NBA Offseason Thread

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

Salmons is a good player when he gets time. He does a little bit of everything, and can run the point a bit. I could see him averaging like 10, 5 and 5 or so.

 

He's a chucker...

 

Sac-Town is going to regret signing him for that much money, considering Wells is a much better player.

[Brett Favre 0]

He's not a chucker. The most games he ever took in a game the whole year was 18. He doesn't even shoot many threes.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

He's not a chucker. The most games he ever took in a game the whole year was 18. He doesn't even shoot many threes.

 

How many games have you seen of the 76er's games have you seen? There were a couple times when he cost them the game because of his chucking.

 

All my family in Philly are happy that he's gone. He won't put up the numbers your suggest. He's likely to back up Bibby at point though, because Garcia and Martin play his normal positon and are better then him at it.

[Brett Favre 0]

I saw a fair share. They play the Knicks and Nets a shitload of times, and they get their national games as well. A guy who averages 6 shots per 25 minutes a game is not a chucker.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

I saw a fair share. They play the Knicks and Nets a shitload of times, and they get their national games as well. A guy who averages 6 shots per 25 minutes a game is not a chucker.

 

He doesn't chuck when A.I. is in the line-up, but when A.I. is out he's a poors man Mike James.

 

Bonzi Wells was a big factor in the Sac-Town offense, and they replacement with Salmons??? Not too mention they extremely overpaid him.

 

The Raptors ended up being the winners of Salmons not coming to them, because they got a better player(Fred Jones) for cheaper(3 yrs/11 million)

 

Garcia and Martin >>>>>>> Salmons.

 

Salmons will most likely put up 8 PPG, 2 RPG, 3 APG.

[Precious Roy 0]

I want to know why Bonzi turned down over $7 mil a year from Sacramento. Isn't he worried that Ron Artest will kill him now?

 

Seriously though, I think that's about as good an offer as he was going to get. Maybe he can get bumped up to 8 per in a sign and trade, but he'll probably end up with a lesser team.

 

I don't understand this John Salmons lovefest at all. I think I'll call it the "Boris Diaw Syndrome"

 

And to touch on Al Harrington...why the hate for the Hawks on this deal? The point behind jettisoning him all along has been to clear room for their other, cheaper forwards. They didn't want to take comparable contracts back, the trade exception was the best thing that could have happened to them. The deal gives them a lot of flexibility and more cap room to resign their kids in a few years.

 

Potential Lineup:

 

Pachulia

S. Williams

Childress

Johnson

Claxton

 

with Marvin Williams, Josh Smith, Stoudamire, Lue off the bench.

 

Plus they might be able to sign a Wilcox/Drew Gooden/Reggie Evans/Melvin Ely now if they feel so inclined

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

I grew up a Kings fan, but I lived in Portland during the Bonzi Wells era and I am beyond relieved that he won't be back next year. This guy is an absolute headcase and only showed promise last year because he was in a contract year. Think of it as the "Jerome James" Award. Whoever signs him to that big contract will be rewarded with a guy who will become a locker room cancer the minute he is jettisoned to the bench for ballooning up 30 lbs. by Christmas.

[Ripper 0]

Josh Smith is a allstar in the making. He ain't going to the bench. He will probably start at the 4 with Marvin Williams starting at the 3.

 

The reason the Hawks are getting shitted on for this deal is because THAT couldn't have been the best deal on the table. Sure up your bench some more in the front court for christ sake. Our back up center is...I...I really don't know. I guess Esteban Batista. But seroiusly, any player that can come in and give minutes in the front court without needing starter minutes is esential right now.

 

Instead they take a high draft pick and thats pretty much it?

[Ripper 0]

I grew up a Kings fan, but I lived in Portland during the Bonzi Wells era and I am beyond relieved that he won't be back next year. This guy is an absolute headcase and only showed promise last year because he was in a contract year. Think of it as the "Jerome James" Award. Whoever signs him to that big contract will be rewarded with a guy who will become a locker room cancer the minute he is jettisoned to the bench for ballooning up 30 lbs. by Christmas.

