| 16 January 2010
Sam Dalembert and Willie Green have many things in common.
They both are good, if not great guys. Talking about role model citizens, millionaires that REALLY like to help the community: they are constantly involved in many social and humanitarian activities, in the US and abroad.
Sammy's committment for his hometown Haiti (in the pic) is only the last example of many, many good things he has always been doing outside the court. So all I can do I take my hat off to them as persons. Sam, Willie, you have my respect.
On the court, pretty different story. He and Green have been getting a lot of crap from Sixers fans in the last seven years. And I have always been among the ones that were giving them this crap.
I must say around 80% of what they got was 100% deserved. Not being evil, just realistic and fair, calling it like it is. No need to repeat why we (all) always bashed Sam, all I can add is that all the criticisms I made were made reguardless of his fat contract - that I blame Billy King, and only him, for. It's his poor play that drives me crazy, I don't even consider the $.
But hey, I can't argue with 12.4 points, 13 rebounds, 75% (39/52) from the floor, 90% from the line and 2.7 blocks per game. Those are Dalembert's numbers in the seven games played in January !!!
Sam was again THE factor in Sixers' 98-86 W over the Kings (13-26, .333). While Thaddeus Young's stat line might look just as good as Dalembert's, it was Sam to change the game and make the final push in the fourth quarter, when Sixers held Sacramento to 4/12 shooting. A couple of key offensive rebounds, a huge block, three free throws. Enough to give us the sixth win in the last ten games. (more after the jump)THREE ANSWERS
1) Yes, Dalembert is really a difference maker when he's on (focused, 'angry' etc etc). We all knew that, but we always knew that he does that 5-6 games per season, and that's why he is so maligned. Now he basically put together a streak of those 5-6 games, and this leads to some Qs (see below)...
2) Yes, finally Young had a great game, taking the ball to the rim, playing effectively also in the low post, helping even defensively (two nice blocks).
3) No, I have no idea why Iguodala got 40 minutes, even after he twisted his ankle early in the first quarter. He played a solid game (don't get fooled by the low shooting percentage) but I think the risk was too high.
He was limping and continuing to take long jumpers, the chance to land on somebody's foot was always there... bad decision by Jordan in my opinion, I would have saved him much of the second and third quarter.
THREE QUESTIONS
1) Is it me or what Kings desperately need is actually "a Dalembert"? Their paint was a sort of a stage for a 48 minute alley oop show: Sam (7/7) had around five dunks, Thad had another one.. no one to contest those passes, or block those shots.
2) Does Sam perhaps think that THIS is his contract year?
3) Why does Kapono NEVER get in against zone defenses? Not even a couple of minutes, just to keep a defender busy?
REASONS
Why we won the game
Played some decent defense, finally. But Remember, it was the Kings, perhaps the softest team in the League, with zero presence in the paint.
To be optimistic
Uhm, 6-4 in the last ten, and the 8-33 Timberwolves next... Brand finally playing (and scoring) in the low post was a nice sight. We shared the ball well, Iverson and Iguodala often found the open men with some extra passes. We were aggressive from the start, also (12 FTs in the first quarter) and had a balanced offense, with six players in double figures.
To be worried
The worst case scenario (34-36 wins and no playoffs) is still very likely. With the exception of Brand, we got nearly nothing from the bench last night.
Bring on Minnesota.
