Ed Snider talking Sixers and Flyers on Comcast Now

[dond]

Man, Skates.....that was a great post. I think you nailed it.

Let's just hope Stephanski keeps rolling along and builds the team however HE feels it should be built. Sometimes an overriding philosophy blinds you to opportunities. I really hope Stephanski is leaving himself open to any number of possibilities

The flip-side of staying with an overriding philosophy can turn out to be ... THE KNICKS ! A mishmash of talent.

If the Sixer's overriding philosophy is to acquire talented, young (low salary) , good character players who play and do not try to coach ... I am all for it. No superstars ... just hard working, hungry players eager to learn and improve.

They are just about there. One or two more players and they are ready.

[bech01a1]

As a Sixers fan, I despise Ed Snider.

[The Guilty Party]

They are just about there. One or two more players and they are ready.

In the NBA, couldn't just about every team say that they are 1 or 2 players away? I mean, if you pair 1 or 2 solid players with Jefferson, Foye, and Brewer.... the Wolves could actually contend for something but it depends on who the 1 or 2 players are. Same thing with Memphis, Miami, the Clippers and just about every other team in the NBA.

Actually... the more I think about Snider's comments... the more I despise him. Snider is apparently not interested in players like LeBron James, Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudemire, and so on. Huh? The NBA is built on superstars and those superstars winning championships. He points out the 1 team in the last 30 years to win a championship without a true superstar and states that he wants to model his team after them and not the other 29 teams.

Ed Snider is a jackass.

[Sixers24]

-= original quote snipped =-



Well, you may be rewriting history a little there ...

The way I recall it ... is that Croce wanted a bigger piece of the pie ... actually infringing on Snider's role and Snider said ... Thanks but no thanks ... so Croce resigned.

This is true.

And Ed Snider is a jackass. Continuing to take veiled shots at Iverson is pathetic.

And does anyone hate the "build like the Detroit Pistons" comments/aspirations? And I'm not just singling out Snider and the Sixers here. You're talking about a franchise that got extremely lucky (wrong word? maybe) with an up-to-that-point NBA journeyman in Chauncey Billups. You could argue that they were lucky or fortunate to have the Grant Hill trade and the Tayshaun Prince draft turn out as well as they did. Ditto for the Rasheed Wallace deal, which, by the way, was a 'push the chips into the middle of the table' type move that people forget Detroit made. Let's not even mention that the Pistons completely blew the #2 pick in the draft in what was arguably the best Top 5 class ever or that they have been successful during one of the worst runs of a conference in history. Or, you know, that they are the complete exception to the traditional NBA champions of the last, I don't know, 30 years.

I'll take the luck thing; you need that to win games and championships. But the way people this thing out is that it was a carefully crafted plan from the start. What it evolved into is certainly impressive. But you can't simply say "we want to be the Pistons." It's unreasonable. You want to win Championships. Period. And you'll do the smart moves to get yourself there.

[Sixers24]

Hmm, I just realized you could make the case for Miller being our Billups, the Iverson trade being our Grant Hill trade, and Thad being our Prince (all a stretch...but go with it).

Still...I hate the build like the Pistons thing. And I really hope we don't draft Darko Jr.

[dond]

Ed Snider is a jackass.

Well, I guess I am from a different era but I really do not get the name-calling stuff. From my perspective it diminishes the quality of your message. You disagree with Ed Snider ... fine ... but when you throw in the name calling, it takes away from your credibility ... in my opinion and probably in the opinion of numerous others who read but do not post on this forum. I will probably be attacked from some of the more vocal posters who also engage in that sort of thing ... but it needs to be said.

[The Guilty Party]

Credibility? This is a message board... I'm not all that concerned about my credibility here. As always, I appreciate you getting on your soap box to lecture us inferior folk.

[dond]

Well, I like what the Sixer management has done with the moving AI to another team that now wishes he was not on their team and releasing Webber, who is now retired and the draft choices they have made and their choice of coaches. I could not be more please with it all.

