PDA

View Full Version : Trust The Process: Stupid, Textbook, or Genius?



Greet
06-20-2017, 05:07 PM
I come to PSD today to ask a complex question regarding the 76ers "rebuild" as some would like to call it, as others like to say "Trusting The Process".

Is this rebuild that the 76ers have put together something that you would consider it stupid, textbook or genius in terms of rebuilding? The 76ers have put on the court the past 4 years a miserable (At best) showing of talent, with the only bright side being the 31 games that Joel Embiid played this season. What level of success would make up for those years of miserable basketball?

The 76ers are moving forward basically putting all their cards into 3 unproven college studs. If the core of Fultz-Simmons-Embiid doesn't pan out, would this go down as one of the worst rebuild attempts in modern day sports? Does investing so much into these players have too much risk? Considering Simmons hasn't stepped on an NBA court yet, Embiid has played 31 games in 3-years and Fultz is an unproven rookie who couldn't lead his college team into the tournament?

I have a hard time justifying what the 76ers have done, especially if you look at past franchises rebuilding efforts in the NBA. But I was wondering what other people thought.

TheDish87
06-20-2017, 05:38 PM
cant call it genius just yet but you also cant call it stupid given we have the most young talent and 2nd more cap space in the league along with additional draft picks still. Im not sure textbook is the right word but in light of the choices thats the answer for now.

(leading your team to the tourney is irrelevant)

Westbrook36
06-20-2017, 05:44 PM
After the Bynum trade that failed miserably..What was the franchise supposed to do? I loved every minute of the rebuilding process. At times tough, but you need star players to be able to compete in this league. The ping pong balls always didn't work in our favor, but you handle that as it comes. We wouldn't be in the position to trade up to #1 if we didn't take on salary and do trades that other fans completely bashed (MCW for LA pick).

I'm not at all worried about Simmons not being able to play due to his injury. Nor am I worried that Fultz couldn't lead an awful Washington team to the tournament. Embiid is really the only concern to me currently about his long term health, but we will have to wait to see how that plays out.

Go big or go home..No more mediocre 8th-6th seed 76ers for me.

KB24PG16
06-20-2017, 05:45 PM
embiid has looked more than solid when healthy, gotta save judgment until simmons and fultz play in the nba though. still a lot of if's but philly looks promising

AllBall
06-20-2017, 06:02 PM
I think there's no way to fully know, it was interrupted with Hinkie's firing.

More-Than-Most
06-20-2017, 06:07 PM
Fultz/Embiid/Simmons/Saric/Covington/TLC... all of our future firsts and the kings or lakers pick... and max cap space

mrblisterdundee
06-20-2017, 07:18 PM
I just picture a meme of Sam Hinkie dressed like Ice-T with the caption, "Don't Hate the player. Hate the game."

flea
06-20-2017, 07:30 PM
Nobody ever questioned whether Philly would eventually luck into the sort of talent that couldn't be ruined by an atmosphere mired by willful underachieving, poor coaching, and turnstile GMing. In basketball you might not have a truly great player in the top 5 every year, but every few years you will definitely have 2 or 3. By simple dumb luck they'd end up with one.

What people questioned was whether their deliberate incompetence could be turned off suddenly once they had decided they were done willfully losing. That's yet to be seen - maybe they just spin their wheels around .500 and never develop a chemistry. Maybe the FO keeps offloading good integrated role players for more picks in an effort to keep chasing multiple max-level players (like what the Warriors have). Who knows how this story ends?

Say Embiid doesn't like Fultz and Simmons turning him into a role player and either forces a trade or just walks away, Simmons turns out to be Lamar Odom (good player, but not a franchise one) and Fultz does hit but he's still not the best guard in the league. What then? Restart "The Process™" all over again?

The criticism wasn't that they'd never get talent. Any idiot could tell they would, it was a plan designed for idiots. The criticism was whether you could turn such a poor approach to competition into winning.

Bostonjorge
06-20-2017, 07:46 PM
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Seriously tho they have a lot of young talent. They will be a force soon.

Raps18-19 Champ
06-20-2017, 08:01 PM
Getting high draft picks is always a good thing.

valade16
06-20-2017, 08:12 PM
Nobody ever questioned whether Philly would eventually luck into the sort of talent that couldn't be ruined by an atmosphere mired by willful underachieving, poor coaching, and turnstile GMing. In basketball you might not have a truly great player in the top 5 every year, but every few years you will definitely have 2 or 3. By simple dumb luck they'd end up with one.

What people questioned was whether their deliberate incompetence could be turned off suddenly once they had decided they were done willfully losing. That's yet to be seen - maybe they just spin their wheels around .500 and never develop a chemistry. Maybe the FO keeps offloading good integrated role players for more picks in an effort to keep chasing multiple max-level players (like what the Warriors have). Who knows how this story ends?

Say Embiid doesn't like Fultz and Simmons turning him into a role player and either forces a trade or just walks away, Simmons turns out to be Lamar Odom (good player, but not a franchise one) and Fultz does hit but he's still not the best guard in the league. What then? Restart "The Process™" all over again?

The criticism wasn't that they'd never get talent. Any idiot could tell they would, it was a plan designed for idiots. The criticism was whether you could turn such a poor approach to competition into winning.

Well said.

mike_noodles
06-20-2017, 08:38 PM
Nobody ever questioned whether Philly would eventually luck into the sort of talent that couldn't be ruined by an atmosphere mired by willful underachieving, poor coaching, and turnstile GMing. In basketball you might not have a truly great player in the top 5 every year, but every few years you will definitely have 2 or 3. By simple dumb luck they'd end up with one.

What people questioned was whether their deliberate incompetence could be turned off suddenly once they had decided they were done willfully losing. That's yet to be seen - maybe they just spin their wheels around .500 and never develop a chemistry. Maybe the FO keeps offloading good integrated role players for more picks in an effort to keep chasing multiple max-level players (like what the Warriors have). Who knows how this story ends?

Say Embiid doesn't like Fultz and Simmons turning him into a role player and either forces a trade or just walks away, Simmons turns out to be Lamar Odom (good player, but not a franchise one) and Fultz does hit but he's still not the best guard in the league. What then? Restart "The Process™" all over again?

The criticism wasn't that they'd never get talent. Any idiot could tell they would, it was a plan designed for idiots. The criticism was whether you could turn such a poor approach to competition into winning.

It's not just that, but it's also a little bit of luck in regards to timing. You really can't predict what each draft class will be like that far out, it's impossible. But the part that's missing here is that it wasn't just about losing and getting high picks, they caught alotta flack for trading away MCW for more futures and drafting multiple players of the same position, etc. Not trying to build around the wrong guys like Noel or MCW shouldn't be overlooked either.

KnicksorBust
06-20-2017, 09:34 PM
Fultz/Embiid/Simmons/Saric/Covington/TLC... all of our future firsts and the kings or lakers pick... and max cap space

I dont know how you can look at that list of assets and say stupid. It is genius. Especially in today's league...look at the Warriors. Even in the East the Cavs have 3 allstars. You cant make a finals with Patrick Ewing and John Starks anymore. Hakeem and Vernon Maxwell? Nope. These stars find a way to get together now and the Sixers wanted to build a team with the highest ceiling possible. I love it. I just can't wait to see what they do with their cap space. That's the missing piece. That AND they desperately need some role model vets to control the locker room.

Alayla
06-20-2017, 10:43 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNHyuBc2kkg

Greet
06-20-2017, 10:56 PM
I dont know how you can look at that list of assets and say stupid. It is genius. Especially in today's league...look at the Warriors. Even in the East the Cavs have 3 allstars. You cant make a finals with Patrick Ewing and John Starks anymore. Hakeem and Vernon Maxwell? Nope. These stars find a way to get together now and the Sixers wanted to build a team with the highest ceiling possible. I love it. I just can't wait to see what they do with their cap space. That's the missing piece. That AND they desperately need some role model vets to control the locker room.

I think there are a few things you can point out too, the main being that it took 4 years of disgusting basketball to get those assets. Lets point out that he wasn't the best drafter as well. The thing is after 4 years of this, they are relying on Joel Embiid (who played 31 games in 3 seasons in the NBA), Ben Simmons (Who didn't play his first season, and can't shoot a jumpshot to save his life) and Markelle Fultz (undrafted and unproven). I just don't believe that this has been the best they can do.

In 2013, drafts MCW with the #11 overall pick. During that pick there was consideration between Kelly Olynyk (picked at #13) and Giannis Antetokuonmpo (picked at #15). He clearly missed with that one.

In 2014, drafts Joel Embiid at #3. He went into the draft injured and was known as an injury prone player. The jury is still out on him but it'll be extremely lucky at this point for him to have a full, healthy career. They also drafted Elfrid Payton at #10 but traded him away.

In 2015, drafts Jahlil Okafor... enough said

In 2016, drafts Ben Simmons. The obvious pick and the most upside out of any player. But still missed the first season due to injury and has a lot of things he needs to develop with his game.


At this point, could the 76ers have done better than what they have now?

valade16
06-20-2017, 11:00 PM
Without seeing the resulting success I don't see how you can simply look at losing and say they are geniuses for losing so much.

By that measure Matt Millen and David Khan are the greatest GMs of all-time.

ewing
06-20-2017, 11:01 PM
I dont know how you can look at that list of assets and say stupid. It is genius. Especially in today's league...look at the Warriors. Even in the East the Cavs have 3 allstars. You cant make a finals with Patrick Ewing and John Starks anymore. Hakeem and Vernon Maxwell? Nope. These stars find a way to get together now and the Sixers wanted to build a team with the highest ceiling possible. I love it. I just can't wait to see what they do with their cap space. That's the missing piece. That AND they desperately need some role model vets to control the locker room.

Is KD a genius or a puss?

