PDA

View Full Version : Are the 76ers for real?



jul392
01-29-2012, 04:29 PM
Ive been a sixers fan for quite some time now and the team that I have seen this year is one of the most hard working teams on sharing the ball and putting the team first. Im just wondering if you guys think this will last. Why or Why Not?

Pakman
01-29-2012, 04:30 PM
Nope

Nick O
01-29-2012, 04:31 PM
i think they are for "real" in the way the Hawks are.. i think they will be pretty good for the next couple years but they wont be contenders

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 04:50 PM
they are built for this regular season with good depth, and great defense. But I don't see them as a threat to beat either Miami or Chicago in a 7 game series.

Sort of the Denver of the east if you will

THE GIPPER
01-29-2012, 04:54 PM
they are built for this regular season with good depth, and great defense. But I don't see them as a threat to beat either Miami or Chicago in a 7 game series.

Sort of the Denver of the east if you will

I might be biased as a denver fan but i think the nuggets are more "for real" than the 76ers, but i understand the comparison.

bholly
01-29-2012, 05:08 PM
We've been talking about this in the Sixers' forum: we might've had the easiest schedule in the league so far. Heaps at home, heaps against bad teams. But, we're about to go on a 7 game stretch of good teams, and then 7 of 8 on the road. February is going to be really tough, and could seem like a whole different season.

So let's see how we do in the next month and then talk about it.

numba1CHANGsta
01-29-2012, 05:23 PM
I can see them beating any team in the East other than the Bulls and Heat

More-Than-Most
01-29-2012, 05:31 PM
Agreed...We might give heat/Bulls a good series but not shot at beating them

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 05:33 PM
I might be biased as a denver fan but i think the nuggets are more "for real" than the 76ers, but i understand the comparison.

I mean, that from my personal standpoint, neither can beat the top teams in their conference, but both may end up with a high seed going in.

I haven't watched enough of Denver, only seen them 2 times this year. I need to watch some more before I can put them with OKC for instance.

BallIsAll
01-29-2012, 05:34 PM
I'm getting tired of people saying teams that are winning now are only winning because of depth and won't win in the playoffs. It's not like only a select few players can make tough shots in the playoffs because god said so. Is Derek fisher a superstar? Cuz he's hit a lot more tough shots in the playoffs than these "superstars". Most of these superstars never even made it to the finals. I think the sixers are forreal and just because theyre deep that doesn't mean they won't make noise in the playoffs.

BallIsAll
01-29-2012, 05:37 PM
I mean, that from my personal standpoint, neither can beat the top teams in their conference, but both may end up with a high seed going in.

I haven't watched enough of Denver, only seen them 2 times this year. I need to watch some more before I can put them with OKC for instance.


So just because you haven't watched them they aren't up there with okc? They are the second best team in the west and their records back it up. Just because they don't have many household names on their rosters doesn't mean their team is not a top team in the nba.

dfritz03
01-29-2012, 05:45 PM
We've been talking about this in the Sixers' forum: we might've had the easiest schedule in the league so far. Heaps at home, heaps against bad teams. But, we're about to go on a 7 game stretch of good teams, and then 7 of 8 on the road. February is going to be really tough, and could seem like a whole different season.

So let's see how we do in the next month and then talk about it.

My thoughts exactly.

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 05:58 PM
So just because you haven't watched them they aren't up there with okc? They are the second best team in the west and their records back it up. Just because they don't have many household names on their rosters doesn't mean their team is not a top team in the nba.

no, your biggest strength is depth. In the playoffs, that just doesn't matter nearly as much as it does in a season with 66 games in 134 days. I could care less about household names, but lets be honest.... The Nuggets are running teams out of the gym with massive depth and a great bench. The playoffs slow down, and teams shorten their rotations. OKC's first 7-8 guys, in a series where everyone gets rest, is better than the Nuggets rotation they will march out there.

PacersForLife
01-29-2012, 06:00 PM
I can see them beating any team in the East other than the Bulls and Heat

You could say the same for the Pacers.

