Report: C's worried about Okafor's off-court issues; not offering much in trade

[jpotter33]

If Embiid ends up being questionable again, then they can justify keeping him, though he'll certainly not develop to his ceiling there with that logjam.

But the Colangelos are running that organization now, and I don't think they're dumb enough to keep all of them. They'll absolutely destroy their values by doing so.

Well, he hasn't played a minute of pro ball, and has been out of organized ball for more than 2 years. If I were in Philly, I'd be worried about cleaning house to give him minutes. But then again, I'd trust the brass there to always make the wrong decision at this point. There's no other explanation about why this franchise has been this bad for this long.

Well, again, they've made better moves since the Colangelos have been there. Most of the horrible decisions were due to Hinkie operating on a theory of team building that doesn't necessarily translate to the real world where team fit, development, and roles/positions actually matter.

Perhaps. But I just did the math on Embiid: he started playing basketball at 15, and moved to the US at 16. So that's 2 years of US high school basketball, 1 year at Kansas, and 2 seasons missed with an injury. Even if he's healthy, I'm not sure what you're going to be getting from him and when.

On the bright side, though, I hear he used the time to add a three-point shot. Perhaps he's going to come in this year and make me eat my words.

Oh, I totally agree. That's something people conveniently ignore about Embiid is his immaturity when it comes to actually playing the game of basketball. His potential is sky high, but he needs so much development to actually get there that's it's far from a certainty that he'll even be a good rotation level for the next several years.

[LarBrd33]

Posturing.  Not going to work.  But hopefully we somehow pull off trading for him. 

It's pretty simply, really.  If Boston isn't willing to give up substantial assets for Okafor (like Smart + the future Brooklyn picks), there's no point to Philly trading them Okafor.

Which by the way... is the entire point of Keith Pompay's article masslive is spinning.  From the original article:

It doesn’t make sense to trade Jahlil Okafor to the Boston Celtics unless the 76ers' only goal is to dump one of their bigs at any cost.

That’s basically all they would be doing by trading him to their Eastern Conference foe.

His point is that it doesn't seem (according to unsubstantiated whispers) that Boston is willing to pay much for Okafor right now.  And until they do, there's no sense in trading Okafor to the Celtics.  Philly wants equal value.  Unless Boston gives up equal value, there's no reason to do a deal.

The funny thing is that fans read this stuff and go, "See Okafor's trade value is low!" and assume that means you can get him for one of our d-leaguers.  That's not how it works.  That's not how any of this works.  Even if you believe that nobody is willing to pay a lot for him - that just means they will not trade him.  It doesn't mean you can get him for nothing.

No, the real funny thing is that you keep denying all of these rumors that cut down his trade value just because they don't fit your narrative. It's going to be hilarious to watch you eat Philly crow once again when he's trade for much less value than you keep on naively suggesting.   

I'll be shocked if he gets traded at all. For all I know, the 76ers are dumb enough to start Simmons at SF, and Embiid may or may not ever be ready to be an NBA player.

If Embiid ends up being questionable again, then they can justify keeping him, though he'll certainly not develop to his ceiling there with that logjam.

But the Colangelos are running that organization now, and I don't think they're dumb enough to keep all of them. They'll absolutely destroy their values by doing so.

Embiid more than likely will be on a minute restriction.  They can justify keeping all three of their bigs regardless.   We have a billion guards on our roster and we make it work.  They can handle splitting minutes between three 7 footers for now.   Simmons will basically be playing point.  They can play Saric at SF.   They don't need to do anything right now.  Nobody needs to do anything right now.  The season is a foregone conclusion anyways unless a couple of Golden State's All-NBA players have season-ending injuries.  Philly might as well hold onto their star prospects, regardless of position, until someone is willing to trade star prospects at different positions.

That's a false analogy. We have four (or five tops) guards who will get minutes on our roster (IT, Smart, Bradley, Rozier, Brown at the 2). However, that's spread out over two positions (three with Smart and Brown going to play regular minutes at the 3 spot, too), and literally three of those five will regularly share the court together.

Embiid, Noel, and Okafor simply cannot share the floor together, which was proven last year, because they're all pure centers. This, it's not even close to similar to our guard situation.

