CBS Sports "reporting": Sixers reportedly plan to trade either Nerlens Noel or Jahlil Okafor

[LloydFree]

Just say "he's terrible defensively, but I have hope that he will somehow become a good defender" and move on. No more debate or clarification would be needed.

We don't even need to go that far. We are hoping that he becomes an AVERAGE defender and rebounder for whatever position he plays. You think he can only play the 5, but we think he has a shot at playing the 4.

That better encapsulates the differences in our positions.

If the "We's" hope Okafor can improve to be average at Defense and Rebounding, then the "We's" KNOW he is a bad defender and rebounder. So why the convoluted, contrived, passionate, rebuttals everytime the "you's" say Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder? There seems to be agreement Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder, but the conflict comes when someone says it?

Or is it that the "We's" are unable to properly valuate defense and Rebounding for Bigs?

[Ericb5]

Just say "he's terrible defensively, but I have hope that he will somehow become a good defender" and move on. No more debate or clarification would be needed.

We don't even need to go that far. We are hoping that he becomes an AVERAGE defender and rebounder for whatever position he plays. You think he can only play the 5, but we think he has a shot at playing the 4.

That better encapsulates the differences in our positions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wait really? I thought it was more "well he's such a disaster defensively regardless why not just put him at the 4?" You honestly think he can be an average defender at the 4?

No. I hope he can be an average defender at the 4 because, if he can't, then he will have to be traded.

Maybe he can split time between the 4 and 5. If he is just a 5 though then he won't be a Sixer unless Embiid's foot falls off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spikeslovechild]

Just say "he's terrible defensively, but I have hope that he will somehow become a good defender" and move on. No more debate or clarification would be needed.

We don't even need to go that far. We are hoping that he becomes an AVERAGE defender and rebounder for whatever position he plays. You think he can only play the 5, but we think he has a shot at playing the 4.

That better encapsulates the differences in our positions.

If the "We's" hope Okafor can improve to be average at Defense and Rebounding, then the "We's" KNOW he is a bad defender and rebounder. So why the convoluted, contrived, passionate, rebuttals everytime the "you's" say Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder? There seems to be agreement Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder, but the conflict comes when someone says it?

Or is it that the "We's" are unable to properly valuate defense and Rebounding for Bigs?

First of all, saying he's terrible isn't much of an evaluation. Which I find people tend to do when it comes to Okafor. They'd rather just throw out labels then have a substantive discussion on what he does well on defense, what he does poorly and how he can/will improve moving forward.

Which is strange because the very same people refuse to the same thing with Noel and his offense. They will bring up Whitside and Jordan as comparables despite Noel being nowhere either of them offensively and despite him showing no ability as of yet to even get close to either of them in three seasons. We are supposed to believe Noel has all this untapped potential after three years of basically stagnation not only on offense but defense as well but bring up the fact Okafor was a 19 year old rookie last year and somehow you are making excuses.

And yes such things matter. At least it should. The two players are in two different stages of their development process. It's sort of strange that some of you selectively apply such a standard. For example Porzingis didn't have a much better season then Okafor yet for some reason his game isn't writ in stone. Russell was just as bad as Okafor on defense, his offense was worse as he had some truly terrible stretches, filmed his teammate and somehow he is viewed as having more potential on this board. I just read someone would be willing to trade Okafor for Marcus Smart who is awful and hasn't devloped much from there since entering the league. Booker is terrible on defense and fell apart as the season went along yet somehow he gets the excuse of being a rookie. Mudiay is he a bust? How about Winslow and his 9 PER (last i checked he may have improved)?

In alot of ways I guess Okafor is a victim of being so advanced offensively people just expect his other areas of his game to be were his offense is. He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt that pretty much every other rookie in the league enjoys. Even Hejonza who I listened on one of the announcers on the radio try and convince me would have been the better selection. I'm sorry what? It's almost personal with you guys. You have so are invested in Noels success at this point it isn't even about Okafor or the sixers anymore.

[Unbreakable99]

We don't even need to go that far. We are hoping that he becomes an AVERAGE defender and rebounder for whatever position he plays. You think he can only play the 5, but we think he has a shot at playing the 4.

That better encapsulates the differences in our positions.

