Sixers 2017-2018 Season

[bigegypt0417]

No...injuries are different than the yips. Embiid and Simmons were the clear players to take in their spots, Fultz was less clear. However, to be fair, I supported the move. It’s really just astonishing how Ainge always wins trades by a mile. I hate that guy.

Fultz has the yips from a fairly significant injury and if you watch him now, you'll notice those yips are going away.I think you're building a narrative that helps you make a point you are unable to as of right now.

Tatum isn't exactly setting the world on fire.

[LegoDoom]

Tatum isn't exactly setting the world on fire.

Tatum is averaging 13 and 5 at very efficient rate and just turned 20. He's fine. Arguing that trading away a player like that (or any other non Fultz or Lonzo player in the draft.. the current team with Mitchell or Markkanen would be in much better shape going into the playoffs) and a future 1st rounder for Fultz, who has gone from a Barkley to a Matsuyama hitch, seems like a bad argument at this point. Especially considering that the team could use a player of Tatum's caliber even in his rookie year as the Sixers are trying to make the playoffs. And while I haven't kept up with the exact Fultz timeline, it seems like blaming his hitch on an injury may not be correct.

I hope Fultz figures it out as he seems like a Kyrie caliber player, but the trade could have a negative impact this year and could be catastrophic going forward if Fultz can't get his form back and the team winds up trading away a lottery pick.

EDIT: And I'm not blaming the Sixers for Fultz's yips. It obviously wasn't something that was an issue on draft day (at least not to my knowledge). I wasn't a huge fan on trading up, but knew that Fultz was a talented player and a good fit for the team.

[phillychuck]

The bottom line on draft picks is that year one (and probably year 2) is probably too soon to evaluate a pick. Fultz is red-shirting this year. Let's see what we think next May.

[bigegypt0417]

The bottom line on draft picks is that year one (and probably year 2) is probably too soon to evaluate a pick. Fultz is red-shirting this year. Let's see what we think next May.

I think in judging teenagers there seems to be this idea they can have immediate success based on their draft position. Fultz is having his struggles but using hindsight to kill the trade less than a year in seems to be premature in every way. All the video you see recently shows a much improved stroke. Going in to next season we'll see another year where we introduce top shelf talented to an already talented team.

[LegoDoom]

If teenagers aren't supposed to immediately contribute, then doesn't that increase what Tatum has done this season?

I am not going to fully analyze the trade at this point because it's way too early for that, but to just brush away Fultz not playing in his rookie year because rookies aren't supposed to be good seems like a bad take. Fultz should have probably been better than TJ McConnell this year. And TJ is getting 25 minutes a game for a team that should probably make the playoffs.

Also, comparing Fultz to Embiid and Simmons is flawed on many levels, but if Embiid or Simmons didn't get healthy, then the team would have future lottery picks to make up for it. If Fultz never learns how to shoot a basketball like he used to, then the team loses out on that pick, the future 1st that was given up, and the team is now good enough that it won't have a high pick to make up for missing on the 1st overall pick. The Simmons injury got the team in a position to get Fultz in the first place. The same cannot be said of Fultz not playing.

The recent video (I've only seen 2 videos in the last week and they only contained a total of 3 shots) still shows a hitch in his release. It also doesn't account for what happens if he is at the FT line or is lining up a 3 in a real game. Who knows what's going on his in head, but to use Nick Anderson as an example, the guy didn't want to get to the FT line after his struggles in the finals.

And I criticized the trade when it was made, but the trade is over and I am hoping for the best. Still, if a redraft was done today, where would Fultz be drafted? While it may not be fair to criticize the trade based on Fultz's struggles and he might go on to have a great career, I think you have to admit that Fultz has lost value as an asset since he was drafted. I guess you could make a case that Embiid lost value as an asset (especially when he missed a 2nd season), but the only reason he fell to the Sixers in the first place was because of the injury. The Sixers had to trade a valued asset to go get Fultz, which impacts this situation.

[bigegypt0417]

If teenagers aren't supposed to immediately contribute, then doesn't that increase what Tatum has done this season?

I think my point was it's easy to use hindsight and say it wasn't a great move and that's a bad take. Tatum has been a good player but we're nowhere close to knowing where this end ups. Pointing out my bad takes in an sea of bad takes seems a little tone-deaf.

I am not going to fully analyze the trade at this point because it's way too early for that, but to just brush away Fultz not playing in his rookie year because rookies aren't supposed to be good seems like a bad take.