PacersForLife
01-29-2012, 06:04 PM
We've been talking about this in the Sixers' forum: we might've had the easiest schedule in the league so far. Heaps at home, heaps against bad teams. But, we're about to go on a 7 game stretch of good teams, and then 7 of 8 on the road. February is going to be really tough, and could seem like a whole different season.

So let's see how we do in the next month and then talk about it.

I like the Sixers so don't get me wrong here. The Pacers have played quite a few games against top-tier teams and have won against the Bulls in Chicago, Lakers in LA, Boston twice by double digits. The Pacers and Sixers are a lot alike, but the Pacers have had a tougher schedule and it makes me wonder why the Sixers are getting more hype... I'm glad to see we are getting recognition from Magic Johnson and Mike Wilbon though.

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 06:06 PM
Also, looking at the statistical production, there is no way some of the Nuggets can sustain those high PER and Offrtg's all year. 8 players well over league average in PER, 4 players with ELITE Offrtg's, and a handful more with very good ratings. I can't see them sustaining it.

Look, I am not saying the Nuggets can't win a championship. I just don't think they have the players who can outplay the Thunder in a 7 game series.

2-ONE-5
01-29-2012, 06:17 PM
The Sixers beat (and are better than) the Pacers.

da ThRONe
01-29-2012, 06:24 PM
As currently constructed no. I think the 6ers are a big trade away from being true contenders.

Gritz
01-29-2012, 06:31 PM
Also, looking at the statistical production, there is no way some of the Nuggets can sustain those high PER and Offrtg's all year. 8 players well over league average in PER, 4 players with ELITE Offrtg's, and a handful more with very good ratings. I can't see them sustaining it.

Look, I am not saying the Nuggets can't win a championship. I just don't think they have the players who can outplay the Thunder in a 7 game series.

If you won't say it, I will

Nuggets can't win a championship

BallIsAll
01-29-2012, 06:35 PM
Also, looking at the statistical production, there is no way some of the Nuggets can sustain those high PER and Offrtg's all year. 8 players well over league average in PER, 4 players with ELITE Offrtg's, and a handful more with very good ratings. I can't see them sustaining it.

Look, I am not saying the Nuggets can't win a championship. I just don't think they have the players who can outplay the Thunder in a 7 game series.


Why can't they sustain it? All the nuggets starters are above average and the thunder only have 2 above average starters. The nuggets have above average players coming off the bench and all the thunder have is harden?

8 men rotation
Lawson - all star candidate
Afflalo - all star candidate, elite defender
Gallo - all star candidate
Nene - all star candidate
Mozgov - average player
Miller - all star candidate
Harrington - starter on many teams
Fernandez - starter on many teams

Westbrook - all star candidate
Thabo - role player
Durant - superstar
Ibaka - average player, elite defender
Perkins - average player
Harden - starter on many teams
Collison - average player
Then a whole bunch of garbage

BallIsAll
01-29-2012, 06:38 PM
If you won't say it, I will

Nuggets can't win a championship

And who are you?

bholly
01-29-2012, 06:41 PM
I like the Sixers so don't get me wrong here. The Pacers have played quite a few games against top-tier teams and have won against the Bulls in Chicago, Lakers in LA, Boston twice by double digits. The Pacers and Sixers are a lot alike, but the Pacers have had a tougher schedule and it makes me wonder why the Sixers are getting more hype... I'm glad to see we are getting recognition from Magic Johnson and Mike Wilbon though.

Yeah. I think part of it is that up until the last week the Pacers' schedule had been just as soft team-wise, and people just don't notice home and away records nearly as much as they should. Another aspect is that the Sixers have been totally destroying bad teams, and huge wins and points differential are things that do get noticed. Also, Indy got more love leading into the season, while for a lot of people the Sixers were more of a surprise, and hype is story-driven.

