Tom Moore 2.0

tmoore · Post #481 » by **tmoore** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:00 pm

New York Times and New York Daily News today wrote about the Miller-Duhon piece I filed for Saturday. It's unlikely to happen, since Duhon's agent would have to work out the details of a sign-and-trade that would satisfy Miller and the Sixers, but you never know. I didn't say the teams talked about it -- just that the agent was exploring the idea.

Still think it's most likely Miller leaves for nothing, though he doesn't appear to have too many options for more than the MLE -- and probably for one year. Sixers' offer is one year and $6 mill, but don't think they really want him back.

radrmd216 · Post #482 » by **radrmd216** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:05 pm

Tom if you owned the team or were the GM would you commint to an MLE signing for multiple years this offseason. Also what do you think about the whole idea of MLE signings?

LongLiveHinkie · Post #483 » by **LongLiveHinkie** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:07 pm

If they don't want him back, then why did they keep saying he was their #1 priority?

tmoore · Post #484 » by **tmoore** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:10 pm

It's the only way teams over the cap can improve, other than trades. Players like the MLE because it allows some of them to get more money than they would be able to without the MLE. Good teams like the Celtics (Rasheed Wallace) can take advantage of their success by getting guys for below market value -- a team like the Sixers can't even get Mike Bibby.

This year is bad because the list of players isn't up to par, especially given the economy, but next year could be better, even though the cap and luxury tax are likely to go down again. Bibby was signed for the MLE and Miller might end up with it, too, unless agent Andy Miller can work out a sign-and-trade.

tmoore · Post #485 » by **tmoore** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:10 pm

Westbrook36 wrote:If they don't want him back, then why did they keep saying he was their #1 priority?

Because he's their only quality free agent.

LongLiveHinkie · Post #486 » by **LongLiveHinkie** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:27 pm

But if they didn't want him back, then usually GMs just give the runaround.

"We'll see what happens when we negotiate", "We'll evaluate our needs and go from there" etc.

But Stefanski was pretty adamant that he wanted him back. I believed him, and I think something changed.

radrmd216 · Post #487 » by **radrmd216** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:29 pm

Tom with all the variables surrounding this team could you say what you think could be the best and worst case scenarios. Also what are you looking for this season and what you consider a good season.

BobbyJones · Post #488 » by **BobbyJones** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 8:45 pm

Westbrook36 wrote:I think something changed.

I think reality hit home when Ed saw that the Millers were not blowing smoke when the asked for 10mio for 3 years. Ed was probably convinced that common sense would prevail at some point.

LongLiveHinkie · Post #489 » by **LongLiveHinkie** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:09 pm

Tom said that they probably won't even take him for one year though because they simply don't want him. That is a long way away from him being the supposed main offseason priority.

ryst · Post #490 » by **ryst** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:12 pm

radrmd216 wrote:Tom with all the variables surrounding this team could you say what you think could be the best and worst case scenarios. Also what are you looking for this season and what you consider a good season.

to the sixers and Stefanski a good off season will be not to spend even $1 on new players, not re signing Andre Miller and not trading for anyone that will cost money.

so i think in his own eyes Stefanski has done a great job and can get his yearly bonus right now.

after last season disaster with Brand(and i dont care what the reason is, it was a disaster and its very clear that even if Brand gets better he will never live up to the money he is being paid) stefanski is scared to do anything or sign anyone because he think he might be fired if it doesnt go well.

so he does NOTHING

westbrook , you are right about Miller ,they dont want him because that mean spending money and they dont want to do that.
they were hoping a team like Portland will throw the big bucks at him so they said he is their #1 priority and they could have saved face once they didnt re sign him saying the portalnd offer was too much money and too many years , and tom moore said here many times(unlike sf76 source) that the sixers never talked to portland about a sign and trade deal and it was never on the table ,THEY NEVER TALKED TO PORTLAND)

but portland didnt sign him and now it comes out they dont even want to re sign the best player on the team , not even for one year.
and its got nothing to do with the system or whats best for the team , its only got to do with money they dont want to spend and stefanski saving his ass from getting fired.

this summer started with signing Eddie Jordan not because he was the best man or the right man for the job , it was because he was the one who agree to be paid as less money as possible(i am sure we all remember that)
so anything that comes out now will not surprise me.

LongLiveHinkie · Post #491 » by **LongLiveHinkie** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:36 pm

This offseason is not about money the way you think. It's about money for the future, not because they are cheap. They are really playing things smart right now. If they went into the season with the current roster, I give Stefanski a solid B+ for the offseason.

radrmd216 · Post #492 » by **radrmd216** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:24 pm

Westbrook you are right the sixers cannot just frivolously spend money. Some people say they don't want the sixers to be a lottery team but the only thing worse than being a lottery team is overpaying players for multiple years. The sixers need to see what their young roster can do and not try to overpay people through free agency to be like a crutch for the team.

If anybody can make a list or knows of a list of the money spent by NBA teams this decade, I think the Sixers would be one of the top teams. I'm not saying the money spent was effective, but the ownership has shown the willingness to spend.

