Uh oh, fellow Sixers fans: We got problems.

[DuckyNinja]

Why hasn't Ricky been banned yet?  He was a troll on the Philaphans board and banned there.  He certainly doesn't belong here.

FYI, I've already banned ricky at another board.  I don't need you telling me who ricky is, what kind of poster he is, or how to do my "job".

Well, that's the last I'll say about that then.

[RickyPryor]

I apologize if I offended you.

In my mind, I honestly believe I argue with people with the same intensity they themselves employ.  I could very well be wrong.  I've been told I am.

Believe it or not I actually read what I write more than once to make sure I'm not coming across as a jerk.  Perhaps my editorial skills are lacking as well.

I'm merely suggesting this team needs MUCH more tweaking than people here realize.  To a MAN we are inferior to Boston.  Think about that:  How could we possibly win anything of consequence, anytime soon, when each and every man we have (managment included) is inferior?  It's deflating.

Of course when I make statements like this I am going on all the evidence presented to me.  Recent performance included.  Observation.  Common sense (mine, anyway).  All the same things everyone else presumably uses when discussing topics.

And from what I've seen (my opinion only), the Sixers will not compete against the 'elite' teams next year.  No way, no how.  I'll take 47 wins and a second round appearance next year in a heartbeat.  But I recall saying that last year, too.

I wish I could share your optimistic view.  I would sleep much better and smile more.

Next up: The Cavs.

[bebopdeluxe]

If you tell me that who the coach and PG will be next season, I'll tell you if they can win a playoff round or two next season.  If DiLeo is back?  NFW.  If Miller is back?  Iggy and Thad will have to work way too hard for us to make any noise in the playoffs.

But if we hire Collins, sign Jack with the MLE and draft Curry?

I could easily see 50 wins and playing basketball at this point in the season.

[RickyPryor]

*Delonte >> Green (Not a wider margin to West's injured status.)
Williams > Miller
Z >> Sam (Will Sam win any of these matchups?)
LeBron >> Iggy (Will IGGY win any of these matchups?)
*Varejoa > Young (by a nose, due to his defense, height & heart)

*A little uunfortunate, due to Brand's injured status.  Had that not been the case, I believe Elton would trump V...and, then, Iggy would surpass Delonte.  But it was the case...and at the moment...Brand can't be counted on since he's consistently injured.

Smith > Evans (Not as wide a margin as most believe.)
Gibson < Williams (Our first edge in this exercise; and it ain't a big one.)
Wally = Speights (I'm being kind to Marreese.)

Mike Brown >> Tony


So, over the course of TWO full roster comparisons...we have ONE better positional player, when compared head-to-head.  ONE single matchup.  This is worse than I thought...

[tk76-]

The Sixers are not a serious playoff team next year.  It should be about improvement, not about match-up against top teams

In 2 years...

1.  Cleveland may not have Lebron (and the Celtics likely will be much changed too.)

2.  Looking at C and PF: Z will be retired or a 36 year old shell of a center.  Speights/Brand should be better than Varejo + whomever the Cavs start next to Varejo.

3.  Lebron/West vs Thad/Iguodala will be a good match-up in 2 years.  No one will stop Lebron, but its not like the Sixers will lack scoring or defense at these two positions.  Cavs have the clear advantage, but at least they have good athletes and size at 2/3 to send at Lebron.  Other opponents of the Cavs will be at a greater disadvantage.

4.  PG?  Who knows who the Sixers have in 2 years (likely not on the roster.)  Hopefully someone who can defend and hit the 3 ball.  Who knows if they will be better or worse than Williams.  If 2 years ago someone told you Mo Williams was going to be the Cavs PG it would not have inspired much concern.

[RickyPryor]

It should be about improvement, not about match-up against top teams

We've averaged 40 wins for EIGHT YEARS NOW.  I'm tired of settling for "improvement" (and it never coming).  ALL I'm interested in now is how we stack up against other teams.

In 2 years...

With all due respect:  I can only smile when fans cite how OTHER teams will decline "in two years" time, while assuming we'll be the only ones to improve.  Two years ago the Celtics won TWENTY FOUR games.  And two years ago I'll bet you thought they'd suck for the next 8.

[tk76-]

It sounds like all you want to discuss is in what ways a 41 win Sixer team matches up poorly against teams that won 55+ games.  If you don't want to talk about the future then you might as well compare the 1997 Sixers with the 1997 Bulls.  Guess what, the Sixers matched up poorly at every position.