I think, though, the biggest thing could be timing. The Sixers' hype, at least in the major media outlets, all pretty much happened over one or two days - around the 10th of Jan when we were suddenly #1 in the Hollinger rankings, and #4 at Sports Illustrated and there were a bunch of articles about us on ESPN that day - it all came out of nowhere really suddenly. And it just so happened that day, when the spotlight was on us the most, we beat Sacto by almost 30 and had beaten Indy by 10 the day before to go up to like 3rd in the East or whatever. Once the spotlight and story moved on the next day, that sort of hype was what stuck in people's minds.

So yeah, I think it's a combination of the above things. I wouldn't worry too much about it, though - it's just hype.

A lot has changed in the last week - the Pacers had some great wins, and we had a horrible loss, etc. Hype is largely media (and power rankings) driven, so you've got to give it time to catch up. Then a few more Pacers wins like @Chi and @LAL, and a cooling of the Sixers as the schedule gets brutal, and the respect will even itself right out.

bholly
01-29-2012, 06:47 PM
Why can't they sustain it? All the nuggets starters are above average and the thunder only have 2 above average starters. The nuggets have above average players coming off the bench and all the thunder have is harden?

8 men rotation
Lawson - all star candidate
Afflalo - all star candidate, elite defender
Gallo - all star candidate
Nene - all star candidate
Mozgov - average player
Miller - all star candidate
Harrington - starter on many teams
Fernandez - starter on many teams

Westbrook - all star candidate
Thabo - role player
Durant - superstar
Ibaka - average player, elite defender
Perkins - average player
Harden - starter on many teams
Collison - average player
Then a whole bunch of garbage

I love the Nuggets, and totally think they have a chance to really contend, but your bias is showing a little in this post and that isn't going to help your argument. You absolutely cannot call Miller an All Star Candidate and then lump Harden in as 'starter on many teams' along with Harrington and Fernandez, nor give AAA 'elite defender' and Thabo just 'role player'. Same with Westbrook being 'all star candidate' as if he's on the same level as Lawson, Gallo, Nene. He's more like 'all star lock, superstar candidate'.

It's also worth noting that breaking things down like this doesn't mean anything (other than maybe proving what other people are saying - they have more supserstar power at the top, while you're deeper). It's how good the team is, and how well the players work together, that counts.
Ibaka and Perkins and whatever may not be All Stars individually, but they're just about perfect for that team.

BallIsAll
01-29-2012, 07:00 PM
I love the Nuggets, and totally think they have a chance to really contend, but your bias is showing a little in this post and that isn't going to help your argument. You absolutely cannot call Miller an All Star Candidate and then lump Harden in as 'starter on many teams' along with Harrington and Fernandez, nor give AAA 'elite defender' and Thabo just 'role player'. Same with Westbrook being 'all star candidate' as if he's on the same level as Lawson, Gallo, Nene. He's more like 'all star lock, superstar candidate'.

It's also worth noting that breaking things down like this doesn't mean anything (other than maybe proving what other people are saying - they have more supserstar power at the top, while you're deeper). It's how good the team is, and how well the players work together, that counts.
Ibaka and Perkins and whatever may not be All Stars individually, but they're just about perfect for that team.

Thabo is just a role player AAA is an all star candidate and it's just a fact so it's miller. I haven't seen harden on the all star ballot but he is definitely a starter so I stated it. Westbrook is definitely just an all star candidate and not even close to a superstar there is no way in hell a superstar POINT GUARD should average those assists and turnover numbers. I have reasons why i listed them like that and I actually state them this isn't a hollow statement.

HouRealCoach
01-29-2012, 07:03 PM
Nope

SeoulBeatz
01-29-2012, 07:04 PM
Why can't they sustain it? All the nuggets starters are above average and the thunder only have 2 above average starters. The nuggets have above average players coming off the bench and all the thunder have is harden?