KnicksorBust
06-20-2017, 11:10 PM
I dont know how you can look at that list of assets and say stupid. It is genius. Especially in today's league...look at the Warriors. Even in the East the Cavs have 3 allstars. You cant make a finals with Patrick Ewing and John Starks anymore. Hakeem and Vernon Maxwell? Nope. These stars find a way to get together now and the Sixers wanted to build a team with the highest ceiling possible. I love it. I just can't wait to see what they do with their cap space. That's the missing piece. That AND they desperately need some role model vets to control the locker room.

I think there are a few things you can point out too, the main being that it took 4 years of disgusting basketball to get those assets. Lets point out that he wasn't the best drafter as well. The thing is after 4 years of this, they are relying on Joel Embiid (who played 31 games in 3 seasons in the NBA), Ben Simmons (Who didn't play his first season, and can't shoot a jumpshot to save his life) and Markelle Fultz (undrafted and unproven). I just don't believe that this has been the best they can do.

In 2013, drafts MCW with the #11 overall pick. During that pick there was consideration between Kelly Olynyk (picked at #13) and Giannis Antetokuonmpo (picked at #15). He clearly missed with that one.

In 2014, drafts Joel Embiid at #3. He went into the draft injured and was known as an injury prone player. The jury is still out on him but it'll be extremely lucky at this point for him to have a full, healthy career. They also drafted Elfrid Payton at #10 but traded him away.

In 2015, drafts Jahlil Okafor... enough said

In 2016, drafts Ben Simmons. The obvious pick and the most upside out of any player. But still missed the first season due to injury and has a lot of things he needs to develop with his game.


At this point, could the 76ers have done better than what they have now?

No team drafts perfectly. You can play the coulda woulda shoulda with anybody. The fact is they didnt want to be mediocre. There are franchises littered throughout sports that have been bad for the last 4 years and how many can say they have as bright a future? I am okay admitting they blew the Okafor pick if you will admit they have 3 incredibly talented / potential stars on rookie deals.

I bet Sixers fans are loving life right now.

Greet
06-20-2017, 11:17 PM
No team drafts perfectly. You can play the coulda woulda shoulda with anybody. The fact is they didnt want to be mediocre. There are franchises littered throughout sports that have been bad for the last 4 years and how many can say they have as bright a future? I am okay admitting they blew the Okafor pick if you will admit they have 3 incredibly talented / potential stars on rookie deals.

I bet Sixers fans are loving life right now.

I understand that but in-terms of rebuilding, they could have done better. Lets look at the Washington Wizards for example. They had awful years after the Arenas debacle and seriously needed to rebuild their franchise and identity.

2010-11: Draft John Wall, get the future of your franchise. (23-59 record)
2011-12: Get rid of Nick Young who is not helping out Wall at all. Draft Jan Vesely, bad pick. Bring in Nene and other role players (20-46 record)
2012-13: Draft Bradley Beal, perfect compliment to your star player. Bring in vet presence of Ariza (3&D), Barbosa, Okafor, Collins (29-53 record)
2013-14: Draft Otto Porter, another great pick that fits your team. Bring in Gortat, veteran Andre Miller. (44-38 record, 5th in conference)

That is, in my opinion, a text-book rebuild.

mike_noodles
06-20-2017, 11:23 PM
I understand that but in-terms of rebuilding, they could have done better. Lets look at the Washington Wizards for example. They had awful years after the Arenas debacle and seriously needed to rebuild their franchise and identity.

2010-11: Draft John Wall, get the future of your franchise. (23-59 record)
2011-12: Get rid of Nick Young who is not helping out Wall at all. Draft Jan Vesely, bad pick. Bring in Nene and other role players (20-46 record)
2012-13: Draft Bradley Beal, perfect compliment to your star player. Bring in vet presence of Ariza (3&D), Barbosa, Okafor, Collins (29-53 record)
2013-14: Draft Otto Porter, another great pick that fits your team. Bring in Gortat, veteran Andre Miller. (44-38 record, 5th in conference)

That is, in my opinion, a text-book rebuild.

Sure, they look pretty good. But what's the ceiling of that team. They're not contenders.

lol, please
06-20-2017, 11:24 PM
Trust the process is something our old coach Mark Jackson used to say, often, and for all intents and purposes, I believed in it then and it worked out well for us. How, or why the phrase is all of the sudden treated as if the 76ers have a copyright on it, I have no idea.

ewing
06-20-2017, 11:33 PM
to answer the OP's question. None of the above. Its not stupid b/c if you lose a ton you get good picks. If you do that a bunch and invest nothing in your team eventually you will have talent, money, and picks. Its not text book b/c sports has an ethos- you play to win the game. Its not genius b/c the outcome is oblivious. Its disrespectful to the spirit competition

Westbrook36
06-20-2017, 11:37 PM
I think there are a few things you can point out too, the main being that it took 4 years of disgusting basketball to get those assets. Lets point out that he wasn't the best drafter as well. The thing is after 4 years of this, they are relying on Joel Embiid (who played 31 games in 3 seasons in the NBA), Ben Simmons (Who didn't play his first season, and can't shoot a jumpshot to save his life) and Markelle Fultz (undrafted and unproven). I just don't believe that this has been the best they can do.

In 2013, drafts MCW with the #11 overall pick. During that pick there was consideration between Kelly Olynyk (picked at #13) and Giannis Antetokuonmpo (picked at #15). He clearly missed with that one.

In 2014, drafts Joel Embiid at #3. He went into the draft injured and was known as an injury prone player. The jury is still out on him but it'll be extremely lucky at this point for him to have a full, healthy career. They also drafted Elfrid Payton at #10 but traded him away.

In 2015, drafts Jahlil Okafor... enough said

In 2016, drafts Ben Simmons. The obvious pick and the most upside out of any player. But still missed the first season due to injury and has a lot of things he needs to develop with his game.


At this point, could the 76ers have done better than what they have now?

You are missing a few things so I'll take us through the process

2012 - We traded Iggy, Mo Harkless, Nik Vucevic, and our 2015/16 1st round pick protected (Top 11 protected in 15', top 8 protected in 16'). Both Harkless & Vucevic were our mid 1st rounders in 2011/2012. This was for Andrew Bynum who didn't play at all, obviously a major bust of a trade..He happened to be only 24 years old at the time.

2013 - This is where the process begins with Sam Hinkie as he is hired. He makes his bold move by trading All-Star Jrue Holiday for the #6 overall pick where we select the best prospect of the bunch in Noel. Who had the ACL tear and was kept out the entire season as a precaution. We then select MCW with our own pick at #11..Sure you could say it would be great to pick Giannis, but who knew he would grow a few more inches and become the player he is today. You certainly can't hold that one against him.

2014 - You can't hold that against him because (1) He saw what MCW was early on and flipped him for what has become the 2018 LA Lakers selection, which even if they obtain George will really be tough for that team to be more than subpar in the West unless Ball/Ingram make insane growth and (2) 14 other teams passed on him. We were the worst team this season and ended up as the #3 pick, would have been nice to have Wiggins, but honestly we all have seen that Embiid has the highest upside of the group. We traded Elfrid Payton who can't shoot and re-acquired our 15/16' pick that was owed to Orlando from the Bynum trade. While also acquiring our pick back we nabbed Dario Saric at #13 who showed some serious promise as a rookie this past season.

but we sure did hear a whole lot about how Saric would never come over..and by all means is the most promising player drafted after pick #13.

2015 - Okafor was definitely a miss and this was another draft where two teams jumped in front of us, thus losing out on Towns and even Russell who at the time we desperately wanted. Apparently Hinkie wanted to draft KP, but was unable to get a workout and our owner believed in Okafor. This was obviously was where the log jam began and he never truly got the full opportunity to clear that before he stepped down.

This was also the year we took on Sauce, Carl Landry, and those Kings swap/2019 1st. The best thing he did was not sign mediocre players like the Blazers and Lakers did last offseason so he didn't have to give up future assets that he acquired to move them..Which allowed us to take this salary dump with ease.

This is also the end of the Hinkie era....technically

2016 - Simmons. While Hinkie also was able to collect two other first rounders that were used by Coangelo on TLC and Furkan Korkmaz.

And even now we see the benefit of what Hinkie has done..the LA/SAC pick which was able to nab us a player this team feels fits perfectly with our core players.

Greet
06-21-2017, 12:05 AM
@Westbrook, I didn't want to quote your post because of it's size.

I understand what you're saying, and I thank you for taking the time to put together a sort of move-by-move of the 76ers during this era (We'll call it that because TtP has seriously been a genius branding move by the 76ers). I should have been a little more clear in my OP & other posts. I think the moves Hinkie made were very unconventional (in terms of a "textbook" rebuild) but were mostly positive ones. Not positive in the sense of trying to field a decent team, but in building the future.

The real question in this thread should probably be, how do we determine the success of "Trust The Process"? If the 76ers lets say make the playoffs in 2 years and then continue to be competitive for 4-5 after that (by competitive I'd define it as 1st to 2nd round exits, but no championship), is that successful? Or is it championship or bust?

I guess this would point to one question I kind of asked in the OP of this thread: What type of success and in what time frame would make the 4 (maybe more) years of miserable basketball acceptable?

Alayla
06-21-2017, 08:54 AM
@Westbrook, I didn't want to quote your post because of it's size.

I understand what you're saying, and I thank you for taking the time to put together a sort of move-by-move of the 76ers during this era (We'll call it that because TtP has seriously been a genius branding move by the 76ers). I should have been a little more clear in my OP & other posts. I think the moves Hinkie made were very unconventional (in terms of a "textbook" rebuild) but were mostly positive ones. Not positive in the sense of trying to field a decent team, but in building the future.

The real question in this thread should probably be, how do we determine the success of "Trust The Process"? If the 76ers lets say make the playoffs in 2 years and then continue to be competitive for 4-5 after that (by competitive I'd define it as 1st to 2nd round exits, but no championship), is that successful? Or is it championship or bust?

I guess this would point to one question I kind of asked in the OP of this thread: What type of success and in what time frame would make the 4 (maybe more) years of miserable basketball acceptable?