If the "We's" hope Okafor can improve to be average at Defense and Rebounding, then the "We's" KNOW he is a bad defender and rebounder. So why the convoluted, contrived, passionate, rebuttals everytime the "you's" say Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder? There seems to be agreement Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder, but the conflict comes when someone says it?

Or is it that the "We's" are unable to properly valuate defense and Rebounding for Bigs?

First of all, saying he's terrible isn't much of an evaluation. Which I find people tend to do when it comes to Okafor. They'd rather just throw out labels then have a substantive discussion on what he does well on defense, what he does poorly and how he can/will improve moving forward.

Which is strange because the very same people refuse to the same thing with Noel and his offense. They will bring up Whitside and Jordan as comparables despite Noel being nowhere either of them offensively and despite him showing no ability as of yet to even get close to either of them in three seasons. We are supposed to believe Noel has all this untapped potential after three years of basically stagnation not only on offense but defense as well but bring up the fact Okafor was a 19 year old rookie last year and somehow you are making excuses.

And yes such things matter. At least it should. The two players are in two different stages of their development process. It's sort of strange that some of you selectively apply such a standard. For example Porzingis didn't have a much better season then Okafor yet for some reason his game isn't writ in stone. Russell was just as bad as Okafor on defense, his offense was worse as he had some truly terrible stretches, filmed his teammate and somehow he is viewed as having more potential on this board. I just read someone would be willing to trade Okafor for Marcus Smart who is awful and hasn't devloped much from there since entering the league. Booker is terrible on defense and fell apart as the season went along yet somehow he gets the excuse of being a rookie. Mudiay is he a bust? How about Winslow and his 9 PER (last i checked he may have improved)?

In alot of ways I guess Okafor is a victim of being so advanced offensively people just expect his other areas of his game to be were his offense is. He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt that pretty much every other rookie in the league enjoys. Even Hejonza who I listened on one of the announcers on the radio try and convince me would have been the better selection. I'm sorry what? It's almost personal with you guys. You have so are invested in Noels success at this point it isn't even about Okafor or the sixers anymore.

A lot of what you wrote is wrong or false. Everyone acknowledges that Okafor is very good on offense. The concerns of people who prefer Noel over Okafor or who don't value Okafor as much as other players in the league is because of his defense. And it's ok for other positions to not be that good on defense but for a Center that really isn't ideal. That's where Okafor is not good. He doesn't protect the rim. He isn't good on pick and roll defense. he doesn't have good awareness on defense. He isn't a good rebounder.

Going back to offense, while Okafor is the best scorer player on the team that doesn't mean he's the best offensive player. The stats show that the team scores more points with Noel on the court than Okafor. And it's not just Sixer fans who see this. Just about every analyst and writer and blogger and expert sees the flaws of Okafor and rate Noel higher.

Look at the best teams. If Cleveland and Golden St and OKC and Toronto and Boston had their choice of Okafor or Noel they all would take Noel.

[Ericb5]

Just say "he's terrible defensively, but I have hope that he will somehow become a good defender" and move on. No more debate or clarification would be needed.

We don't even need to go that far. We are hoping that he becomes an AVERAGE defender and rebounder for whatever position he plays. You think he can only play the 5, but we think he has a shot at playing the 4.

That better encapsulates the differences in our positions.

If the "We's" hope Okafor can improve to be average at Defense and Rebounding, then the "We's" KNOW he is a bad defender and rebounder. So why the convoluted, contrived, passionate, rebuttals everytime the "you's" say Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder? There seems to be agreement Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder, but the conflict comes when someone says it?

Or is it that the "We's" are unable to properly valuate defense and Rebounding for Bigs?

We concede that he is a poor rebounder and defender overall currently, but you guys assume that he will always be that way. That is the big difference between us. You guys think that he can't improve, and we think that maybe he can.

He isn't likely to go from a bad defender and rebounder to a good one, but he only needs to become neutral in those departments to be a star player because offensively he is an all star prospect all day. I know that you always say that only defense and rebounding matters at the Center position, but there we have another disagreement. He may be able to play the 4, rendering your position on Center's moot.

