<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Aug 5 2006, 02:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You guys are vastly overrating the team in general, considering our only moves were drafting Carney and Jones, plus getting rid of Salmons.I can't blame you for being very optimistic, but sorry to say it just isn't going to happen.</div>Actually were not overrating the team the Sixers will make the playoffs next season if AI is still with the team. You just can't be for real saying we can't get a 6th, 7th, or a 8th seat in the playoffs.Again only like 5 teams are locked for the playoffs. Other seats are deff wide open for most teams, and the Sixers are one of them.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Aug 5 2006, 04:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I hear what you're saying, but you guys are being WAY too optimistic about the upcoming season. There are many teams in the East that could keep us out of the playoffs. These are the teams that I think will have a better record than us at the end of next season (in no particular order):MiamiNew JerseyDetroitClevelandWashingtonChicagoIndianaMilwaukeeOrlandoBoston (possibly)So, us making the playoffs isn't guaranteed...</div>We will be better then Boston for sure, and and better the the Bucks, Indiana, and even Orlando who I really think will be playing very nicly next season, and for years to come.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ Aug 5 2006, 02:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I agree you guys are being optimistic. We didn't really change the team at all and aren't heading in the right direction. We still have a weak bench and Carney and Jones aren't enough to help are defense. And yes AI will be playing with fire and intensity but since when has he not? There are a lot of teams on the rise in the East and we will have trouble making the playoffs this season. Luckily for us though there should be a killer lottery and we can get an awesome player from it.</div>We did not change the team your right, but we will make the playoffs with the same team. I am not saying Carney, and Jones will change our D. Again I am saying it will help only a little, but we should still make the playoffs even if we did not draft those guys.Killer lottery? Are you freakin kidding me? Yes it is going to be a good draft, but your already talking about the lottery? WOW what kinda fan are you? Why tank the season when even if we have the worst record it's not a sure thing to get the first pick. I got no problem to rebuild if we can get a deal for AI that will not rape us, and atleast be a fair one. But if not then don't trade AI, and go for the playoffs. Why tank a damn season? That's just stupidty!!!
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ Aug 5 2006, 03:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Serge there is a lot of teams better than us this season in the East. These are off the top of my head...MiamiDetroitNew JerseyClevelandChicagoWashingtonOrlandoUs, Milwaukee, Boston, and Indiana are all questionable. One of those three teams could easily end up with a better record.</div>Top 5 I agree, and actually probably top 6. But Orlando who I think will make the playoffs next season still are not a sure thing better then us your overrating other teams. I think the Sixers, Pacers, Bucks, and Orlando will all be fighting for the last 2 spots in the playoffs. And we got the most experience with Iverson, and Webber.
You are one optimistic person Serge, because quite frankly I really don't see how we are a lock for the playoffs with the same returning roster from last year (plus Carney/Jones, minus Salmons). Our defense won't be much better... and Iverson won't get much help offensively. Hell, I don't even think Webber will play well this season. I think he'll go back to his 15-7 days on horrible shooting (i.e. when he first came to Philadelphia). We haven't gotten much better coaching either.Yes, there is a possibility we will make the playoffs, but we damn sure are not a lock for the playoffs. The East improved, and we have stood pat aside from minor transactions. I don't want to get raped on in AI deal as much as the next guy, but the fact of the matter remains that if we were going to trade Iverson, it will happen either this summer or next summer. If we trade him midseason, we're not going to get much in return, unless a team REALLY wants him... and I just don't see that happening during the season.Billy King screwed us up financially... and now he's delaying the inevitable rebuilding process. I hope Comcast sells the team, and then we can get new blood in here from top to bottom, because the Snider/King combination just isn't getting the job done.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Serge @ Aug 5 2006, 12:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Actually were not overrating the team the Sixers will make the playoffs next season if AI is still with the team. You just can't be for real saying we can't get a 6th, 7th, or a 8th seat in the playoffs.Again only like 5 teams are locked for the playoffs. Other seats are deff wide open for most teams, and the Sixers are one of them.We will be better then Boston for sure, and and better the the Bucks, Indiana, and even Orlando who I really think will be playing very nicly next season, and for years to come.We did not change the team your right, but we will make the playoffs with the same team. I am not saying Carney, and Jones will change our D. Again I am saying it will help only a little, but we should still make the playoffs even if we did not draft those guys.Killer lottery? Are you freakin kidding me? Yes it is going to be a good draft, but your already talking about the lottery? WOW what kinda fan are you? Why tank the season when even if we have the worst record it's not a sure thing to get the first pick. I got no problem to rebuild if we can get a deal for AI that will not rape us, and atleast be a fair one. But if not then don't trade AI, and go for the playoffs. Why tank a damn season? That's just stupidty!!!</div>Where did I say I want us to screw up and purposely blow the season. That's right no where. All I said is on the bright side if we don't make the playoffs there is a great lottery an we can come out with a great player. i would rather see us have a successful season but I'm saying if we don't atleast something positive comes out of it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Aug 5 2006, 04:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You are one optimistic person Serge, because quite frankly I really don't see how we are a lock for the playoffs with the same returning roster from last year (plus Carney/Jones, minus Salmons). Our defense won't be much better... and Iverson won't get much help offensively. Hell, I don't even think Webber will play well this season. I think he'll go back to his 15-7 days on horrible shooting (i.e. when he first came to Philadelphia). We haven't gotten much better coaching either.Yes, there is a possibility we will make the playoffs, but we damn sure are not a lock for the playoffs. The East improved, and we have stood pat aside from minor transactions. I don't want to get raped on in AI deal as much as the next guy, but the fact of the matter remains that if we were going to trade Iverson, it will happen either this summer or next summer. If we trade him midseason, we're not going to get much in return, unless a team REALLY wants him... and I just don't see that happening during the season.Billy King screwed us up financially... and now he's delaying the inevitable rebuilding process. I hope Comcast sells the team, and then we can get new blood in here from top to bottom, because the Snider/King combination just isn't getting the job done.