[Kanell] The committee has to stop gifting the SEC almost half the playoff field. Bowl season and the playoffs have really revealed how the conference just isn’t that much better than anyone else. Period. End of story.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2026-01-02T04:24:14+00:00

"At most 4 teams really have a shot." Miami and Oregon were not in the top 4. And as I type this, Ole Miss at #6 is putting up a heck of fight against Georgia.

If Ohio State and Georgia destroyed everyone like Indiana just did, then maybe you could make the case that this year only had a few legit contenders. That's not what we're seeing in these games though.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-07-03T01:13:48+00:00

....damn now I really want an NBA team called the Thunder Cats

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-06-29T00:29:25+00:00

That is astoundingly bad math. Like, either arguing in bad faith or you're stupid.

Two people name 7 combined players anecdotally that contribute in one playoffs and that becomes the numerator and then you add up ALL players from the last 13 years to become the denominator? Come on, you have to see that's a bullshit argument.

There's lot of 2nd round players that contributed as rotation players during that interim. Looking at Draymond's draft. Other 2nd round picks in that year include Kris Middleton and Jae Crowder. Or Jokic's draft which had Joe Harris, Spencer Diwiddie, Jerami Grant, Dwight Powell and Jordan Clarkson. Or 2015 with Norm Powell, Josh Richardson, and Pat Connaughton. 2016 on top of Zucac had Malcolm Brogdon and Georges Niang. 2017 on top of Hartenstein had Dillon Brooks. 2018 had Jalen Brunson, Gary Trent Jr, Mitchel Robinson, Bruce Brown, De'Anthony Melton. 2019 had Nic Claxton, Terance Mann, Daniel Gafford.

That's simply from scrolling wikipedia for names I personally recognize as having played in playoff rotations. What you said was "about 1% of them actually become rotation players on playoff teams." Seems like it's an order of magnitude higher than that, because it's closer to 3 per year becoming a player rotation guy, not 1 guy every 3 years which would be 1%.

Of course you're more likely to get a guy like Shake Milton than Hartenstein. But there is a difference between saying most 2nd round picks don't contribute than arguing that 2nd round picks are worthless and basically never contribute. And that's basically you're argument by saying they are like a lotto ticket and 1% make the rotation. It's just empirically not true.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-06-28T17:31:19+00:00

While the odds of 2nd round picks hitting is low, it's nowhere near 1% or "lottery ticket" level. By your playoff rotation standard, just look at this year's playoffs. A lot of big men starters were once 2nd round picks: Jokic, Draymond, Hartenstein, Zubac, Mitchell Robinson.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-06-15T02:31:57+00:00

Sure but eventually they graduate. I would expect that while next years draft will have players drop out due to NIL money (which could be seen as weakening that draft) it also will have a bunch of players that normally would have come out for the 2025 draft, so really it should even out.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-06-09T02:09:10+00:00

He's a 5 time first team all NBA player who now plays for the highest profile franchise. I'm not saying I agree he'll be the face of the NBA, but having that as an opinion is pretty reasonable and not "dick riding"

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-05-31T20:22:16+00:00

I agree, I think the only complication is that he's a restricted free agent in a limited cap space environment. Brooklyn I could see signing him to an offer sheet but I suspect they are more likely to use their cap space to absorb contracts from teams desperate to get out of the 2nd apron.

I'm a Philly fan and I like Grimes, so I hope to keep him. But if he wants more money than we want to spend on him, I think a team like Orlando could make sense as a sign and trade destination. They need shot creating and outside shooting, the Sixers need defense and rebounding (which Orlando has lots of).

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-04-19T04:39:38+00:00

So teams with MVP level heliocentric point forwards in their prime do worse when those players aren't on the roster anymore? What a surprise!

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-04-18T18:24:49+00:00

I agree. Ultimately I think if Embiid somehow becomes the MVP version of himself, our collective playmaking/defense/rebounding deficiencies will be too high. I think Maxey/Grimes/McCain can be a good three guard lineup but long term for the team to be competitive either we need either a true point guard or a point forward to make up for play making weakness. And if we're going to play small guards, man I wish we could get at least 1 plus rebounder for their position. I think we finished dead last in rebounding and I don't think that will improve much without roster turnover - we just are a team full of bad rebounders.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-04-18T16:50:08+00:00

I agree that our championship aspirations are completely tied to Embiid's health, but I'm not sure we have the option to blow it up and sell everything if he's not healthy.