The reason that there is so much push back is because it seems as if you are being unfair to him by saying that he will never improve when he is 20 years old. We control him for a few more years so lets give the kid a chance. Don't treat him like a hot potato that we have to get rid of immediately. In the absolute worst case scenario he flames out, and we don't resign him when his contract is up, and we lose him for nothing. We don't NEED him to succeed for the team to succeed. We have Embiid, and Simmons as our core players.

So by all means trade him today for full value, but if we are getting trash offers for him today then we should hold on to him and hope for the best. As long as we never compromise Embiid's development for Okafor(a position that you and I agree on) then there is no downside to keeping him. If it means losing Noel in the mean time then so be it. We don't NEED him either.

[Sixerscan]

Being a limited offensive big man is different than being a terrible defensive man. Regardless, does anyone here actually think Noel can be a long term starting piece on this team? (Barring a disaster scenario where Embiid never gets healthy and were probably screwed regardless)

Personally, I think You can trade either one, I don't think it's worth the headache to decide which from my POV. Let the market dictate. The other one will be a fine backup center/Embiid insurance.

[Foshan]

A lot of what you wrote is wrong or false. Everyone acknowledges that Okafor is very good on offense. The concerns of people who prefer Noel over Okafor or who don't value Okafor as much as other players in the league is because of his defense. And it's ok for other positions to not be that good on defense but for a Center that really isn't ideal. That's where Okafor is not good. He doesn't protect the rim. He isn't good on pick and roll defense. he doesn't have good awareness on defense. He isn't a good rebounder.

Going back to offense, while Okafor is the best scorer player on the team that doesn't mean he's the best offensive player. The stats show that the team scores more points with Noel on the court than Okafor. And it's not just Sixer fans who see this. Just about every analyst and writer and blogger and expert sees the flaws of Okafor and rate Noel higher.

Look at the best teams. If Cleveland and Golden St and OKC and Toronto and Boston had their choice of Okafor or Noel they all would take Noel.

So i generally try to stay out of Oak vs Noel, cause I actually like them both, and am very happy to keep them both (at least for the near future).

I like all of your arguements about why Okafor can't be our C because of how D is so important, etc. But if that is the case, why can't he play the 4? Lots of teams have bad defensive 4's (lol Love!) Okafor has a decent stroke out to 18 or so feet, so while not a stretch four, can create some space, add in a guy like Embiid who can also has some range, yet can protect the paint and your set, right? Add to that, our new 'star' player is a guy who doesn't really get buckets for himself so much as getting buckets for others, and you have a guy like Oak who has great hands and good post moves. /shrug

[Sixerscan]

A lot of what you wrote is wrong or false. Everyone acknowledges that Okafor is very good on offense. The concerns of people who prefer Noel over Okafor or who don't value Okafor as much as other players in the league is because of his defense. And it's ok for other positions to not be that good on defense but for a Center that really isn't ideal. That's where Okafor is not good. He doesn't protect the rim. He isn't good on pick and roll defense. he doesn't have good awareness on defense. He isn't a good rebounder.

Going back to offense, while Okafor is the best scorer player on the team that doesn't mean he's the best offensive player. The stats show that the team scores more points with Noel on the court than Okafor. And it's not just Sixer fans who see this. Just about every analyst and writer and blogger and expert sees the flaws of Okafor and rate Noel higher.

Look at the best teams. If Cleveland and Golden St and OKC and Toronto and Boston had their choice of Okafor or Noel they all would take Noel.

So i generally try to stay out of Oak vs Noel, cause I actually like them both, and am very happy to keep them both (at least for the near future).

I like all of your arguements about why Okafor can't be our C because of how D is so important, etc. But if that is the case, why can't he play the 4? Lots of teams have bad defensive 4's (lol Love!) Okafor has a decent stroke out to 18 or so feet, so while not a stretch four, can create some space, add in a guy like Embiid who can also has some range, yet can protect the paint and your set, right? Add to that, our new 'star' player is a guy who doesn't really get buckets for himself so much as getting buckets for others, and you have a guy like Oak who has great hands and good post moves. /shrug

How many other top teams besides Cleveland had bad defensive 4s? The Warriors and thunder certainly didn't. For the most part it's a pretty solid defensive position. And Love has Lebron who can handle having someone useless next to him.

And okafor isn't just bad he's bad in ways that would be further exposed the more he has to cover quicker players. It's not like he's Thad or something and we can try to hide it by switching on everything.

