I think it's fair to say their top assets (Noel, Embiid, pick this year) are better than our 3 top assets but after that I can't agree with their assets being as good as ours.
Hinkie has let it be known that pretty much anyone on the Sixers roster that can be had for a second round pick. The back end players on the Sixers would have been moved if they had any real value. That makes it really easy to know what the gms around the league think of the Sixers roster.
The Sixers have a bright future, but having a bright future and realizing it are something different. Even if all their players develop perfectly I don't see them being better than us for at least 3 more years.
Our ability to be competitive now gives us a huge edge over them in free agency and even in trades for established talent (no big name player is agreeing to go to Philly anytime soon). So the C's are better now and if they are able to leverage this into attracting talent that Philly won't be able to the C's will also be better long term.
thank you. Common logic has escaped this thread. Somehow a team that has intentionally tried to lose as many games as possible, has filled their roster with second round and undrafted players has an insane amount of NBA quality players on their team... I am not sure I have bumped a thread before in all my years on the forum. But I am definitely bumping this a year or two from now when all the Philly guys are out of the league and zeller and crowder are still plugging along.
What the Sixers are doing is interesting, and they deserve all the credit for building some elite assets that could turn into good players. But to stating a lot of their bench guys are as good as ours doesn't make sense. Our bench has consistently been one of the better ones in the league and produces positively in most games. The Sixers bench might put up some solid traditional numbers but their team performs poorly with them on the court. I'm not sure how you can reasonably compare their ancillary players to ours when our ancillary players are essentially leading us to the playoffs and the Sixers ancillary players are one of the worst units in the league.
well their ancillary players are starting and playing bigger minutes because unlike Boston, Philadelphia has very few starter level players. I guess that is the big difference. Philadelphia doesn't have IT, Turner, Bradley, and Smart in the backcourt. So guys like Wroten, Covington, and Thompson instead of being in bench roles are starting (or playing a lot more minutes than they should be). That doesn't however mean that Philadelphia's bench level players aren't basically equivalent to Boston's bench level players. They just have different roles because Boston has more overall talent.
That Boston is more talented doesn't mean that Philadelphia's bench level players aren't equivalent to Boston's. I agree with that. The thing that makes our bench level players better, is the team performs better when they are in than the Philly performs when their bench level players are in.
You have to know that around the league the Boston bench players are viewed of more highly than the Philly bench level players though. Hinkie has been trying to trade anyone he can for picks, and that guys like Wroten, Sims and Thompson are still on the team speaks volumes to their value around the league.
Where Crowder was one of the main pieces in trading for a former all star, Turner was traded to Indi for a first the year before and Zeller was the player the C's thought enough of to ask for when Cleveland needed to create space for LeBron.
The NBA asset market shows that the Celtics bench players are valued much higher than the Sixers.
The traditional stats just don't tell the whole story when comparing the two, once 82games updates their site I will show you some numbers that better explain the difference between the two groups of players.
TP for the discussion.
Wroten tore his ACL in January so that nixed whatever trade plans, if any, that Hinkie had. Regarding Turner, Philly tried to trade Turner for a 1st but no team would do it. The Philly/Indy trade was Granger and a 2nd round pick for Turner and Lavoy Allen.
A player's value to their current team may not match that player's value around the league. From rumors, Bradley is apparently worth a late 1st around the league but Ainge values him higher. Apparently no one offered a 1st for Bass so he's still with the team. Would anyone offer even a late 1st for an injured, overweight Sully? I'd say Noel and Smart are the only active players on either team worth more than a late 1st.
Isaiah Thomas?
Boston just acquired him for a late 1st and Thornton. So no, not so much.
That's a strange way to assess a trade of a first and an expiring contract. Thornton made the deal work. That was the extent of his value.
Edit: Don't agree with your assessment. Getting a rotation player for a late first is good value.
what does you post have to do with mine? Someone said the only players on either team worth more than a late first were Noel and Smart. Someone else then asked about Thomas. My response was that considering Thomas was just traded for a late first and Thornton that Thomas pretty clearly doesn't have value more than a late 1st since you know he was just traded for a late 1st and salary filler (Thornton has barely played in Phoenix so they clearly only acquired him because they needed salary to make the trade work).
Just the same, Thomas was traded at low value because of circumstances, and his value was estimated to be higher during free-agency, which is why Ainge struck the deal when he did.
That Thomas was traded for what he was says more about the Suns' overcrowded PG situation and interest in moving away from Thomas, than it says about Thomas' value in the market, particularly during the trade deadline when the trade assets teams have at their disposal are not at their most optimal.
After trading Dragic, the Suns could have stuck with Bledsoe and Thomas. Instead they went after Knight and got rid of Thomas. If the Suns thought the could get more value than a late 1st for Thomas in the offseason, they could have waited to trade him. They didn't even get the Clippers 1st this year but instead got the Cavs 2016 1st.
Which ignores the displeasure that already existed between the Suns and Thomas in the trade deadline. They had a broken locker room, and there was a desire to move away from that without a doubt.
It also ignores that Knight is younger than Thomas, taller than Thomas, and was having either a comparable or better season than Thomas.
So there's no real point to be made on this regard.
Topic: Great C's article by Zach Lowe (Read 30064 times)