Winning a Title
by jemagee on Nov 16, 2009 4:27 PM PST
31 comments
Well, Speights is down for 6-8 weeks, Brand is the highest paid player on the roster and he'll be coming off the bench soon, the sixers currently will be starting 2 (maybe 3) guys who wouldn't be starters on quality NBA teams with a shot to win a title, so I thought I'd propose the following discussion and see where it goes.
Winning a title. Isn't that what it's about in sports...I mean once you hit high school varsity (or even middle school) it's not about 'everyone playing' anymore, it's about winning. Hell for me, it was around 6th grade when I played goalie for a DELCO soccer team (do they still have those any more). I'm a fan of the sixers (and phillies and eagles and wisconsin badgers) but even I admit I pay more attention when the team looks like it has a chance to contend for a title (or even making the finals).
Sure, there are professional sports teams out there with cheap owners (Kansas City Royals, Los Angeles Clippers for example) who treat their teams more of a tax write off than trying to build a title or with crazy owners (Oakland Raiders, Golden State Warriors) or with rich owners who don't know when to get out of the way (Dallas Cowboys, Washington Redskins)...and come on, no one expects any of those team (any of them Jordan) to win a title as long as the current 'junta' running said team is in place. If I was a fan of any of those teams, I'd be tempted to jump ship, cause just once, I'd like a realistic shot of winning some time in the future.
Sure, I got a win from the phillies, and maybe someday I'll get one from the eagles, but the sixers are the ones I want the title from. I'd trade those world series wins for another NBA title.
Since 2001, I haven't looked at a sixers roster and thought, this is a roster that can win a title, now or in the future, and I still don't see a roster built to win any time soon...do you?
What's wrong with the roster? Is it the fact that Comcast has to answer to the bottom line (which I think is an incorrect way to run a professional sports franchise, if you win it, they will come), is it the fact that while DiLeo drafts while he doesn't draft good pieces? Is it the curse of the rat? Of Iverson?
It's 8 years since the last time the sixers made the NBA finals - and as far as I'm concerned they don't look any closer than they did 5 years ago...
What do you think? And Why?
0 recs |
31 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I think Elton Brand was the dagger for the Iguodala era. If he doesn’t sign we have a lot of money and young nucleus when Sam and Green come off the books, but who am I to say Stefanski would’ve that money correctly?
by jsams on Nov 16, 2009 4:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Eliminate Josh Smith – the sixers weren’t getting him – it’s a pipe dream to think so – and i don’t think the suns SSOL can win a title…what would you have spend the money on.
More importantly – how many teams win NBA titles without a big man who can post up?
by jemagee on Nov 16, 2009 4:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
DET did a pretty good job of it. so did the jordan era bulls, unless you think bill wennington and
so did the jordan era bulls, unless you think bill wennington, dennis rodman, and luc longley were bonifide post threats.
human beings, who are almost unique in their ability to learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
by variablesdont on Nov 16, 2009 4:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
A. Not recent
B. Jordan is a basketball anomaly
by jemagee on Nov 16, 2009 5:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so is thad young.
human beings, who are almost unique in their ability to learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
by variablesdont on Nov 16, 2009 5:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok – so you think Thaddeus Young will be as good at basketball as Michael Jordan who was one of the best of all time.
Ricky pryor – is that you?
by jemagee on Nov 16, 2009 5:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
where did i say that?
jordan is a basketball anomaly because of his outstanding greatness.
thad young, albeit for different reasons, is just as much of an anomaly.
human beings, who are almost unique in their ability to learn from the experiences of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.
by variablesdont on Nov 16, 2009 5:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well, who are free agents next year? if stefanski didn’t pay brand, we could’ve rolled with the core (andre, thad, speights, jrue, lou) last year, this year, and next year, and see what happens when Sam and green’s contracts expire.
they’d have 5 players under contract in the summer of 11
andre – 13.5 million
lou – 5 million
speights – 2.7 million
thad – 4 million (qualifying offer)
jason smith 3.1 million (qualifying offer)
that’s about 29 million, meaning they’d have 25 million to spend assuming they don’t extend Thad first.
free agents in summer of ’11:
glen davis
al horford
joakim noah
melo (maybe)
nene (maybe)
jr. smith
pau gasol
david west (maybe)
greg oden (restricted)
spencer hawes (restricted)
tim duncan (maybe)
tony parker
by jsams on Nov 16, 2009 5:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, what you would hope for is that Thad develops into that Worthy/Melo potential celilng he has. Speights has Amare/Sheed potential. I do agree that Brand was a mistake. But if you eliminate Brand and focus on building this team’s young core to gel 3+ years into the future, between Andre, Thad, Speights & Jrue, you have a potential high-level core, if all of them work towards it, individually and as a unit. You need a defensive center to complete it though, and a better coach obviously.
by MojoPharoah on Nov 16, 2009 6:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The original mistake was made at the time of the AI trade
They had the worst record in the league (I think 5-24.) They should have decided to fully bottom out and maximize picks/young assets for the 2 additional years on CWebbs contract.
