Overlooked Idiocy: The Dalembert Deal
It sure was fun hating Samuel Dalembert over the eight years he spent in Philadelphia. Which of his tried and true tendencies did you most look forward to loathing? Personally I couldn't wait for the opportunity to mock Slammin' Sammy after he padded his already insurmountable NBA lead in goaltending violations, but if the preferred object of your vitriol was the "uncontested 17-foot fadeaway", or the "commit obvious foul and then react with an incredulous stare of disbelief", or even the ol' "mistime the opening tip so badly that by the time I land I can no longer reach the ball", I sure won't blame you. Point is, we all hated him at times, some constantly, some only most of the time, and the truth is bad teams need a target at which to hurl abuse, and when it came to abuse hurling, his 6'11 frame was hard to miss. It is this history of hatred, in my opinion, that has allowed us Sixers fans to generally overlook the nearly incomprehinsible idiocy that was this summer's Dalembert Deal.
We keep hearing how impressed we should be by the Sixers' defensive stats this year: look how well they're defending, and that's without anyone who can protect the rim! Ok, but you know what would be better than that? If they had someone who could protect the rim! Say what you will about Dalembert's offensive capablities, and say what I have about his propensity for goaltending; Dalembert is, was, and always will be (always!) a good help defender, and a solid defensive presence in the lane, something the Sixers could desperately use right now (Elton Brand is about to become the first player since Zydrunas Ilgauskus in 2004-05 to lead his team in blocks without ever jumping once all season). And while his offensive inconsistencies over the course of his career were certainly frustrating, he seemed to get it for much of last year (the "it" in question being: don't shoot, only dunk), as evidenced by his 8 ppg and 55 FG %. Combine those numbers with 9.6 boards and 1.8 blocks in only 26 minutes a game, and any level-headed person can admit that we're looking at a productive statline that would surely help the current 76ers.
Let's compare that to what we got in exchange for the big man. The casual observer can be excused for thinking that Spencer Hawes is in the last year of a long career, going through the motions and trying to milk a last few millions out of his aging body. Of course, as I've had to double check oh so many times this year, Mr. Hawes is only 22 years old. That's right, 22. I don't know either. Maybe he's suffering through an usually late case of Osgood Slaughter Disease. That's my best guess. But his nightly 6.5 pts, 5 rbs, and 0.8 blocks are worth about as much to our cause as the sum of the two numbers on his jersey (or the product, or the quotient, or the dividend, etc), and he's not exactly what you might call "even mildly interesting in any way" (this summer Ron Artest was the guest editor for an issue of ESPN the Magazine, and in said issue he asked for an article to be written on ex-teammate Spence. I'm pretty sure this was a practical joke on Ron-Ron's part to see if he could get away with requesting and then publishing an article on such a boring person. And he did. And it was very boring). Then there's Andres Nocioni, a decent energy player who serves absolutely no purpose for the swingman-heavy Sixers (who need to devote as many minutes as possible to the youngsters), and as such has seemingly been cut out of the rotation, which is the right and frankly overdue decision.
Then there's this: ever notice how almost all of the trade rumors you stumble upon this time of year include at least one player who is attractive to the opposing team solely because of his expiring contract? Well, Sammy's got one of those. That would've been a nice trading chip to have right about now, when we are should be doing absolutely everything in our power to turn Andre Iguodala into something more condusive to the youth movement. Say we aren't able to include Dalembert in a deadline deal? The cap relief come this off-season would be more than welcome.
So, to recap:
We Gave: a very good defensive center with decent, if unobtrosive, offensive capabilities and an expiring contract.
We Got: a below-average center, both offensively and defensively, and a G/F who ideally will not play much if at all for the rest of the season (and, oh yeah, is set to make $6.6 million in 2011-12).
So unless you're betting on the longterm potential of Spencer Hawes (and if you are, for your own good, please click here), this trade made us worse in the interim and will cost us cap space in the future. Yes, Slammin' Sammy was fun to hate, and he didn't always have the best attitude, and he did look a fair amount like a portugese waterdog. But that's no reason to ignore the utter idiocy that was the trade that sent him out of time. Shame on you, Ed Stefanski, to manipulate your fanbase by hiding your ineptness behind the long, lean frame of a hated player. And furthermore, shame on you for being so goddamn inept in the first place.
Another user-created commentary provided by a Liberty Ballers reader.
12 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Agreed.
If you asked me today who I’d rather have on the squad – Iggy or Sammy? – I’d say Sammy.
Obviously, his expiring contract is more compatible with our rebuilding plans (we are rebuilding… aren’t we?). Sammy also wasn’t hurting anyone else’s game by being on the court. Even if you think about the development of Mo Speights, what harm is there in keeping a defensive-minded C around with him?