IF they decide they want to go forward with this, I think Brett had to be creative and install a zone. Otherwise I don't see how it works.

[LloydFree]

Being a limited offensive big man is different than being a terrible defensive man. Regardless, does anyone here actually think Noel can be a long term starting piece on this team? (Barring a disaster scenario where Embiid never gets healthy and were probably screwed regardless)

Personally, I think You can trade either one, I don't think it's worth the headache to decide which from my POV. Let the market dictate. The other one will be a fine backup center/Embiid insurance.

I also think either would be a decent backup Center, but if you are forced into a situation where one has to start, it has to be Noel. Embiid being healthy is not something that can be taken for granted. If he re-breaks his foot in November, the thought that Noel is our Center and we can easily create a contender with him at Center, would be comforting. For me, I said it bunch of times before:. You can't name a championship team sans Jordan or Lebron, that won with a bad-average Defender/Rebounder at Center. I really can't even recall a conference Champ with that kind of Center. From my point of view, if Embiid goes down and Noel has been traded, they're in the same position as if they didn't have a Center at all.

[rzzzzz]

Embiid is our ideal center, obviously. Okafor is more in the mold of the classic post player, but also has a better chance to develop into a part=time pf that could be on the floor with Joel. Noel is arguably easier to build around in the "modern" game, IF Embiid goes done, but more superfluous if he remains healthy. i'd prefer we continue to hold off coming to any conclusions until at least the trade deadline. heck, we ain't competing this season, and it will be a blast watching what the different line-ups can do.

[Ericb5]

Being a limited offensive big man is different than being a terrible defensive man. Regardless, does anyone here actually think Noel can be a long term starting piece on this team? (Barring a disaster scenario where Embiid never gets healthy and were probably screwed regardless)

Personally, I think You can trade either one, I don't think it's worth the headache to decide which from my POV. Let the market dictate. The other one will be a fine backup center/Embiid insurance.

I also think either would be a decent backup Center, but if you are forced into a situation where one has to start, it has to be Noel. Embiid being healthy is not something that can be taken for granted. If he re-breaks his foot in November, the thought that Noel is our Center and we can easily create a contender with him at Center, would be comforting. For me, I said it bunch of times before:. You can't name a championship team sans Jordan or Lebron, that won with a bad-average Defender/Rebounder at Center. I really can't even recall a conference Champ with that kind of Center. From my point of view, if Embiid goes down and Noel has been traded, they're in the same position as if they didn't have a Center at all.

You are right that Noel protects us more in the non-Embiid scenario where he busts due to health. I am more focused on the healthy Embiid scenario though. It is a gamble for sure no matter who we trade.

[hookshot199]

A lot of what you wrote is wrong or false. Everyone acknowledges that Okafor is very good on offense. The concerns of people who prefer Noel over Okafor or who don't value Okafor as much as other players in the league is because of his defense. And it's ok for other positions to not be that good on defense but for a Center that really isn't ideal. That's where Okafor is not good. He doesn't protect the rim. He isn't good on pick and roll defense. he doesn't have good awareness on defense. He isn't a good rebounder.

Going back to offense, while Okafor is the best scorer player on the team that doesn't mean he's the best offensive player. The stats show that the team scores more points with Noel on the court than Okafor. And it's not just Sixer fans who see this. Just about every analyst and writer and blogger and expert sees the flaws of Okafor and rate Noel higher.

Look at the best teams. If Cleveland and Golden St and OKC and Toronto and Boston had their choice of Okafor or Noel they all would take Noel.

So i generally try to stay out of Oak vs Noel, cause I actually like them both, and am very happy to keep them both (at least for the near future).

I like all of your arguements about why Okafor can't be our C because of how D is so important, etc. But if that is the case, why can't he play the 4? Lots of teams have bad defensive 4's (lol Love!) Okafor has a decent stroke out to 18 or so feet, so while not a stretch four, can create some space, add in a guy like Embiid who can also has some range, yet can protect the paint and your set, right? Add to that, our new 'star' player is a guy who doesn't really get buckets for himself so much as getting buckets for others, and you have a guy like Oak who has great hands and good post moves. /shrug

This is not a criticism. I just feel like responding to somebody else's post. I don't think anybody is arguing the fact that we will have to move one of our centers if Embiid is healthy. The issue is when. And when will be determined in part by what Brown and management see on the court - and assuming Embiid is healthy.

