Sixers Season thread 2

SunMo · January 23, 2006, 10:57:10 AM

Quote from: mhunt on January 23, 2006, 10:47:48 AM
iverson was great that season....but that was 5 years ago.
and i know it's splitting hairs but romey said they wouldn't WIN a championship with iverson & they didn't that year.

i know, but when you make a statement like that, it's because you believe the player in question is not good enough to get a team even close to winning a championship. to pound your chest about that statement when the guy was league MVP, carried them to the finals, and even singlehandedly stole a game from one of the best teams in the past 15 year is asinine.

that's like me saying, "Kobe Bryant will never score 85 points in a game in his career." And then me pounding my chest about it after he only scores 81.

Rome · January 23, 2006, 11:02:09 AM

* Sighs *

Dude, for the last farging time... Garnett is a better player than Iverson. He is also the kind of player that a team can build around to compete for a championship. The fact that Minnesota has been utterly incompetent in selecting players to complement him doesn't mean that he sucks. If you're going to sit there and tell me it's easier to build a team around a six-foot point guard than a 6-11 freak of nature, then that tells me that you're a complete fraud as a basketball fan. It also exposes you as being utterly clueless which we already knew to begin with.

The fact is, Iverson is what he is. He's a six-foot guard who guns the ball and plays hellaciously awful defense. The only reason they've held onto him this long is because he puts asses in the seats in South Philly. Now that he isn't anymore, his worth to the team is dwindling.

But whatever. We're arguing in circles here and apparently we now both share the opinion that the Sixers aren't going to do dick with him. Congratulations for finally agreeing with me on that point.

BigEd76 · January 23, 2006, 11:03:05 AM

Quote from: Sun_Mo on January 23, 2006, 10:43:26 AM
Quote from: Jerome99RIP on January 23, 2006, 10:41:22 AM
He didn't take them to the finals singlehandedly, you jackass.

They had a far better complement of players on that team than they do now and they still got smoked by the Lakers.

Like Hunt said, the Eastern Conference was an absolute joke that year. The stars aligned and the Sixers made it to the Finals with a good team and a Hall of Fame coach.

Yay. They still got demolished by the Lakers in 5.

he was the MVP of the league, and their only scorer, yes he singlehandedly took them to the finals. to say otherwise only exposes that you truly hate the guy and negates any misinformed opinion you may have of him.

Here's what I remember about that 2001 playoff run:

-- Mutombo provided nothing on offense and very little on defense with everyone shooting 3s
-- Eric Snow had a broken foot
-- George Lynch had a broken foot
-- Tyrone freakin' Hill
-- The #5 seed Raptors had Carter, A.Davis and MoPete giving them fits throughout that series, and we know how game 7 ended
-- The Bucks were a Big Dog layup in game 5 away from winning that series in 6

SunMo · January 23, 2006, 11:04:18 AM

i don't know if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing with me. but do you also remember that AI went for 50+ twice against Toronto?

Rome · January 23, 2006, 11:06:34 AM

Quote from: Sun_Mo on January 23, 2006, 10:57:10 AM
Quote from: mhunt on January 23, 2006, 10:47:48 AM
iverson was great that season....but that was 5 years ago.
and i know it's splitting hairs but romey said they wouldn't WIN a championship with iverson & they didn't that year.

i know, but when you make a statement like that, it's because you believe the player in question is not good enough to get a team even close to winning a championship. to pound your chest about that statement when the guy was league MVP, carried them to the finals, and even singlehandedly stole a game from one of the best teams in the past 15 year is asinine.

that's like me saying, "Kobe Bryant will never score 85 points in a game in his career." And then me pounding my chest about it after he only scores 81.

They were never close to winning a championship. Never.

That's like saying the '85 Patriots were close to winning the Super Bowl because they happened to play in it against the Bears.

It's laughable and you know it, Mo.

hunt · January 23, 2006, 11:06:37 AM

the chargers will never win a super bowl with stan humphries at qb.