Ahhhhhhhhhh! I’m sick of having to stay up til 1:00AM to watch good hoops. I want the team in MY time zone to be good. Dammit.
by cliphord on Jan 29, 2011 4:38 AM PST via mobile reply actions
I understand that you are new here but this is not overlooked. Someone mentions it at least once a week (I think I’m underestimating).
Dalembert was an expiring contract and had been asking to be traded for years. The Sixers weren’t going anywhere this year and tried to get something out of him. You may be disappointed with what Hawes brings to the team but at least he is/was a young player with potential.
Besides, would you be so upset with Hawes if he averaged 11.7 points, 9.7 rebounds, and 1.4 blocks a game? Those are his averages per 36 minutes. I don’t think he’s been quite as bad as people have been making him out to be. I think he’s a solid backup on a team that unfortunately does not have a starter at his position. To say he brings absolutely nothing is silly. He actually rebounds better on a per minute basis than Brand. Why aren’t we complaining about Brand’s lack of rebounding? Because his numbers look pretty thanks to playing nearly 35 minutes a game?
Dalembert may have added 2 or 3 wins to a mediocre-to-bad team. His only value to the team was as an expiring contract. But there is nothing he could have brought in a trade that a combination of Kapono and Dongaila can’t. And looking at the list of free agents this season I don’t see anybody who would be worth pursuing that would come to Philly for the amount of money they would have had available to offer.
At the very least they got something, even if it is just a mediocre piece, instead of the risk of getting absolutely nothing. It wasn’t a great move but I think it’s a little harsh to call it “idiocy.”
Brand actually produces in 35 minutes.
Hawes can’t produce in 20.
It ain’t even apples and oranges, that was a “LeQuan”-esque argument.
I have decided that, for my own sanity, I will not respond to any of yours posts from now on. I’d appreciate if you do the same.
I would not be upset if Hawes put up 11.7, 9.7, and 1.4 a game in 36 minutes…but he doesn’t, because he’s not good enough to be on the court for 36 minutes a game, deeming those statistics nearly irrelevant. Not to mention, they are eerily similar to Tony Battie’s per 36 stats of 10/8.7/1.8. The notion that it was worth shedding a semi-valuable player with a very valuable contract for a center who can’t consistently earn more than 20 mins a game and who’s per36 stats are essentially Tony Battie’s (plus Nocioni’s bad contract) just to get “something” is ridiculous, especially because, without question, we could have gotten a better haul for him. Why you think Dalembert could’ve brought us nothing more valuable than a combo of Kapono and Dongalia (sic) is beyond me; he could be a quality piece for a contending team, and even if the money saved did not translate directly to a star player this off-season, it makes more sense to have money to spend than to spend money on nothing (in this case, we’ll be paying $6.6 mil for Nocioni to watch from the bench).
Hindsight is 20/20 my friend.
And our F/O isn’t known for its good decisions. lol
But it’s kind of pointless to really go into “what ifs”. If Hawes put up the same numbers and performance then it would be a wash. If he put up better numbers and performed better then we’d (the Sixers) look like geniuses. We can just file this under the folder entitled “Facepalm”. haha
"They say that nobody is perfect. Then they tell you practice makes perfect. I wish they'd make up their minds." - Wilt Chamberlain
Sorry You Got Stuck With Them...
What you see with Hawes is what you get. I lived in Sacramento until just recently and can tell you from 1st hand experience watching Hawes since he was a rookie that he is the classic case of all talent and little results. He’ll have a few good games here and there but his effort is inconsistent and his attitude isnt always great.
Hawes is very bright but not always very smart. My Dad has a great expression about guys like Hawes, “I wish I could buy him for what he’s worth and sell him for what he thinks he’s worth.” I’m sorrry you guys got stuck with him.
Kings Fan
Sammy for expiring contracts!?
Sammy HAS an expiring contract! Whoever started that “rumor” is obviously not very bright.
I suppose if he was packaged with someone else it would make sense, but trading Sammy solo for a different expiring contract is pretty idiotic in its own right.
I was uncool before it was cool
I didn't like the trade when it happened and still dont
I started a poll in the fan posts about this actually.
The only reason why Dalembert was traded was to get under the luxury tax threshold. What really sucks about this trade is that we lost our best interior defender during a year we could of have had a decent shot at a first round upset. And because it may prevent us from resigning Thad.
That beind said I can understand why the Sixers would make this decision:
a.) this team was horrible last season and it didn’t look like they were going anywhere
b.) this team was last in the league in attendance and Dalembert wasn’t worth going over the tax for
c.) Thad wasn’t that good last year and it looked as if he was going to be a 7th man rotational player at best.
Who's Been Eatin' Hummus?
She passed wind, excused herself, and sponged off in the corner as I sat dazed and confused...

by 