I also have full confidence that they will continue making the best choices they can in an effort to bring a championship to the city of Philadelphia through the Seventy-Sixers. And, I/We ... do not have to do anything except enjoy the fruits of their labor. It is going to happen ...

[CPops57]

I don't understand the hate for the Piston's model.

If you're not able to acquire a truly dominant big man, isn't the next best strategy to put together a starting lineup with 5 above average players that combine to play tough defense and team basketball?

[Salvistine24]

its funny bc im a huge hockey fan too and while hes always lurking around the locker room, ed has always been hands-off with bobby clark and now gm paul holmgren

and might i say, holmgren has done an incredible job taking an older, worse team than the sixers were and morphing them into a playoff team that looks to contend for the long haul...and im sure if ovechkin or crosby or igilna or malkin was available ed would be signing the check to get them to philly

i think hes just got this lingering iverson fear which he shouldnt have considering iverson put this team on his back for a decade and brough bball back to philly...i think its real classless to keep portraying iverson as this selfish malcontent who did nothing for this town...he wasnt webber

[dond]

Credibility? This is a message board... I'm not all that concerned about my credibility here.

Well, that was unexpected. I don't even know how to respond to that.

As always, I appreciate you getting on your soap box to lecture us inferior folk.

I know you don't like to be scolded ... nobody does. As you say this is a message board so who cares ... but like I said ... I am from a different era where things matter ... and people take pride in how they are perceived. And ... I think you know that I am absolutely correct ... you just don't like to hear it.

[The Guilty Party]

I don't disagree with you, dond but I do not credit Ed Snider with the good moves that have been done to fix this situation. I don't believe blame Snider for the bad roster decisions that have been made in the past and so why should I praise him for the team's turnaround?

If you say that it was Snider who put the right people in place to make those decisions, I would also disagree since it was Peter Luukko who initiated the talks that brought Stefanski here. Point being... Ed Snider has little to nothing to do with the actual acquisition of players so that is why his statements about what kind of team the Sixers are building makes no sense.

Is Stefanski going to turn down a trade offer for Amare? If Orlando calls and offers us Howard... do we say "Sorry Magic, we don't want a superstar"??? Do you see how silly his statements are??

[Sixers24]

I don't understand the hate for the Piston's model.

If you're not able to acquire a truly dominant big man, isn't the next best strategy to put together a starting lineup with 5 above average players that combine to play tough defense and team basketball?

The next best strategy is to make smart draft choices, cap-savvy moves, and maintain player development year to year and versatility within your roster. If that's the Pistons model, then fine, call it the Pistons model. I'd simply call it smart.

[STChaser]

I agree with CPops on this one. I also may be in the minority here but I truly believe we are two players away from being serious contenders - and I'm talking "championship" here. Those two players are a true PF in the Al Horford mold and a backup 5 to eventually take over the role from Sam. We have an exceptional PG in Miller. We'll have an exceptional SG in Iguodala once Thaddeus is moved to SF to make room for our PF. And we have a very serviceable 5 in Sam. We also have a great spark off the bench in Lou Williams and a matchup nightmare for many teams when he's on the floor. If Carney can continue to hit the 3, he'll play a pivotal role for this team as well. But the two most glaring shortcomings on this team is our lack of a PF and a lack of another serviceable big to bring off the bench behind Sam. This draft COULD potentially get us one of the two with all the PF's who should be available with our pick. If not, acquire one via FA and draft the backup 5 - guys like Hibbert or Thabeet may be availabel with our pick as well. With DiLeo at the helm, I have 100% faith in him that we'll wind up getting another surprising talent.

STChaser

[The Guilty Party]

I don't understand the hate for the Piston's model.

If you're not able to acquire a truly dominant big man, isn't the next best strategy to put together a starting lineup with 5 above average players that combine to play tough defense and team basketball?

There's no hate for the Pistons model but the Pistons won the championship with 4 All-Star players so it's not like they were a bunch of mediocre players. The problem with the Pistons model is that they won one championship without a true superstar and over the past 30 years, no other team has done it.

The odds are not in our favor to build that way and I know some Piston players have said that they believe Rasheed Wallace is a superstar since he is one of the most talented players in the league.