Sixerscan has very strong views that Okafor is a horrible defensive player and perhaps can't be salvaged. He may be right. But just because Mike Krzyzewski took him out games as a freshman on a national team team is not a big deal in my opinion. And especially because he had problems last season performing on a team in complete disarray - having no point guard on a young team is a big deal - is not a career-buster in my opinion.

And lastly, for a team that didn’t have a legitimate center since Mutombo - more than a decade - what’s the rush? Let’s get this right. We lucked into the Noel pick. We lucked into the Embiid pick. And I believe we lucked into the Okafor pick (unlucked because we didn’t get Anthony-Towns). Sure, Prozingis might be better. But if Jim Buss had chosen Okafor instead of Russell, would Hinkie have chosen Russell or Prozingis? I’d like to think Prozingis, but there was so much hype about Russell.

I do think history is important. This is what our center-power forward lineup looked like for 11 years after Mutombo and Theo (I'm reposting it because I posted it as a correction). More so than for many other teams in the league, we need to see how this plays out - at least up to the trade deadline. And the idea of having to pay Noel to be a backup is propaganda mostly from my neck of the woods in New England.

Main point: It’s simply too soon to make a judgment about Noel and Okafor, any of our players for that matter, until they get some games under their belt.

And never, never trade them for guys like Marcus Smart, a player I like...but who can’t shoot.

2003-04: Dalembert, Kenny Thomas, Mark Jackson
2004-05: Dalembert, C-Webb, Kenny Thomas, Mark Jackson
2005-06: Dalembert, C-Web, Steven Hunter, Lee Nailen
2006-07: Dalembert, C-Webb, Joe Smith, Steven Hunter, Shavlik Randolph
2007-08: Dalembert, Reggie, Thad, Jason Smith
2008-09: Dalembert, Thad, Brand, Theo, Speights, Reggie
2009-10: Dalembert, Thad, Brand, Speights, Jason Smith
2010-11: Hawes, Brand, Thad, Speights, Brackins, Battie
2011-12: Hawes, Brand, Thad, Vucevic, Lavoy, Battie
2012-13: Hawes, Thad, Lavoy, Kwame, Moultrie
2013-14: Hawes, Thad, Lavoy, Orton, Simms, Brandon Davies

[CoreyGallagher]

And never, never trade them for guys like Marcus Smart, a player I like...but who can’t shoot.

Speaking of Marcus Smart, while I do like him as a talent, I just read a tweet that got me searching. It mentioned that Marcus Smart is one of only two players to shoot a higher eFG% off of the dribble instead of on catch and shoot. He shoots 21.8% overall, 32.4 eFG% on catch and shoot field goals - which are the worst percentages in the league for players that shot at least 100 attempts.

He provides no spacing from a Guard position. If we're going to trade one of our bigs than I'd want something more complimentary to the building blocks that we've chosen to build with.

Spoiler:

Read on Twitter

[LloydFree]

And never, never trade them for guys like Marcus Smart, a player I like...but who can’t shoot.

Speaking of Marcus Smart, while I do like him as a talent, I just read a tweet that got me searching. It mentioned that Marcus Smart is one of only two players to shoot a higher eFG% shooting off of the dribble instead of on catch and shoot. He shoots 21.8%, 32.4 eFG% on catch and shoot field goals - which are the worst percentages in the league for players that shot at least 100 attempts.

Marcus Smart is a very good young player. He has to fix his shooting mechanics. There are hundreds of examples of 21 year old bad shooters who improved their shooting. IMO, there is a better chance he can improve his shooting to average, than the chance Okafor improves his defense to average. Give me Smart and Hunter for Okafor and I'm fine.

[hookshot199]

And never, never trade them for guys like Marcus Smart, a player I like...but who can’t shoot.

Speaking of Marcus Smart, while I do like him as a talent, I just read a tweet that got me searching. It mentioned that Marcus Smart is one of only two players to shoot a higher eFG% shooting off of the dribble instead of on catch and shoot. He shoots 21.8%, 32.4 eFG% on catch and shoot field goals - which are the worst percentages in the league for players that shot at least 100 attempts.

