Tom Moore 2.0

[Mahorn at the 4]

To make this team relevant again, it is going to take some creative thinking. Therefore, Stefanski needs to take this low risk, high reward move...

Ed needs to sign Allen Iverson. Ok, I will pause while some get happy and a whle lot more curse me. haha

But, hear me out.

Iverson is getting very little interest. He should be humbled. My plan is to bring him in with a plan. It would be made clear that we want him hear, but he would have to follow the company line. He is shoot first, but our 2 is a good distributor, this would balance out somewhat.

So, we get Iverson in hear on a make good deal. He buys in and starts out well. Then, we trade him to a contender at the deadline. We use this scenario to our advantage. Maybe even package Green and Dalembert with him. We use this opportunity to add young players and cap space.

In the mean time, we put butts in the seats and generate buzz. Worst case scenario, he acts up and gets cut and his career is likely done.

Thoughts?

[tmoore]

To make this team relevant again, it is going to take some creative thinking. Therefore, Stefanski needs to take this low risk, high reward move...

Ed needs to sign Allen Iverson. Ok, I will pause while some get happy and a whle lot more curse me. haha

But, hear me out.

Iverson is getting very little interest. He should be humbled. My plan is to bring him in with a plan. It would be made clear that we want him hear, but he would have to follow the company line. He is shoot first, but our 2 is a good distributor, this would balance out somewhat.

So, we get Iverson in hear on a make good deal. He buys in and starts out well. Then, we trade him to a contender at the deadline. We use this scenario to our advantage. Maybe even package Green and Dalembert with him. We use this opportunity to add young players and cap space.

In the mean time, we put butts in the seats and generate buzz. Worst case scenario, he acts up and gets cut and his career is likely done.

Thoughts?

I don't think it's a good idea or it's going to happen. Iverson doesn't want to come off the bench and you can't pair him with Lou Williams in the starting backcourt because they're too small. The Sixers want to see what Williams and Jrue Holiday can do, especially Williams, and having Iverson might not allow you to find that out. The Sixers aren't going to win anything (such as a playoff series, if they make the postseason) in 2009-10, with or without Iverson. Also, attendance was consistently dropping when Iverson was traded to the Nuggets.

[BobbyJones]

Tom, thanks for being the voice of reason. Some posters just don't want to accept that Allen Iverson would be a step in the wriong direction for this team, as it is currently constructed.

[sweetlou23]

That statement says a lot about how ed feels about lou. Basically he saying that lou will be on a short leash and that he is not going to be given a legit shot. He is going to continue to be hamstrung. Ed is showing very little confidence in Lou's ability to step up. If Lou plays it safe, like i think the sixers want him to, he will be undermining his own career for a team that is really not going to far this year anyway. The sixers have always looked at him as a spark off of the bench, when in reality he should have been starting over green. Eventually, he will be relegated to bench duty. And Jrue will start. If I'm Lou, i would not be a willing participant in my own demise. Its going to be interesting how lou plays it. Are they expecting only 14 pts and 6 assists out of Lou? If that is his production he is not playing to his strengths and he is going to wind up on the bench.

What's with the Lou Williams obsession?

He's going to have adapt to the starting PG position, and there are questions as to whether he can do that.

And what do you mean "only 14 pts and 6 assists"? Those would be pretty solid numbers for him. That's a huge increase in his assist total, and I would expect him to be shooting the ball at a lower rate in a starting role rather than as a spark off the bench.

Those are sorry for numbers for a player of his talent level. He averaged 12 off of the bench. It should be much easier to get assists when you are playing with four players who can put the ball in the basket. Also, you would not be satisfied with 14 pts from Iggy, Brand, or thad. Why would you be satisfied with those numbers for lou? I understand the obsession with traditional points. I don't agree with it, but i understand it. If lou is to maximize his potential in this league he has to exploit his natural scoring ability and use it to elevate other aspects of his game. He has to be aggressive, and if he is only scoring 14 points in 30 plus minutes a game he is not being aggressive enough. I think what this boils down to is that people are really underestimating what lou is capable of. I have a question for you, what do you think his ceiling is?

[tk76]

Iverson is getting very little interest. He should be humbled.

The rest of what you said made sense- but what have you seen in Iverson that makes you think he would be "humbled?" He is one of the proudest competetors in the NBA, and not always in a good way. If anything he is going to want and show everyone they are wrong.

To Iverson that likely means show them he can be the starting centerpiece that carries a team, not that he can be a selfless team player. I'm guessing he tried the selfless route in Denver and thinks he was burned by that experience.

I think Iverson is more angry than humble right now. An angry Iverson (especially if he thinks the team who signs him is stealing his services with a low-ball offer and not 'respecting' him) is not the Iverson you want on your team.

[tk76]

I have a question for you, what do you think his ceiling is?

Ceiling as a scorer is high if he stops settling for jumpers. People are suggesting he will shoot 35% from 3pt while last year he was essentially the worst high volume 3 pt shooter in the NBA. His 2pt jump shot 37% was also bottom 1/3 in the league.