By the way, Wallace is a highly paid all-star player who has repeatedly had run-ins with Flip Saunders... doesn't he go against what Snider is talking about building here?

[Sixers24]

Not to mention that the only championship to ever be won without a dominant frontcourt (at least dating back to anything relevant) was done by a guy named MJ. So color me skeptical about wanting a dominant frontcourt, and note that it is slightly different than simply saying 1 dominant big man.

[STChaser]

There's no hate for the Pistons model but the Pistons won the championship with 4 All-Star players so it's not like they were a bunch of mediocre players. The problem with the Pistons model is that they won one championship without a true superstar and over the past 30 years, no other team has done it.

Ok, but look at the flip side of that argument. Look how many teams are out there who did have superstars and still had nothing to show for it. Toronto with Vince Carter won squat. Orlando with Tracy McGrady won squat. Philly with Iverson won squat. Kobe without Shaq won squat. Point is, while the "build a team without a superstar" model hasn't shown a whole lot of success outside of Detroit, neither has the "build a team WITH a superstar" model. The real intangibles that win championships are things like chemistry, attitude, willingness of a team to buy into a system, leadership, etc., etc. For every team you can show me that lacks a star and is mediocre, I can show you a team WITH a star that is still mediocre.

STChaser

[The Guilty Party]

I'll make this easy, STChaser....

other than the 2004 Detroit Pistons, what team in the past 30n years has won without a superstar? There isn't one.

Also, Ed Snider said he's against having a highly paid player who conflicts with the coaching staff and front office. Well, doesn't Rasheed Wallace meet that criteria? So when Ed talks about the Pistons' model, he's really talking about them minus Rasheed Wallace and the last time I checked, they didn't win a championship without him.

[STChaser]

TGP,
I get what you're saying but on the flip side, you can pretty much say that 90% of the teams in the NBA have one "superstar" on their roster. So the idea of any team winning without one is almost impossible. As others pointed out, you could even argue that Sheed is a "superstar" or at least borderline one. How many teams around the league are without a "superstar" nowadays? Off the top of my head, you've got Lebron, Kobe, Iverson, Carmello, Paul, Duncan, Shaq, McGrady, Durrant (soon to be labelled a superstar), etc., etc. The league has taken on the marketing strategy of assigning at least one "superstar" to every team - at least in name. At some point in the near future, Iguodala will be labelled our "superstar". Point is, it's hard to argue that no team outside of Detroit has ever won a championship without a "superstar" when almost every team has one.

Also, Ed Snider said he's against having a highly paid player who conflicts with the coaching staff and front office. Well, doesn't Rasheed Wallace meet that criteria? So when Ed talks about the Pistons' model, he's really talking about them minus Rasheed Wallace and the last time I checked, they didn't win a championship without him

.

I agree with Ed on this matter in terms of having a team without the prima donna "superstar" who expects special treatment, etc. I'd rather have players like Iguodala, Lou, Thaddeus, etc., who are all willing to step up when their number is called and all know their roles within the team, than have one player who thinks he is the organization. I'm done with that tired, worn-out model. Been there, done that - it didn't work!

However, you have a legitimate point that Sheed does qualify as one of those players so in that sense, Ed is wrong in including him in the comparison. What I'd rather have is a PF like Horford, Boozer, or Okafor - a good character type who would fit right in with our current squad - and willing to listen to Cheeks and buy into the system. Not all "superstars" are prima donnas like Kobe and AI. There are the Duncans out there who are willing to put their ego aside for the sake of the team. This is the type of character we need manning the PF spot next season.


STChaser

[The Guilty Party]

STChaser.... I agree with you 100% on your last post. Your right, because of marketing and other things... there are now more superstars in the league and I'm sure Iguodala will eventually qualify as this. It's this reason that makes what Ed said so ridiculous.

I think we can all agree that we would like a balanced team with as few egos as possible. There's nothing wrong with wanting that but the Pistons did have egos and in fact, they had one of the biggest ones in the league.

Either way, I really don't care what model Ed wants to build after as long as that model is a championship one and we can get there.