It doesn't matter.   Embiid and Okafor might play well together.   Noel can back both up.  Simmons is basically their point guard.  Saric might be able to play with all three.  They don't know yet.  Until they know they don't know.  Until they know, they don't need to desperately do anything.

What's the worst-case scenario?  They have to play someone 25 minutes a night instead of 35?  They win 15 games?   If the trade value is really as low as these "reports" claim (it isn't), then what's the rush to do anything?  Like the article said... the only reason they'd trade Okafor for less than an equal star prospect is for the sake of trading him.  There's no benefit to the team to trade Okafor 1 year into his career for a d-leaguer.  That's heads-on-pants stupid. 

[jpotter33]

Posturing.  Not going to work.  But hopefully we somehow pull off trading for him. 

It's pretty simply, really.  If Boston isn't willing to give up substantial assets for Okafor (like Smart + the future Brooklyn picks), there's no point to Philly trading them Okafor.

Which by the way... is the entire point of Keith Pompay's article masslive is spinning.  From the original article:

It doesn’t make sense to trade Jahlil Okafor to the Boston Celtics unless the 76ers' only goal is to dump one of their bigs at any cost.

That’s basically all they would be doing by trading him to their Eastern Conference foe.

His point is that it doesn't seem (according to unsubstantiated whispers) that Boston is willing to pay much for Okafor right now.  And until they do, there's no sense in trading Okafor to the Celtics.  Philly wants equal value.  Unless Boston gives up equal value, there's no reason to do a deal.

The funny thing is that fans read this stuff and go, "See Okafor's trade value is low!" and assume that means you can get him for one of our d-leaguers.  That's not how it works.  That's not how any of this works.  Even if you believe that nobody is willing to pay a lot for him - that just means they will not trade him.  It doesn't mean you can get him for nothing.

No, the real funny thing is that you keep denying all of these rumors that cut down his trade value just because they don't fit your narrative. It's going to be hilarious to watch you eat Philly crow once again when he's trade for much less value than you keep on naively suggesting.   

I'll be shocked if he gets traded at all. For all I know, the 76ers are dumb enough to start Simmons at SF, and Embiid may or may not ever be ready to be an NBA player.

If Embiid ends up being questionable again, then they can justify keeping him, though he'll certainly not develop to his ceiling there with that logjam.

But the Colangelos are running that organization now, and I don't think they're dumb enough to keep all of them. They'll absolutely destroy their values by doing so.

Embiid more than likely will be on a minute restriction.  They can justify keeping all three of their bigs regardless.   We have a billion guards on our roster and we make it work.  They can handle splitting minutes between three 7 footers for now.   Simmons will basically be playing point.  They can play Saric at SF.   They don't need to do anything right now.  Nobody needs to do anything right now.  The season is a foregone conclusion anyways unless a couple of Golden State's All-NBA players have season-ending injuries.  Philly might as well hold onto their star prospects, regardless of position, until someone is willing to trade star prospects at different positions.

That's a false analogy. We have four (or five tops) guards who will get minutes on our roster (IT, Smart, Bradley, Rozier, Brown at the 2). However, that's spread out over two positions (three with Smart and Brown going to play regular minutes at the 3 spot, too), and literally three of those five will regularly share the court together.

Embiid, Noel, and Okafor simply cannot share the floor together, which was proven last year, because they're all pure centers. This, it's not even close to similar to our guard situation.

It doesn't matter.   Embiid and Okafor might play well together.   Noel can back both up.  Simmons is basically their point guard.  Saric might be able to play with all three.  They don't know yet.  Until they know they don't know.  Until they know, they don't need to desperately do anything.

What's the worst-case scenario?  They have to play someone 25 minutes a night instead of 35?  They win 15 games?   If the trade value is really as low as these "reports" claim (it isn't), then what's the rush to do anything?  Like the article said... the only reason they'd trade Okafor for less than an equal star prospect is for the sake of trading him.  There's no benefit to the team to trade Okafor 1 year into his career for a d-leaguer.  That's heads-on-pants stupid.

1) There's absolutely no indication that Embiid is anything other than a pure 5.

2) Saric can't play the 3 in the NBA. He will be absolutely tore up defensively. He's a 4 through and through.

