NBA likely to vote on changing draft odds next month

[Sixerscan]

NBA is a rig job. Illuminati rigged it for the Cavs. Without the Cavs winning the lotto, they wouldn't have had the crucial piece (Wiggins) to make a believable K. Love trade. They wanted to keep Irving so this was the only possible scenario. I didn't think so before, but all pro sports is a rigged. I'm going to start watching NCAA this season.

We'll, if you're turning to NCAA, make sure you don't google the phrase "point shaving."

Yeah I was gonna say, if you're looking for less corruption, I'd go somewhere other than college sports.

[the_process]

Fact: the people who b**** about tanking are either:

a) over 45 and remember the good old days of walking 5 miles uphill barefoot in the snow to school, and will constantly tell you about the "integrity of the game" and the benefits of "healthy and fair effort and competition".

b) jealous fans of treadmills who wish that someday their owner would let them tank.

c) people who care far too deeply about public perception and will follow along to whatever the flavor of the week is.

Truth: you HAVE TO HAVE a superstar to win a title in the NBA. It's almost indisputable. Yes, you can tell me about the '04 Pistons and I can tell you they had 4 all stars, the DPOY, the 6th man of the year, and a top 3 PG. So is THAT a more viable working model than tanking to get a superstar??? I think not.

The point of professional sports is NOT to compete, it's NOT to show sportsmanship, and it's NOT for love of the game. All those things are NICE, but the POINT is to WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS. Doesn't matter how you accomplish it. No one likes the Patriots now, right? Just a bunch of cheaters, right? Did the NFL take away those 3 rings? No? Then they still won. WHO CARES what people say now, all The Hoodie has to do is point to his left hand with 3 rings. Did cheating diminish those rings? Are they somehow less valid? Well, do the history books still list the Pats as 3 time champs? Then no, history still says they won 3 Super Bowls.

The reason I say all of that is the exact same applies to the Sixers. If Hinkie builds them into a back to back champion in 2019 and 2020, will we remember they threw away the 2015 season purposely? Unequivocally the answer is no. Quick, what was OKC's record in 2009? Seattle was a 31 win treadmill in 2007 who lucked into the 2nd pick and Kevin Durant. They then tanked and won only 43 games the next two years combined; drafting Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden in the process. (Oh yeah, and moving to OKC) They then shot up to 50 wins and have been a legit contender since. Everyone seems to forget this is only the Sixers 2nd year of tanking. I'm not saying the Sixers are going to have the same success, but I could easily see the Sixers going .500 next year if Embiid is right and the guy drafted this summer is a player. So we sit through one more mulligan year. The only reason anyone cares about it is because Hinkie doesn't care about public perception. Well, neither do I. As the saying goes: hate the game, not the player. Tank on, friends! (Sorry for the novel, this is a pet peeve topic lol)

[deep6er]

Fact: the people who b**** about tanking are either:

a) over 45 and remember the good old days of walking 5 miles uphill barefoot in the snow to school, and will constantly tell you about the "integrity of the game" and the benefits of "healthy and fair effort and competition".

b) jealous fans of treadmills who wish that someday their owner would let them tank.

c) people who care far too deeply about public perception and will follow along to whatever the flavor of the week is.

Truth: you HAVE TO HAVE a superstar to win a title in the NBA. It's almost indisputable. Yes, you can tell me about the '04 Pistons and I can tell you they had 4 all stars, the DPOY, the 6th man of the year, and a top 3 PG. So is THAT a more viable working model than tanking to get a superstar??? I think not.

The point of professional sports is NOT to compete, it's NOT to show sportsmanship, and it's NOT for love of the game. All those things are NICE, but the POINT is to WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS. Doesn't matter how you accomplish it. No one likes the Patriots now, right? Just a bunch of cheaters, right? Did the NFL take away those 3 rings? No? Then they still won. WHO CARES what people say now, all The Hoodie has to do is point to his left hand with 3 rings. Did cheating diminish those rings? Are they somehow less valid? Well, do the history books still list the Pats as 3 time champs? Then no, history still says they won 3 Super Bowls.

