Samuel Dalembert Anyone????

walker60

walker60

Bench
#3
#3
He definitely has his faults but I would take him. Who the heck would the sixers want from us though? They already have our best player. :)
 
B

BALLER4LIFE

G-League
#4
#4
last season in only 26 minutes he was putting up 8.2 rebounds and 2.4 blocks while shooting 53 percent from the field! u dont like those numbers??? and hes only 25!
 
K

Kings113

All-Star
#7
#7
Can't quite see the Sixers doing that. I love Iguodala though, he's a victim of not getting enough shots on a regular basis, and sometimes not being assertive enough because of AI/Webber. He's shown a number of times he can be a good offensive player as well. I think he's a stud on any other team.

Dalembert I like for his athleticism/shotblocking/rebounding, but doesn't seem that smart yet, and don't know about his post defense. Overall though, I'd take him.
 
Sac.Kings

Sac.Kings

All-Star
#8
#8
I would take him, hes got his faults but his faults hopefully will be covered by other players. He brings what we need--rebounding and blocking, not to mention he is athletic and young. He won't develop into a very good player with AI and Webber as his teammates.
 
walker60

walker60

Bench
#9
#9
I wonder if they would want Bonzi? I bet they would, they need someone to replace Korver in the starting lineup. No way would the give up Iguadola though. Maybe something like Bonzi and KT for Dalembert and Korver? Idk...
 
Sptsjunkie

Sptsjunkie

Starter
#10
#10
walker60 said:
I wonder if they would want Bonzi? I bet they would, they need someone to replace Korver in the starting lineup. No way would the give up Iguadola though. Maybe something like Bonzi and KT for Dalembert and Korver? Idk...
Click to expand...
I wonder if they would take Garcia, Thomas, and the #19. It would be unfortunate to lose Garcia, but Dalembert is the type of big we need. His contract is terrible, but so is Thomas'. He would cover up Brad's weaknesses though. Although he would definitely want to start, so we would have Reef off the bench again. I like Reef off the bench though, brining in Martin and Reef provides us with instant energy and offense.
 
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#12
#12
Of course I'd take him...but it all depends on what they would want. And it would probably be considerable. I'd probably do the above mentioned KT, Garcia #19 though. Highly unlikely we'd find a better rebounder/shotblocker at that point in the draft. Of course just as unlikely Philly would take back what could be a major cancerous headcase at that point in KT, brimming over with resentment for Philly having "disrespected" him by trading him, playing behind Webber, back with A.I. who he made a point of saying he did not like playing with...hard to see.
 
B

BALLER4LIFE

G-League
#15
#15
Sptsjunkie said:
You're right about that. I wonder if they would take Cisco, #19, and some expiring contracts, like Corliss and Potepenko
Click to expand...
thats exactly what i was thinking.. because whether they like it or not the 76ers are in the rebuilding phase... they may be looking to clear some cap room... trading williamson would work well.. but we would have to package another quality player.. i would not want to see cisco go because i feel he has a lot of potential. but if we got iguodala in the deal i would include cisco... how about sign and trade wells, williamson, and cisco for iguodala and dalembert....

but now that i think about it... ever since we unloaded webbers contract on philly they might think twice before dealing with us again!
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#17
#17
BALLER4LIFE said:
but now that i think about it... ever since we unloaded webbers contract on philly they might think twice before dealing with us again!
Click to expand...
You're not serious, right? We "unloaded Webber's contract" on them? Good grief.

THEY unloaded Thomas, Skinner and Williamson on us, remember?

I'm pretty sure they're not that unhappy about the deal.
 
nbrans

nbrans

All-Star
#18
#18
VF21 said:
You're not serious, right? We "unloaded Webber's contract" on them? Good grief.

THEY unloaded Thomas, Skinner and Williamson on us, remember?

I'm pretty sure they're not that unhappy about the deal.
Click to expand...
Given that they didn't win any more games after the trade, missed the playoffs and are considering trading Iverson and Dalembert because Webber's contract is considered untradable I'd say things didn't work out so swimmingly for Philadelphia.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#19
#19
But webber's contract is now going to be an expiring one. KT is gonna be with us until the end of the world...

Webber wasn't the reason the 76ers didn't do well, any more than Iverson was IMHO. But I'm not going to argue about him for the simple reason we'll never see it from the same viewpoint.

I'll agree to disagree with you and leave it at that.
 
LPKingsFan

LPKingsFan

All-Star
#20
#20
Moving past the Webber thing...