If you are a bad jump shooter you can adapt by shooting less jumpers. Rondo for example, took 56% of his shots inside. That is how they maintained good FG% despite being poor jump shooters.

Lou, on the other hand, took a ton of jumpers. 26% of his shots were 3pters, while another 38% were 2pt jumpers (only 35% were inside shots. Lou can blow by his man at will, and yet 2/3rds of the time he settles for jumpers- which statistically he is horrible at. He needs to become a better shooter or realize he is a lousy jump shooter.

If Lou being 'unleashed' this year means he continues to shoot a ton of jumpers at a low percentage then that would be bad for the team. If he learns that his main talent is breaking his man down and getting into the lane then he can be an impact player.

whether Lou has the right instincts to be a good lead guard is another issue entirely. We will have to see if he has learned to stop making jump passes and dribbling himself into traps. He should try to patern his game after Tony Parker. Another scoring guard who can penetrate the lane at will and has a high usage rate. The main difference being Parker knows what shots he can make, and has a high shooting percentage because he does not settle for low percentage jumpers.

[tmoore]

Stefanski on not having a traditional point guard in Eddie Jordan's Princeton offense: "It's definitely easier. How they adapt is going to be the question. We’ll have to wait and see. Coach Jordan isn’t as concerned at not having a true point guard, but we’ll see how that progresses."

[youngcrev]

Those are sorry for numbers for a player of his talent level. He averaged 12 off of the bench. It should be much easier to get assists when you are playing with four players who can put the ball in the basket. Also, you would not be satisfied with 14 pts from Iggy, Brand, or thad. Why would you be satisfied with those numbers for lou? I understand the obsession with traditional points. I don't agree with it, but i understand it. If lou is to maximize his potential in this league he has to exploit his natural scoring ability and use it to elevate other aspects of his game. He has to be aggressive, and if he is only scoring 14 points in 30 plus minutes a game he is not being aggressive enough. I think what this boils down to is that people are really underestimating what lou is capable of. I have a question for you, what do you think his ceiling is?

But they aren't sorry numbers for a player of his talent level. His talent level is not inordinately high. He'll be the 4th option in the starting lineup. He's not going to be able to put up shots at the same rate as a starter that he did in an instant offense role off the bench. The fact is, there aren't many 4th options out there that put up 14 a game. There were only 2 guys this season that scored 15 or more as a 4th option; Steve Nash and Jameer Nelson. Lou is not at the level of either of these guys.

[Dedicated_76ers_fan]

Coach Jordan isn't concerned because Andre Miller was never a true point guard. Thank god I don't have to hear Salmi over and over again about Andre Miller's "Pump Fake". This great PG's AST'S were down by 3. And I don't think the talent level from Denver was far apart. They had Melo, and god knows what else. They added A.I to be a legitimate 2nd option.

Iggy's no Carmelo, but I venture to think Iggy, Thad, Daly for the occassional oop is enough options to at least average 8 assists. At least 8.

1-2 Assists amounts to thousands of passes that he could've made, that he didn't. Instead, those isolation pull up jumpers. Sure, they hit but they didn't exactly get us in the best position to win games.

And I know why Elton Brand's excited: Those days of isolation basketball are over. Only if your interested in 40-41 wins would you have kept a no-defense, sometimes-pass PG.

[Dedicated_76ers_fan]

Those are sorry for numbers for a player of his talent level. He averaged 12 off of the bench. It should be much easier to get assists when you are playing with four players who can put the ball in the basket. Also, you would not be satisfied with 14 pts from Iggy, Brand, or thad. Why would you be satisfied with those numbers for lou? I understand the obsession with traditional points. I don't agree with it, but i understand it. If lou is to maximize his potential in this league he has to exploit his natural scoring ability and use it to elevate other aspects of his game. He has to be aggressive, and if he is only scoring 14 points in 30 plus minutes a game he is not being aggressive enough. I think what this boils down to is that people are really underestimating what lou is capable of. I have a question for you, what do you think his ceiling is?

But they aren't sorry numbers for a player of his talent level. His talent level is not inordinately high. He'll be the 4th option in the starting lineup. He's not going to be able to put up shots at the same rate as a starter that he did in an instant offense role off the bench. The fact is, there aren't many 4th options out there that put up 14 a game. There were only 2 guys this season that scored 15 or more as a 4th option; Steve Nash and Jameer Nelson. Lou is not at the level of either of these guys.

How do we know what level Lou Williams is at? He got 0 starts because this organization was interested in playing over the hill vets to squeak out a few wins. This youth movement should've happened 2-3 years ago.

[youngcrev]

How do we know what level Lou Williams is at? He got 0 starts because this organization was interested in playing over the hill vets to squeak out a few wins. This youth movement should've happened 2-3 years ago.

We have a good idea of what level player he is, he has played over 23mpg in each of the last 2 years... We just don't know what he can do as a starter.