If you are talking about an average team then you need to talk about how you expect them to be with the same core players in 2 years.  Otherwise you are just confirming that this year they were average.  If you don't think those players will be good projecting forward then you make changes... but not based on what they gave you last year.

Young will never again be in his second year.  Miller will only get older.  Any evaluation of this team has to spent looking forward.  Otherwise you would say Miller is more valuable to the team than Young becasue he was a better player in 2008.

[RickyPryor]

It sounds like all you want to discuss is in what ways a 41 win Sixer team matches up poorly against teams that won 55+ games.  If you don't want to talk about the future then you might as well compare the 1997 Sixers with the 1997 Bulls.  Guess what, the Sixers matched up poorly at every position.

This isn't about "matchups".  That implies game-planning and competition.  This is about "stacking up".  Which is all about inferiority of inventory.

We need to get better (people) at most EVERY POSITION.  Not just 2-3 guys "improving". 

[tk76-]

Again, we know that this past year's team was mediocre.  Any .500 team compares poorly to teams that win 60+ games.  But this will not be the same line-up they put out by playoffs next year, even if they make no new additions.  If you want to know what changes need to be made you have to at least try to project the roster forward- as this season is over for them.

So if you want to compare, look at Young/Iguodala/Brand/Speights and try and predict how they will be in a couple of years.  And try and figure out what the team can and will add to complement them.

Still falls short of a contender IMO, but a much more relevant exercise than dwelling on a weak team where the starter at C/PF/SG/PG likely will all be different when the playoffs roll around next year.

This isn't about "matchups".  That implies game-planning and competition.  This is about "stacking up".  ... Not just 2-3 guys "improving". 

That's not entirely true.

If the Sixers this year went C/PF with Sam/Young, but in 2 years will be starting Speights/Brand then we should look at what the team will be instead of dwelling on what was during .500 season. 

A 36 year old Z and Ilgaskas in 2 years does not compare well to Speights and Brand (even at 32.)  You an argue about a how they compare with KG at age 35 and Perkins.  That is more important when evaluating the team then looking at what they did this past season. 

Same thing at PG and SG.  Who cares how Miller played this year at age 33 or that WG is a poor excuse for an NBA starter.  We all know that.  Hopefully in 2 years it will be a new PG and either Iguodala or a new player at SG- and comparing other team's PG/SG to Miller/Green is as useful as comparing them to the Sixers PG/SG in 1983.  In both cases the starters at PG/SG on those past teams are different what we will see as soon as next year.  So last years starters at those positions have no bearing on the future.

[Derek Bodner]

*Varejoa > Young (by a nose, due to his defense, height & heart)

Not even friggin close.  Varejao's defense is criminally overrated.  Young's a much better player NOW and will be twice the player in two years.

[bebopdeluxe]

derek:

Why waste your time having a debate with someone who would take Varejao over Thad?

[RickyPryor]

I sense some homer-ism.

I believe that if Young had ended the season the same way he played for most OF the season...you'd be whistling a different tune.

For the most part he was invisible for the first 70% of the season.  I like the guy...but it's HIS defense that is wildly overrated (it's fine; no more).

He has greater potential maybe...but at the '4' (which is how he's being judged here)...take 'V'.  Since, ya know, he is one.

[Derek Bodner]

For the most part he was invisible for the first 70% of the season.  I like the guy...but it's HIS defense that is wildly overrated (it's fine; no more).

he averaged 14+ ppg in January, February, March and April.  That's not invisible.  especially when you're talking about for a 20 year old.

And if his defense is "fine", then that's as good as Varejoa's.

[Derek Bodner]

derek:

Why waste your time having a debate with someone who would take Varejao over Thad?

I don't know.

[RickyPryor]

he averaged 14+ ppg in January, February, March and April.  That's not invisible.

That's also not the beginning of the season, to which I referred.  How was November and December?

  especially when you're talking about for a 20 year old.

I'm not.  I'm talking about how we stack up against others at the same position.  I don't care if he's 6.

And if his defense is "fine", then that's as good as Varejoa's.

Not in my opinion...but for another day I suppose.

When we speak about the '4', we should speak of rebounds.  I don't "need" 15 PPG from my '4'.  (I'll take them, sure.  But I'm FAR more interested in Rebounds.  And defense against other 4's.  How do their rebounds compare, while you have your stats out in front of you?)