</div>Well actually nah I am not way to optimistic you should see what I think of the Eagles. The people who don't know me who see what I post they think I hate the Eagles when I am actually a big fan. I just really think I am right about this. Our D won't be to much better, but atleast a little better will help. And again I think Iguodala will break out, and get a jump shot going. I also think he will be consistently aggressive going to the hoop. And for the love of god Mo Cheeks yes he made mistakes during last season, but if you don't have the right guys you can't really do anything. He likes D, and the only D guy on that team was Iguodala really. Also enough about Salmons he sucked. One good game in 50 does not mean crap.The only team who really got better was Chicago, and again a trade can still be made even though it be hard to get a little better. And again there is a better chance AI will be traded during the season before the deadline, and we will get more for him then in the summer. It's exactly the opposite if we trade him during the season we will get more in return is what you don't seem to understand. The teams who will be close to contending will give up more young guys like say the Clippers. Right now they don't want to give up Livingston, and other stuff. But if they see during the season that they are close to being able to contend with the Spurs, or Dallas they will give up more to get AI then they would right now. Same goes for other team they will give up more of there future if they are close to contending.This maybe the only thing we agree on here lol, but yes Billy King did mess up financially your right. Yep the Snider/King combo sucks. I do like Snider for hockey though he is doing a great job with the Flyers. I wish Jordan could have bought this team.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ Aug 5 2006, 05:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Where did I say I want us to screw up and purposely blow the season. That's right no where. All I said is on the bright side if we don't make the playoffs there is a great lottery an we can come out with a great player. i would rather see us have a successful season but I'm saying if we don't atleast something positive comes out of it.</div>How is making the lottery a bright side though? Yes we can come out with a great player no question about that. But if the team is like this even if that dude we draft turns out to be as good as Iverson, but the gm does the same for the team as he did for AI, and that = to nothing pretty much then no matter how good that player is the team will lose just like with AI. I am saying in the future even if that guy is a great player if we don't have a better team put around that player then we will suck just like now with AI even though he is playing amazing. And we know Billy King will screw us up for the future after drafting the great player he will end up screwing the team up anyway. So until Billy King is fired there is no point to rebuild. Because if he messes up the rebuilding process then wow the team will be dead not just for 3, or 4 years, but close to 10 years.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Serge @ Aug 5 2006, 02:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well actually nah I am not way to optimistic you should see what I think of the Eagles. The people who don't know me who see what I post they think I hate the Eagles when I am actually a big fan. I just really think I am right about this. Our D won't be to much better, but atleast a little better will help. And again I think Iguodala will break out, and get a jump shot going. I also think he will be consistently aggressive going to the hoop. And for the love of god Mo Cheeks yes he made mistakes during last season, but if you don't have the right guys you can't really do anything. He likes D, and the only D guy on that team was Iguodala really. Also enough about Salmons he sucked. One good game in 50 does not mean crap.The only team who really got better was Chicago, and again a trade can still be made even though it be hard to get a little better. And again there is a better chance AI will be traded during the season before the deadline, and we will get more for him then in the summer. It's exactly the opposite if we trade him during the season we will get more in return is what you don't seem to understand. The teams who will be close to contending will give up more young guys like say the Clippers. Right now they don't want to give up Livingston, and other stuff. But if they see during the season that they are close to being able to contend with the Spurs, or Dallas they will give up more to get AI then they would right now. Same goes for other team they will give up more of there future if they are close to contending.This maybe the only thing we agree on here lol, but yes Billy King did mess up financially your right. Yep the Snider/King combo sucks. I do like Snider for hockey though he is doing a great job with the Flyers. I wish Jordan could have bought this team.</div>Your basing it just on opinions. You think Iguodala will break out. You think Iguodala will develop a consistent jumper. You think he will finally get aggresive. None of this will happen as long as Webber stays in Philly and keeps debanding a lot of touches to shoot his inconsistent jumper. The only way I can see us making the playoffs is if Webber steps down as the second option and Iguodala and Dalemburt both break out or Billy King making a huge deal for us. Both seem very unlikely to happen. We obviously can't sign much since King already overpayed so many players which screwed any chance we had at rebuilding any time soon. The only way I can see us being able to rebuild is by trading AI for young prospects.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ Aug 5 2006, 05:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Your basing it just on opinions. You think Iguodala will break out. You think Iguodala will develop a consistent jumper. You think he will finally get aggresive. None of this will happen as long as Webber stays in Philly and keeps debanding a lot of touches to shoot his inconsistent jumper. The only way I can see us making the playoffs is if Webber steps down as the second option and Iguodala and Dalemburt both break out or Billy King making a huge deal for us. Both seem very unlikely to happen. We obviously can't sign much since King already overpayed so many players which screwed any chance we had at rebuilding any time soon. The only way I can see us being able to rebuild is by trading AI for young prospects.