As for your commentary on Andre Miller, see: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=930749

[Dedicated_76ers_fan]

I won't be politically correct, Andre Miller is NOT a good PG. Nate McMillian admitted that much when he put Miller on the bench. Why? Because his isolation scoring doesn't mesh with Brandon Roy at all.

At least Hedo could use the pick and pop with LMA to own defenses. Miller could score but he could never spread the floor. Neither with an outside shot or with slashing abilities(Because Miller is not a slash and pass guard). He either shoots or he doesn't.

Sixers fans have fell in love with a mediocre PG, calling him the next big thing.

[youngcrev]

I won't be politically correct, Andre Miller is NOT a good PG. Nate McMillian admitted that much when he put Miller on the bench. Why? Because his isolation scoring doesn't mesh with Brandon Roy at all.

At least Hedo could use the pick and pop with LMA to own defenses. Miller could score but he could never spread the floor. Neither with an outside shot or with slashing abilities(Because Miller is not a slash and pass guard). He either shoots or he doesn't.

Sixers fans have fell in love with a mediocre PG, calling him the next big thing.

lol, what are you making up about Nate McMillian?

Miller was a good player for us, nobody was making him out to be a superstar. People just feel the need to defend him when things that aren't true get said about him.

[Dedicated_76ers_fan]

I'm not making up a thing. He said that Miller was coming off the bench. And the most likely reason for that is not chemistry or training camp battles. Miller and Roy CANNOT co-exist. Because they are both isolation guards in the same lineup.

What did I say that's not true? He's an isolation, semi-pass PG that would've led us places if he shot less: Passed more.

I think I can count 5 games(INC.The Orlando Series where he shot 18 FGA attempts and I think only once anywhere near 12(13). where I felt like if he passed more,we win.

[ankle420breaker]

You have a link to those McMillian comments, Dedicated?

[youngcrev]

Andre Miller is NOT a good PG. Nate McMillian admitted that much when he put Miller on the bench.

I would qualify this part as not true, insinuating that McMillian "admitted" that Miller is not a good PG...

Your arguments don't make sense. You are basically saying that because you think that Miller is not a good match for Roy in a backcourt means that he is not a good PG in general.

[Lapinski]

I won't be politically correct, Andre Miller is NOT a good PG. Nate McMillian admitted that much when he put Miller on the bench. Why? Because his isolation scoring doesn't mesh with Brandon Roy at all.

Sixers fans have fell in love with a mediocre PG, calling him the next big thing.

I don't think Portland has played this summer at all. Did I miss the start of the season? I don't think you or anyone else knows what McMillan will do with Miller Nostrodamus.

Nowhere have I found fans calling Miller the next big thing. Do you mean second coming of Walt Frazier, Gary Payton or Magic Johnson?

[Dedicated_76ers_fan]

Andre Miller is NOT a good PG. Nate McMillian admitted that much when he put Miller on the bench.

I would qualify this part as not true, insinuating that McMillian "admitted" that Miller is not a good PG...

Your arguments don't make sense. You are basically saying that because you think that Miller is not a good match for Roy in a backcourt means that he is not a good PG in general.

Think Eddy Curry/Zach Randolph of two years ago in NY. Think of A.I/Melo and the Iso-heavy Denver Nuggets. That's what they would turn into with Roy and Miller. Except, Roy actually passes so you can create a situation like in CLE: With shooters, with space.

Miller and Roy, two iso-heavy guards don't mix. Iggy's not a guy that really needs the ball all that much, that's why it worked here. It won't work in Portland, because Roy's like a D-Wade scorer. Not me, Lawrence Frank(Nets HC) said that.

It's not a matter of "Earning the job", McMillian already knows as a player development coach how that's gonna work out: It can't.

Because Miller can't spread the floor or create scoring opportunities with his slashing. You got 2 players who for the most part: Play the same.

As evidenced in NY/Denver: That just doesn't work.

This is also why I have Atlanta as the team to fall. Jamal Crawford/Joe Johnson in the same lineup? That ain't working either.

Cleveland is the perfect example of balance in the lineup. There's no balance in ATL'S lineup, and Nate would be stupid to break up the balance of his lineup with Miller/Roy.

[ankle420breaker]

So, Nate didn't say Miller was coming off the bench. Gotcha.

And did you just compare Miller/Roy to Eddie Curry and Zach Randolph?

[Dedicated_76ers_fan]

Actually, he did say that. Check Miller's ESPN page for updates. And I did just make that comparison. You don't put two isolation guys together. It doesn't work. Blake/Roy compliments each other. Miller/Roy does not. Simple, easy for you to understand right?

Similarly, Mo Williams-Delonte West. You had West be the defense guy, guy to handle the rock. West/LBJ would act as the playmakers while Mo could play off the ball and score.

Co-existing, styles meshing. Miller's and Roy's have ZERO chance of meshing. Because they both need the rock in their hand. This is why it was hard to get talent around A.I.