I mean assuming we even make the playoffs in the next couple years and if at least one of our core develops into a star player then it succeeded this was about giving us a foundation that can prevent us from being mediocore.
We now definately have that foundation assuming health. Embiid alone is proof of that let alone Simmons and Fultz.

TheDish87
06-21-2017, 09:01 AM
Nobody ever questioned whether Philly would eventually luck into the sort of talent that couldn't be ruined by an atmosphere mired by willful underachieving, poor coaching, and turnstile GMing. In basketball you might not have a truly great player in the top 5 every year, but every few years you will definitely have 2 or 3. By simple dumb luck they'd end up with one.

What people questioned was whether their deliberate incompetence could be turned off suddenly once they had decided they were done willfully losing. That's yet to be seen - maybe they just spin their wheels around .500 and never develop a chemistry. Maybe the FO keeps offloading good integrated role players for more picks in an effort to keep chasing multiple max-level players (like what the Warriors have). Who knows how this story ends?

Say Embiid doesn't like Fultz and Simmons turning him into a role player and either forces a trade or just walks away, Simmons turns out to be Lamar Odom (good player, but not a franchise one) and Fultz does hit but he's still not the best guard in the league. What then? Restart "The Process™" all over again?

The criticism wasn't that they'd never get talent. Any idiot could tell they would, it was a plan designed for idiots. The criticism was whether you could turn such a poor approach to competition into winning.

woah woah woahhh. for starters Brown has been nothing short of a terrific coach given the talent hes had to work with. Its easy to say we lucked into this but the reality is Hinkie positioned us for exactly this, you dont think he was looking at future drafts? its a plan designed to get our of purgatory and thats what it has done. this was a horrible take, just horrible.

TheDish87
06-21-2017, 09:05 AM
I understand that but in-terms of rebuilding, they could have done better. Lets look at the Washington Wizards for example. They had awful years after the Arenas debacle and seriously needed to rebuild their franchise and identity.

2010-11: Draft John Wall, get the future of your franchise. (23-59 record)
2011-12: Get rid of Nick Young who is not helping out Wall at all. Draft Jan Vesely, bad pick. Bring in Nene and other role players (20-46 record)
2012-13: Draft Bradley Beal, perfect compliment to your star player. Bring in vet presence of Ariza (3&D), Barbosa, Okafor, Collins (29-53 record)
2013-14: Draft Otto Porter, another great pick that fits your team. Bring in Gortat, veteran Andre Miller. (44-38 record, 5th in conference)

That is, in my opinion, a text-book rebuild.

yet the Wiz are no where near contending for a title. so how did they do it right?

PhillySport03
06-21-2017, 09:24 AM
@Westbrook, I didn't want to quote your post because of it's size.

I understand what you're saying, and I thank you for taking the time to put together a sort of move-by-move of the 76ers during this era (We'll call it that because TtP has seriously been a genius branding move by the 76ers). I should have been a little more clear in my OP & other posts. I think the moves Hinkie made were very unconventional (in terms of a "textbook" rebuild) but were mostly positive ones. Not positive in the sense of trying to field a decent team, but in building the future.

The real question in this thread should probably be, how do we determine the success of "Trust The Process"? If the 76ers lets say make the playoffs in 2 years and then continue to be competitive for 4-5 after that (by competitive I'd define it as 1st to 2nd round exits, but no championship), is that successful? Or is it championship or bust?

I guess this would point to one question I kind of asked in the OP of this thread: What type of success and in what time frame would make the 4 (maybe more) years of miserable basketball acceptable?

I think this is where so many people nationally are inaccurate. Most true Sixers fans in Philly enjoyed the last 3-4 years more than we enjoyed the previous 10. I say that, not because we were losing regularly and had a revolving door of players, but because we actually had a plan and a vision and were working towards that. The fans during 7/8th seed years of Iggy/Thad Young/Jrue Holiday were mostly apathetic. We were good enough to be interesting, but never good enough to truly compete. We were bad enough to bring in some interesting new talent each year, but not bad enough to bring in any true difference makers. Since the start of the Hinkie-era, there's been growing excitement around this team that hasn't been here since the days of Iverson. Lottery night excitement, draft excitement, college scouting excitement, developing young talent excitement, trades, cap space, etc etc. People see the vision and, without sounding too corny, trust the process that they've been running.

So, in a long winded way of responding, the type of success won't make the last 4 years "acceptable" or not. The process succeeded. The results are still to be seen but the process put us in a position to grow and potentially compete for a championship. To actually do that is now the much harder part.

Scoots
06-21-2017, 10:05 AM
For The Process to be successful the Sixers have to be considered legit contenders for a title.

But if the team is fun to watch and generally competitive that is a small victory.

BKLYNpigeon
06-21-2017, 10:34 AM
Building a team-wise it's the best way to do it.

Business wise - it kills your valuation and fan base.


It would have been genius if they drafted Porzingis over Oakfor.
It all depends if embiid and Simmons can stay healthy.

TheDish87
06-21-2017, 10:57 AM
Building a team-wise it's the best way to do it.

Business wise - it kills your valuation and fan base.


It would have been genius if they drafted Porzingis over Oakfor.
It all depends if embiid and Simmons can stay healthy.

Season tickets increased every year to the point they are sold out for this upcoming season. Initially it upset most fans but once Hinkie explained his plans most got on board. The first year was the hardest for obvious reasons but since then attendance crept back up each year and i believe the team is worth more now than when the new owners purchased it.

Alayla
06-21-2017, 11:33 AM
Building a team-wise it's the best way to do it.

Business wise - it kills your valuation and fan base.


It would have been genius if they drafted Porzingis over Oakfor.
It all depends if embiid and Simmons can stay healthy.

sad part is that was hinkies intent but between porzingis not wanting to come here and ownership being infauated with okafor his hands where tied.

Jamiecballer
06-21-2017, 12:07 PM
to answer the OP's question. None of the above. Its not stupid b/c if you lose a ton you get good picks. If you do that a bunch and invest nothing in your team eventually you will have talent, money, and picks. Its not text book b/c sports has an ethos- you play to win the game. Its not genius b/c the outcome is oblivious. Its disrespectful to the spirit competition
Great post, agree with it. All of it.

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

JLynn943
06-21-2017, 12:24 PM
Yeah, I don't think it's genius or textbook, but it's certainly not stupid. It's a method that many people knew would probably be effective (but also create a few terrible years before there'd even be a chance at improving), but Hinkie not being there to carry it out means it gets an incomplete. At some point he had to turn assets into better assets like Colangelo just did, but I don't know if he ever would have.

I'm not convinced it will work out, but it could, and it will be interesting to watch. Most people figured Minnesota would be better than they are by now but it hasn't worked out yet, so success is no sure thing. They've got a good chance of becoming at least competitive though.

KnicksorBust
06-21-2017, 02:21 PM
Without seeing the resulting success I don't see how you can simply look at losing and say they are geniuses for losing so much.

By that measure Matt Millen and David Khan are the greatest GMs of all-time.

Fultz - Simmons - Embiid. All 3 could be all-nba players. This core has the potential to compete for a title. How many teams can we say that about?


I understand that but in-terms of rebuilding, they could have done better. Lets look at the Washington Wizards for example. They had awful years after the Arenas debacle and seriously needed to rebuild their franchise and identity.

2010-11: Draft John Wall, get the future of your franchise. (23-59 record)
2011-12: Get rid of Nick Young who is not helping out Wall at all. Draft Jan Vesely, bad pick. Bring in Nene and other role players (20-46 record)
2012-13: Draft Bradley Beal, perfect compliment to your star player. Bring in vet presence of Ariza (3&D), Barbosa, Okafor, Collins (29-53 record)
2013-14: Draft Otto Porter, another great pick that fits your team. Bring in Gortat, veteran Andre Miller. (44-38 record, 5th in conference)

That is, in my opinion, a text-book rebuild.

Other people already quoted you on this but since you were responding to me I will challenge you with the same argument. How close are the Wizards to winning a title? I believe it was genius for 2 reasons.

#1) Because you need a superstar to win a championship and tanking gives you the best opportunity to add one.

#2.) The current 2017 outlook of the NBA is bleak. If you listed the top 20 players in the NBA then the Warriors would have 4, the Cavs would have 3, the Spurs and Clippers would have 2 each. That's 55% of the list on 4 teams. There are 26 other teams in the NBA just hoping they have 1. That's nuts. The Sixers just need to hit on 2 out of those 3 guys (Fultz-Simmons-Embiid) and then at least they are in the conversation.
There is still more to do but that's the hardest part of any rebuild. To some people it might be honorable to compete like the Hawks-Wizards-Jazz-Thunder. However, those teams are just treading water until they run into one of the real contenders in the playoffs.


Is KD a genius or a puss?

the latter

Greet
06-21-2017, 04:50 PM
Fultz - Simmons - Embiid. All 3 could be all-nba players. This core has the potential to compete for a title. How many teams can we say that about?

Here's my gripe with this (and I've said it a bunch of times), you are talking about potential for:
Joel Embiid (31 games in 3 seasons)
Ben Simmons (0 games in 1 season)
Markelle Fultz (Not even drafted yet)

How can you say, at this point in time, anything about their potential when you haven't seen real NBA minutes out of any of them. If that was the case, the Lakers had the same thing with Randle (#7 pick), Russell (#2 pick) and Ingram (#2 pick). Or the Magic with Sabonis, Hezonja, and Gordon. Or the Wolves with KAT, Wiggins, Dunn.

I think the Wolves are the best example. They have KAT, who is a proven stud in the NBA and I would say at this point has shown he has more potential than Embiid. Wiggins who was maybe a more hyped up #1 pick than Simmons. And Dunn, relatively unproven vs. Fultz, unproven. But no one is talking about how that core is a championship caliber core?



Other people already quoted you on this but since you were responding to me I will challenge you with the same argument. How close are the Wizards to winning a title? I believe it was genius for 2 reasons.

#1) Because you need a superstar to win a championship and tanking gives you the best opportunity to add one.