</div>He was aggresive already in a few games last season. And I am not just thinking this. I saw Iguodala play very good in a few games after the all star break even with Webber, and AI still doing what they do. Then he went back to passing the ball every time he got it. And also got away from being aggresive. So we know he can do it, because we saw him do it in a few games. Now he has to do that in every game, and not be scared to dribble when AI passes him the ball. Also like I said be aggresive every game not just some games. So I am not just saying this out of no were I saw those few games he was not scared to dribble/be aggresive even with Iverson, and Webber on the court. The thing that won't happen with Webber here is us playing D good. And again Iguodala, and Sammy have to wanna break out. And I don't think Sammy wants to break out he already got that big contract. And about Iguodala again he played great a few games with Iverson, and Webber still doing there thing. So Webber don't really have to step down other guys just gotta step up, and trust me if they do AI will pass them the ball, and so would C-Webb. AI makes sure he gets the ball to guys he can trust. And if he would see that other guys are breaking out he would pass them the ball. People never thought AI would pass to Webber enough that they would fight. Now people think he passes way to much to Webber. Also Sammy might not break out even though I think he can, but Iguodala will break out. I think in camp he will work more with Webber, and Iverson to be that 3rd guy they can count on. Anyway yes the only way we can really rebuild is trade for young prospects, but we also should not just trade him unless the offer is fair. And for that to happen we should wait until the middle of the season before the deadline teams who are close to contending will give up more of there young guys then they would now just for a chance to win it all that year, and maybe the following year.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Serge @ Aug 5 2006, 02:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He was aggresive already in a few games last season. And I am not just thinking this. I saw Iguodala play very good in a few games after the all star break even with Webber, and AI still doing what they do. Then he went back to passing the ball every time he got it. And also got away from being aggresive. So we know he can do it, because we saw him do it in a few games. Now he has to do that in every game, and not be scared to dribble when AI passes him the ball. Also like I said be aggresive every game not just some games. So I am not just saying this out of no were I saw those few games he was not scared to dribble/be aggresive even with Iverson, and Webber on the court. The thing that won't happen with Webber here is us playing D good. And again Iguodala, and Sammy have to wanna break out. And I don't think Sammy wants to break out he already got that big contract. And about Iguodala again he played great a few games with Iverson, and Webber still doing there thing. So Webber don't really have to step down other guys just gotta step up, and trust me if they do AI will pass them the ball, and so would C-Webb. AI makes sure he gets the ball to guys he can trust. And if he would see that other guys are breaking out he would pass them the ball. People never thought AI would pass to Webber enough that they would fight. Now people think he passes way to much to Webber. Also Sammy might not break out even though I think he can, but Iguodala will break out. I think in camp he will work more with Webber, and Iverson to be that 3rd guy they can count on. Anyway yes the only way we can really rebuild is trade for young prospects, but we also should not just trade him unless the offer is fair. And for that to happen we should wait until the middle of the season before the deadline teams who are close to contending will give up more of there young guys then they would now just for a chance to win it all that year, and maybe the following year.</div>Yeah Iguodala did play very well in a few games. So did John Salmons. I guess that means that he will break out for the Kings next season huh?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ Aug 5 2006, 06:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah Iguodala did play very well in a few games. So did John Salmons. I guess that means that he will break out for the Kings next season huh?</div>Mr. VIP can you give more of a reason as to why you feel like you feel? :HAHAHA: Salmons is a complete, and utter joke. He played well once in like 50 games. Iguodala showed after the all star break that he can be consistently good. Because he was doing good like 9 games straight after the all star break maybe less, but he plays amazing D also for us. He has to play D for every guy on the Sixers. So you know what excuse him for not looking to be more aggressive on the offense side. Even though yes I agree he should be more aggressive on offense also.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Serge @ Aug 5 2006, 04:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well actually nah I am not way to optimistic you should see what I think of the Eagles. The people who don't know me who see what I post they think I hate the Eagles when I am actually a big fan. I just really think I am right about this. Our D won't be to much better, but atleast a little better will help. And again I think Iguodala will break out, and get a jump shot going. I also think he will be consistently aggressive going to the hoop. And for the love of god Mo Cheeks yes he made mistakes during last season, but if you don't have the right guys you can't really do anything. He likes D, and the only D guy on that team was Iguodala really. Also enough about Salmons he sucked. One good game in 50 does not mean crap.</div>Mo Cheeks made some mistakes? He made A LOT of mistakes, especially late in games. He wasn't the real coach of that team... Kuester was. I mean, I don't think you're a good coach if you repeatedly turn to fans behind the bench and ask them what you should do. Sometimes Mo's substitutions made no sense, and sometimes he just didn't know what to do late in games. And don't even get me started on his "play" to get the last shot. He ran the SAME thing every time, even though it was clear it wasn't working. Hey, we need one point, let's inbounds the ball to CWebb at the 3-point line and let him shoot a three, even though AI is hot! Also, Cheeks rarely stressed defense. He didn't start stressing defense until he saw that it was our achilles heal. He didn't mention defense ONCE in training camp, or in traning camp interviews. Every practice I saw during training camp dealt with offense, but he just isn't a defensive minded coach (and if he is, then he sure sucks at it). You would have thought he learned a little something under Brown, but I guess not.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The only team who really got better was Chicago, and again a trade can still be made even though it be hard to get a little better. And again there is a better chance AI will be traded during the season before the deadline, and we will get more for him then in the summer. It's exactly the opposite if we trade him during the season we will get more in return is what you don't seem to understand. The teams who will be close to contending will give up more young guys like say the Clippers. Right now they don't want to give up Livingston, and other stuff. But if they see during the season that they are close to being able to contend with the Spurs, or Dallas they will give up more to get AI then they would right now. Same goes for other team they will give up more of there future if they are close to contending.