Did we trade the 13th for the 16th straight up? What's the point, why
not just take the guy at 13?

Did we just draft Iguodala again in Carney? I hear he's got good D,
and now KK can come off the bench like he should.

Dont know much about him. They say he has no middle game. What does
that mean - he cant shoot from 12-15, he can't dribble, he likes to
stand at the 3point line, what?

I was hoping for PG Marcus Williams from CT, but he's still on the
board so maybe there's something wrong there. That would have put
Iggy at SF and KK on the bench, with two good guards on the court.

Swyck

I would have rather had the Sixers take Marcus Williams as well.

Hell, I'd have much rather had them just kept the kid they took with the
13th pick. I've never seen a team trade down & get NOTHING extra in
return, but unless theres further info to surface, thats just what
happened. Nice move Billy, ya genius.

This team will win NOTHING of substance until Billy King AND Allen
Iverson are gone.

Swyck wrote:

Teams don't trade down for nothing. EVER. They had to get something,
things are often announced after the fact, it won't be a whole lot,
maybe
a 2nd next year or a young player.

Dennis

"Greg" <brunell-8@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:21765-44A3333E-136@storefull-3233.bay.webtv.net...

They picked up a 2007 2nd round pick + cash considerations.

So, yes, they pretty much swapped the pick straight up.

You have to think the plan if for Carney and Andre Ig to start at the two
and three next year. Now who goes where, I don't know and it may not
matter. This also tells us that AI will return next year, and once again
will play PG, which is OK with me. I guess it will be Willie Green and
Kyle Korver off the bench at 2-3, but I'm still not sure who takes the 4-8
minutes a night behind AI as the backup PG. Maybe Louis Williams will be
trusted in that minor role. Hopefully we have seen the last of Kevin Ollie
and John Salmons.

Since we have no pick in the 2nd round, it looks like no change at the four
and five spots. Which is trouble.

----- Kurt Straub

<Swyck> wrote in message news:ndb6a2tv64me4kptbl3vpf4i788866mq8k@4ax.com...

Kurt Straub wrote:

I'm pretty much with your thinking here Kurt. The only reason to take
Williams is if Iverson is definitely going to be traded. I didn't
really understand all the stuff that was saying the Sixers had a hole
at PG when Iverson has consistently shown in the past two years that he
is perhaps at his most productive at the 1. Salmons should be gone
(finally) though somehow I suspect that Ollie will stay - or at least
be traded 3 times and make it back by the end of the year.

I'm not sure though that a whole lot can be done at the 4/5 slots
barring total roster reconstruction. Webber will demand and get his
minutes. The team is pretty much locked in with Dalembert at center,
and even with his flaws, I'd still say he's probably in the top half of
starting centers in the league when he's healthy. Going from the last
quarter of the year, I have some mild confidence that Hunter can be
decent for 20 minutes a night at backup 4. The problem is that he'll
probably mostly be a backup 5, which is where the bad news is. And
though I'm sure there are a number of minimally competent backup
centers out there, like every year, that could be picked up to fill the
role, who knows if King will actually go out and get one, or keep them
around if he does (a la passing through M. Jackson & Z Hamilton). In
any case, the point is that any big guy from the 2nd round would either
be a long project or just one of this breed of interchangeable stiffs
in waiting. Might as well pick up an experienced one by free agency or
waivers.

Anyway, I kind of like the pick of Carney. I know nothing about him
other than the descriptions I've heard in the last few days, but those
make him sound like the "Bruce Bowen type" a lot of people were saying
the team could use last year, except more atheletic. Of course, I
believe you and I, Kurt, are fully agreed that Bruce Bown himself
actually sucks, but the presumed type is certainly useful.


--IK

"Ian Kognitow" <covanus@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1151585916.864132.105530@d56g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...

Shouldn't this be obvious? If the Sixers had any notion of trading Iverson,
Williams was the logical pick, in fact probably the only defensible pick.
Yet they left him on the board to take Iguodala Version 2.0.

Yet even so, you have a professional basketball writer, David Aldridge, with
a column in the Inky today, who writes that it's just a matter of time now,
the Iverson era is about to end. "Write it in ink," says the scribe.

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/14925179.htm

I'd love to know what happened yesterday to cause Aldridge to write that
article for publication today. The draft having just occurred, he does not
even mention it in his article. Sometimes evidence is such a devilish thing!


