Isaac
Years ago
Hypothetical: Brian Wethers
A year or two ago when Farley returned to Adelaide, the club also looked at or had interest from Brian Wethers. From what I was told, his asking price was very reasonable.
So my hypothetical today is: had we gone for Wethers instead of Farley last time we had the chance, would that have given us more flexibility for 06/07?
I don't mean to insult Willie because I think he's an entertaining player to watch and should get let off the leash a bit more in 06/06 hopefully, but I thought it might be an interesting topic. Not so much "Sixers should have done this instead" - just a discussion point to distract from the doom and gloom.
What it could've meant:
1. Tiny bit more cash to spend.
2. Could've played Wethers comfortably at SG/SF giving a bit more versatility.
3. Could get a back-up point guard without recruiting over Hill and cutting his minutes. Hill could still get minutes at SG while Wethers would move to SF, and Holmes to PF. Forman could've backed up SF and PF. Nash getting minutes all over town.
Maher/?
Wethers/Hill
Forman/Nash
Holmes/Hambour
?/Cooper
240 minutes might play out like this: PG (Maher 35 MPG, backup 13); SG (Wethers 28, Hill 20); SF (Forman 30, Wethers 12, Nash 6); PF (Holmes 34, Import 8, Nash 6); C (Import 28, Cooper 20).
Maher gets 35 MPG to try and ease the load on him. Hill gets 20 to assist his development, and playing SG where he should be. The backup point would get a token 13. Wethers would play 40 split between two positions. Forman would've got his 30 at SF (or maybe switching with Holmes at PF), Nash would pick-up 12 in the frontcourt, Holmes 34, an import centre 36 and Coops 20 (I think he played about that last year).
Had they lost one of Holmes or Forman, there's obviously minutes available for the bench point or Nash to take on.