Instead they ended up a 500 team from there on out, signed Brand and are now in purgatory for about 4 more years (at least.)
Not saying having a bottom 5 record for 3 years would have meant they would be better now, but there is no reason a team like this should be committed to 27M-34M for 2 good but not great players for the next 4 years (Brand and Iguodala.) It essentially means no cap maneuverability for trades or FA.
http://www.phillyarena.com - Philly sports forum/blog
by tk76 on Nov 16, 2009 8:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Maybe comcast did not allow them to bottom out?
It would have been a huge gate hit to be bottom 5, but then again they are last in gate now- so they screwed themselves by trying to stay competitive.
…Don’t mistake what I’m saying for tanking. I’m saying staying afloat on the backs of large contracts/minutes for Miller, Brand and Joe Smith is not the way to win when you want to rebuild. It yeilds .500 records and empty wins and no hope at truly transformational talent.
http://www.phillyarena.com - Philly sports forum/blog
by tk76 on Nov 16, 2009 8:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And the irony is they still ended up with great picks with Speights and Thad… so they could still have been fine without the “win now” move of signing brand and holding onto Miller.
I would not have signed Smith or Brand- the team was far from ready to compete. I’d have taken the cap space and Miller’s expiring to the table and tried to turn that into as many 1st round picks and young talent as possible. Types of deals where you take one a big 1-2 year contract and just buy the player out. Other capped teams pay #’s and young assets if you can clear 10-20M off of their cap a year or two earlier.
So from 2007-9 you stockpile talent and keep finantial flexibility.
then in either 2010 or 2011/12 (more likely 2011/2) you turn some young assets and cap space into vet star that can take your young talent to a higher level (since the young talent is old enough to win, unlike when they signed Brand or added Miller.)
http://www.phillyarena.com - Philly sports forum/blog
by tk76 on Nov 16, 2009 8:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Speights and Young are good, but if they would’ve gotten Durant (long shot even if they were bottom 5) I’d think we’d have a much, much, much better future with Durant and Iguodala who could’ve been modern Jordan and Pippen.
by jsams on Nov 16, 2009 9:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If you wanna go back to the AI trade, how about how bad a deal it was? It ended up being AI for 10+ wins for the 2 and a half years of Miller, (not a good thing because it just made us mediocre), one year of Joe Smith, and Jason Smith. We let both Miller and Smith walk for nothing so it was essentially Iverson for Jason Smith. One of the worst trades ever, considering the probability that there were better trades on the table. Some variation of Boozer, Al Jefferson, and/or Rajon Rondo was the big one.
by jsams on Nov 16, 2009 9:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s sort of where my babbling was going. They held on to AI to long (losing value) and then took back too much. They should have worked to get young players and expiring who they should have bought out. Doping from worse record to 12th pick was a joke. They went on a huge winning run using Miller and Joe Smith. Why?
http://www.phillyarena.com - Philly sports forum/blog
by tk76 on Nov 17, 2009 5:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair, most of the NBA is (of varrying degrees) stuck in this purgatory. Like I’ve said before, there’s only a handful of teams that even have a chance of winning the Finals, and I don’t think that’s going to change very much next year because, for all the talk, I think LeBrons staying put and all those big time FAs are going to baiscally wind up being traded for each other. So I think it’ll be more of the same for not just the Sixers, but also 25 other teams.
by philiafan14364 on Nov 16, 2009 8:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
The original mistake was long before the Iverson trade, the moment the rules changed and the rat left, Iverson should have been traded, but not by King, King should have been jettisoned as well…when the rat left, they should have cleaned house
by jemagee on Nov 16, 2009 9:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
+1
They would have gotten good value for AI at that point.
It was clear them team was declining. That was the time to act (although they had already trtaded away a few #1 picks, making it a tough time to rebuild.)
http://www.phillyarena.com - Philly sports forum/blog
by tk76 on Nov 17, 2009 5:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hindsight is 20/20. Step one in turning this around is getting rid of Elton Brand. We can’t have him on the books for 15+ mill for the next 4 years.
by jsams on Nov 16, 2009 9:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. I say you build around Andre, Thad & Speights. Jrue has some definite complimentary potential, if not more. You get a defensive center(Solomon Alabi from FSU would be nice). Then you cultivate Smith & Lou as rotation players off the bench. You need another banger(Sheldon Williams type) and a sweet-shooting wing who can defend both wing spots.