The reason I say all of that is the exact same applies to the Sixers. If Hinkie builds them into a back to back champion in 2019 and 2020, will we remember they threw away the 2015 season purposely? Unequivocally the answer is no. Quick, what was OKC's record in 2009? Seattle was a 31 win treadmill in 2007 who lucked into the 2nd pick and Kevin Durant. They then tanked and won only 43 games the next two years combined; drafting Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden in the process. (Oh yeah, and moving to OKC) They then shot up to 50 wins and have been a legit contender since. Everyone seems to forget this is only the Sixers 2nd year of tanking. I'm not saying the Sixers are going to have the same success, but I could easily see the Sixers going .500 next year if Embiid is right and the guy drafted this summer is a player. So we sit through one more mulligan year. The only reason anyone cares about it is because Hinkie doesn't care about public perception. Well, neither do I. As the saying goes: hate the game, not the player. Tank on, friends! (Sorry for the novel, this is a pet peeve topic lol)

If you want to get cynical about the point of professional sports though, it's not about winning championships, it's about making money. The reason why the tank upsets the NBA so much is because it is a great long term investment by Sixers management for trying to build the value of their franchise. The problem is that by intentionally putting such a **** product on the court for right now, the Sixers are currently hurting the brand, product and value of the NBA as a whole. Sixers road games are going to be poor ticket sellers and bad ratings nights. Fans can more visibly see the flawed structure of the league and form negative opinions about it. In short the tank is great for Sixers value but bad for NBA value which is really what this vote is about.

[Ericb5]

Fact: the people who b**** about tanking are either:

a) over 45 and remember the good old days of walking 5 miles uphill barefoot in the snow to school, and will constantly tell you about the "integrity of the game" and the benefits of "healthy and fair effort and competition".

b) jealous fans of treadmills who wish that someday their owner would let them tank.

c) people who care far too deeply about public perception and will follow along to whatever the flavor of the week is.

Truth: you HAVE TO HAVE a superstar to win a title in the NBA. It's almost indisputable. Yes, you can tell me about the '04 Pistons and I can tell you they had 4 all stars, the DPOY, the 6th man of the year, and a top 3 PG. So is THAT a more viable working model than tanking to get a superstar??? I think not.

The point of professional sports is NOT to compete, it's NOT to show sportsmanship, and it's NOT for love of the game. All those things are NICE, but the POINT is to WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS. Doesn't matter how you accomplish it. No one likes the Patriots now, right? Just a bunch of cheaters, right? Did the NFL take away those 3 rings? No? Then they still won. WHO CARES what people say now, all The Hoodie has to do is point to his left hand with 3 rings. Did cheating diminish those rings? Are they somehow less valid? Well, do the history books still list the Pats as 3 time champs? Then no, history still says they won 3 Super Bowls.

The reason I say all of that is the exact same applies to the Sixers. If Hinkie builds them into a back to back champion in 2019 and 2020, will we remember they threw away the 2015 season purposely? Unequivocally the answer is no. Quick, what was OKC's record in 2009? Seattle was a 31 win treadmill in 2007 who lucked into the 2nd pick and Kevin Durant. They then tanked and won only 43 games the next two years combined; drafting Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden in the process. (Oh yeah, and moving to OKC) They then shot up to 50 wins and have been a legit contender since. Everyone seems to forget this is only the Sixers 2nd year of tanking. I'm not saying the Sixers are going to have the same success, but I could easily see the Sixers going .500 next year if Embiid is right and the guy drafted this summer is a player. So we sit through one more mulligan year. The only reason anyone cares about it is because Hinkie doesn't care about public perception. Well, neither do I. As the saying goes: hate the game, not the player. Tank on, friends! (Sorry for the novel, this is a pet peeve topic lol)

If you want to get cynical about the point of professional sports though, it's not about winning championships, it's about making money. The reason why the tank upsets the NBA so much is because it is a great long term investment by Sixers management for trying to build the value of their franchise. The problem is that by intentionally putting such a **** product on the court for right now, the Sixers are currently hurting the brand, product and value of the NBA as a whole. Sixers road games are going to be poor ticket sellers and bad ratings nights. Fans can more visibly see the flawed structure of the league and form negative opinions about it. In short the tank is great for Sixers value but bad for NBA value which is really what this vote is about.

