Aldridge On Thaddeus Young: Proving Everyone Wrong
It's safe to say the majority of people who even cared who the Sixers took in last year's draft thought getting Thaddeus Young with the 12th pick was a horrible move. In the past few months, Young-- helped by Mo Cheeks lengthening his bench -- has been proving he was a great pick for the Sixers.
+1 Billy King.
The Inquirer's David Aldridge writes about Thaddeus' athleticism, size, humility, and work ethic. The biggest problem Young brings to the Sixers is that he's a natural three, a position currently occupied by Andre Iguodala. Coach Cheeks on the issue, "He's going to be able to play wherever you put him out on the floor. He finds a way to find the ball. He's always around the rim. He defends threes and fours, and obviously fours can't run with him. They can't guard him. But I think his best position is three [small forward]."
Too much talent at one position. Not exactly the worst problem in the world.



I love Thaddeus, he plays like a veteran... one of the most mistake free rookies you will see, especially at 19 (maybe 20 by now but close enough). This kid will be a great player for years to come barring any serious injuries.
Posted by: T | Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 05:23 PM
I don't see a problem with having 2 3's and no 4 because as Aldridge says he can guard both small and power forwards and the Sixers run the ball so you can get away with not having a real power forward.
Posted by: Paul | Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 06:24 PM
I'm assuming Young's development paves the way for Iguodala to leave town after this season? Someone will make him a crazy Rashard Lewisesque that the Sixers won't match. Not that I really have a problem with this. Take the money we would pay him (and some of the excess we have under the cap) and bring in Elton Brand to play the 4.
Posted by: Jeff | Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 06:53 PM
Jeff, I think it's a real tough circumstance. Like Paul said, Thad's ability to play the 4 gives us a poor man's Suns look (before they traded Marion). Dalembert, Iggy and Thad are as athletic if not more athletic a frontcourt than Stoudemire, Marion and Hill/Diaw were.
It's the reason we traded Korver and dumped Giricek, they just don't fit the coaching plan Cheeks put together. Is it fair to think a set offense player like Brand might totally change the chemistry of this team? We might have to throw that money at Iggy, or get someone who fits the offense.
Posted by: T | Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 07:00 PM
I'm still really excited about the possibility of getting Josh Smith this summer, though. he's young enough and defnitely athletic enough to fit with this team, and I don't think Atlanta can afford to match the money we can afford to offer him. I don't think that Brand is the right player for this team; if we're going to try to run a lot, which we've shown we can do with great success, a player coming off of a major knee injury might not be the right thing. But here's the thing: if we bring in Smith (which would absolutely fill our need for a scoring big man who can also defend), then Young is definitively on the bench. And for a guy who is on record recently saying that he wants to play a lot and is undeniably talented, you would bring up a question of whether he's going to be able to stay happy. Even if we give him almost a starter's minutes as a sixth man, people like Lou Williams and Rod Carney start getting left out. Here's my solution: get rid of Willie Green somehow, preferably for a draft pick, let Lou start at the 2, and bring in Smith, using Young as a sixth man getting significant time off the bench. Aside from being a Sixth Man of the Year contender, he would be able to do a lot for the team in that role. Reggie Evans and Rod Carney would be great energy guys. And seeing how they're playing now...it would be tough to convince me that that team, set up in that way, wouldn't win a lot of games.
Posted by: Saul | Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 07:47 PM
The other thing that isn't discussed is that Young and Iguodala are incredible defenders, so if you let Iguodala go after this year that will definitely hurt the team's defensive efforts as well as harming the ability to run the ball. I think what the sixers should do is try to trade up in the draft and get a real 4 who can split playing time with Young at that position. They do have 2 first round picks this year because I'm gonna go ahead and assume that the Jazz will not finish in the lottery. So trade Green, and the 2 first round picks for a lottery pick of some ilk.
Posted by: Paul | Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 07:58 PM
Definitely agree with trading the 2 draft picks, we have enough young guys who I want to see given more time to already.
Posted by: T | Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 08:47 PM
Any plan that eliminates that gunner Willie Green to give more PT to Lou and Thad is a good one in my book.
Posted by: Tartan69 | Friday, March 28, 2008 at 12:00 AM
what if Andre Iguodala moves to 2 gaurd and let Young play 3 and still find a true 4?
Posted by: M | Friday, March 28, 2008 at 03:23 AM
Say it with me now, Ed: "Thanks, Billy!"
The unavoidable fact is that Billy King did a horrible job building around Iverson, but as soon as he looked past the AI era, his drafts and trades have been pretty damn solid. Stefanski has a shitload of upside with the young guys on his team and a ton of money in the offseason...I'm sure most GM's in the league would want to be in his spot right now.
Posted by: Pete D | Friday, March 28, 2008 at 12:19 PM
Thaddeus Young will be more suited for the 3, but he has to develop an efficient jump shot first.
The Sixers did not draft him to play forward. They drafted him to play the 3. Willie Green is more suited to be a great scorer off the bench and that is where he is more suited.
Anyway, I thought it was a great pick and the only reason he dropped was because they said he can't dribble that well with his off-hand.
Posted by: Justin Evans | Friday, March 28, 2008 at 05:48 PM