 

Difference between Jerome James and Bonzi. Bonzi always has produced when on the court. Jerome James played 3 good games against the Kings and got a shit load of money. Bonzi has been a pretty consistant scorer since he came in the league. So I don't think Jerome James is a very good comparison.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Instead they take a high draft pick and thats pretty much it?

 

Did you miss the part where they got a trade exception? That's big, and probably better than anything else they could have gotten on the current market.

[Ripper 0]

Giving up 18-8 (although I am sure Childress, williams and Smith will more than take up the slack) for a trade exception and a pick in the twenties is not a good deal no matter how you cut it.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Atlanta wasn't being offered anything of worth. The most you will get in a sign-and-trade are bad contracts or loose parts that can help fill out a roster. With the trade exception, they were able to take back a draft pick and no other salaries. They got something for nothing. Harrington was a free agent, and was never resigning with the Hawks.

 

Say all you want about the Hawks mismanagement, but saving cap room is a better strategy than filling your squad with bench fodder that will take minutes from your developing young players and cap room that can be used better elsewhere. The Hawks can still pursue an Iverson, Gooden, Wilcox, Magloire or something else out there.

[teke184 0]

Atlanta wasn't being offered anything of worth. The most you will get in a sign-and-trade are bad contracts or loose parts that can help fill out a roster. With the trade exception, they were able to take back a draft pick and no other salaries. They got something for nothing. Harrington was a free agent, and was never resigning with the Hawks.

 

Say all you want about the Hawks mismanagement, but saving cap room is a better strategy than filling your squad with bench fodder that will take minutes from your developing young players and cap room that can be used better elsewhere. The Hawks can still pursue an Iverson, Gooden, Wilcox, Magloire or something else out there.

 

That trade exception is going to be passed around like Paris Hilton at a kegger...

[Precious Roy 0]

Josh Smith is a allstar in the making. He ain't going to the bench. He will probably start at the 4 with Marvin Williams starting at the 3.

 

The reason the Hawks are getting shitted on for this deal is because THAT couldn't have been the best deal on the table. Sure up your bench some more in the front court for christ sake. Our back up center is...I...I really don't know. I guess Esteban Batista. But seroiusly, any player that can come in and give minutes in the front court without needing starter minutes is esential right now.

 

Instead they take a high draft pick and thats pretty much it?

 

So they start Smith at the 3, whatever, the guys they have there are pretty much interchangable in the sense that any one of them could be a competent starter. I don't really see Smith as a 4, personally, he seems like a prototype 3 man, kind of a more explosive/less polished Kirilenko type. I can't see Sheldon Williams not starting at the 4, and I still think Marvin Williams is a 3 in a 4's body, at least at this point. They drafted Sheldon to give them some polished muscle inside, not to come off the bench, at least that's how I see it. If you didn't plan on having him start why would you lock in on him at #5 weeks before the draft.

 

But that's the thing I like about the Hawks' depth, you can make valid arguments for any one of Smith/Childress/Williams starting at the 3, or even at the 4 for Smith/Williams, and all three are versatile enough to play at least two positions.

 

And as Cheech13 reiterated, this was the best deal for the Hawks. The only other enticing offer they were getting was from the Warriors, but it involved players at the same positions they're already stacked at (I'm thinking Pietrus) plus filler they didn't want to make the contracts match. Why create a further logjam at the 2/3 and take some crappy contracts when you can have a big chunk of salary freedom to do whatever you want with? In the NBA right now a trade exception of that ammount is infinitely more valuable than some average player who's making a couple mil a year. Now they have flexibility to sign another big on the FA market, and have more room to reup a Childress or Smith in a few years. With a young, promising team it's smart strategy.

[goldengreek 0]

I want to know why Bonzi turned down over $7 mil a year from Sacramento. Isn't he worried that Ron Artest will kill him now?

 

Seriously though, I think that's about as good an offer as he was going to get. Maybe he can get bumped up to 8 per in a sign and trade, but he'll probably end up with a lesser team.