3) You keep saying that Simmons is basically their point guard, but that doesn't matter since he's still going to guard the 4/3 of the other team, provides no spacing, and is still just a point forward. You still can't effectively play him with any more than one of the other bugs due to no spacing.

4) The worst-case scenario is the absolute destruction of all of your bigs' trade value. Okafor will go from a moderate trade value to weak trade value due to having hardly any playing time and/or playing out of position.

You have this Hinkie-esque notion of team building that isn't based in reality. Taking the best talent available doesn't matter if they can't fit together, meaning you can't develop them and ruin their trade value.

[timpiker]

Off court issues is a red herring. He has done nothing in Philly or anyplace else except in Boston. Defending teammates against a bunch of thugs.

Ainge is just trying to drive the price down. Pretty obvious.

Just defending huh?  And u know this how?  Did u give your eyewitness statement to the cops?

[outflip50]

1) For the people thinking this is the Celtics trying to decrease Okafors value, the article was actually written by  Keith Pompey of the Philly.com and the inquirer daily news out of Philly  http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/sports/sixers/Okafor-to-Boston-not-a-good-deal-for-Sixers.html

2) If for some reason you believe Philly doesn't know the problem, Their GM was on Sirius XM saying " Colangelo told SiriusXM NBA Radio. "But at the end of the day, the reality says one has to go at some point, but only when the deal is right."

Okafor has value but, certainly not sure what that value is. If Danny had valued him as much as Philly does right now, a deal would have gotten done. You certainly can't blame Colangelo for trying to hold out for what he can get but, I can pretty much guarantee he is never getting a Brooklyn pick for him. One dimensional problem children do not carry a lot of inherent value.

The rumored offer on draft night says quite a bit. Okafor, Covington and 2 firsts and nobody would bite, is enough to say he just isn't that highly valued at the moment.

[Diggles]

For two firsts?    Like the 16 and 23?

[Beat LA]

If Embiid ends up being questionable again, then they can justify keeping him, though he'll certainly not develop to his ceiling there with that logjam.

But the Colangelos are running that organization now, and I don't think they're dumb enough to keep all of them. They'll absolutely destroy their values by doing so.

Well, he hasn't played a minute of pro ball, and has been out of organized ball for more than 2 years. If I were in Philly, I'd be worried about cleaning house to give him minutes. But then again, I'd trust the brass there to always make the wrong decision at this point. There's no other explanation about why this franchise has been this bad for this long.

Well, again, they've made better moves since the Colangelos have been there. Most of the horrible decisions were due to Hinkie operating on a theory of team building that doesn't necessarily translate to the real world where team fit, development, and roles/positions actually matter.

Perhaps. But I just did the math on Embiid: he started playing basketball at 15, and moved to the US at 16. So that's 2 years of US high school basketball, 1 year at Kansas, and 2 seasons missed with an injury. Even if he's healthy, I'm not sure what you're going to be getting from him and when.

On the bright side, though, I hear he used the time to add a three-point shot. Perhaps he's going to come in this year and make me eat my words.

Oh, I totally agree. That's something people conveniently ignore about Embiid is his immaturity when it comes to actually playing the game of basketball. His potential is sky high, but he needs so much development to actually get there that's it's far from a certainty that he'll even be a good rotation level for the next several years.

What do you mean by immaturity?  Did you guys not see him at Kansas?  He was incredible, and the fact that he hasn't been playing basketball for that long makes it all the more remarkable, imo, and scary, lol .

[Irish Stew]

Wonder if they've discussed protecting the pick.  I'd favor trading Nets '17 or '18 if top 5 protected.  Even top 3.   I think this would work fine with the swap.   Send Rozier or Brown (maybe Smart) plus:

Top 5 protected '17; if doesn't convey then Nets '18 top 3 protected; if doesn't convey, then Philly gets Boston '18 plus Memphis '19.   Err, something like that.

IMO the problem with this is that you tie up these picks that can be used as trade chips in bigger trades for guys like Westbrook or Cousins. For other posters that think that Philly will move Okafor for our discards, they are much more likely to keep him until the first center goes down and they can get something reasonable for him.