Does your analysis have to be completed to still be an analysis? The core bad take is making any judgements without pointing out it can all look silly a year from now.

And I criticized the trade when it was made, but the trade is over and I am hoping for the best. Still, if a redraft was done today, where would Fultz be drafted? While it may not be fair to criticize the trade based on Fultz's struggles and he might go on to have a great career, I think you have to admit that Fultz has lost value as an asset since he was drafted. I guess you could make a case that Embiid lost value as an asset (especially when he missed a 2nd season), but the only reason he fell to the Sixers in the first place was because of the injury. The Sixers had to trade a valued asset to go get Fultz, which impacts this situation.

Who said it didn't impact the situation?

You just have no clue what the actual impact will be. For all you know and I know we get the lakers pick next year and the Celtics second 1st round pick is in the teens. You keep saying you aren't making a determination while you write out your determination.

[LegoDoom]

I am not making a determination, but I didn't like the trade when it was made, so I am using that as a basis for where I think the trade stands. The fact that Fultz hasn't played a game because he can't shoot obviously hasn't helped changed my view that it was a good trade.

My analysis at the time of the trade was that I wasn't sure Fultz was the best player in the draft and I didn't think he was of the quality of player that was worth giving up a potential future lottery pick. I thought the value of the draft last year was in the 3-10 range and I don't see anything thus far that disproves that thought. I'm not sure how that is using hindsight. Unless you figured everyone liked the trade at the time.

While I agree that you need a few years to determine if the trade was a good one (I mean, the trade hasn't even been completed yet), but my view of the trade hasn't changed thus far.

[LegoDoom]

You just have no clue what the actual impact will be. For all you know and I know we get the lakers pick next year and the Celtics second 1st round pick is in the teens. You keep saying you aren't making a determination while you write out your determination.

And you are using recent videos of a few shots (where his form is better than his previously horribly broken shot, but still not close to ideal) and the fact that the Kings are projected by some to get the 1st overall pick in 2019 as the basis for hope of it not being a total disaster of a trade. The fact is that teams are tanking this year is a big reason that the Lakers pick won't convey is because they have no reason to tank. There is a good chance that the same thing happens to the Kings next season.

[phillychuck]

Just an opinion from an onlooker here...I get what you're saying, Lego, but you make it harder to see your side when you assert, "My analysis at the time of the trade was that I wasn't sure Fultz was the best player in the draft." I think I listened to about 20 draft analysts, and not only did almost all of them firmly believe Fultz was the best player, they had him on a tier by himself (or occasionally with Ball). They also thought he was likely to be the best fit with Simmons. Given the information at thee time, there weren't many identifiable analysts who did not think Fultz was by far the best player. You can make your point now without criticizing the trade based on Fultz's perceived value pre-draft..

[zambonir]

If the Sixers hadn't made the trade would they have even taken Tatum? Would the Celtics have taken Fultz, and/or still made a trade?

[LegoDoom]

So, because I disagreed with some analysts it makes it hard to see my side? Odd, but ok. And not liking the trade does not mean I am not a fan of Fultz. I just didn't think the difference between Fultz and Tatum/Jackson was big enough to give up a potential lottery pick in a year or two (Fox was a possibility, but only because of fit. I didn't like that neither him or Jackson were poor shooters). I also said after the trade that the best part of it was that Fultz was a good fit with Simmons.

And I know some analysts that didn't have Fultz or Ball as the best player in the draft. They work for the Celtics. We may not know for a few years or more who really won the trade, but I think it's fair to say right now it looks like the Celtics did. And I don't see why it's wrong to say that at this point. I hope that Fultz comes around and becomes a great player and in a few years it looks like the Sixers got the better of the trade.

[LegoDoom]

Another reason I didn't like the value the Sixers gave up in the trade is that the Celtics had Tatum as #1 on their board and I don't think they could have traded down further than #3 as it would be uncertain if he would still be there. Also, there were limited options after Sixers to even partner with in a trade. The Kings had the 5th pick and the Sixers had their 2019 1st rounder, so I'm not sure they would have made a good trade partner. That potentially left only the Sixers and the Suns.

I don't know who was on the Sixers draft board, but Tatum, Jackson, and maybe Fox seemed like reasonable picks at #3.

[bigegypt0417]

So, because I disagreed with some analysts it makes it hard to see my side? Odd, but ok.

Not some...pretty much every single analyst.

You disagreed or weren't convinced based on what?

[LegoDoom]

I posted it on this board (and got quite a bit of blow-back).

