Marcus Hayes: Even if Paul George was the Sixers' best option, that doesn't mean it was a smart move

Meanwhile, up the road, the New York Knicks added rising star Mikal Bridges.

The Sixers think they HAD to do this. They think this is a better move than trading for, then extending, Pelicans gunner Brandon Ingram, an imperfect wing who’s more than seven years younger than George and who might be nowhere near his ceiling.

I see the logic.

I understand that George is the best player available.

I understand that George is the best bet among available free agents and likely trade options to complement Joel Embiid, whose atrocious condition habits, injury history, and reckless play have made him old at 30 and will make him obsolete at 33.

I understand that George’s presence is the best insurance against Embiid’s inevitable injury absences since Jimmy Butler’s short, happy life in Philadelphia.

I also understand that now, at 34, George is not nearly as good as he once was.

The Sixers are gambling that he’ll be good enough to make them relevant.

That he’ll be better than Tobias Harris was over the past five seasons. Harris left on a sour note, but his “win shares,” a dubious analytic (it can be like a participation trophy), were 30.8 in his five full seasons in Philly. George was at 23.2 in five full seasons with the Clippers.

Yes, I know, I watched Harris, and he wasn’t as good as George in those five seasons. But is George, combined with Embiid, Maxey and re-signed Kelly Oubre Jr., better enough than Tobi to make the Sixers contenders in the Eastern Conference? Does he move the needle anywhere close to Boston or Milwaukee?

...continued

swipe to next page