</div>I understand what you're saying, but I just don't see it happening. The Clippers won't trade for Iverson (and give up Livingston) if they are "close" to contending. They have a veteran point guard (Cassell) to lead them, and their big man (Brand) is still fairly young and just entering his prime. As long as Livingston progresses in his development, they'll be fine. It's not like they are a team who desperately needs to win now. There really aren't any teams like that (aside from maybe SA). I just don't see any team giving up MORE for Iverson during the season, especially if we suck. We probably won't trade Iverson if we are winning.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Serge @ Aug 5 2006, 03:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Mr. VIP can you give more of a reason as to why you feel like you feel? :HAHAHA: Salmons is a complete, and utter joke. He played well once in like 50 games. Iguodala showed after the all star break that he can be consistently good. Because he was doing good like 9 games straight after the all star break maybe less, but he plays amazing D also for us. He has to play D for every guy on the Sixers. So you know what excuse him for not looking to be more aggressive on the offense side. Even though yes I agree he should be more aggressive on offense also.</div>I was making a point and that point is he's inconsistent. I realize that Salmons was more inconsistent that Iguodala and probably the the most inconsistent player on the team. Yeah he had some good consecutive offensive games towards the end of the season. A lot of the games where he played well were when Iverson was injured towards the end of the season where he was getting more touches. Plus people go through hot streaks. Just because they go through one doesn't mean they are going to consistently do it the next season. I've seen it happen many times in all sports. Also since when does playing good defense give you an excuse to not have to be aggresiv on offense? That is the lamest excuse I have ever heard. That's like saying since LeBron is so good on offense he shouldn't have to try on defense. i'm sorry but it's his own fault he isn't aggresive on offense and he either needs to learn to be aggresive on offense and get better at it or settle for being a mediocre player for the rest of his career.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Aug 5 2006, 10:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Mo Cheeks made some mistakes? He made A LOT of mistakes, especially late in games. He wasn't the real coach of that team... Kuester was. I mean, I don't think you're a good coach if you repeatedly turn to fans behind the bench and ask them what you should do. Sometimes Mo's substitutions made no sense, and sometimes he just didn't know what to do late in games. And don't even get me started on his "play" to get the last shot. He ran the SAME thing every time, even though it was clear it wasn't working. Hey, we need one point, let's inbounds the ball to CWebb at the 3-point line and let him shoot a three, even though AI is hot! Also, Cheeks rarely stressed defense. He didn't start stressing defense until he saw that it was our achilles heal. He didn't mention defense ONCE in training camp, or in traning camp interviews. Every practice I saw during training camp dealt with offense, but he just isn't a defensive minded coach (and if he is, then he sure sucks at it). You would have thought he learned a little something under Brown, but I guess not.I understand what you're saying, but I just don't see it happening. The Clippers won't trade for Iverson (and give up Livingston) if they are "close" to contending. They have a veteran point guard (Cassell) to lead them, and their big man (Brand) is still fairly young and just entering his prime. As long as Livingston progresses in his development, they'll be fine. It's not like they are a team who desperately needs to win now. There really aren't any teams like that (aside from maybe SA). I just don't see any team giving up MORE for Iverson during the season, especially if we suck. We probably won't trade Iverson if we are winning.</div>Kuester was the real coach? Yea I am sure he was, and you know this how? And if your saying he was the coach, and called the plays so how will you put this of on Mo Cheeks?"I don't think you're a good coach if you repeatedly turn to fans behind the bench and ask them what you should do" Dude your a joke!!! You just lost your argument who in the right mind would believe that. How can you even say that crap? Sometimes Mo's substitutions made no sense, and sometimes he just didn't know what to do late in games. I Agree!!! "Cheeks rarely stressed defense"? Are you kidding me? First how do you know that? You don't exactly!!! Cheeks is a defense coach. Just because the players were to stupid to understand D does not mean he did not stress defense. Again you don't know what he said to the guys in practice about defense in camp behind close doors. And during the season he said in interviews we need to play D many times so I have no idea what your talking about. "but he just isn't a defensive minded coach" Again that's just stupid saying that!!! And he learned from Brown it is not his fault the players just are to stupid to listen. And ever think that he just does not have the right players on this team? He is about D.........There is only one guy here really that is about D, and it's Iguodala. Once Billy King will bring in guys who fit in to Mo's system then you won't be saying he is a bad coach."The Clippers won't trade for Iverson (and give up Livingston) if they are "close" to contending." Actually your wrong they will. Why? Because if they get AI to come play with Brand they would be a contender the next 3 years. "They have a veteran point guard (Cassell) to lead them, and their big man (Brand) is still fairly young and just entering his prime" Cassell is not enough for Brand to win a title so that is why if they think they are close enough they would trade there young future for Iverson. Also Denver would trade for AI anything accept from Melo they already said. Maybe they give us more though if we trade during the season then now if they think AI will make them a contender. And no I don't think that be enough to win a title. They would still be able to get past the 2nd round though."I just don't see any team giving up MORE for Iverson during the season, especially if we suck." Again your wrong!!! Tell me why teams would give a crap if the Sixers suck if Iverson is still playing the same? Exactly they would not care less if the Sixers suck. Because they are trading for Iverson not the Sixers. They know it's not a one man game so they would trade for AI as long as he is having a good season.