Thank you for that. I couldn't find his ranking. But I suspect that his 32% rating was due in part to injury and missing 20 games. Still, he's not a good shooter. And it's uncommon that below-average shooters become good shooters. Iguodala's an example. So is Tony Allen, more relevant for the Celtics (though I hope I'm not putting my head into a green hornets' nest again). Smart is a solid, hard-nosed player. But is he worth $15 mil? I suspect someone will make an offer when he becomes an RFA two years from now (or whenever), and the Celtics will be hard-pressed to match.

[hookshot199]

And never, never trade them for guys like Marcus Smart, a player I like...but who can’t shoot.

Speaking of Marcus Smart, while I do like him as a talent, I just read a tweet that got me searching. It mentioned that Marcus Smart is one of only two players to shoot a higher eFG% shooting off of the dribble instead of on catch and shoot. He shoots 21.8%, 32.4 eFG% on catch and shoot field goals - which are the worst percentages in the league for players that shot at least 100 attempts.

Marcus Smart is a very good young player. He has to fix his shooting mechanics. There are hundreds of examples of 21 year old bad shooters who improved their shooting. IMO, there is a better chance he can improve his shooting to average, than the chance Okafor improves his defense to average. Give me Smart and Hunter for Okafor and I'm fine.

I'm glad you're not our GM.

[Sixerscan]

A lot of what you wrote is wrong or false. Everyone acknowledges that Okafor is very good on offense. The concerns of people who prefer Noel over Okafor or who don't value Okafor as much as other players in the league is because of his defense. And it's ok for other positions to not be that good on defense but for a Center that really isn't ideal. That's where Okafor is not good. He doesn't protect the rim. He isn't good on pick and roll defense. he doesn't have good awareness on defense. He isn't a good rebounder.

Going back to offense, while Okafor is the best scorer player on the team that doesn't mean he's the best offensive player. The stats show that the team scores more points with Noel on the court than Okafor. And it's not just Sixer fans who see this. Just about every analyst and writer and blogger and expert sees the flaws of Okafor and rate Noel higher.

Look at the best teams. If Cleveland and Golden St and OKC and Toronto and Boston had their choice of Okafor or Noel they all would take Noel.

So i generally try to stay out of Oak vs Noel, cause I actually like them both, and am very happy to keep them both (at least for the near future).

I like all of your arguements about why Okafor can't be our C because of how D is so important, etc. But if that is the case, why can't he play the 4? Lots of teams have bad defensive 4's (lol Love!) Okafor has a decent stroke out to 18 or so feet, so while not a stretch four, can create some space, add in a guy like Embiid who can also has some range, yet can protect the paint and your set, right? Add to that, our new 'star' player is a guy who doesn't really get buckets for himself so much as getting buckets for others, and you have a guy like Oak who has great hands and good post moves. /shrug

This is not a criticism. I just feel like responding to somebody else's post. I don't think anybody is arguing the fact that we will have to move one of our centers if Embiid is healthy. The issue is when. And when will be determined in part by what Brown and management see on the court - and assuming Embiid is healthy.

Sixerscan has very strong views that Okafor is a horrible defensive player and perhaps can't be salvaged. He may be right. But just because Mike Krzyzewski took him out games as a freshman on a national team team is not a big deal in my opinion. And especially because he had problems last season performing on a team in complete disarray - having no point guard on a young team is a big deal - is not a career-buster in my opinion.

And lastly, for a team that didn’t have a legitimate center since Mutombo - more than a decade - what’s the rush? Let’s get this right. We lucked into the Noel pick. We lucked into the Embiid pick. And I believe we lucked into the Okafor pick (unlucked because we didn’t get Anthony-Towns). Sure, Prozingis might be better. But if Jim Buss had chosen Okafor instead of Russell, would Hinkie have chosen Russell or Prozingis? I’d like to think Prozingis, but there was so much hype about Russell.

I do think history is important. This is what our center-power forward lineup looked like for 11 years after Mutombo and Theo (I'm reposting it because I posted it as a correction). More so than for many other teams in the league, we need to see how this plays out - at least up to the trade deadline. And the idea of having to pay Noel to be a backup is propaganda mostly from my neck of the woods in New England.