#2.) The current 2017 outlook of the NBA is bleak. If you listed the top 20 players in the NBA then the Warriors would have 4, the Cavs would have 3, the Spurs and Clippers would have 2 each. That's 55% of the list on 4 teams. There are 26 other teams in the NBA just hoping they have 1. That's nuts. The Sixers just need to hit on 2 out of those 3 guys (Fultz-Simmons-Embiid) and then at least they are in the conversation.
There is still more to do but that's the hardest part of any rebuild. To some people it might be honorable to compete like the Hawks-Wizards-Jazz-Thunder. However, those teams are just treading water until they run into one of the real contenders in the playoffs.

the latter

So this is what comes back to the fact that after 4 years of terrible basketball, the Sixers hope lies on the chance that 2 out of 3 players (One who is a proven injury prone player, one who didn't play his first season and hasn't proven that he can hit an open jumpshot in a game, and one that is undrafted at the moment) turn into superstar (top 20) caliber players? The likelihood of that happening is less than the chance that all 3 turn into mediocre NBA players. And that's the gripe I have with this "rebuild attempt". If 2 out of 3 of these guys don't turn into stars, the 76ers are likely to not compete with the league for another 3-5 years. That would make this rebuild an almost 10-year process. After 4 years, not one proven NBA player. That's my issue.

People want to talk about the Wizards but their core of star players are 26 (Wall), 24 (Porter) and 23 (Beal). They still haven't hit the prime of their career (or the defined prime). Wall, top 5 in his position. Beal, top 10 in his position. Porter, top 10-15 in his position. They have had success at such a young age, and it looks positive. Once again, proven NBA players.

Bostonjorge
06-21-2017, 04:53 PM
The only reason it worked is because they drafted Simmons.

eDush
06-21-2017, 05:07 PM
Fultz - Simmons - Embiid. All 3 could be all-nba players. This core has the potential to compete for a title. How many teams can we say that about?

Here's my gripe with this (and I've said it a bunch of times), you are talking about potential for:
Joel Embiid (31 games in 3 seasons)
Ben Simmons (0 games in 1 season)
Markelle Fultz (Not even drafted yet)

How can you say, at this point in time, anything about their potential when you haven't seen real NBA minutes out of any of them. If that was the case, the Lakers had the same thing with Randle (#7 pick), Russell (#2 pick) and Ingram (#2 pick). Or the Magic with Sabonis, Hezonja, and Gordon. Or the Wolves with KAT, Wiggins, Dunn.

I think the Wolves are the best example. They have KAT, who is a proven stud in the NBA and I would say at this point has shown he has more potential than Embiid. Wiggins who was maybe a more hyped up #1 pick than Simmons. And Dunn, relatively unproven vs. Fultz, unproven. But no one is talking about how that core is a championship caliber core?



Other people already quoted you on this but since you were responding to me I will challenge you with the same argument. How close are the Wizards to winning a title? I believe it was genius for 2 reasons.

#1) Because you need a superstar to win a championship and tanking gives you the best opportunity to add one.

#2.) The current 2017 outlook of the NBA is bleak. If you listed the top 20 players in the NBA then the Warriors would have 4, the Cavs would have 3, the Spurs and Clippers would have 2 each. That's 55% of the list on 4 teams. There are 26 other teams in the NBA just hoping they have 1. That's nuts. The Sixers just need to hit on 2 out of those 3 guys (Fultz-Simmons-Embiid) and then at least they are in the conversation.
There is still more to do but that's the hardest part of any rebuild. To some people it might be honorable to compete like the Hawks-Wizards-Jazz-Thunder. However, those teams are just treading water until they run into one of the real contenders in the playoffs.

the latter

So this is what comes back to the fact that after 4 years of terrible basketball, the Sixers hope lies on the chance that 2 out of 3 players (One who is a proven injury prone player, one who didn't play his first season and hasn't proven that he can hit an open jumpshot in a game, and one that is undrafted at the moment) turn into superstar (top 20) caliber players? The likelihood of that happening is less than the chance that all 3 turn into mediocre NBA players. And that's the gripe I have with this "rebuild attempt". If 2 out of 3 of these guys don't turn into stars, the 76ers are likely to not compete with the league for another 3-5 years. That would make this rebuild an almost 10-year process. After 4 years, not one proven NBA player. That's my issue.

People want to talk about the Wizards but their core of star players are 26 (Wall), 24 (Porter) and 23 (Beal). They still haven't hit the prime of their career (or the defined prime). Wall, top 5 in his position. Beal, top 10 in his position. Porter, top 10-15 in his position. They have had success at such a young age, and it looks positive. Once again, proven NBA players.Okay I tend to agree with this post :nod:

Good job :hi5:

Greet
06-21-2017, 05:10 PM
Building a team-wise it's the best way to do it.

Business wise - it kills your valuation and fan base.


It would have been genius if they drafted Porzingis over Oakfor.
It all depends if embiid and Simmons can stay healthy.

So, my opinion on the business side of it is a little different then yourself. In a normal situation and what the 76ers have gone through, this would surely kill your business and fan base. But Hinkie and the 76ers FO did an absolutely incredible job marketing this whole "Trust The Process" idea and (for lack of a better word) brain washing the fans of what was going on. Fans simply did not care that this stretch of years is historically one of the worst ever. That's the incredible and mind blowing part of the whole thing.

TheDish87
06-21-2017, 05:15 PM
The only reason it worked is because they drafted Simmons.

id say its bcuz we landed Embiid, hes out Batman. Simmons is Robin.

TheDish87
06-21-2017, 05:19 PM
So, my opinion on the business side of it is a little different then yourself. In a normal situation and what the 76ers have gone through, this would surely kill your business and fan base. But Hinkie and the 76ers FO did an absolutely incredible job marketing this whole "Trust The Process" idea and (for lack of a better word) brain washing the fans of what was going on. Fans simply did not care that this stretch of years is historically one of the worst ever. That's the incredible and mind blowing part of the whole thing.

i dont know how you think fans were brainwashed. more like tired of 6-10 seeds and first round exits with no real chance to contend for a title let alone a ECF.

Greet
06-21-2017, 05:35 PM
i dont know how you think fans were brainwashed. more like tired of 6-10 seeds and first round exits with no real chance to contend for a title let alone a ECF.

Celtics from 12-13 season to 15-16 season ranged everywhere from not seeded to the 5th seed. They didn't completely overhaul their roster and get rid of their talent. They continued to build, made good FA acquisitions and become the #1 seed (while maintaining a competitive [ie: watchable] team for majority of those years).

Utah Jazz post D-Will/Boozer/AK/Korver-era had the worst record in the West 4 seasons ago, then was an "on the cusp" playoff team for the two years after that. They didn't just throw away their young talent, they surrounded it with key assets and this year was the 5-seed in a tough western conference.

These are just two examples that I found in 5 minutes, but I could probably find countless more. My point is, when you have a team with playoff talent (noted by the fact that they made the playoffs) and your team is in the 4th biggest market in the NBA... you shouldn't just throw away every asset you have in hopes of contending in 5-6 years. That, in my opinion, is ridiculous.

And after 4 years, they have a few load of unproven NBA players (who were studs in college) to show for it.

More-Than-Most
06-21-2017, 05:39 PM
Here's my gripe with this (and I've said it a bunch of times), you are talking about potential for:
Joel Embiid (31 games in 3 seasons)
Ben Simmons (0 games in 1 season)
Markelle Fultz (Not even drafted yet)

How can you say, at this point in time, anything about their potential when you haven't seen real NBA minutes out of any of them. If that was the case, the Lakers had the same thing with Randle (#7 pick), Russell (#2 pick) and Ingram (#2 pick). Or the Magic with Sabonis, Hezonja, and Gordon. Or the Wolves with KAT, Wiggins, Dunn.

I think the Wolves are the best example. They have KAT, who is a proven stud in the NBA and I would say at this point has shown he has more potential than Embiid. Wiggins who was maybe a more hyped up #1 pick than Simmons. And Dunn, relatively unproven vs. Fultz, unproven. But no one is talking about how that core is a championship caliber core?



So this is what comes back to the fact that after 4 years of terrible basketball, the Sixers hope lies on the chance that 2 out of 3 players (One who is a proven injury prone player, one who didn't play his first season and hasn't proven that he can hit an open jumpshot in a game, and one that is undrafted at the moment) turn into superstar (top 20) caliber players? The likelihood of that happening is less than the chance that all 3 turn into mediocre NBA players. And that's the gripe I have with this "rebuild attempt". If 2 out of 3 of these guys don't turn into stars, the 76ers are likely to not compete with the league for another 3-5 years. That would make this rebuild an almost 10-year process. After 4 years, not one proven NBA player. That's my issue.

People want to talk about the Wizards but their core of star players are 26 (Wall), 24 (Porter) and 23 (Beal). They still haven't hit the prime of their career (or the defined prime). Wall, top 5 in his position. Beal, top 10 in his position. Porter, top 10-15 in his position. They have had success at such a young age, and it looks positive. Once again, proven NBA players.

let me just clear this up... in no way shape or form has Kat shown he has more potential than embiid... Kat has shown he is the better player no doubt because embiid health and inability to stay on the floor... embiid in those 31 games did something KAT cant do meaning he flat out headlined and owned BOTH sided of the floor and that is why the sixers won more games than they lost when Embiid is on the floor... Potential wise its not close.... The reason why the wolves were the wolves last year is because as great as kat is defensively he is bad... Embiid was one of the top defensive basketball players in all of basketball when he was on the floor. Like I said Kat is the better player but potential Embiid is above him.

Greet
06-21-2017, 05:53 PM
let me just clear this up... in no way shape or form has Kat shown he has more potential than embiid... Kat has shown he is the better player no doubt because embiid health and inability to stay on the floor... embiid in those 31 games did something KAT cant do meaning he flat out headlined and owned BOTH sided of the floor and that is why the sixers won more games than they lost when Embiid is on the floor... Potential wise its not close.... The reason why the wolves were the wolves last year is because as great as kat is defensively he is bad... Embiid was one of the top defensive basketball players in all of basketball when he was on the floor. Like I said Kat is the better player but potential Embiid is above him.