Honestly, you are the complete joke here...[quote name='Serge' post='133630' date='Aug 6 2006, 05:58 PM']Kuester was the real coach? Yea I am sure he was, and you know this how? And if your saying he was the coach, and called the plays so how will you put this of on Mo Cheeks?[/quote]I know this because all the players acknowledged it, and the two sources that I have from within the organization (namely trainers) said it. John Kuester was doing most of the coaching, Cheeks was just the figurehead. I'll put it all on Cheeks because if you are the HEAD COACH, YOU should be COACHING. Once again, I'm a complete joke because I've heard from numerous people that he indeed does this repeatedly. I'm not spitting this sh*t out of my ass... I have REASONS to say it. When 20-25 DIFFERENT people tell me that they sat behind the bench and Cheeks turns to fans and ask them what he should do, well then I'm inclined to believe it. First, if you're going to ask me "how I know" that Cheeks rarely stressed defense, then I'll ask you this: How do you know that he is a defensive coach and DID stress defense? And for your information, the training camp practices were NOT behind closed doors. They were televised on NBATV, and Cheeks was too busy trying to figure out how to set up Webber that he didn't spend enough time on the defensive side of the floor. Why do you think we sucked defensively? You stress defense from day one... if somebody isn't giving full effort defensively, you bench him. But, Cheeks couldn't/didn't do that. Cheeks is still a fairly young coach, and has a reputation (even in Portland) for being "soft" and caving into the players' wants/demands. Also, just because he "said" we need to play more defense AFTER he saw we were struggling does not mean that he is a defensive-minded coach. A defensive-minded coach builds his team starting with defense first. It was obvious that our team this past season was an OFFENSIVE team... not a defensive one. If Cheeks was such a "defensive coach," then we would have been a defensive team, and concentrated on our defense more than we did our offense... and that did not happen. Really? I'm stupid for saying that? Well, once again, let me ask you: how do YOU know that he is a defensive-minded coach, and that his system concentrates primarily on defense? That's right... you don't! So, you're telling me that the reason we sucked defensively was not because Mo concentrated 80-90% of our training camp practices stressing offense... it was not because he wanted to try to figure out how to get the Iverson/Webber combination rolling... it was not because he didn't stress defense enough since Day 1... it was because our players were "too dumb to listen?" Yeah, right... If you're a defensive-minded coach... you're going to stress defense. Look at Larry Brown. If you don't play defense under him... you're not playing, period. Look at Gregg Poppovich... you don't play defense... you're not playing. Mo IS NOT A DEFENSIVE MINDED COACH. If our guys didn't listen to him, he should have benched them... but he didn't. Yet another example of him being either a "soft" coach, or not being a defensive minded coach. No, they won't. If they trade Livingston, they will trade Maggette along with him. They have enough youth to be a contender within the next three years ANYWAY (enough time for Livingston to develop into a very good player), so why give up TWO solid contributors for just one? Especially when that one player is 31-years old right now, and many GMs fear he will begin declining within the next two-three years. They're not giving up a young player with potential (Livingston) and a very good player (Maggette) for a 31-year old point guard who only has two or three good years left in him. It's not as if Brand is 32 or anything... he has enough time to wait for Livingston to develop. They are not in WIN NOW mode. Denver has already lowballed us twice with two horrible offers, and they just are not going to part ways with Marcus Camby (the player we want instead of Kenyon Martin). They could end up offering us more, but I really doubt it. First of all, that last sentence is a completely contradictory. "They know it's not a one man game, but they'll trade for a player even if his team sucks as long as he's having a great season." Yeah... way to contradict yourself.Second of all... teams WILL care if the Sixers suck and they are trading for Iverson. Why? Well, if we suck, and every team out there knows that it's time we part ways with Iverson (which they already know), they will keep lowballing us like they are now. We'll be "desperate" to get rid of Iverson and start the rebuilding process ASAP, and thus we won't get a good deal in return. Think of it this way. If you have a big screen TV, and it's broken or something is wrong with it... are people going to buy it from you for 70-80% of what you paid for it? Hell no... they'll give you jack sh*t for it.The only way we'll get MORE for Iverson during the season is if both he and the Sixers as a team are playing very well. Otherwise teams will know we are looking to get rid of him, and will lowball us. It doesn't take a genius to figure that out. That's how it has been in the NBA for years... and that is how it will continue to be.EDIT: I'll tell you what. Since you believe so strongly that Cheeks is a defensive-minded coach, how about I start a poll in the General NBA section asking people, and we'll see what everybody says? Because quite frankly, Mo Cheeks is NOT a defensive-minded coach.So, take a step outside of you optimistic little bubble there, and see the dark cloud of reality that is hovering over the Sixers franchise, and that will continue to be there for the next five to eight years.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ Aug 5 2006, 11:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I was making a point and that point is he's inconsistent. I realize that Salmons was more inconsistent that Iguodala and probably the the most inconsistent player on the team. Yeah he had some good consecutive offensive games towards the end of the season. A lot of the games where he played well were when Iverson was injured towards the end of the season where he was getting more touches. Plus people go through hot streaks. Just because they go through one doesn't mean they are going to consistently do it the next season. I've seen it happen many times in all sports. Also since when does playing good defense give you an excuse to not have to be aggresiv on offense? That is the lamest excuse I have ever heard. That's like saying since LeBron is so good on offense he shouldn't have to try on defense. i'm sorry but it's his own fault he isn't aggresive on offense and he either needs to learn to be aggresive on offense and get better at it or settle for being a mediocre player for the rest of his career.</div>It's insulting to Iguodala when you put him in the same sentence as Salmons. Iguodala played great in games were AI, and Webber both played also. He was not just going thru a hot streak he did it a few times for a few games. I am not giving a excuse as to why he is not aggresiv on offense. I am just saying he has to play D for everyone else I understand a little that it be tiring. HAHA WOW you did not just say crap about Lebron did you? "mediocre player for the rest of his career."? Are you kidding Lebron can play w/e no D he want's if he keeps doing what he is doing he will be in talk with best to ever play the game. (I hope that was about Iguodala what you said, and not Lebron.)