Dedicated_76ers_fan · Post #493 » by **Dedicated_76ers_fan** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:34 pm

Again. I think the money was spent wisely by Stefanski.

Westbrook: Argue about Brand's "explosiveness" that was never there to begin with. But even if he's an 18/8 player. That's AWESOME to have from the 4 spot. He's never been a super-star. But he's a legitimate 2nd option type of guy.

Iggy may be 1 mill or two mill over-paid, but I think if he's a good-to-great 3pt shooter this year, we're not talking about this.

Lou's contract is fair value and we need to see what Lou brings to the table.

Post #494 » by **tk76** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 11:10 pm

You can argue iguodala and Brand's current salary. But down the road when they make 15and 18M it will be hard to justify- especially of the cap does not bounce back. i thing the cap dropping took the Sixers by surprise, and now they look to be stuck for the next sveral years.

As it stands now, they won't even have more than the MLE in 2011/12 when Sam, Evans and Kapono come off the books. (copied from reclinerGM):

Say they add no new players that are on the roster in 2 yrs aside from #1 picks:

For 2011/12:

EB/AI/LW= 36.5M
TY cap hold= 8M (+7M if you keep Jason Smith)
Speights + 2009/10/11 #1’s= 8M

That’s 52M+ if you renounce your rights to Jason Smith.

So, unless the cap suddenly balloons from the current 58M (and its as likely to go down as up in 2 years) the team will have a hair over MLE money unless they start selling away #1 picks or can unload Lou. And that is after giving up Smith. Keep/resign Smith and all you have is the MLE.

So 2011/12 is not a very realistic option. They have a better chance of trading Sam+young talent+picks at the 2011 deadline for a superstar- but they may have to pay the tax the following year. Trying to go the FA route only gets them MLE level talent.

radrmd216 · Post #495 » by **radrmd216** » Sun Jul 12, 2009 11:56 pm

If the Sixers want to build a team like the Pisons they need to be over the tax if they want to win a championship. I don't know of a team that was under the cap that won a championship. i don't think thats the way to build a championship team though. At least 2 superstars are needed. Usually the teams that win have a big that is good on both ends of the floor, a aggressive scoring wing, and a PG that can control the tempo. Maybe the sixers have that kind of PG in Holiday, but they don't have the big or dominant wing scorer. Iggy and Brand will be making franchise player money and they are not franchise players, very few players actually are.

Does anybody think the NBA will ever have a hard cap and non guarenteed contratcs or is the NBAPA too powerful. The NBA needs to change something because before the season starts fans know which teams will be playing for the title. There are always some nice stories and suprise teams but one of the top 3 favorites usually win.

Dedicated_76ers_fan · Post #496 » by **Dedicated_76ers_fan** » Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:10 am

tk76 wrote:You can argue iguodala and Brand's current salary. But down the road when they make 15and 18M it will be hard to justify- especially of the cap does not bounce back. i thing the cap dropping took the Sixers by surprise, and now they look to be stuck for the next sveral years.

As it stands now, they won't even have more than the MLE in 2011/12 when Sam, Evans and Kapono come off the books. (copied from reclinerGM):

Say they add no new players that are on the roster in 2 yrs aside from #1 picks:

For 2011/12:

EB/AI/LW= 36.5M
TY cap hold= 8M (+7M if you keep Jason Smith)
Speights + 2009/10/11 #1’s= 8M

That’s 52M+ if you renounce your rights to Jason Smith.

So, unless the cap suddenly balloons from the current 58M (and its as likely to go down as up in 2 years) the team will have a hair over MLE money unless they start selling away #1 picks or can unload Lou. And that is after giving up Smith. Keep/resign Smith and all you have is the MLE.

So 2011/12 is not a very realistic option. They have a better chance of trading Sam+young talent+picks at the 2011 deadline for a superstar- but they may have to pay the tax the following year. Trying to go the FA route only gets them MLE level talent.

Back in mid-2008, I don't think Stefanski or anyone else saw the economy dripping down. And many felt secure when Barack Obama was elected. In truth, neither Barack Obama nor John McCain had sound economic policies.

And it goes to show

, investing in a politician is the WORST thing you can do.

Mik317 · Post #497 » by **Mik317** » Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:18 am

lets keep politics off this board please....

Dedicated_76ers_fan · Post #498 » by **Dedicated_76ers_fan** » Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:26 am

Just saying, people didn't think the economy would fall like it did

STChaser · Post #499 » by **STChaser** » Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:26 am

STChaser deleted the post. Agree that we should focus on BB. Too much anger to start discussing our politics at this point...

tmoore · Post #500 » by **tmoore** » Mon Jul 13, 2009 1:37 am

Westbrook36 wrote:Tom said that they probably won't even take him for one year though because they simply don't want him. That is a long way away from him being the supposed main offseason priority.

I think this will be a 36- to 44-win season, depending on how well Brand plays. They could be a lottery team in contention for the playoffs until the final week or lose in the first round for the third straight year.