This is just false, I can't really say anything else. Lets not forget that Karl-Anthony Towns is YOUNGER than Embiid. Towns is a much more efficient offensive player, shooting significantly better % from the floor and the line. They shot the same percentage from 3. Towns is a better rebounder and commands more attention offensively. Embiid is a better defender (in a very small sample size), I'll give him that for sure.

But this comes back to what I said earlier, how can you talk about Embiids potential when he has played 31 games in 3 seasons? His potential as of right now seems to be on par with Greg Oden for all I'm concerned. There is one thing talking about potential coming out of the draft, that is fine. But after 3 years and 31 games, you have to stop talking about his potential coming out of the draft. To say he has more potential than KAT is silly at this point. To talk about his potential before he plays HALF a season is silly.

Philly fans are so caught up on "potential, potential, potential" but have yet to produce a player on their roster who has put in a solid NBA season from this rebuild. The best they can say is Robert Covington, who was pretty terrible offensively but a very solid defender. After 4 years, that seems a bit sad.

More-Than-Most
06-21-2017, 06:19 PM
do you understand what potential means or are you just trying to sound dumb? him playing 31 games is WHY towns is the better player... Him playing how he played in those 31 games without the likes of a wiggins/levine/rubio along side him and carrying that horrid sixers team to wins IS why he has the limitless potential he has... will he become oden? maybe... Towns is a much more efficient offensive player because he had guys around him where Embiid was the focal point always when playing the other team... I think wiggins has been lackluster but who has embiid played with that could take the pressure off like wiggins?

As for a better rebounded etc etc.... per 36 minutes their rebounding is about the same and that is with an embiid being forced next to okafor/noel at times. Again you either dont understand the meaning of potential... dont understand basketball or are just being ignorant... What has Towns done that Embiid cant do? besides stay healthy... Now what has Embiid done that Towns will never do? Defensive player of the year like talent... I love Kat... I actually argued him in several threads about how his season is really being forgotten when its greatness... the problem is there is a reason why an amare stadamire never had top 5 player in basketball potential.... All the offense in the world cant save you if you cant defend.

In case you need help with the term potential

having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.

Greet
06-21-2017, 06:35 PM
do you understand what potential means or are you just trying to sound dumb? him playing 31 games is WHY towns is the better player... Him playing how he played in those 31 games without the likes of a wiggins/levine/rubio along side him and carrying that horrid sixers team to wins IS why he has the limitless potential he has... will he become oden? maybe... Towns is a much more efficient offensive player because he had guys around him where Embiid was the focal point always when playing the other team... I think wiggins has been lackluster but who has embiid played with that could take the pressure off like wiggins?

As for a better rebounded etc etc.... per 36 minutes their rebounding is about the same and that is with an embiid being forced next to okafor/noel at times. Again you either dont understand the meaning of potential... dont understand basketball or are just being ignorant... What has Towns done that Embiid cant do? besides stay healthy... Now what has Embiid done that Towns will never do? Defensive player of the year like talent... I love Kat... I actually argued him in several threads about how his season is really being forgotten when its greatness... the problem is there is a reason why an amare stadamire never had top 5 player in basketball potential.... All the offense in the world cant save you if you cant defend.

In case you need help with the term potential

having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.

Come on MTM, lets not bring this to insulting each other. I obviously know what potential is, but it is the most hollow argument there is. How do I make an argument against potential of a guy who hasn't played any significant NBA minutes? It's impossible. It's a cop-out argument. The Nets won the trade against the Lakers because D'Angelo Russell has loads of potential as a 21-year old former #2 overall pick. No wait, the Lakers won the trade because they have the potential to be a championship team IF they can sign LeBron and George. LeBron and George have the potential to be dominant teammates together. etc. etc. etc.

You're talking about a guy who has played 8% of the possible games he could have in his career. Yet we are talking about his potential like he is fresh out of college. You're arguing per 36 minute stats for a guy who physically hasn't proved he can play 30 minutes a game let alone 36. In fact, in those 31 games he never even eclipsed the 30 minute mark in a single game.

What has Towns done that Embiid hasn't? Proven that he can play NBA basketball. This argument will stem back to the one I have said multiple times, but it's been ignored. After 4 years, the 76ers don't have a single player on their roster that an NBA fan/analyst/player/mascot can look at and say "This guy is going to have a successful NBA career". That is the issue with this experiment that Philly has done.


edit: Just for a little fun, tell Steph Curry that all his offense in the world can't save him if he can't play defense ;)

More-Than-Most
06-21-2017, 06:58 PM
not insulting... am legit curious... Was asking not insinuating. Potential is potential... Kat is better... If all things go right for embiid his ceiling is higher.. thus more potential. I am in no way being an *** etc... Its just defense in fact matters and Kat has a Looooong way to go there.

What Happens if kat obliterates his Mcl/ACL etc tomorrow? It will hurt his career but he still had the potential to be what he could be.. see oden.

Curry has the perfect situation... 3 other top 15 nba players next to him lol... there wont be another situation like that.

Greet
06-21-2017, 09:33 PM
But why do you ignore everything I say? :(

More-Than-Most
06-21-2017, 09:46 PM
But why do you ignore everything I say? :(

lol not ignoring agreeing with everything else... Its a fact Kat is amazing offensively and rebounding... Embiid is an injury risk... Embiid could very well alway be hurt and Kat could turn into a monster... I just dont think his defense can touch Embiids defensive level if both are healthy and have long careers where embiid can be just as good offensively and rebounding

warfelg
06-21-2017, 09:59 PM
So, my opinion on the business side of it is a little different then yourself. In a normal situation and what the 76ers have gone through, this would surely kill your business and fan base. But Hinkie and the 76ers FO did an absolutely incredible job marketing this whole "Trust The Process" idea and (for lack of a better word) brain washing the fans of what was going on. Fans simply did not care that this stretch of years is historically one of the worst ever. That's the incredible and mind blowing part of the whole thing.

Actually it was a podcast named "Rights to Ricky Sanchez" that really did everything with "Trust the Process".

Greet
06-21-2017, 10:35 PM
Actually it was a podcast named "Rights to Ricky Sanchez" that really did everything with "Trust the Process".

Did not know that, thanks! But do you agree with the rest of the post?

" marketing this whole "Trust The Process" idea and (for lack of a better word) brain washing the fans of what was going on. Fans simply did not care that this stretch of years is historically one of the worst ever. That's the incredible and mind blowing part of the whole thing."

warfelg
06-21-2017, 10:37 PM
Did not know that, thanks! But do you agree with the rest of the post?

" marketing this whole "Trust The Process" idea and (for lack of a better word) brain washing the fans of what was going on. Fans simply did not care that this stretch of years is historically one of the worst ever. That's the incredible and mind blowing part of the whole thing."

Disagree. They were wide open which is why we were ok with it. If they half assed it or did "the right thing" (looking at you Minny and LAL) we would have been pissed.

warfelg
06-21-2017, 10:38 PM
Did not know that, thanks! But do you agree with the rest of the post?

" marketing this whole "Trust The Process" idea and (for lack of a better word) brain washing the fans of what was going on. Fans simply did not care that this stretch of years is historically one of the worst ever. That's the incredible and mind blowing part of the whole thing."

I put it more in depth here.

Sixers and Celtics in deep talks for #1 pick

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?share_fid=103466&share_tid=926677&share_pid=31696916&url=http%3A%2F%2Fforums%2Eprosportsdaily%2Ecom%2Fs howpost%2Ephp%3Fp%3D31696916&share_type=t

TheDish87
06-22-2017, 08:02 AM
Celtics from 12-13 season to 15-16 season ranged everywhere from not seeded to the 5th seed. They didn't completely overhaul their roster and get rid of their talent. They continued to build, made good FA acquisitions and become the #1 seed (while maintaining a competitive [ie: watchable] team for majority of those years).

Utah Jazz post D-Will/Boozer/AK/Korver-era had the worst record in the West 4 seasons ago, then was an "on the cusp" playoff team for the two years after that. They didn't just throw away their young talent, they surrounded it with key assets and this year was the 5-seed in a tough western conference.

These are just two examples that I found in 5 minutes, but I could probably find countless more. My point is, when you have a team with playoff talent (noted by the fact that they made the playoffs) and your team is in the 4th biggest market in the NBA... you shouldn't just throw away every asset you have in hopes of contending in 5-6 years. That, in my opinion, is ridiculous.

And after 4 years, they have a few load of unproven NBA players (who were studs in college) to show for it.

dude are you forgetting that 2 years prior to Hinkie the team was less then 2 mins away from the ECF? We tried to capitalize and maximize that roster by trading all of our remaining assets for Bynum. Everyone knows it failed. What else were we supposed to do after that? Most knew a rebuild was coming just knew one knew it would be so extreme but hot damn it it didnt work out for us and refresh the fanbase. What other teams did or didnt do has no impact on how Hinkie decided to build a team, there is no law on how its done and none of the teams you mentioned are or were real title contenders. But maybe we should have built a team around Holiday, Hawes, and Thad Young instead...

KnicksorBust
06-22-2017, 02:47 PM
Here's my gripe with this (and I've said it a bunch of times), you are talking about potential for:
Joel Embiid (31 games in 3 seasons)
Ben Simmons (0 games in 1 season)
Markelle Fultz (Not even drafted yet)

How can you say, at this point in time, anything about their potential when you haven't seen real NBA minutes out of any of them. If that was the case, the Lakers had the same thing with Randle (#7 pick), Russell (#2 pick) and Ingram (#2 pick). Or the Magic with Sabonis, Hezonja, and Gordon. Or the Wolves with KAT, Wiggins, Dunn.