[LarBrd33]

1) For the people thinking this is the Celtics trying to decrease Okafors value, the article was actually written by  Keith Pompey of the Philly.com and the inquirer daily news out of Philly  http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/sports/sixers/Okafor-to-Boston-not-a-good-deal-for-Sixers.html

Right.  He's responding to the rumors that Okafor's trade value is low.  The entire point of the article is:  "If his trade value is that low, there's no point in trading him". 

He's right.

[LilRip]

I don't see Okafor moving for a bag of chips. It'd be like us moving Smart for a bag of chips. I know some of you guys would still do that though, but fortunately, you guys aren't the C's GM. Now, if only you guys were the Thunder/Clippers/Sixers/Kings GM...

[MBunge]

1) For the people thinking this is the Celtics trying to decrease Okafors value, the article was actually written by  Keith Pompey of the Philly.com and the inquirer daily news out of Philly  http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/sports/sixers/Okafor-to-Boston-not-a-good-deal-for-Sixers.html

Right.  He's responding to the rumors that Okafor's trade value is low.  The entire point of the article is:  "If his trade value is that low, there's no point in trading him". 

He's right.

There's no need the trade him right now because we're months away from training camp.  That does not mean, however, that Philly doesn't need to trade somebody because not only could Okafor's value drop further, the log jam he creates could lower the value of Noel, Embiid and Saric.

Mike

[jpotter33]

If Embiid ends up being questionable again, then they can justify keeping him, though he'll certainly not develop to his ceiling there with that logjam.

But the Colangelos are running that organization now, and I don't think they're dumb enough to keep all of them. They'll absolutely destroy their values by doing so.

Well, he hasn't played a minute of pro ball, and has been out of organized ball for more than 2 years. If I were in Philly, I'd be worried about cleaning house to give him minutes. But then again, I'd trust the brass there to always make the wrong decision at this point. There's no other explanation about why this franchise has been this bad for this long.

Well, again, they've made better moves since the Colangelos have been there. Most of the horrible decisions were due to Hinkie operating on a theory of team building that doesn't necessarily translate to the real world where team fit, development, and roles/positions actually matter.

Perhaps. But I just did the math on Embiid: he started playing basketball at 15, and moved to the US at 16. So that's 2 years of US high school basketball, 1 year at Kansas, and 2 seasons missed with an injury. Even if he's healthy, I'm not sure what you're going to be getting from him and when.

On the bright side, though, I hear he used the time to add a three-point shot. Perhaps he's going to come in this year and make me eat my words.

Oh, I totally agree. That's something people conveniently ignore about Embiid is his immaturity when it comes to actually playing the game of basketball. His potential is sky high, but he needs so much development to actually get there that's it's far from a certainty that he'll even be a good rotation level for the next several years.

What do you mean by immaturity?  Did you guys not see him at Kansas?  He was incredible, and the fact that he hasn't been playing basketball for that long makes it all the more remarkable, imo, and scary, lol .

There's still a lot about the game that he has yet to learn. His BBIQ isn't very strong due to not playing the game all that long, and he's going to need a ton of reps to get back into the swing of things, especially being both newer to the game and sitting out the last two years. This whole next year will most likely be a way of easing him back into the game.

[jpotter33]

I don't see Okafor moving for a bag of chips. It'd be like us moving Smart for a bag of chips. I know some of you guys would still do that though, but fortunately, you guys aren't the C's GM. Now, if only you guys were the Thunder/Clippers/Sixers/Kings GM...

The difference is that we have ample space and opportunity for him, and he's not stuck behind two other players that play the exact same position as him, which is the only position he can play. Marcus regularly plays the 1, 2, and 3 in our system; whereas, Okafor is legitimately a pure 5 who cannot play the 4.

If they go into the season, one, if not more, of their bigs is going to get the shaft and look horrible and lose most of his trade value. My bet is that big will be Okafor, unless Embiid gets injured again.

[Beat LA]

If Embiid ends up being questionable again, then they can justify keeping him, though he'll certainly not develop to his ceiling there with that logjam.

But the Colangelos are running that organization now, and I don't think they're dumb enough to keep all of them. They'll absolutely destroy their values by doing so.