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Serge @ Aug 6 2006, 04:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It's insulting to Iguodala when you put him in the same sentence as Salmons. Iguodala played great in games were AI, and Webber both played also. He was not just going thru a hot streak he did it a few times for a few games. I am not giving a excuse as to why he is not aggresiv on offense. I am just saying he has to play D for everyone else I understand a little that it be tiring. HAHA WOW you did not just say crap about Lebron did you? "mediocre player for the rest of his career."? Are you kidding Lebron can play w/e no D he want's if he keeps doing what he is doing he will be in talk with best to ever play the game. (I hope that was about Iguodala what you said, and not Lebron.)</div>Wow dude I was using Lebron as an example. You seriously think because LeBron is amazing on offense he shouldn't have to learn to play good defense? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I was reffering to Iguodala at the end also when I said he better get an offensive game or he'll have to settle for being mediocre for the rest of his career. I'm insulted that you would think I would think LeBron is mediocre for not having a defensive game. Last quit making Iguodala sound so much better than he is. It's insulting to put Iguodala in the same sentence as Salmons? Please! Iguodala is obviously better than Salmons but he hasn't played anywhere near his potential. Quit giving Iggy so much slack. He hasn't played aggresive at all on offense and his defense hasn't been as good as it can be. I don't get where your getting the idea that his defense was amazing. It was above average last season but not amazing. If it was amazing he would've been selected onto atleast the 2nd team.
Agreed. Iguodala has all the tools... he just needs to use them and play to his potential. He can easily become a Ron Artest type of guy... amazing defense, and still a big threat offensively (minus the headaches, of course).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Aug 6 2006, 07:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Honestly, you are the complete joke here... Nah you are, because your having people all over read your false info.I know this because all the players acknowledged it, and the two sources that I have from within the organization (namely trainers) said it. John Kuester was doing most of the coaching, Cheeks was just the figurehead. I'll put it all on Cheeks because if you are the HEAD COACH, YOU should be COACHING.What all players acknowledged it? I did not here anything I don't know were you could have heared the players say that. And the trainers wow ok w/e you say I am sure the players talk to them more then about the injury, or hi/bye. And again if he was not coaching, then how you saying he made bad calls at the end of games? Ah ow ya make up your mind first. Once again, I'm a complete joke because I've heard from numerous people that he indeed does this repeatedly. I'm not spitting this sh*t out of my ass... I have REASONS to say it. When 20-25 DIFFERENT people tell me that they sat behind the bench and Cheeks turns to fans and ask them what he should do, well then I'm inclined to believe it.Who are those people Cheeks haters? lol Why don't you actually go sit behind the bench, and see if he turns around to fans. I don't sit behind the bench, but at the end of games I go down there, and I here him screaming to the players what to do not Kuester. And do not here him asking fans what to do. Let me guess your one of those Cheeks haters who wants to bad mouth the guy.First, if you're going to ask me "how I know" that Cheeks rarely stressed defense, then I'll ask you this: How do you know that he is a defensive coach and DID stress defense? And for your information, the training camp practices were NOT behind closed doors. They were televised on NBATV, and Cheeks was too busy trying to figure out how to set up Webber that he didn't spend enough time on the defensive side of the floor. Why do you think we sucked defensively? You stress defense from day one... if somebody isn't giving full effort defensively, you bench him. But, Cheeks couldn't/didn't do that. Cheeks is still a fairly young coach, and has a reputation (even in Portland) for being "soft" and caving into the players' wants/demands. Also, just because he "said" we need to play more defense AFTER he saw we were struggling does not mean that he is a defensive-minded coach. A defensive-minded coach builds his team starting with defense first. It was obvious that our team this past season was an OFFENSIVE team... not a defensive one. If Cheeks was such a "defensive coach," then we would have been a defensive team, and concentrated on our defense more than we did our offense... and that did not happen.Well first after games he always says I stress to them that we gotta play better D. And in the practice videos I see him showing them stuff on D. But more importantly some players said he does stress D. And for you information you can't tell by watching on TV. And Mo working with Webber is what needed to happen also since him, and AI had to do good or the team would not do good. And we sucked on D because we had Korver, Webber, and Iverson starting a lot of games, and when Korver was not starting we still had Webber, and AI starting together. And because pretty much only D guy we had was Iguodala. So um I say because of Billy King who puts this team together. If you had Korver, Webber, and Iverson starting with any other coach it would be the same. Maybe a few more wins 3 w/e, but when you don't have D guys there is nothing a coach can do. And your stupid you bench Korver yes, but you don't bench guys like Webber, and Iverson making 20 mill and doing great other wise pretty much well Iverson atleast. If you benched a guy who does not play D then Nash, and Lebron would be benched they suck on D especially Nash. When he had a pretty good team in Portland they won games. And players over there were uncontrollable he could not do anything the gm would just have to suspend them. And he said we need to play D not just when we played bad D he started with that right away. And again your being stupid a coach can not build a team with D first when he only has 1 freakin player who can play D. Yes we were a offensive team this past season, because we just do not having any D guys except for Iguodala. OMG are you that stupid? No matter how much Cheeks stressed D we can't play D at all none of our guys can except for Iguodala no matter how you try to stress D. If you don't have the players for it then you can't play D period end of story.Really? I'm stupid for saying that? Well, once again, let me ask you: how do YOU know that he is a defensive-minded coach, and that his system concentrates primarily on defense? That's right... you don't! So, you're telling me that the reason we sucked defensively was not because Mo concentrated 80-90% of our training camp practices stressing