I think the Wolves are the best example. They have KAT, who is a proven stud in the NBA and I would say at this point has shown he has more potential than Embiid. Wiggins who was maybe a more hyped up #1 pick than Simmons. And Dunn, relatively unproven vs. Fultz, unproven. But no one is talking about how that core is a championship caliber core?



So this is what comes back to the fact that after 4 years of terrible basketball, the Sixers hope lies on the chance that 2 out of 3 players (One who is a proven injury prone player, one who didn't play his first season and hasn't proven that he can hit an open jumpshot in a game, and one that is undrafted at the moment) turn into superstar (top 20) caliber players? The likelihood of that happening is less than the chance that all 3 turn into mediocre NBA players. And that's the gripe I have with this "rebuild attempt". If 2 out of 3 of these guys don't turn into stars, the 76ers are likely to not compete with the league for another 3-5 years. That would make this rebuild an almost 10-year process. After 4 years, not one proven NBA player. That's my issue.

People want to talk about the Wizards but their core of star players are 26 (Wall), 24 (Porter) and 23 (Beal). They still haven't hit the prime of their career (or the defined prime). Wall, top 5 in his position. Beal, top 10 in his position. Porter, top 10-15 in his position. They have had success at such a young age, and it looks positive. Once again, proven NBA players.

You're not comparing apples to apples. Comparing Embiid who went pick #3 and would have been #1 if he was healthy, Simmons #1, and Fultz #1 to Randle/Russ/Ingram is not the same. Not all lottery picks are created equally. The #1 pick in the NBA draft is significantly more valuable than any other pick. Look at the hall of famers picked from #1. It's far longer than any other draft spot. They have drafted a C who can shoot 3's, a 6'10 PG, and are about to draft a combo guard who offensively can do anything out on the floor. Their potential is on another planet compared to Sabonis/Mario/Gordon. The percentage of #1 picks that hit compared with those other draft slots makes the upside of the Sixers AND the likelihood that they achieve success better than any other young core in the league. You can claim they are unproven but the facts support that the higher the pick in the draft the more likely that player is to be a star player. If 2 hit then the Sixers will be a dangerous team for the next 5-6 years. If all 3 hit then watch out.


Celtics from 12-13 season to 15-16 season ranged everywhere from not seeded to the 5th seed. They didn't completely overhaul their roster and get rid of their talent. They continued to build, made good FA acquisitions and become the #1 seed (while maintaining a competitive [ie: watchable] team for majority of those years).

Utah Jazz post D-Will/Boozer/AK/Korver-era had the worst record in the West 4 seasons ago, then was an "on the cusp" playoff team for the two years after that. They didn't just throw away their young talent, they surrounded it with key assets and this year was the 5-seed in a tough western conference.

These are just two examples that I found in 5 minutes, but I could probably find countless more. My point is, when you have a team with playoff talent (noted by the fact that they made the playoffs) and your team is in the 4th biggest market in the NBA... you shouldn't just throw away every asset you have in hopes of contending in 5-6 years. That, in my opinion, is ridiculous.

And after 4 years, they have a few load of unproven NBA players (who were studs in college) to show for it.

Give me the Sixers core over the Jazz core all day long. The Celtics example is legit. They built a balanced team but they also tore down the PP/KG/Ray team and stored a log cabin of draft picks. Keep the Jazz out of it. They don't help you. That team is going nowhere.


dude are you forgetting that 2 years prior to Hinkie the team was less then 2 mins away from the ECF? We tried to capitalize and maximize that roster by trading all of our remaining assets for Bynum. Everyone knows it failed. What else were we supposed to do after that? Most knew a rebuild was coming just knew one knew it would be so extreme but hot damn it it didnt work out for us and refresh the fanbase. What other teams did or didnt do has no impact on how Hinkie decided to build a team, there is no law on how its done and none of the teams you mentioned are or were real title contenders. But maybe we should have built a team around Holiday, Hawes, and Thad Young instead...

I'm completely on the same page. They could have been a mid 30s win team with over payed role players having the usage of star players or they could tear it down as fast as possible. Hinkie did it right.

Greet
06-22-2017, 03:14 PM
You're not comparing apples to apples. Comparing Embiid who went pick #3 and would have been #1 if he was healthy, Simmons #1, and Fultz #1 to Randle/Russ/Ingram is not the same. Not all lottery picks are created equally. The #1 pick in the NBA draft is significantly more valuable than any other pick. Look at the hall of famers picked from #1. It's far longer than any other draft spot. They have drafted a C who can shoot 3's, a 6'10 PG, and are about to draft a combo guard who offensively can do anything out on the floor. Their potential is on another planet compared to Sabonis/Mario/Gordon. The percentage of #1 picks that hit compared with those other draft slots makes the upside of the Sixers AND the likelihood that they achieve success better than any other young core in the league. You can claim they are unproven but the facts support that the higher the pick in the draft the more likely that player is to be a star player. If 2 hit then the Sixers will be a dangerous team for the next 5-6 years. If all 3 hit then watch out.

I'll admit that the Magic and Lakers examples were a bit nit-picky, but you avoided my best one which is the Timberwolves. Two #1 (proven, for the most part) draft picks, and a #5 draft pick. Why do people not talk about the TWolves like they have the potential of the Sixers? I would say from what we have seen and what we can tell, they have a better chance to be contenders than the Sixers.

I was listening to The Vertical Podcast with Woj today, and he had a guest from DraftExpress. It was a really good episode of the podcast and they talked in-depth about the draft. But he said along the lines that a #1 pick has about a 60% chance to be a multiple all-star caliber player and #3 pick drops to about 30%.

So assuming that these stats are correct, after 4 years of experiment the Sixers have about a 35% chance that both Simmons and Fultz are (multiple) all-star players and a 30% (Which imo, should be lower because of injury concern over the past 3 years, and he's not a fresh pick) that Embiid turns into an multi-year all-star caliber player. And that's about all you can say about that roster. Besides that they have a decent role player in RoCo and still a very unproven Saric. If I'm doing my math correctly (I could be wrong) that leaves about a 10% chance that all 3 turn into multi-year all-stars.

Seems like a long time to risk for something so unlikely (statistically) and that was benefit of the doubt that Simmons injury is a one time thing and wont come back and bite him (like Embiids have).


Give me the Sixers core over the Jazz core all day long. The Celtics example is legit. They built a balanced team but they also tore down the PP/KG/Ray team and stored a log cabin of draft picks. Keep the Jazz out of it. They don't help you. That team is going nowhere.

(This will all be ASSUMING the Jazz resign Hayward)
I'm not so sure I would take the 76ers core over the Jazz at this point in time. 27 year old proven Gordon Hayward, 25 year old proven Derrick Favors, 24 year old proven Rudy Gobert and still surrounded by young guys who have shown flashes of being real NBA players (Lyles, Burks, Exum, Hood).

This Jazz team would have been the #1 seed in the East, probably by a good amount. They started off in a VERY similar shape the 76ers, maybe even worse. But they built a good, solid squad. A team that won a playoff series in a tough conference despite Gobert missing the first 3 games.

Greet
06-22-2017, 03:20 PM
To go off what i just said about the TWolves, Woj just posted this:

Adrian Wojnarowski‏Verified account @WojVerticalNBA 3m3 minutes ago
Minnesota continues to show interest in landing Paul George or Jimmy Butler, league sources tell @TheVertical.

If they can do this without giving up Wiggins, lets say Rubio + #7 + future pick. Are you going to argue that that the Sixers still have a better chance at being contenders? Definitely not, and assuming they land one of these guys... that seems pretty textbook on how to rebuild a team from scratch.

More-Than-Most
06-22-2017, 03:45 PM
http://hinkie.theringer.com/

Alayla
06-22-2017, 04:17 PM
I'll admit that the Magic and Lakers examples were a bit nit-picky, but you avoided my best one which is the Timberwolves. Two #1 (proven, for the most part) draft picks, and a #5 draft pick. Why do people not talk about the TWolves like they have the potential of the Sixers? I would say from what we have seen and what we can tell, they have a better chance to be contenders than the Sixers.

I was listening to The Vertical Podcast with Woj today, and he had a guest from DraftExpress. It was a really good episode of the podcast and they talked in-depth about the draft. But he said along the lines that a #1 pick has about a 60% chance to be a multiple all-star caliber player and #3 pick drops to about 30%.

So assuming that these stats are correct, after 4 years of experiment the Sixers have about a 35% chance that both Simmons and Fultz are (multiple) all-star players and a 30% (Which imo, should be lower because of injury concern over the past 3 years, and he's not a fresh pick) that Embiid turns into an multi-year all-star caliber player. And that's about all you can say about that roster. Besides that they have a decent role player in RoCo and still a very unproven Saric. If I'm doing my math correctly (I could be wrong) that leaves about a 10% chance that all 3 turn into multi-year all-stars.

Seems like a long time to risk for something so unlikely (statistically) and that was benefit of the doubt that Simmons injury is a one time thing and wont come back and bite him (like Embiids have).



(This will all be ASSUMING the Jazz resign Hayward)
I'm not so sure I would take the 76ers core over the Jazz at this point in time. 27 year old proven Gordon Hayward, 25 year old proven Derrick Favors, 24 year old proven Rudy Gobert and still surrounded by young guys who have shown flashes of being real NBA players (Lyles, Burks, Exum, Hood).

This Jazz team would have been the #1 seed in the East, probably by a good amount. They started off in a VERY similar shape the 76ers, maybe even worse. But they built a good, solid squad. A team that won a playoff series in a tough conference despite Gobert missing the first 3 games.

Okay so lets in your statsics ignore Embiid would have been the head and shoulders #1 pick barring injury lets also ignore that he was outputting wilt like numbers last season in the time that he did and has more or less already proven to have star talent and just act like he is a 100% unknown here yeah that's entirely fair let me tell you.
If he can stay healthy (something i have less faith in than most sixers fans mind) this guy is a surefire hall of famer.