Main point: It’s simply too soon to make a judgment about Noel and Okafor, any of our players for that matter, until they get some games under their belt.

And never, never trade them for guys like Marcus Smart, a player I like...but who can’t shoot.

2003-04: Dalembert, Kenny Thomas, Mark Jackson
2004-05: Dalembert, C-Webb, Kenny Thomas, Mark Jackson
2005-06: Dalembert, C-Web, Steven Hunter, Lee Nailen
2006-07: Dalembert, C-Webb, Joe Smith, Steven Hunter, Shavlik Randolph
2007-08: Dalembert, Reggie, Thad, Jason Smith
2008-09: Dalembert, Thad, Brand, Theo, Speights, Reggie
2009-10: Dalembert, Thad, Brand, Speights, Jason Smith
2010-11: Hawes, Brand, Thad, Speights, Brackins, Battie
2011-12: Hawes, Brand, Thad, Vucevic, Lavoy, Battie
2012-13: Hawes, Thad, Lavoy, Kwame, Moultrie
2013-14: Hawes, Thad, Lavoy, Orton, Simms, Brandon Davies

You clearly aren't comprehending the conversation I was trying to have with Corey because you kept trying to make the conversation about something else. I said about 10 times that he's young and can improve. With that in mind, please stop referring to me and distorting my points. Thanks.

This is exactly why I don't waste my time giving actual analysis about okafor anymore btw. You cite any numbers or specific example and someone always acts like that is all you are basing your analysis on, like I'm supposed to write a 10,00 word essay every time I want to critique a basketball player.

[LloydFree]

Speaking of Marcus Smart, while I do like him as a talent, I just read a tweet that got me searching. It mentioned that Marcus Smart is one of only two players to shoot a higher eFG% shooting off of the dribble instead of on catch and shoot. He shoots 21.8%, 32.4 eFG% on catch and shoot field goals - which are the worst percentages in the league for players that shot at least 100 attempts.

Marcus Smart is a very good young player. He has to fix his shooting mechanics. There are hundreds of examples of 21 year old bad shooters who improved their shooting. IMO, there is a better chance he can improve his shooting to average, than the chance Okafor improves his defense to average. Give me Smart and Hunter for Okafor and I'm fine.

I'm glad you're not our GM.

No harm. The feeling is mutual.

[76ciology]

We all acknowledge the talent we have at hand. We just have differences in our ideas on how to build a winning team and differences in projection of a player's upside.

Personally, I don't think we should trade our bigs because a 3 big rotation is possible and is being done by contenders like the Thunders. And we shouldn't just put our bigs in a box where we just evaluate them on their past performance. Much worse on a rookie season playing with an all time horrible team.

I wouldn't put much weight on Okafor's impact and +/- last season because the team is just undeniably horrible that it even did Noel looked bad on D for a chunk of season. And a rookie who's new to the NBA lifestyle and style of play (big difference in pace @ duke and w/ Sixers) made it more complicated with the off court stuffs and team (horrible scheme and talent) we had last season.

Nevertheless, the fact is Okafor didn't provide positive impact on the court and no one is going to deny that. But I hope everyone can be fair enough to consider that he did have good individual number and has the tools to improve on both ends.

[spikeslovechild]

If the "We's" hope Okafor can improve to be average at Defense and Rebounding, then the "We's" KNOW he is a bad defender and rebounder. So why the convoluted, contrived, passionate, rebuttals everytime the "you's" say Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder? There seems to be agreement Okafor is a terrible defender and rebounder, but the conflict comes when someone says it?

Or is it that the "We's" are unable to properly valuate defense and Rebounding for Bigs?

First of all, saying he's terrible isn't much of an evaluation. Which I find people tend to do when it comes to Okafor. They'd rather just throw out labels then have a substantive discussion on what he does well on defense, what he does poorly and how he can/will improve moving forward.

Which is strange because the very same people refuse to the same thing with Noel and his offense. They will bring up Whitside and Jordan as comparables despite Noel being nowhere either of them offensively and despite him showing no ability as of yet to even get close to either of them in three seasons. We are supposed to believe Noel has all this untapped potential after three years of basically stagnation not only on offense but defense as well but bring up the fact Okafor was a 19 year old rookie last year and somehow you are making excuses.