If we can't get Tyson Chandler, Dalembert would be a good second option. Pricey, and risky, but would be a good defensive big to cover up Miller's weaknesses.

Then again, if a Dalembert/Webb frontcourt is terrible defensively, I don't know if a Dalembert/Miller frontcourt would be any better.
 
nbrans

nbrans

All-Star
#21
#21
LPKingsFan said:
Then again, if a Dalembert/Webb frontcourt is terrible defensively, I don't know if a Dalembert/Miller frontcourt would be any better.
Click to expand...
Yeah, exactly. Even though their stats are somewhat similar, just watching Chandler and Dalembert shows there's a gulf of basketball knowledge between them. Chandler is an underrated passer, he's coordinated and he plays good defense. Dalembert probably has the edge in athleticism, but he's clumsy and he just doesn't understand the game (as evidenced by the fact that he leads the league in goaltending by a wide margin). Meanwhile Dalembert has just as huge of a contract.

I don't really think there's any sort of equivalence between Chandler and Dalembert. I'd take Chandler even though he's not good on offense because he's good on defense and a reasonably smart player. I don't think Dalembert's rebounding numbers outweigh his incompetence on offense and his lack of basketball IQ.

P.S. All of this would be rendered moot if the Sixers wanted KT back and he was the main chip, but I don't think that's very likely.
 
Last edited:
DocHolliday

DocHolliday

Starter
#22
#22
If we could get Dalmebert and somehow retain Miller that would be cool. It's said that Musselman awards playing time based on effort, and who is working better in the line up. If that's true shortly after the start of the season Dalembert will show Miller up as far as athleticism, and fitting into defensive schemes better. Miller would end up being the back up, and I'd be cool with Miller backing up Dalembert.
 
Sptsjunkie

Sptsjunkie

Starter
#23
#23
LPKingsFan said:
Moving past the Webber thing...
Then again, if a Dalembert/Webb frontcourt is terrible defensively, I don't know if a Dalembert/Miller frontcourt would be any better.
Click to expand...
The reason that line of thinking doesn't necessarily hold up is that one defence is not created by one player. Iverson is a mediocre defender at this point in his career. Webber and Korver are terrible defenders. The only two players on Philly's roster who are good defenders are Iggy and Hunter (who doesn't play with Dalembert). Also, Dalembert only played 66 games last year for approximately 25 minutes a game. So Philly's problems on D aren't because of Dalembert, imagine how bad they would have been on D without him. The big downsie to Dalembert is his contract. If we can dump a contract back on them, I think he could play a good role on this team.
 
B

BRad1055

Bench
#25
#25
Here is what u do u put Dalembart at center and Miller back to his original position and the position he is best suited for and that is power forward with Artest at SF and either Martin or Wells if he comes back at SG and Bibby at PG
 
DocHolliday

DocHolliday

Starter
#26
#26
I just really don't want Brad anymore. Whatever position he's at whether it be the 4 or the 5, he become's a liability. If he's at the 4, you now have no low post action from the 4. Now every power forward in the Nba can take advantage of him off the dribble, etc.

He's just a liability, because of his lack of athleticism.
 
walker60

walker60

Bench
#27
#27
I think a Brad/Dalembert or Brad/Chandler combo would be awesome. Then you could almost do just a 3-man rotation with SAR off the bench because when you bring him in the game Chandler/Dalembert could move to C. Then we could sign someone for some muscle and they wouldn't have to do anything more than be the 9th man off the bench. Someone cheap like Cato would work for that role. To get Dalembert the following trade (pretty sure it was mentioned above).

-Trade #19, Garcia, Williamson, and Pota for Dalembert. Maybe they are willing to do a salary dump. Then sign Cato or someone like him.

Miller/Cato
Dalembert/SAR

I like that front court. Good mix of Offense/Defense. Here's another scenario that I wouldn't mind:

-Trade #19 and KT for Danny (we could all put with him for 1 season right?) Fortson and #10
-Trade Miller for Chandler
-Draft Shelden Williams

Then we have the following frontcourt:

Chandler/Forston
SAR/Williams
 
Last edited:
H

HaraWish

G-League
#28
#28
Dalembert is suitable for up-tempo basket.

His strong and weak points are obvious. Atheletic but low BQ. Seems to be a good defender, but has a lot of goal-tending, and gets foul troubles so much. And offense? Well, at least he can run very fast with his size.

And... he is EXPENSIVE.

Maybe Dalembert and Miller would be a good combination, which compensate other's weak side.

However, Dalembert and Miller? Wow. pretty expensive. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.