like his time to be healthy enough for a run like Jokic has run out.

No doubt. I think it’s a combination of both though. In addition to being totally unreliable physically, I don’t think Joel has the chops to perform when the lights are the brightest. I don’t think you can win if he’s your best player. That doesn’t mean he’s not a good player, but that’s why he’s not a great player. Some guys thrive off those moments (see Jalen Hurts) and some guys wilt.

All that being said, he’s played with worse choke artists than himself in Harden and Simmons which is hard to do. But I don’t think it’s as easy as saying if Embiid had a prime Jamal Murray like Jokic he’d have a championship too.

[Jhawk03]

A Paul George thread turns into a discussion about Joel

I just want Paul George to work, when I plug him into my controller, I want him to be Paul George and not the worst verision of himself career wise right after giving him the biggest contract of his career.

[Peak Brunson]

A Paul George thread turns into a discussion about Joel

I just want Paul George to work, when I plug him into my controller, I want him to be Paul George and not the worst verision of himself career wise right after giving him the biggest contract of his career.

But that's the thing, there is no incentive for him to do that.
-He is 34 years old, very close to retirement age
-He already got his big bag that won't get anymore when he is 38.

He literally has no incentive to play better. That's why you don't hand out these contracts to 34 years old players.