what's the argument against

by variablesdont on Dec 31, 2008 7:34 PM PST

i'm pretty sure that i heard two things during the first half of the clippers game. the first thing was that the sixers are 27th in the league in scoring. the second was that both marreese speights and louwill had scored 10 points in each of the first 3 games of the road trip, all of which were losses.

i'm on record as saying that this team will only go as far as lou, marreese, and thad will take it, so my question is this: what would this team lose by starting all three?

as far as i can tell, iggy isn't able to carry this team. andre isn't able to carry this team. sammy d, good willie, and reggie evans aren't able to carry this team. since this configuration isn't working, why not hand the reigns over to 3 guys on the rise, each of whom has shown flashes of being very proficient scorers.

Another user-created commentary provided by a Liberty Ballers reader.

Tweet Comment 2 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I'd love to see a lineup of:

Miller, Lou, Iggy, Thad, Speights.

Pimpin' ain't easy and neither is being a Sixers fan. I manage to do both. Join me at Liberty Ballers, the SBNation 76ers blog. Don't make fun of the name either. It has nothing to do with the New York Liberty of the WNBA.

by Jordan Sams on Jan 1, 2009 3:36 AM PST reply actions

The argument against it is that the sixers still think they can be competitive this year. Lou Williams isn’t really an NBA starter and Speights is a defensively liability right now…he needs to start working more on the defensive end, sooner rather than later.

by jemagee on Jan 1, 2009 9:31 AM PST reply actions