offense... it was not because he wanted to try to figure out how to get the Iverson/Webber combination rolling... it was not because he didn't stress defense enough since Day 1... it was because our players were "too dumb to listen?" Yeah, right... If you're a defensive-minded coach... you're going to stress defense. Look at Larry Brown. If you don't play defense under him... you're not playing, period. Look at Gregg Poppovich... you don't play defense... you're not playing. Mo IS NOT A DEFENSIVE MINDED COACH. If our guys didn't listen to him, he should have benched them... but he didn't. Yet another example of him being either a "soft" coach, or not being a defensive minded coach.I know because he said that, and everyone says that. And same for you how do you know he is not? Ah exactly you don't. OMG your being stupid again he did not concentrated 80-90 % of our training camp/practices stressing offense. And we sucked again, because of the lack of D guys on this team that is a total of 1 (Iguodala). You heared him say he wanted to make the Iverson/Webber combination work when he was introduced as the coach of this team so now your stuck on that. HAHA look at Larry that's right let's look at Larry. He had Billy King bring in D guys. Did Billy King do this now for Mo? No!!! And did Larry Bench AI for not playing D? Exactlly no he got Billy King to bring it more D guys around Iverson. So you just have proven what I been trying to say. Thank You Sir!!! And if you wanna see D so much go watch the boring Spurs play. People could not wait for them to get knocked out to not watch a boring team. Look at the Suns they win with offense, but they got better D guys then us. He benched Korver............Should he have benched Webber who is making 20 mill, and Iverson also? NOO because Larry did not bench Iverson for not playing D. He got Billy King to bring in guys who can play D around AI. Yet Billy King has not done that now. So it's on him not Mo.No, they won't. If they trade Livingston, they will trade Maggette along with him. They have enough youth to be a contender within the next three years ANYWAY (enough time for Livingston to develop into a very good player), so why give up TWO solid contributors for just one? Especially when that one player is 31-years old right now, and many GMs fear he will begin declining within the next two-three years. They're not giving up a young player with potential (Livingston) and a very good player (Maggette) for a 31-year old point guard who only has two or three good years left in him. It's not as if Brand is 32 or anything... he has enough time to wait for Livingston to develop. They are not in WIN NOW mode.Okay and? I was saying they would trade him, and you said the same thing. Because they might think that when the young guys are good enough to help Brand win then Brand would be to old. They also might think that those guys won't be good enough after sometime next season change there mind. Or they just might not want to risk them not becoming as good as they think, and deicde to get a sure thing star next to Brand to win with in the next 3 years. And that 31 year old has been playing as well as that 21 year old named Lebron. (knock on wood) They might not be in win now mode, but things change when you know that your close to being able to contend with the Spurs, and Dallas.Denver has already lowballed us twice with two horrible offers, and they just are not going to part ways with Marcus Camby (the player we want instead of Kenyon Martin). They could end up offering us more, but I really doubt it.First of all, that last sentence is a completely contradictory. "They know it's not a one man game, but they'll trade for a player even if his team sucks as long as he's having a great season." Yeah... way to contradict yourself.Again you have shown how stupid you are by this. Denver has said that they are willing to trade anyone except for Melo to get AI. And what the heck are you talking about? If a team is having a bad season, but the player is good yes they would trade for that player. If the team sucks out side of that that one player everyone knows that player can't carry the whole team no matter how good he is. And why you using big words for gotta feel smart? "Mr. I went to private school." lolSecond of all... teams WILL care if the Sixers suck and they are trading for Iverson. Why? Well, if we suck, and every team out there knows that it's time we part ways with Iverson (which they already know), they will keep lowballing us like they are now. We'll be "desperate" to get rid of Iverson and start the rebuilding process ASAP, and thus we won't get a good deal in return. Think of it this way. If you have a big screen TV, and it's broken or something is wrong with it... are people going to buy it from you for 70-80% of what you paid for it? Hell no... they'll give you jack sh*t for it.OMG like WTF did you say haha this is a complete joke, and they say I don't post good enough posts to be VIP. Bottom line is.............We won't get as much as we would have if AI was 27, but we should still get 2 good young guys, and a pick. Or package Iverson with Sammy, Korver, and a future 1st for a young all star, but I don't think teams would give up there young all star so 2 good young guys, and a pick should be pretty good. And yes they will give up more for AI during the season, because teams who would be close to contending now would not care about the young guys a lot of the times. And no they won't care that his team might be 15 games under .500 at that time as long as Iverson is still playing at the same level as he has been. And the thing about the TV haha wow what does that have to do with anything? I hope this is not how you became VIP.The only way we'll get MORE for Iverson during the season is if both he and the Sixers as a team are playing very well. Otherwise teams will know we are looking to get rid of him, and will lowball us. It doesn't take a genius to figure that out. That's how it has been in the NBA for years... and that is how it will continue to be.OMG again dude if he is playing the same like he has been for years no one will care how bad his team is. What don't you get they are trading for AI's play not his teams play. And if we have not gotten rid of him yet they might think we would consider keeping him until he retires unless we get a good offer so they can still offer more even with the team doing bad as long as Iverson is doing good.EDIT: I'll tell you what. Since you believe so strongly that Cheeks is a defensive-minded coach, how about I start a poll in the General NBA section asking people, and we'll see what everybody says? Because quite frankly, Mo Cheeks is NOT a defensive-minded coach.For the love of god people get the wrong idea with him not having guys who can play D at all except for Iguodala, and maybe Ollie a little.So, take a step outside of you optimistic little bubble there, and see the dark cloud of reality that is hovering over the Sixers franchise, and that will continue to be there for the next five to eight years.Optimistic? Are you that stupid? I am not saying we will win a title. I am just saying we will make the playoffs, and that AI can average 33/9. And 5-8 years? Your full of it, because if we get a fair offer for AI 2 young good guys, and a first round pick then we can rebuild with in 3 years. Because with our pick we would have a good chance at getting Oden since we will suck if AI is traded. And then we would have another first rounder from the team we trade AI to. And even though that pick will probably be a bad one with that team being good probably when AI get's there it would still be a first rounder that can maybe be traded with our lottery first rounder to get a #1 pick. So Oden maybe, and we have Iguodala that be a great way to rebuild. So it would not take us 5-8 years to rebuild it can be about 3 years if we would do it right, and fire Billy King maybe to have a different better gm do this.</div>^^^