Greet
06-22-2017, 04:45 PM
Okay so lets in your statsics ignore Embiid would have been the head and shoulders #1 pick barring injury lets also ignore that he was outputting wilt like numbers last season in the time that he did and has more or less already proven to have star talent and just act like he is a 100% unknown here yeah that's entirely fair let me tell you.
If he can stay healthy (something i have less faith in than most sixers fans mind) this guy is a surefire hall of famer.

Come on man, come on. You made a VALID point in about the first sentence and then the rest of this post was pure Bologna. I'm talking about statistically, regardless of if he "should have been" the 1st pick (which is not as sure fire, Wiggins was just as hyped up)... he was still a #3 pick. Wiggins looks like he has a potential to be part of that 60% that become multi-season all-star players.

Then you're saying he put up Wilt type numbers... just not true, not even close to true and then you go and call the guy a SUREFIRE hall of famer. A guy that has played 31 minutes in 3 seasons, SUREFIRE??? Come on. There are guys in the league that have put up years of all-star numbers and have been in the top 10 of current players and they aren't even surefire hall of famers... yet you're going to say that if he stays healthy he will be one? This is the type of brain-washing none-sense I'm talking about. People actually believe this.

Greet
06-23-2017, 10:38 AM
To go off what i just said about the TWolves, Woj just posted this:

Adrian Wojnarowski‏Verified account @WojVerticalNBA 3m3 minutes ago
Minnesota continues to show interest in landing Paul George or Jimmy Butler, league sources tell @TheVertical.

If they can do this without giving up Wiggins, lets say Rubio + #7 + future pick. Are you going to argue that that the Sixers still have a better chance at being contenders? Definitely not, and assuming they land one of these guys... that seems pretty textbook on how to rebuild a team from scratch.

Not to toot my own horn, but now it's hard to argue that the 76ers have done anything close to what the Wolves have so far.

KnicksorBust
06-23-2017, 12:47 PM
You're not comparing apples to apples. Comparing Embiid who went pick #3 and would have been #1 if he was healthy, Simmons #1, and Fultz #1 to Randle/Russ/Ingram is not the same. Not all lottery picks are created equally. The #1 pick in the NBA draft is significantly more valuable than any other pick. Look at the hall of famers picked from #1. It's far longer than any other draft spot. They have drafted a C who can shoot 3's, a 6'10 PG, and are about to draft a combo guard who offensively can do anything out on the floor. Their potential is on another planet compared to Sabonis/Mario/Gordon. The percentage of #1 picks that hit compared with those other draft slots makes the upside of the Sixers AND the likelihood that they achieve success better than any other young core in the league. You can claim they are unproven but the facts support that the higher the pick in the draft the more likely that player is to be a star player. If 2 hit then the Sixers will be a dangerous team for the next 5-6 years. If all 3 hit then watch out.

I'll admit that the Magic and Lakers examples were a bit nit-picky, but you avoided my best one which is the Timberwolves. Two #1 (proven, for the most part) draft picks, and a #5 draft pick. Why do people not talk about the TWolves like they have the potential of the Sixers? I would say from what we have seen and what we can tell, they have a better chance to be contenders than the Sixers.

I was listening to The Vertical Podcast with Woj today, and he had a guest from DraftExpress. It was a really good episode of the podcast and they talked in-depth about the draft. But he said along the lines that a #1 pick has about a 60% chance to be a multiple all-star caliber player and #3 pick drops to about 30%.

So assuming that these stats are correct, after 4 years of experiment the Sixers have about a 35% chance that both Simmons and Fultz are (multiple) all-star players and a 30% (Which imo, should be lower because of injury concern over the past 3 years, and he's not a fresh pick) that Embiid turns into an multi-year all-star caliber player. And that's about all you can say about that roster. Besides that they have a decent role player in RoCo and still a very unproven Saric. If I'm doing my math correctly (I could be wrong) that leaves about a 10% chance that all 3 turn into multi-year all-stars.

Seems like a long time to risk for something so unlikely (statistically) and that was benefit of the doubt that Simmons injury is a one time thing and wont come back and bite him (like Embiids have).


Give me the Sixers core over the Jazz core all day long. The Celtics example is legit. They built a balanced team but they also tore down the PP/KG/Ray team and stored a log cabin of draft picks. Keep the Jazz out of it. They don't help you. That team is going nowhere.

(This will all be ASSUMING the Jazz resign Hayward)
I'm not so sure I would take the 76ers core over the Jazz at this point in time. 27 year old proven Gordon Hayward, 25 year old proven Derrick Favors, 24 year old proven Rudy Gobert and still surrounded by young guys who have shown flashes of being real NBA players (Lyles, Burks, Exum, Hood).

This Jazz team would have been the #1 seed in the East, probably by a good amount. They started off in a VERY similar shape the 76ers, maybe even worse. But they built a good, solid squad. A team that won a playoff series in a tough conference despite Gobert missing the first 3 games.

The numbers are compelling. I am actually a math teacher and have been for the last 10 years so I have a healthy respect for stats and probability. However I would also argue that not all #1 picks are created equal. If you let me know out some #1's like Anthony Bennett which everyone knew was BS at the time then it becomes a different ballgame. I think there is a middle ground here. I do not believe this Sixers core will win a title. I have doubts about all 3 of those stud prospects. But as a fan I can't imagine a Sixers fan who is pissed right now. They have the flexibility and young talent to be on the rise for the foreseeable future. That is what a good rebuild looks like... and I still say the upside is immense and better than the overwhelming majority of the league.

Demetrius7
06-23-2017, 03:08 PM
To me it's obvious that The Process is working out. Full disclosure I'm a Sixers fan but I would rather be in the Sixers position then that of about 20 teams in the NBA given the depth of young talent they have up and down the bench. Also add in the fact that Simmons and Embiid definitely have super star potential, with Fultz having All Star potential. The Sixers are on the way up at the end of the day because the heights are much better than the Iggy/Holiday group could get them.

PAOboston
06-23-2017, 03:15 PM
They have a nice collection of talent on paper. Tru blue chip prospects. But that is exactly what they are at this point. Prospects who have not proven anything.

There are still large questions regarding the key players as well, primarily Joel Embiid. Can he show he can actually be an every day player and not get knocked out by lower body/knee/back injuries? Will Simmons be able to shoot at all at the NBA level? Lots of questions out there.

That being said, it is nice to see Philly getting some positive vibes for once. They have a great history/legacy in the NBA and their fans deserve better than all out tanking for 5 years. Always a firm believer that when all the teams in the big markets are good/relevant (BOS, NY, CHI, LA, CHI), that's when NBA is at its best.

TheDish87
06-23-2017, 04:02 PM
Not to toot my own horn, but now it's hard to argue that the 76ers have done anything close to what the Wolves have so far.

double post

TheDish87
06-23-2017, 04:02 PM
Not to toot my own horn, but now it's hard to argue that the 76ers have done anything close to what the Wolves have so far.

what exactly are the wolves doing so right lol. great move for them to get butler but it comes as a result of their top prospects not looking good enough to turn the corner. No Simmons and only 31 games of Embiid yet the Wolves had 3 more wins

Greet
06-23-2017, 04:30 PM
what exactly are the wolves doing so right lol. great move for them to get butler but it comes as a result of their top prospects not looking good enough to turn the corner. No Simmons and only 31 games of Embiid yet the Wolves had 3 more wins

Gave up top prospects? The only thing the Bulls got in that trade (that has value) is LaVine (coming off major injury, surprised Philly didn't look at him) and #7 (Which they took arguably the biggest lottery reach in the draft with Lauri).

What do the Wolves have? Towns(21 - proven), Wiggins (22 - not proven yet, but shows in real NBA minutes that he has potential), Rubio(26 - proven), Butler(27 - proven star). Along with a bunch of good young role players. Come on brother!

Alayla
06-23-2017, 05:04 PM
Gave up top prospects? The only thing the Bulls got in that trade (that has value) is LaVine (coming off major injury, surprised Philly didn't look at him) and #7 (Which they took arguably the biggest lottery reach in the draft with Lauri).

What do the Wolves have? Towns(21 - proven), Wiggins (22 - not proven yet, but shows in real NBA minutes that he has potential), Rubio(26 - proven), Butler(27 - proven star). Along with a bunch of good young role players. Come on brother!

It was reported the bulls wanted to trade bulter for 3 and we choose to trade up for one rather than trading for bulter and most of us are very happy about that i don't personally feel that makes the wolves longterm look any better than ours we have plenty of capspace and assets left and picking up a star player of our own shouldn't be difficult. You look at this sixers roster as though we are done making moves none of us sees this as a finished product nor would we want this rushed. That being said out of all sixers fans on this board i'm lowest on Embiids longterm health so i don't consider us better off than the wolves either i consider them comparable situations

TheDish87
06-23-2017, 09:14 PM
hope the wolves enjoy 7-8 seeds and first round exits the next 3 years. better hope those young guys learn how to D up.

Alayla
06-23-2017, 09:19 PM
Come on man, come on. You made a VALID point in about the first sentence and then the rest of this post was pure Bologna. I'm talking about statistically, regardless of if he "should have been" the 1st pick (which is not as sure fire, Wiggins was just as hyped up)... he was still a #3 pick. Wiggins looks like he has a potential to be part of that 60% that become multi-season all-star players.

Then you're saying he put up Wilt type numbers... just not true, not even close to true and then you go and call the guy a SUREFIRE hall of famer. A guy that has played 31 minutes in 3 seasons, SUREFIRE??? Come on. There are guys in the league that have put up years of all-star numbers and have been in the top 10 of current players and they aren't even surefire hall of famers... yet you're going to say that if he stays healthy he will be one? This is the type of brain-washing none-sense I'm talking about. People actually believe this.

look at his per 36 min numbers and compare them across any rookies throughout history he is in truely elite company. If you disargee you simply haven't looked at the numbers becuase what he did on a per 36 basis hasn't happened since Wilt.
Mind you this coming from someone who is low on the guy and wishes we kept Noel as i don't expect him to be healthy pretty much ever. But i must admit IF he is he is going to change the league in a big way.

metswon69
06-26-2017, 04:52 AM
It's never good to tank multiple seasons. That said, what did the 76ers have to gain from aspiring to be mediocre or a 7th or 8th seed?