I thought Lonzo had a higher BBIQ and didn't need the ball in his hands quite as much as Fultz does to be successful. Both Lonzo and Fultz had defensive concerns and both of their FT% was cause for concern, but Lonzo had a pretty incredible shot percentage chart from everywhere on the court. I disagreed with most analysts about Lonzo not having a midrange shot was a concern. I think Lonzo realizes that 3 pointers and shots near the rim are much more important than a midrange game and that is why he doesn't take many of those shots or tried to develop that part of his game.

Keep in mind that I wasn't advocating taking Ball as I didn't want to trade up for him either and was pretty sure the Lakers would take him. I also thought that Lonzo wasn't the best fit on the Sixers because him and Simmons pass a bit too much to both be on the floor together. Fultz was a better fit with Simmons, which I acknowledged at the time and a big part of the reason I could see why the Sixers made the trade even if I wasn't sure he was the best player in the draft.

I think the only real knock on Tatum was that he didn't shoot overly well from 3, but his FT% was good enough to believe that it may not have been a concern (if you believe in a correlation between FT% and 3P%, which I do). His 3P% in the NBA so far is insane.

One thing I underestimated was Simmons defense. If I would have known he would have been this good defensively, then I would not have worried about Fultz's defense quite as much.

All that being said, it's not I ever said Fultz wasn't a good prospect. I think I had Lonzo at 1a and Fultz at 1b. I saw a few sites that had it the other way and most with Fultz as the clear #1. Still, the Celtics had Tatum #1, so I'm not sure what pointing to the opinions of dozens of draft experts does.

[bigegypt0417]

All that being said, it's not I ever said Fultz wasn't a good prospect. I think I had Lonzo at 1a and Fultz at 1b. I saw a few sites that had it the other way and most with Fultz as the clear #1. Still, the Celtics had Tatum #1, so I'm not sure what pointing to the opinions of dozens of draft experts does.

I think it points to the fact that personal opinion aside, there were not many people saying Fultz wasn't the top player in the draft.

[bigegypt0417]

Nice win for the sixers last night. With the relative ease of their remaining schedule they should be able to get to about 45 wins. I think that was at the top end of most projections.

Here was ESPN:

Projected NBA standings: New playoff contenders, W-L records for all 30 teams

Philadelphia 76ers
Projected wins: 33.2undefined> The Sixers would certainly be disappointed if they won just five more games than they did last season after adding the past two No. 1 overall picks (Markelle Fultz and Ben Simmons) plus veterans Amir Johnson and JJ Redick. Both Fultz and Simmons project as below-average players as rookies, but I'll still take the over on 33 wins.

[phillychuck]

There is a big split between good teams and bad teams right now in the NBA. Before last night there were no teams within 3 games over .500 and 5 games under .500. That's an 8 game split. 18 teams were above and 12 below.

The Sixers have 6 games against the above teams and 13 against the below teams left. After Miami all the games versus "above" teams are at home.

The Sixers have 35 wins and 19 games remaining. It's certainly not unreasonable to think they'll win 10 or 11 of those 19, and if they play well against the bad teams (something they struggle to do on occasion) they could win 12 or 13. They should finish somewhere between 45 and 48 wins. WOW.

[bigegypt0417]

There is a big split between good teams and bad teams right now in the NBA. Before last night there were no teams within 3 games over .500 and 5 games under .500. That's an 8 game split. 18 teams were above and 12 below.

The Sixers have 6 games against the above teams and 13 against the below teams left. After Miami all the games versus "above" teams are at home.

The Sixers have 35 wins and 19 games remaining. It's certainly not unreasonable to think they'll win 10 or 11 of those 19, and if they play well against the bad teams (something they struggle to do on occasion) they could win 12 or 13. They should finish somewhere between 45 and 48 wins. WOW.

It really has been a good season. Going from a team in the hunt for the number one pick to a team that has a reasonable shot at a home playoff series is quite a big jump. I thought I'd see a jump this year but was hopeful for somewhere around .500.

[VoteForKalas]

And this happened with our 1st rd pick only playing 3 games all season

Imagine when Embiid, Simmons and Fultz are all healthy and get settled in

Embiid's health and Simmon's improvement have been the keys this year

We still need a legit backup C and better shooters to be a real contender for the crown

[LegoDoom]

We still need a legit backup C and better shooters to be a real contender for the crown

Any word on how Anzejs Pasecniks is doing or when he'll come over? His stats look fairly pedestrian, but I know he was well regarded at draft time.