 

I don't understand this John Salmons lovefest at all. I think I'll call it the "Boris Diaw Syndrome"

 

And to touch on Al Harrington...why the hate for the Hawks on this deal? The point behind jettisoning him all along has been to clear room for their other, cheaper forwards. They didn't want to take comparable contracts back, the trade exception was the best thing that could have happened to them. The deal gives them a lot of flexibility and more cap room to resign their kids in a few years.

 

Potential Lineup:

 

Pachulia

S. Williams

Childress

Johnson

Claxton

 

with Marvin Williams, Josh Smith, Stoudamire, Lue off the bench.

 

Plus they might be able to sign a Wilcox/Drew Gooden/Reggie Evans/Melvin Ely now if they feel so inclined

Why Mavin Williams off the bench? Put that stud in the starting line up.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Sixers GM Billy King announced that Iverson is officially off the market and will not be discussed in trade possibilities. Nothing like battling for the #8 seed for the next five years, eh Philly?

[naiwf 0]

And the gap between Isiah Thomas and Billy King continues to diminish.

[the pinjockey 0]

In King's defense, he was reportedly trying to pull the trigger on a deal with Boston before the draft that would have netted them the 7th pick+ and Ainge didn't make it happen. Since that didn't happen, if the offers haven't been good (see Denver's "any two players excluding Carmelo" deal) then they should just keep him. No point in flat out giving him away.

[C Dubya 04 0]

The reason you would give him away is to flat out start over. Get some contracts that will go away, be terrible for a year and wind up with a good spot in next year's draft that's going to be incredible. I'm a Sixers fan and I'd much rather have seen them do that then suffer through another average to bad season.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

The current playoff format in the NBA breeds mediocrity. GM's are driven by the oppportunity to make the playoffs and secure the income stream from 2 or more home playoff games. They can say to their fanbase that they made the playoffs and are one or two moves from the finals. In reality, that's not the case. There are 3 or 4 contenders, 3 or 4 bad teams, and 20 or so that fit right in the middle. They are essentially interchangeable and slot up and down year to year based on trivial changes to the roster that handicap them long-term because they sacrifice the cap to keep together a sub-par nucleus. It's a vicious cycle.

[alfdogg 0]

The Sixers weren't doing bad until they traded for Chris Webber. They were two years removed from being the fourth seed in the East. Now, between Webber's selfishness and Green, Korver and Dalembert's contracts, they're in the situation they're in right now. To suggest that Iverson should be the casualty of all this is downright laughable.

[C Dubya 04 0]

The Sixers weren't doing bad until they traded for Chris Webber. They were two years removed from being the fourth seed in the East. Now, between Webber's selfishness and Green, Korver and Dalembert's contracts, they're in the situation they're in right now. To suggest that Iverson should be the casualty of all this is downright laughable.

 

I don't think he should be the casualty, I think that he has to be. For the reasons you mentioned. There is no way that any team would trade for Webber. Green, Korver and Dalembert's contracts make them almost untradeable. And the way the team stands right now they are around a 35 to 40 win team with no way of improving.

 

I love watching Allen Iverson play basketball, and feel lucky to have been able to see him countless times (including the run to the finals where I got to see some of the greatest individual basketball live), but sometimes you have to get worse to get better and he is really the only thing that they can move.

 

Now, also I think that the Sixers MUST have someone who is not Billy King making the decisions, but that's neither here nor there. The situation that King put the team in is an impossible one.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

The Sixers weren't doing bad until they traded for Chris Webber. They were two years removed from being the fourth seed in the East. Now, between Webber's selfishness and Green, Korver and Dalembert's contracts, they're in the situation they're in right now. To suggest that Iverson should be the casualty of all this is downright laughable.

 

Re-read your post and explain to me why Iverson can't be the casualty. You state that they were two whole years removed from being a #4 seed in the East when they traded for Webber. They weren't a contender, and they certainly aren't now that a couple years have passed and they have a couple more with these guys under contract.

 

The Sixers (and their fans) have to decide what they want. Do you want to fight for an 8th seed every year, or do you want to start rebuilding now with the intent to really compete 3-5 years down the road. McKie, Mashburn and Webber will all be off the books by the end of '08 season. If you can move Iverson for a package of young players with upside, draft picks and short-term contracts, you are in a position to have a solid base in just two years.