Agreed, but all of the issues with the Sixers as a road draw exist for ANY putrid team. The fine line is between the teams that are purely incompetent and the ones that are tanking as a strategy. The Sixers are being punished for being honest about their intentions. The incentives to be bad in the short term exist for all teams within a certain range.

People who are against the tanking also seem to believe that it is a perpetual thing. The Sixers have followed this path for two off seasons and are now truly at the bottom. They have jettisoned every player that is not part of their future and had trade value. After this year there should only be players that are considered part of the future left on the team so for all intents and purposes they are done tanking. We already got our potential star in Embiid so there is no NEED to draft one now. Of course it is still a preference to draft one, but it isn't like last year.

[Sixerscan]

Fact: the people who b**** about tanking are either:

a) over 45 and remember the good old days of walking 5 miles uphill barefoot in the snow to school, and will constantly tell you about the "integrity of the game" and the benefits of "healthy and fair effort and competition".

b) jealous fans of treadmills who wish that someday their owner would let them tank.

c) people who care far too deeply about public perception and will follow along to whatever the flavor of the week is.

Truth: you HAVE TO HAVE a superstar to win a title in the NBA. It's almost indisputable. Yes, you can tell me about the '04 Pistons and I can tell you they had 4 all stars, the DPOY, the 6th man of the year, and a top 3 PG. So is THAT a more viable working model than tanking to get a superstar??? I think not.

The point of professional sports is NOT to compete, it's NOT to show sportsmanship, and it's NOT for love of the game. All those things are NICE, but the POINT is to WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS. Doesn't matter how you accomplish it. No one likes the Patriots now, right? Just a bunch of cheaters, right? Did the NFL take away those 3 rings? No? Then they still won. WHO CARES what people say now, all The Hoodie has to do is point to his left hand with 3 rings. Did cheating diminish those rings? Are they somehow less valid? Well, do the history books still list the Pats as 3 time champs? Then no, history still says they won 3 Super Bowls.

The reason I say all of that is the exact same applies to the Sixers. If Hinkie builds them into a back to back champion in 2019 and 2020, will we remember they threw away the 2015 season purposely? Unequivocally the answer is no. Quick, what was OKC's record in 2009? Seattle was a 31 win treadmill in 2007 who lucked into the 2nd pick and Kevin Durant. They then tanked and won only 43 games the next two years combined; drafting Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden in the process. (Oh yeah, and moving to OKC) They then shot up to 50 wins and have been a legit contender since. Everyone seems to forget this is only the Sixers 2nd year of tanking. I'm not saying the Sixers are going to have the same success, but I could easily see the Sixers going .500 next year if Embiid is right and the guy drafted this summer is a player. So we sit through one more mulligan year. The only reason anyone cares about it is because Hinkie doesn't care about public perception. Well, neither do I. As the saying goes: hate the game, not the player. Tank on, friends! (Sorry for the novel, this is a pet peeve topic lol)

If you want to get cynical about the point of professional sports though, it's not about winning championships, it's about making money. The reason why the tank upsets the NBA so much is because it is a great long term investment by Sixers management for trying to build the value of their franchise. The problem is that by intentionally putting such a **** product on the court for right now, the Sixers are currently hurting the brand, product and value of the NBA as a whole. Sixers road games are going to be poor ticket sellers and bad ratings nights. Fans can more visibly see the flawed structure of the league and form negative opinions about it. In short the tank is great for Sixers value but bad for NBA value which is really what this vote is about.

Single game tickets don't drive attendance numbers as much as you might think. We were 11th in road attendance last year. Most sales come from season tickets and club boxes. And I don't have equivalent numbers for TV ratings, but remember the way it generally works is that these teams sign long term TV contracts with some local station. I doubt the actions of the Sixers will impact an 8 year contract all that much.

Also remember that basketball is a zero sum game. If the Sixers are losing, it means other teams are winning. Even if they lose sales because of us (I don't see any indication that they have) they should theoretically increase when they play teams that win more than they would otherwise.

[KKell2507]

Fact: the people who b**** about tanking are either:

a) over 45 and remember the good old days of walking 5 miles uphill barefoot in the snow to school, and will constantly tell you about the "integrity of the game" and the benefits of "healthy and fair effort and competition".

b) jealous fans of treadmills who wish that someday their owner would let them tank.

c) people who care far too deeply about public perception and will follow along to whatever the flavor of the week is.