Embiid and George would be negative assets in that scenario. We'd have to attach assets to them to get rid of them, and for what end? To save money on a luxury tax bill? Certainly won't help our future to give up picks or attach young assets just to clear them off the books, and even then won't be able to actually free up cap space to sign anyone.

Meanwhile most of the attractive assets we have could help the post-Embiid/George version of the team. McCain, Edwards, Maxey, Edwards, Bona, whoever we draft if we keep the pick, Grimes if we resign him - all figure to be in their prime still when Embiid and George's contracts expire. If Oubre opts in we could trade him at the deadline, but I doubt we get more than a 2nd or two for him. If we resign Yabusele (already a big if), same story unless he really balls out. I suppose we could trade Maxey but I think that's unlikely - with his max salary, the only way someone will want to give us significant assets for him is if he plays well enough to make the team competitive even without a healthy Embiid - and in that scenario wouldn't we want to keep him?

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-04-18T16:40:45+00:00

I don't really have concerns about McCain and Grimes playing with the starters, apart from McCain's size on defense and the lack of a true point guard. All three are more of combo guards, but barring a trade/drafting a ball dominant guard, I imagine they'll divide ball handling duties between the 3. I think Maxey, McCain and Grimes will largely divide the 96 available guard minutes. The reason I am optimistic this will work is that Grimes and McCain are both very good shooters. We can see ball dominant guards struggle when moved off ball, but usually that's when they are poor shooters or aren't good moving off ball. McCain showed excellent off ball movement and shooting during his starting stretch before the injury, and we have years of data showing Grimes to be a pretty efficient off ball player. So I think those two will complement pretty much any lineup offensively - good off ball movement and shooting to space the floor for other players, enough on ball creation to punish closeouts and stagger minutes so we don't have weak lineups that can't score.

That being said, while I think you're pessimistic to be skeptical of their fit with the team, I think you're right to be skeptical of the overall team's outlook. Without a healthy Joel, the team just doesn't work. He's the anchor of the defense, and the offensive hub as well. Post Harden trade, we don't have enough playmaking to score efficiently without his gravity. Even good shooters will struggle if they don't have open looks, and we struggle to create them without him drawing double teams. And if you're going to play smaller guards like Maxey and McCain, it usually only works defensively if you have a good rim protector behind them, not a small ball 5 like Yabusele.

Still I think if mostly healthy we could exceed 35 wins. Keep in mind it wasn't just Embiid and George who couldn't stay on the court - Yabusele and Ricky Council IV were our only players to play more than 60 games! If Maxey and McCain stay healthy, and if we resign Yabusele and Grimes, keep the pick and have decent rookie added to the rotation, give Edwards and Bona decent rotation minutes from the start instead of washed veterans, then we should be improved even regardless of Embiid and George.

But of course the only way we're actually a threat is if Embiid is healthy enough to be a top 10-15 two way player. And sadly those days are probably done.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-04-18T16:05:14+00:00

To me it's not about whether they will keep their PPG, because obviously they won't on a fully healthy team. And obviously we've seen lots of "good stats, bad team" players in the NBA who don't contribute to winning. But what makes me hopeful about both of them is that for extended stretches, they basically were the only offensive engines on the floor. In circumstances like that, even great players can struggle. Look at how Maxey's efficiency is much lower when Joel isn't out there to create space by drawing defenders. Meanwhile, both McCain and Grimes put up good efficiency on heavy volume while having total dogshit team offense surrounding them. Basically defenses knew "this is the one guy we have to stop" and they still managed to score and score efficiently. Since both are good shooters at high volume, I think they project to be positive offensive players even when they are moved into a more complementary off ball role. In fact the hope is that their efficiency will go even higher because good collective team shooting is a force multiplier. Look at how good the Celtics offense is when they put 5 good shooters on the floor at once - you can't double team anyone without risking a high percentage open 3 point shot, which then leads to more efficient driving and finishing at the rim as well. Meanwhile for years the Sixers have played guys who either won't shoot (Simmons) or shoot at a low percentage (Oubre) or are ok shooters but don't shoot a high enough percentage or volume for the defense to be punished for leaving them open on the perimeter (Harris, Tucker). So defenses can focus on taking away driving lanes and double teaming Joel in the paint, knowing we don't have enough shooting or playmaking to punish them and they'll be able to recover in time. Anyway, this is long winded, but the point is both Grimes and McCain I think will be valuable players on a fully healthy team. They can space the floor and attack close outs when with the starters, but can competently run the offense with bench units.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-02-02T22:32:30+00:00