[the pinjockey 0]

That is the point, though. If they were getting offered a package of young players and a bad contract (read: Boston trade King wanted to make), then we wouldn't be having this discussion as Iverson would already be on a flight to his new team.

 

There is a difference between rebuilding with newly acquired young players (perfectly acceptable, what most Sixers fans are pleading for actually) and punting the season entirely for a draft pick (this is what can not happen, no Barkley deals again).

[Just John 0]

I agree with the Sixers needing to trade AI. I understand the idea of keeping your superstar to keep your team competitive, but this line up Philly is putting out hasn't been anywhere near good in years. Occasionally, they'll make it to the playoffs because the competition is so weak (the East has put 1 or more sub-.500 teams in the playoffs for a few years now). Unfortunately, a few years down the line, it creates a retrospective illusion of success for the team, when in reality, that isn't the case. If you look at the past couple of seasons where Philly has gone to the playoffs, they stumbled in and/or were picked to be beaten easily in the first round. Their current lineup is a not a championship caliber lineup and never will be. Sometimes you have to take a step backwards to go two steps forward.

[naiwf 0]

The Sixers weren't doing bad until they traded for Chris Webber. They were two years removed from being the fourth seed in the East. Now, between Webber's selfishness and Green, Korver and Dalembert's contracts, they're in the situation they're in right now. To suggest that Iverson should be the casualty of all this is downright laughable.

 

Re-read your post and explain to me why Iverson can't be the casualty. You state that they were two whole years removed from being a #4 seed in the East when they traded for Webber. They weren't a contender, and they certainly aren't now that a couple years have passed and they have a couple more with these guys under contract.

 

The Sixers (and their fans) have to decide what they want. Do you want to fight for an 8th seed every year, or do you want to start rebuilding now with the intent to really compete 3-5 years down the road. McKie, Mashburn and Webber will all be off the books by the end of '08 season. If you can move Iverson for a package of young players with upside, draft picks and short-term contracts, you are in a position to have a solid base in just two years.

 

Exactly. The Sixers are trying to do what the Knicks were planning on doing every year, barely make it to an 8th seed, get 2 playoff home games and continue to die under the burdens of having a multitude of untradable contracts that only made the team marginally better. If they don't dump AI while he still has value they'll just end up with him being their version of Allan Houston WHEN, not if he breaks down eventually. Tanking a year isn't the worst thing in the world when they might be able to pick up a franchise type player in next year's draft. At worst, they shed big bucks off of their cap and can enter the LeBron/Wade/'Melo etc sweepstakes in 3 years.

[C Dubya 04 0]

That is the point, though. If they were getting offered a package of young players and a bad contract (read: Boston trade King wanted to make), then we wouldn't be having this discussion as Iverson would already be on a flight to his new team.

 

There is a difference between rebuilding with newly acquired young players (perfectly acceptable, what most Sixers fans are pleading for actually) and punting the season entirely for a draft pick (this is what can not happen, no Barkley deals again).

 

Actually, with the salary cap considerations it would be hard to ever have a deal like the Barkley deal again (where you trade your superstar for a crap platter that doesn't help). As long as they don't take on any terrible salaries in the process and can clear money to make a run in a year or two, they will be better off in the long run.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Screamin A Smith was on the ESPN this afternoon discussing the Iverson story. He said that the Sixers can't afford to go into a rebuilding mode and that the only way you trade Iverson is if you get a comparable All-Star in return (Carmelo Anthony and Paul Pierce were names he threw out). Does this guy not understand that today's NBA is not driven by the players, but the contracts by which they are binded to? What good would it do to trade an All-Star for Iverson... you won' tbe any closer to winning a championship. And why can't Philly accept a rebuild now, they are essentially half way there.

[C Dubya 04 0]

Stephen A. is an idiot. He doesn't know shit about shit which is why he screams.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Stephen A. is an idiot. He doesn't know shit about shit which is why he screams.

 

This is true. I was just hoping that since he was from Philadelphia and covered the team that he would have a little better insight. At least he didn't scream about them needing to find a dog, someone they could take into a fight.