A mystery to me, too. Iverson had a great year last year. In fact, I'd say
his last two years were the best of his career, even better than his MVP
year. To have a talent like this, who can play point guard, and do it
productively, is a wondrous thing. Only in Philadelphia would anybody think
of it as a problem of some sort.



Hee heee, well, history is on your side.



I'm higher on Webber than you, but there's no doubt that at his age and
physical condition, to maximize his effectiveness, he has to play no more
than 30 minutes a night, and they've all got to be at forward, none at
center. It's not that he can't play center, but having to bang for 5
minutes at center is going to run the Webber engine like 10 minutes at
forward. Actually I think Webber has the basketball IQ to play just about
anywhere on the court, but he doesn't have the athleticism to go more than
30 minutes a night anymore.


The team is pretty much locked in with Dalembert at center,

You might be a bit higher on Hunter than me, but for sure he showed much
greater effectiveness at forward than at center last year. So if you play
Webber 30 minutes and Hunter 18 minutes at the 4, you might be all right!
Trouble is, you still have to find a body to play center.


I've lost some faith in Sammy. It's a little sad, because I've seen him
play to his highest potential, and that was darn good. As between Hunter,
Bradley and Randolph at center, those guys are so bad, they justify playing
Sammy 48 minutes a night. I'd have taken a flyer on a 7-0 project if we had
a second round pick. (Why couldn't King get that second round pick this
year instead of next for swapping first rond picks with the Bulls??) I'm
fearing that the Sixers are going to lose a lot of games this year just
because they will be so ovematched at center. My improbable solution is to
make a deal for Jamaal Magloire.


Yes, we are in the same club there. If Carney (whom I've never seen play)
is being described accurately, he should contribute more than such a role
player. Supposedly he can not only play tough "D," he can also shoot
outside and run the floor, finish baskets on the break. Hope so! If it's
all true, he could make a very nice starting two guard.

----- Kurt Straub

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:27:12 -0400, "Kurt Straub"
<jkurtstraub@comcast.net> wrote:
I'd be fine with Magloire, I'm just not sure how we get him.

There are teams are fairly loaded with adequate (more or less)
centers, the type that would make a great backup for Sammy. Any of
them would be a great improvement over what we have, and could
probably take a few minutes at PF as well.

How about one of the Seattle centers, Petro or Swift? They both
rebound and block some shots. Seattle also has Wilcox, Collison, and
Fortson, and they just drafted Sene so they may be willing to part
with one of those guys. Milwaukee also has bodies so they may be
willing to move Magloire, but I'd settle for Gadzuric.

Again, what do we have that they need? I dont see a lot of matches,
but that may be because I think we're not all that good, and we don't
have a lot of depth to trade from.

In retrospect, wouldn't this team be a lot better off with Kenny
Thomas and Brian Skinner still on it? I just think the lineup fits
out a lot better that way.

Swyck

Swyck wrote:

I actually think that Gadzuric would be a better option here - and as
you say, he's much more feasible since I don't think there's any way
for the team to really get up to around $8m in salary to match
Magloire. Whatever the opinions are about the effectiveness of Webber,
I don't think that it can be denied that his basic athleticism has been
sapped away and one of the major problems last year was that between
Webber's inability to move and Hunter's inability to play on defense,
the Sixers had absolutely no interior defense when Dalembert was not on
the floor (which was often because of fouls). Having Webber and
Magloire playing at the same time, would just seem way too slow, and I
think teams, especially with the Phoenix-style offensive schemes
becoming popular, would just run circles around them. Gadzuric would
at least provide a much more athletic, and still capable, fill-in for
Dalembert. The question would be whether he's worth Korver - who is
really the only movable piece for the Sixers. I still think that his
shooting is important and, unless Carney immediately becomes a big time
shooter, necessary to keep around. Judging by a lot of King's comments
going back to the end of the reg. season, I think that Korver will
probably be moved though.

One of the interesting things to look at for next year, assuming the
team will more or less stay as currently constructed, is how, with the
exception of Webber, it seems like the Sixers could put out what would
probably be the flat-out fastest team in the league. This is one of
the reasons I'm semi-optimistic about Hunter being able to log some
significant time at the 4. Having Iverson, Iguodala, Carney, Hunter,
and Dalembert running a transition game at breakneck speed doesn't seem
all that bad. It's not like Cheeks would draw up any real plays
anyway.


-IK