Well, he hasn't played a minute of pro ball, and has been out of organized ball for more than 2 years. If I were in Philly, I'd be worried about cleaning house to give him minutes. But then again, I'd trust the brass there to always make the wrong decision at this point. There's no other explanation about why this franchise has been this bad for this long.

Well, again, they've made better moves since the Colangelos have been there. Most of the horrible decisions were due to Hinkie operating on a theory of team building that doesn't necessarily translate to the real world where team fit, development, and roles/positions actually matter.

Perhaps. But I just did the math on Embiid: he started playing basketball at 15, and moved to the US at 16. So that's 2 years of US high school basketball, 1 year at Kansas, and 2 seasons missed with an injury. Even if he's healthy, I'm not sure what you're going to be getting from him and when.

On the bright side, though, I hear he used the time to add a three-point shot. Perhaps he's going to come in this year and make me eat my words.

Oh, I totally agree. That's something people conveniently ignore about Embiid is his immaturity when it comes to actually playing the game of basketball. His potential is sky high, but he needs so much development to actually get there that's it's far from a certainty that he'll even be a good rotation level for the next several years.

What do you mean by immaturity?  Did you guys not see him at Kansas?  He was incredible, and the fact that he hasn't been playing basketball for that long makes it all the more remarkable, imo, and scary, lol .

There's still a lot about the game that he has yet to learn. His BBIQ isn't very strong due to not playing the game all that long, and he's going to need a ton of reps to get back into the swing of things, especially being both newer to the game and sitting out the last two years. This whole next year will most likely be a way of easing him back into the game.

Sure, he still has much to learn, but he seemed to be a very intelligent player on both ends, iirc, but yeah, it's going to take time to get back into the swing of things.  At this point, I just want to see him on the court, quite honestly , but even given what we know now about his medical problems, I still would have taken him at 6 that year, if he had been available, because his talent is just so rare, imo.  Sigh.

[jpotter33]

If Embiid ends up being questionable again, then they can justify keeping him, though he'll certainly not develop to his ceiling there with that logjam.

But the Colangelos are running that organization now, and I don't think they're dumb enough to keep all of them. They'll absolutely destroy their values by doing so.

Well, he hasn't played a minute of pro ball, and has been out of organized ball for more than 2 years. If I were in Philly, I'd be worried about cleaning house to give him minutes. But then again, I'd trust the brass there to always make the wrong decision at this point. There's no other explanation about why this franchise has been this bad for this long.

Well, again, they've made better moves since the Colangelos have been there. Most of the horrible decisions were due to Hinkie operating on a theory of team building that doesn't necessarily translate to the real world where team fit, development, and roles/positions actually matter.

Perhaps. But I just did the math on Embiid: he started playing basketball at 15, and moved to the US at 16. So that's 2 years of US high school basketball, 1 year at Kansas, and 2 seasons missed with an injury. Even if he's healthy, I'm not sure what you're going to be getting from him and when.

On the bright side, though, I hear he used the time to add a three-point shot. Perhaps he's going to come in this year and make me eat my words.

Oh, I totally agree. That's something people conveniently ignore about Embiid is his immaturity when it comes to actually playing the game of basketball. His potential is sky high, but he needs so much development to actually get there that's it's far from a certainty that he'll even be a good rotation level for the next several years.

What do you mean by immaturity?  Did you guys not see him at Kansas?  He was incredible, and the fact that he hasn't been playing basketball for that long makes it all the more remarkable, imo, and scary, lol .

There's still a lot about the game that he has yet to learn. His BBIQ isn't very strong due to not playing the game all that long, and he's going to need a ton of reps to get back into the swing of things, especially being both newer to the game and sitting out the last two years. This whole next year will most likely be a way of easing him back into the game.

Sure, he still has much to learn, but he seemed to be a very intelligent player on both ends, iirc, but yeah, it's going to take time to get back into the swing of things.  At this point, I just want to see him on the court, quite honestly , but even given what we know now about his medical problems, I still would have taken him at 6 that year, if he had been available, because his talent is just so rare, imo.  Sigh.

Yeah, I think you take that chance, too, though it certainly is worrisome that he's had recurring foot injuries ever since.