You bring in a coach that stresses pressure defense and the running game, with any type of non-stagnant offensive system(Pro-style Princeton, the Triangle or Adelman’s hybrid, maybe). The priority is on defense in a Coach Carter type of way. You defend, hustle and run the floor or else you sit.
That type of approach, in 3-4 years when the young core above is either in or just entering their prime might be able to make a run at this thing, IMO.
by MojoPharoah on Nov 16, 2009 10:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Try and trade Brand without taking back bad, long contracts.
Whomever can do that should have an arena named after them.
http://www.phillyarena.com - Philly sports forum/blog
by tk76 on Nov 17, 2009 5:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, that’s the tough part. There is a possibility that you could turn him into a defensive enforcer with some skills in the meantime. Waiting until there are just a couple years left, or you find some dumb GM(Memphis) who thinks that a change of venue would do wonders…
by MojoPharoah on Nov 17, 2009 7:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What hindsight, I was callig for Iverson trades years before it happened
by jemagee on Nov 17, 2009 6:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Props there. Would’ve been the smart move. Barkley said a long time ago that he would’ve moved AI and started to build with Iguodala as a core piece instead.
by MojoPharoah on Nov 17, 2009 7:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m new to the 76ers board….
Since 1983 (a span of almost 27 years). The 76ers have been a lowlife of the NBA, and perhaps the worst franchise in the city, in those 27 seasons (with the exception of the 1998/99 – 2000/01 seasons before Motumbo that is). It’s sad to think that this could’ve happened to a franchise that once dominated the NBA.
It has to start at the top….Ed Snider….(yes the same guy who owns the Flyers, one of the best organizations in the NHL). Why is it he can continue to build solid ice hockey teams, but he can’t put together a strong Basketball team?
In the last 27 years, the 76ers have had only one elite NBA headcoach.
A team that used to have the likes of Wilt Chamberlain, Lucious Jackson, Hal Greer, Billy Cunningham (player & coach), Bobby Jones, Julius “The Doctor” Erving, Maurice Cheeks (the player, not the coach), Andrew Tony, Moses Malone…the list goes on..
Are now into scouting players like – Jellybean Bryant, Manute Bol, Shawn Bradley, to modern day players like Lou Williams, Sammy Dalembert, Willie Greene..so many busts!
Until they stop drafting busts and decide to take a chance on a legitimat head coach, then the empty seats and the losing will continue..
A big post man, would be nice…but the Bulls didn’t need one and neither did the Pistons. But, while Luke Longley wasn’t an offensive threat in the post, he had the height and weight to cause problems for opposing offensive post players on the defensive side of the floor. Same with Ben & Rashead Wallis.
by FlyersGoalies1and27 on Nov 17, 2009 3:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
A big post man, would be nice…but the Bulls didn’t need one and neither did the Pistons. But, while Luke Longley wasn’t an offensive threat in the post, he had the height and weight to cause problems for opposing offensive post players on the defensive side of the floor. Same with Ben & Rashead Wallis.
Good lord I love how peopole use the exceptions – the unique teams either in make up (bad boys beating the crap out of each other) or the GOAT (Jordan) to say that the fact that MOST teams needa real big man to win a title isn’t true.
How can second round picks or low first round picks be busts? Dalembert Green and WIlliams outplayed their pick status and you conveniently ignore Korver cause it misses your point?
by jemagee on Nov 17, 2009 8:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It is more accurate to say that teams require a consistently effective offense headlined by a highly efficient scorer, especially a playoff-tested one. Now, does that scorer have to be a big? Not really, but, historically speaking, highly efficient lead scorers have tended to be bigs rather than smalls.
Jordan was a volume scorer who regularly shot 50+% in his prime and in the neighborhood of that during the 2nd 3-peat. There are more than a few bigs today that would struggle to make the same claim.
The real question is do you believe that Speights or Thad could, given 16-18 shots per game, convert at an efficient level in his prime? If not, then we need to keep looking for the player that can.
by MojoPharoah on Nov 17, 2009 11:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s more accurate to say that if you have the GOAT or a smothering defense you might win without a big man.
The sixers, no matter what the offense, have nothing close to a championnship defense
by jemagee on Nov 18, 2009 6:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Defense is a completely different subject. I agree that the Sixers need to improve exponentially to have a championship-caliber defense. But the offensive is where my argument is centered. A championship caliber offense is consistently effective, requiring lead scorers who are highly efficient.
IMO, the SIxers could potentially build such an attack focused on Speights with Thad & Andre as 2a & 2b. All three are relatively efficient scorers who are still getting better. Plus, all three could be part of an elite defense as well (especially with Holiday at point and a defensive anchor at C).
by MojoPharoah on Nov 18, 2009 12:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