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (iversonfan268 @ Aug 6 2006, 10:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wow dude I was using Lebron as an example. You seriously think because LeBron is amazing on offense he shouldn't have to learn to play good defense? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I was reffering to Iguodala at the end also when I said he better get an offensive game or he'll have to settle for being mediocre for the rest of his career. I'm insulted that you would think I would think LeBron is mediocre for not having a defensive game. Last quit making Iguodala sound so much better than he is. It's insulting to put Iguodala in the same sentence as Salmons? Please! Iguodala is obviously better than Salmons but he hasn't played anywhere near his potential. Quit giving Iggy so much slack. He hasn't played aggresive at all on offense and his defense hasn't been as good as it can be. I don't get where your getting the idea that his defense was amazing. It was above average last season but not amazing. If it was amazing he would've been selected onto atleast the 2nd team.</div>Lebron is not the kinda player you use in a example. He does enough out side of D to still be able to be the best player to ever play the game if he keep doing what he is doing. It be nice if he played better D, but no it's fine if he keeps doing what he is doing. Ow ok I was not sure if you were talking about Iguodala at the end, or not. Sorry I thought you were saying Lebron is medicore for not having a D game, but some of you on here been saying some stupid stuff so I don't know what to think half the times. And Iguodala is deff better then all of you make him out to be. You people are underrating him, and what he does for this team. Yes it is insulting to put Iguodala in the same sentence as Salmons. And he has played aggressive on offense at times. And if your saying he has not at all then maybe you should watch more games. And your talking about his D when he is the only damn player playing D on this team? WOW just wow your full of it. His D would probably get better if he did not have to play D not only for his guy, but also for 4 other guys on this team. Yes his D is amazing when you consider he has to cover for 4 other guys on this team also not just him. And he does not get as much props like he should with our team sucking.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BigMo763 @ Aug 6 2006, 11:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Agreed. Iguodala has all the tools... he just needs to use them and play to his potential. He can easily become a Ron Artest type of guy... amazing defense, and still a big threat offensively (minus the headaches, of course).</div>Could not agree with you more. He can be just as good on D as Artest. Also on offense he just needs to be consistently more aggressive. And he is good at getting steals. So he can be just like Artest easy. Only major thing that really keeps him from being like Artest is being more aggressive on offense. And I think that will change next year when he will be that sure thing #3 guy.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Serge @ Aug 13 2006, 01:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Lebron is not the kinda player you use in a example. He does enough out side of D to still be able to be the best player to ever play the game if he keep doing what he is doing. It be nice if he played better D, but no it's fine if he keeps doing what he is doing. Ow ok I was not sure if you were talking about Iguodala at the end, or not. Sorry I thought you were saying Lebron is medicore for not having a D game, but some of you on here been saying some stupid stuff so I don't know what to think half the times. And Iguodala is deff better then all of you make him out to be. You people are underrating him, and what he does for this team. Yes it is insulting to put Iguodala in the same sentence as Salmons. And he has played aggressive on offense at times. And if your saying he has not at all then maybe you should watch more games. And your talking about his D when he is the only damn player playing D on this team? WOW just wow your full of it. His D would probably get better if he did not have to play D not only for his guy, but also for 4 other guys on this team. Yes his D is amazing when you consider he has to cover for 4 other guys on this team also not just him. And he does not get as much props like he should with our team sucking.Could not agree with you more. He can be just as good on D as Artest. Also on offense he just needs to be consistently more aggressive. And he is good at getting steals. So he can be just like Artest easy. Only major thing that really keeps him from being like Artest is being more aggressive on offense. And I think that will change next year when he will be that sure thing #3 guy.</div>Once again what your saying is stupid and your pretty much saying some players should get special treatment. I don't know how you think since LeBron is one of the best offensive players in the league that he shouldn't have to bother getting better at defense. It would only make him better anyways. Next did I ever say Iguodala isn't very talented? No I didn't. What I've been saying over and over this whole time is your making it seem like Iguodala has been doing so much more than he really has IN GAMES. Why is it insulting to say Iguodala and Salmons in the same sentence? Because Iguodala was a little bit less inconsistent then Salmons last season? Who the F*ck cares if Iguodala sometimes showed what he could do on offense. That's what inconsistency is. Being able to do it always sometimes. Why are you sticking up for him so much? No one here is trying to say Iguodala sucks. All I'm trying to say is I won't cut Iguodala slack until he actually proves to be that reliable #3 option on that team instead of just showing flashes of potetnial. Now for his D. Did I ever say it's bad? No I didn't. I clearly said he's a good defender. I'm saying I don't think he's been playing the best D he can because quite frtankly I believe his best D is good enough to get him on atleast the all 2nd defensive team. BTW quit making it sound like he has to do more on defense. What your making it sound like is in the games Iguodala is actually having to defend 5 players when he isn't. Quit making him sound like a miracle worker.Also I love how BigMo is saying a lot of the same stuff I am and all his posts you respond saying how much you agree with him lol.