8 men rotation
Lawson - all star candidate
Afflalo - all star candidate, elite defender
Gallo - all star candidate
Nene - all star candidate
Mozgov - average player
Miller - all star candidate
Harrington - starter on many teams
Fernandez - starter on many teams

Westbrook - all star candidate
Thabo - role player
Durant - superstar
Ibaka - average player, elite defender
Perkins - average player
Harden - starter on many teams
Collison - average player
Then a whole bunch of garbage

I'm sorry but Afflalo, Miller, and Gallo being all star candidates is some serious homerism.

All VERY good role players, but they have no chance at being all stars this year.

BallIsAll
01-29-2012, 07:09 PM
I'm sorry but Afflalo, Miller, and Gallo being all star candidates is some serious homerism.

All VERY good role players, but they have no chance at being all stars this year.

Go vote for your all stars and they will be on the list.

76erEaglePhils
01-29-2012, 07:16 PM
Go vote for your all stars and they will be on the list.You are completely clueless, and delusional:facepalm:

bholly
01-29-2012, 07:18 PM
Thabo is just a role player AAA is an all star candidate and it's just a fact so it's miller. I haven't seen harden on the all star ballot but he is definitely a starter so I stated it. Westbrook is definitely just an all star candidate and not even close to a superstar there is no way in hell a superstar POINT GUARD should average those assists and turnover numbers. I have reasons why i listed them like that and I actually state them this isn't a hollow statement.

Again, your bias is showing. Westbrook is an All Star lock, not a 'candidate' in the same category as Denver's guys. Andre Miller is not an All Star candidate in any world other than (maybe) the Denver media, and even then I haven't seen it and would be surprised. Being on the ballot doesn't make you a genuine candidate. And just saying you haven't seen Harden on the ballot as part of your argument speaks volumes. Dude is killing, would be an All Star candidate on most teams (not just a starter), and is a huge favourite for 6th man of the year.
I'm not going to keep doing this, because it isn't going to go anywhere, but I'm just telling you, as someone who likes the Nuggets, that from the point of view of anyone but a Nuggets diehard those arguments are just going to lose you credibility and work against you.

bholly
01-29-2012, 07:20 PM
Go vote for your all stars and they will be on the list.

Being on the ballot means next to nothing. Joel Anthony is on there.

Saying someone is an 'All Star candidate' means they have a genuine chance, or a realistic argument that they should be there, not that they're on the ballot.

theLgndKllr35
01-29-2012, 07:21 PM
Andre Miller should be labeled, starter on many teams, superstar against the Sixers

bholly
01-29-2012, 07:24 PM
Andre Miller should be labeled, starter on many teams, superstar against the Sixers

Yeah. Sad face.

roshan3ai
01-29-2012, 07:25 PM
I'm sorry but Afflalo, Miller, and Gallo being all star candidates is some serious homerism.

All VERY good role players, but they have no chance at being all stars this year.
Gallo has a shot. The only guy definitively above him is KD. He's playing better than Rudy Gay this year. I think the 4 that should be considered are KD, Gerald Wallace, Gay and Gallo. He has a shot.

BallIsAll
01-29-2012, 07:29 PM
I'm not trying to sart an arguement I'm just saying just because teams don't have players labeled superstars doesn't mean they can't win in the playoffs. And yeah I guess I was a bit bias but nene gallo and Lawson are all star candidates

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 07:30 PM
Why can't they sustain it? All the nuggets starters are above average and the thunder only have 2 above average starters. The nuggets have above average players coming off the bench and all the thunder have is harden?

8 men rotation
Lawson - all star candidate
Afflalo - all star candidate, elite defender
Gallo - all star candidate
Nene - all star candidate
Mozgov - average player
Miller - all star candidate
Harrington - starter on many teams
Fernandez - starter on many teams

Westbrook - all star candidate
Thabo - role player
Durant - superstar
Ibaka - average player, elite defender
Perkins - average player
Harden - starter on many teams
Collison - average player
Then a whole bunch of garbage


Until the Nugs sustain it and prove me, or anyone analyzing them wrong, they have a bunch of guys playing over their heads currently, and are going to win a lot of regular season games because of the fast schedule and the fact that their 2nd unit could start for an average team.