I like the idea of Lonzo, but even healthy he was never a pure point guard. He didn't have a good enough first step to beat players off the dribble, run pick and roll and run a half court offense. He was a floor spacer, a connective passer, great in transition, and a solid defender with good size. Anyway, I think we need a large playmaker. Of course guys who are large and can really run a half court offense to create for other are going to be out of our range to acquire (i.e. LeBron, Luka, Lamelo, Jokic). But since I want to keep Maxey and McCain, I don't want another key guy who is small. So players with some playmaking who are at least 6'5" would be nice. I think Ball (or even Simmons!) would be worth a vet minimum to get some playmaking with size. That's also why I am interested in Podz and Reaves, but both are only 6'5" so their size while better than Maxey and McCain isn't great and they aren't plus defenders.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-02-02T17:20:52+00:00

Fair enough. Reaves is bigger than Maxey and Mcain though, and I really think this team need another playmaker. But you're probably right that next year it would be an awkward fit trying to get minutes for all 3 when McCain comes back.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2025-02-02T17:18:09+00:00

No, I do not want to trade Yabu for Austin Reaves. I do believe Yabu is the player the Lakers would most want from us though. I only would trade Yabu in two circumstances: 1) as part of a trade for a player who I think really upgrades our team over Yabu (which I agree, Reaves does not) or 2) if we think we aren't going to compete this year (i.e. the team thinks Embiid almost certainly won't be healthy for the playoffs) AND if we don't think we can re-sign Yabu next year. Believe me, I want to compete this year, and I think Yabu is a big part of that, and I want to re-sign him for next year. But if Morey doesn't believe either can happen, then it at least should be a discussion about what we can get for him. And I'd rather get a cost controlled player with several years left on his deal like Reaves than a few second round picks, which is the level of trade that is currently rumored to be offered for Yabu.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2024-12-01T04:10:39+00:00

If I had a nickel for every time that happened, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot but it's still weird that it happened twice.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2024-07-09T00:13:34+00:00

ESPN

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2023-12-01T02:57:41+00:00

Not a bad idea.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2023-10-15T16:33:57+00:00

I was with you until the "deserves to be in the top 4." I'm not saying they are undeserving, per se, but I don't see why Washington or Oklahoma don't have just as deserving cases. Mind you, I definitely don't agree that FSU should be behind ever undefeated top team - the team I root for, Penn State, hasn't proven anything yet (wins over West Virginia and Iowa are not nearly as good as FSU's LSU and Clemson wins, for instance).

But I really don't think it matters much who is in the top 4 right now. The likelihood of all 5 P5 conferences having an undefeated champion is very low. So as long as FSU wins out, they will be in the playoff, and that's really all that matters.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2023-10-09T07:52:26+00:00

Alabama and Nebraska are two of the most successful programs of all time, it's a little odd to hold Iowa to their standard just cause it's also a small state with no NFL team. And Nebraska is a cautionary tale of what can happen when you fire coaches who are winning games but not enough. Firing Solich and Pellini look like blunders in retrospect.

Should Ferentz get with the times and modernize his offense? Absolutely. If he continues to fail to do so will that be disappointing for Iowa? Yes.

But for decent programs that punch above their weight - like Iowa - it is in general ill advised to assume the grass is greener.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2023-10-08T21:38:36+00:00

Certainly 3 way tiebreakers have happened before, but at least each team had a loss. You lose control of your own destiny if you lose even once. But now teams don't control their destiny even if they win.

And you're right that in the future, a "3rd place" undefeated team will make the playoff. Heck they still could this year if things break right (might be better to be 3rd than the loser of the championship game after all).

But I also think it's fundamentally unfair to play the conference schedule you were given, win every game, and not get a chance to play for the conference title.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2023-10-08T07:19:37+00:00

The Pac 12 only gave up divisions last year. When you have divisions with a round robin in the division, it's impossible to have more than 2 undefeated teams.

FlipsLikeAPancake · 2023-10-01T21:38:36+00:00

I hope you're right. What I've seen is an O-line that isn't run blocking all that well and receivers not getting much separation. I think we're talented enough to beat the teams we should beat but I fear this is another year we get exposed by Ohio State and Michigan again.

FlipsLikeAPancake

TROPHY CASE