BigEd76 · January 23, 2006, 11:07:03 AM

I'm agreeing with you. AI had very little help in that playoff run, which is why they played 18 out of a possible 19 games leading into that Lakers series. They got lucky in game 1, then they were finished after that...

ice grillin you · January 23, 2006, 11:09:27 AM

The fact that Minnesota has been utterly incompetent in selecting players to complement him doesn't mean that he sucks

lol @ blasting minnesotas front office for not putting a team around garnett and in the same breath criticizing iverson for not being able to win a title

Rome · January 23, 2006, 11:12:40 AM

Agree or disagree?

Building a championship contender around a 6-11 forward/center is easier than building one around a six-foot point guard?

ice grillin you · January 23, 2006, 11:20:25 AM

if the 6'11 cat is a dominant in the paint presence ala a shaq....duncan or hakeem then i agree...but those players are few and far btwn...and garnett is not in their league

all things equal garnett vs iverson i build around iverson

but i take a shaq over all

Rome · January 23, 2006, 11:27:36 AM

Okay. Fair enough. I disagree with you for the reasons I've stated but if you feel that way, that's fine.

PhillyPhreak54 · January 23, 2006, 11:32:24 AM

Romey, it can be done either way.

If you have Garnett you still have to surround him with talent to win. You blast Minny for not doing that. Put Garnett in Philadelphia and you have a guy who wouldn't be surrounded by a good supporting cast because they don't have the flexibility to do that.

You have AI here, and his height means nothing, and he isn't surrounded by a good supporting cast.

The whole "you'll never win with a 6' gunner" is crazy as hell. AI isn't some average 6' guard. He is one of the most prolific scorers in NBA history and he gets stuff done that people who are 6'4 can't do. He is the best little man in the history of the NBA by far.

And for those of you who are beating the "trade AI" drum I think you're all way off.

You will NOT get equal value for him. SD brought this up and he is dead on. No team is going to give you anything worth a shtein in return. Like IGY said, AI is getting close to being a guy who is just a guy in the league. When the explosiveness is gone, so is the effectiveness. No team would give up a player or players now for that.

You don't just trade him to trade him either. If they had a plethora of young players with promise then maybe I would agree with building up the young stars-in-waiting. But they don't have that. Korver-Dalembert are not stars in waiting. Iggy has a shot to be one, but you don't trade AI just to see if he is or isn't. YOu continue to let him build up his game as being the #3 option.

hunt · January 23, 2006, 11:36:59 AM

why won't they get equal value for him???

all the reasons people are giving are the exact reasons whey they SHOULD trade him.

PhillyPhreak54 · January 23, 2006, 11:37:17 AM

I also caught Mo on the radio this morning and he totally refuted the claims of the Webber thing. He said that he was the guy yelling in Washington. He said that if you polled the players they would all tell you that he was the one who went into a tirade, not the players.

Obviously that'll be debated and it'll be said that "well, no shtein. Mo wouldn't hang them out to dry". But Mo strikes me as the type who will say whats up.

This team is what it is. They need to add a couple of defensive minded players and maybe they can make a run. But it'll depend on who they can add. Billy was on SportsFinal last night (taped interview with that dumbass John Clark) and he said he is trying to get a few guys to help on defense.

This team, if it can play defense, can make some noise in my opinion. Their scoring is there. They need stops.

PhillyPhreak54 · January 23, 2006, 11:41:35 AM

Quote from: mhunt on January 23, 2006, 11:36:59 AM
why won't they get equal value for him???

all the reasons people are giving are the exact reasons whey they SHOULD trade him.

Ok, hunt. Let's say you are Billy King and I am the GM of another franchise. I field your call and you're trying to get me to take AI for another AS player on my roster plus a #1 pick.

I would tell you that why would I give up a 28 year old star & a #1 for a guy whose speed is his game and I don't know how much speed he has left.

That, in you non-AI fans eyes, is a reason to trade him. But you will not get anything equal to what he brings to the team. So you don't trade a guy just for the sake of trading him. If you are serious about dealing him then you have to do it for the betterment of your team, no just for shteins and giggles.

You have AI here until he's ready to hang 'em up. You cannot trade him and get a player who will replace him. You might get an older guy with an equal salary, but what is the good with that? Nothing. What? Just so you can say "well, we traded AI"?