In the NBA where the game is so predicated on stars, if you're gonna suck, do it right and be awful. Fringe lottery picks and adding veterans in FA isn't going to do **** in this NBA. Your best bet is to build for the future, acquire as many young assets as possible and go forward with a core nucleus of talented young players. That's what the 76ers did and although Colangelo is going to get most of the credit when they turn it around, Hinkie is the reason why this happened.

FOXHOUND
06-26-2017, 08:55 AM
It's still too early to tell, but I still lean more to stupid. Embiid is a fantastic talent, and if he can stay healthy then he will be elite for sure. However, it's hard to ignore the enormous blunder of drafting Okafor when they already had Embiid and Noel on the roster.

Yes, I get that Embiid had yet to play, but at a certain point you have to believe in your draft picks enough to build around them. Think of how much different this team looks if they draft Porzingis instead of Okafor, for example? Even if Embiid never plays, Porzingis and Noel is a much better fit than Okafor and Noel. It's also hard to ignore that Noel was ultimately wasted as a #6 pick because their glut of centers didn't allow for him to grow enough in games and to have any real trade value with teams knowing they had to move him. Same is going on with Okafor right now, wasting an even higher #3 pick.

Hinkie should have moved Noel during the 2015-16 season, if he believed in Embiid getting healthy. Hinkie should have never drafted Okafor, knowing he had Embiid and if that pick was ever going to work out that it would mean the end of Okafor. The same goes for vice versa. Taking both Embiid and Okafor was essentially going to waste at least one #3 pick.

For the thread title, I would remove textbook and replace it with luck. Then I would say it's a combination of all three.

Genius - Hinkie's ability to build assets by acquiring an insane amount of draft picks. Hinkie's shrewd contracts?

Stupid - Blindly drafting BPA instead of trying to actually build a team. Those shrewd contracts eventually alienating agents. The losing culture alienating agents and players, leaving to someone like Porzingis avoiding a workout with them. Relying so heavily on lottery ball chances when they are as low as they are for a reason. Constantly stripping the team of any valuable players making it extremely difficult for their high draft picks to play well and develop.

Luck - The lottery balls could have been friendlier to them, and if so then Hinkie is looking a lot better. Injuries.

The Colangelo's have taken over and are building a much better environment. The attitude and aura changed in Philly the minute that Hinkie stepped away, as losing became too ingrained in the culture and oddly acceptable. People are giving Hinkie too much credit for the stuff happening since he's been gone, IMO.

TheDish87
06-26-2017, 11:19 AM
no one can hit on every draft pick. its easy to knock Oak yet you ignore the Saric trade, finding Holmes in the 2nd, plucking Cov form the D-league. in no universe should this be looked at as stupid as you like your team never being close to contending for the division let alone a title. you dont have to like or approve of it but dont hate the player, hate the game. we are better off now then at any point in the last 15 years. oh and the aurora here changed when Embiid took the court, not when the Colangelos took over.

Alayla
06-26-2017, 11:49 AM
It's still too early to tell, but I still lean more to stupid. Embiid is a fantastic talent, and if he can stay healthy then he will be elite for sure. However, it's hard to ignore the enormous blunder of drafting Okafor when they already had Embiid and Noel on the roster.

Yes, I get that Embiid had yet to play, but at a certain point you have to believe in your draft picks enough to build around them. Think of how much different this team looks if they draft Porzingis instead of Okafor, for example? Even if Embiid never plays, Porzingis and Noel is a much better fit than Okafor and Noel. It's also hard to ignore that Noel was ultimately wasted as a #6 pick because their glut of centers didn't allow for him to grow enough in games and to have any real trade value with teams knowing they had to move him. Same is going on with Okafor right now, wasting an even higher #3 pick.

Hinkie should have moved Noel during the 2015-16 season, if he believed in Embiid getting healthy. Hinkie should have never drafted Okafor, knowing he had Embiid and if that pick was ever going to work out that it would mean the end of Okafor. The same goes for vice versa. Taking both Embiid and Okafor was essentially going to waste at least one #3 pick.

For the thread title, I would remove textbook and replace it with luck. Then I would say it's a combination of all three.

Genius - Hinkie's ability to build assets by acquiring an insane amount of draft picks. Hinkie's shrewd contracts?

Stupid - Blindly drafting BPA instead of trying to actually build a team. Those shrewd contracts eventually alienating agents. The losing culture alienating agents and players, leaving to someone like Porzingis avoiding a workout with them. Relying so heavily on lottery ball chances when they are as low as they are for a reason. Constantly stripping the team of any valuable players making it extremely difficult for their high draft picks to play well and develop.

Luck - The lottery balls could have been friendlier to them, and if so then Hinkie is looking a lot better. Injuries.

The Colangelo's have taken over and are building a much better environment. The attitude and aura changed in Philly the minute that Hinkie stepped away, as losing became too ingrained in the culture and oddly acceptable. People are giving Hinkie too much credit for the stuff happening since he's been gone, IMO.

Hinkie wanted porzingis was pretty much pushed into okafor by ownership and retrospectively that ended up being a good thing no chance Simmons is on this team if we drafted porzingis and by extention we may not have Fultz right now.
I miss Noel as much as anyone but our ceiling is crazy high right now and i wouldn't trade it for any therotical sixer line up we could have had.

As stated a post above me in reference to the "culture change" Embiid and Saric are responceable for that not the colanglos and guess who drafted both of those players?

joeyc77
06-27-2017, 08:41 AM
I don't know how exactly to classify what Hinkie did but I will say that any team outside of the Cavs, Warriors and a few others who's not trying to do some version of it are stupid or fooling themselves and their fans. He looked at the atrocity that is the CBA and NBA landscape and was honest about the formula to build a real contender. In order to win in the NBA you need multiple superstars on your roster. That's a fact. There's 3 ways to obtain a superstar- trade, FA, or draft and for those you need assets, cap space or high draft picks. Hinkies plan to achieve this was:

1) He didn't frivolously use his cap space on mediocre veterans to give fans some false hope that a Timofey Mozgov was the missing piece between them and contention. This achieved two things- used cap space as an asset in being able to take on crappy contracts for asserts and allowed young players to play in order to evaluate talent.

2) Didn't get attached to players. Too often teams get attached to their own players/draft picks. He treated them like stocks sold high. Everyone knocked him for trading MCW but that turned out Wonderful. Most teams would have marketed that ROY for a decade.

3) He preached patience and the process. He drafted the best players available even if injured. Noel and Embiid were the best players available for sure. The Sixers drafted Embiid with the #3 pick. Who were they suppose to take instead of him? With Saric, the Sixers probably got a top 5 player from that draft and they received a 1st rd pick (one they had previously trade to Orl).

Most importantly the Sixers and Hinkie were honest with the fan base. The NBA hated this. They want every noob fan to believe that "this is our year" because this offseason we hired a four time coaching retread and signed a $50m marginal talent. The Sixers took the most garbage from the NBA league office and their minions in the media. They tried to claim Hinkies plan was to lose on purpose and that's not accurate at all. He wouldn't have hired a coach like Brett Brown if that was the case. In my opinion though, over the past 4-5 years, the Sixers were one of the only franchises outside a handful of true contenders who were concerned with winning a championship at point. While the majority of the league was concerned with ticket sales, making money and fooling their fan base.

crewfan13
06-27-2017, 10:23 AM
It's hard to say if it "worked" or not because there's a bunch of different perspectives. For sixers fans, it has probably worked in the sense that there's more excitement for this years squad then there would have been for a marginally talented 30 win team every year for the last 3 years.

That being said, there's a lot of luck in what they've done and it still needs to all come together. They got a talent like embiid due to injury. It's possible he never plays a full season and is basically out of the league in 2 years. But had he been completely healthy, he would have gone first. The lucked into getting a first pick in a draft that doesn't seem to have been super deep. They very easily could have gotten the first pick in an Anthony Bennett draft, or been pushed to 3rd or 4th last year. They lucked into the 3rd pick this year in a draft with deep talent. Had they fallen to 5th or 6th, they may not have been able to trade up. They got lucky that the lakers didn't end up signing some free agents that would have pushed the pick they owed philly from a potential top 5 pick to something like 13.

They were all calculated risks. Some have worked out while others haven't. But if the chips fell a little bit differently, they could easily be sitting on a team that looks more like de'Aaron fox, Marcus smart, jaylen brown, Dario saric and okafor or Noel than the squad they have now. That's a decent young team, but fans are no where near as excited about that as they are this team. And if that was the case, I have a feeling a lot of opinions about "the process" would be different.

I have no problem with what the 76ers did. I'm a bucks fan and we spent years in the mid to late 2000s and the early part of the 2010s constantly living in purgatory. That gets old when you have no real upside as a fan. Best case scenario is you sneak out a 6th seed and maybe push a series to 7 games. Worst case scenario you end up with the 9th pick or something. I completely understand what hinkie did. But it's hard to call it genius when it relies somewhat heavily on luck.

The NBA is all about finding superstars. And in today's game, you need at least 2. If you don't have any, the only way to really acquire 2 is to find them in the draft. Earlier draft picks likely mean a better shot at finding a superstar. But it's such an inexact science. Quite a few drafts don't have a superstar. And some that do, it turns out to be athletic guys who develop at a completely unexpected rate. I don't think even the most optimistic folks thought guys like Giannis, kawhi, Paul George or even Steph would become anywhere near as good as they are today. So it's a smart strategy to acquire early picks if your ownership is willing to do it. But it's not foolproof and they could very easily end up in basketball purgatory if their guys don't turn into studs. And looking back at draft history, it wouldn't be surprising at all if fultz and Simmons don't turn into studs and end up just being useful players.

Jamiecballer
06-27-2017, 11:06 AM
it worked. whether it works out remains to be seen.