Please don't think I am crapping on your team, I love the roster. But I can't see that roster beating Durant/Harden/Westbrook and company in the playoffs for instance.

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 07:32 PM
Go vote for your all stars and they will be on the list.

what does this have to do with whether or not a player is an all star candidate?

Sixerlover
01-29-2012, 07:32 PM
Until the Nugs sustain it and prove me, or anyone analyzing them wrong, they have a bunch of guys playing over their heads currently, and are going to win a lot of regular season games because of the fast schedule and the fact that their 2nd unit could start for an average team.

Please don't think I am crapping on your team, I love the roster. But I can't see that roster beating Durant/Harden/Westbrook and company in the playoffs for instance.

I don't know if the fast season has anything to do with it, just because they were very good last season after the trade as well. They're just a good team

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 07:32 PM
How did this turn into a Nuggets thread? I simply mentioned the Sixers were built to be a really good team in this shortened season due to depth and defense. The Nuggets are also built to be a good team in this regular season, or any other.

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 07:33 PM
I don't know if the fast season has anything to do with it, just because they were very good last season after the trade as well. They're just a good team

well, they have depth, and defense. The schedule has been very friendly to you guys, but you have been crushing teams, not just squeaking by many nights.

I still think the Sixers will have too much to overcome, talent wise, to beat Miami and Chicago.

Crackadalic
01-29-2012, 07:34 PM
Philly is a good team but there one of the few teams that has a lot of depth or didnt have a big roster turnover. Lets see how they play against the top heavy teams

2-ONE-5
01-29-2012, 07:36 PM
This thread would of been better off if it was made 3 weeks from now. Sixers are gonna run Orlando out of the building tomorrow night

Sixerlover
01-29-2012, 07:37 PM
well, they have depth, and defense. The schedule has been very friendly to you guys, but you have been crushing teams, not just squeaking by many nights.

I still think the Sixers will have too much to overcome, talent wise, to beat Miami and Chicago.

Oh yeah, back to the Sixers. Yeah we're blowing out the bad teams at a historic level, but the majority of the teams we've played were bad.

Next 7 games in no order is Orlando, Miami, LAC, San Antonio, Chicago, Lakers, Hawks.. We'll see where we stand after that.

But I personally have said since the summer that I don't see us beating Miami or Chicago. BUT we can definitely beat any other team in the east in a 7 game series.

BallIsAll
01-29-2012, 07:38 PM
Sorry for changing the thread guys didn't mean to... The sixers are really good though I do agree with people saying they're schedule has been pretty weeks i so far

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 07:49 PM
I'm not trying to sart an arguement I'm just saying just because teams don't have players labeled superstars doesn't mean they can't win in the playoffs. And yeah I guess I was a bit bias but nene gallo and Lawson are all star candidates

so is Michael Beasley.

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 07:50 PM
Sorry for changing the thread guys didn't mean to... The sixers are really good though I do agree with people saying they're schedule has been pretty weeks i so far

its my B too dude, no worries.

Hawkeye15
01-29-2012, 07:51 PM
Oh yeah, back to the Sixers. Yeah we're blowing out the bad teams at a historic level, but the majority of the teams we've played were bad.

Next 7 games in no order is Orlando, Miami, LAC, San Antonio, Chicago, Lakers, Hawks.. We'll see where we stand after that.

But I personally have said since the summer that I don't see us beating Miami or Chicago. BUT we can definitely beat any other team in the east in a 7 game series.

I agree with all of this, which I think I said in my OP haha.

pacersfan1967
01-29-2012, 09:58 PM
The Sixers beat (and are better than) the Pacers.I don't think so ... 13 of are first 19 games have been on the road chicago ,boston, miami ,orlando, boston we've played 3 times..won twice...

lavilevi23
01-30-2012, 01:50 AM
NAH they aint for real

Lim
01-30-2012, 02:51 AM
sixers fan here... to answer the question: Nope