And yes such things matter. At least it should. The two players are in two different stages of their development process. It's sort of strange that some of you selectively apply such a standard. For example Porzingis didn't have a much better season then Okafor yet for some reason his game isn't writ in stone. Russell was just as bad as Okafor on defense, his offense was worse as he had some truly terrible stretches, filmed his teammate and somehow he is viewed as having more potential on this board. I just read someone would be willing to trade Okafor for Marcus Smart who is awful and hasn't devloped much from there since entering the league. Booker is terrible on defense and fell apart as the season went along yet somehow he gets the excuse of being a rookie. Mudiay is he a bust? How about Winslow and his 9 PER (last i checked he may have improved)?

In alot of ways I guess Okafor is a victim of being so advanced offensively people just expect his other areas of his game to be were his offense is. He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt that pretty much every other rookie in the league enjoys. Even Hejonza who I listened on one of the announcers on the radio try and convince me would have been the better selection. I'm sorry what? It's almost personal with you guys. You have so are invested in Noels success at this point it isn't even about Okafor or the sixers anymore.

A lot of what you wrote is wrong or false. Everyone acknowledges that Okafor is very good on offense. The concerns of people who prefer Noel over Okafor or who don't value Okafor as much as other players in the league is because of his defense. And it's ok for other positions to not be that good on defense but for a Center that really isn't ideal. That's where Okafor is not good. He doesn't protect the rim. He isn't good on pick and roll defense. he doesn't have good awareness on defense. He isn't a good rebounder.

Going back to offense, while Okafor is the best scorer player on the team that doesn't mean he's the best offensive player. The stats show that the team scores more points with Noel on the court than Okafor. And it's not just Sixer fans who see this. Just about every analyst and writer and blogger and expert sees the flaws of Okafor and rate Noel higher.

Look at the best teams. If Cleveland and Golden St and OKC and Toronto and Boston had their choice of Okafor or Noel they all would take Noel.

First of all, nothing I wrote was false. Two, you say "everyone acknowledges that Okafor is very good on offense" then say "team scores more points with Noel on the court than Okafor". So does that mean Noel is the better offensive player? See this is why it is hard to take some of you seriously. Also that stat has more to do with Ish then it does Noel. Okafor just happened to play less games with Ish then Noel because he got injured.

As far as the rest goes Okafor needs to improve his rebounding but does an excellent job boxing out. The numbers from sportsvu indicate he does a better then decent job defending from within six feet. His pick and roll defense was terrible but that goes in large part to what I have said before about college.

He was protected at Duke. Now sixercan says his defense was terrible actually it wasn't. The problem was unlike with the sixers he really wasn't allowed to be bad except in certain situations and because of that he was never really challenged to improve that side of the ball. It's unfortunate that with some of these big schools they are more concerned with winning then player development and preparing these players for the NBA.

As far as Cleveland goes they have a bunch of high usage players already. They are already not enough possessions to give Love. That doesn't make Okafor a bad player just a bad fit. GSW have Durant, Curry, Thompson, etc. Boston tried to trade for Okafor their guards and wings other then Thomas are meh. Tor already has Val which is a poor mans Okafor in alot of ways.

Of course when it comes to the sixers thats not a concern. Irving and Lebron are not on the team. Durant and Curry either. Of course Noel is a poor fit for those teams too. Not because he couldn't play for them because in large part what has allowed to those teams to bring in the Durants. The Lebrons. Is by not over paying the non-skilled players on their roster. Toronto signed Biyombo for 2.5 million and as soon as he got expensive let him walk. Cle let Mozglov walk this offseason. GSW traded Bogut to make room for Durant. Okc wasn't willing to max Ibaka and moved him to create space for another player (Durant walked anyways). The bulls let Noah walk retooled and brought in Wade. I mean the list goes on and on. I've heard numerous times that we should be using the LAL and ORL as some sort of barometer for Noel. What? Why would we want to emulate two of the worst run franchises in the NBA.

The main issue with the roster moving forward is finding a spot we can get Okafor regular minutes. It's not offensive possessions. I'm sorry but Bayless and Henderson are not Durant and Curry. I'm more then willing to have them defer to Okafor.