Truth: you HAVE TO HAVE a superstar to win a title in the NBA. It's almost indisputable. Yes, you can tell me about the '04 Pistons and I can tell you they had 4 all stars, the DPOY, the 6th man of the year, and a top 3 PG. So is THAT a more viable working model than tanking to get a superstar??? I think not.

The point of professional sports is NOT to compete, it's NOT to show sportsmanship, and it's NOT for love of the game. All those things are NICE, but the POINT is to WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS. Doesn't matter how you accomplish it. No one likes the Patriots now, right? Just a bunch of cheaters, right? Did the NFL take away those 3 rings? No? Then they still won. WHO CARES what people say now, all The Hoodie has to do is point to his left hand with 3 rings. Did cheating diminish those rings? Are they somehow less valid? Well, do the history books still list the Pats as 3 time champs? Then no, history still says they won 3 Super Bowls.

The reason I say all of that is the exact same applies to the Sixers. If Hinkie builds them into a back to back champion in 2019 and 2020, will we remember they threw away the 2015 season purposely? Unequivocally the answer is no. Quick, what was OKC's record in 2009? Seattle was a 31 win treadmill in 2007 who lucked into the 2nd pick and Kevin Durant. They then tanked and won only 43 games the next two years combined; drafting Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden in the process. (Oh yeah, and moving to OKC) They then shot up to 50 wins and have been a legit contender since. Everyone seems to forget this is only the Sixers 2nd year of tanking. I'm not saying the Sixers are going to have the same success, but I could easily see the Sixers going .500 next year if Embiid is right and the guy drafted this summer is a player. So we sit through one more mulligan year. The only reason anyone cares about it is because Hinkie doesn't care about public perception. Well, neither do I. As the saying goes: hate the game, not the player. Tank on, friends! (Sorry for the novel, this is a pet peeve topic lol)

If you want to get cynical about the point of professional sports though, it's not about winning championships, it's about making money. The reason why the tank upsets the NBA so much is because it is a great long term investment by Sixers management for trying to build the value of their franchise. The problem is that by intentionally putting such a **** product on the court for right now, the Sixers are currently hurting the brand, product and value of the NBA as a whole. Sixers road games are going to be poor ticket sellers and bad ratings nights. Fans can more visibly see the flawed structure of the league and form negative opinions about it. In short the tank is great for Sixers value but bad for NBA value which is really what this vote is about.

Single game tickets don't drive attendance numbers as much as you might think. We were 11th in road attendance last year. Most sales come from season tickets and club boxes. And I don't have equivalent numbers for TV ratings, but remember the way it generally works is that these teams sign long term TV contracts with some local station. I doubt the actions of the Sixers will impact an 8 year contract all that much.

Also remember that basketball is a zero sum game. If the Sixers are losing, it means other teams are winning. Even if they lose sales because of us (I don't see any indication that they have) they should theoretically increase when they play teams that win more than they would otherwise.

Exactly. Ticket sales last year really only hurt the Sixers themselves. As you said 11th in the league last year in road attendance. And when you look back to the last 5 or 6 years in Sixers attendance, the numbers were not terribly far off from other average seasons where we missed the playoffs. And even the playoff years, we were mid pack in attendance.

Also I think people seem to forget just how much money the Sixers are spending in other areas. While they arent spending on payroll at the moment(and there is no need to at the current state), they are spending TONS of money in other areas to improve the Sixers brand and the value of the franchise.

The 120,000 sq foot practice facility, which will be BY FAR the biggest and most advanced in the league is not coming for free.
The visual effects they are putting in for gamedays and stadium enhancements, to improve game day experience does not come free either. Those effects are only used by 1 other team currently and cost an estimated $1 mil per game. Thats $41 mil just in visual effects just for gamedays.
The advertising and marketing of the team is slowly beginning to go up as the team now has something to market(MCW, Noel, Embiid).

They are putting the necessary groundwork for things off the court, so that when the on court product is worth watching, the Sixers franchise as a whole will be one of the most valuable and advanced franchises in the league.

[guest81]

The point is that you don't worry about need right now. In a few years when hopefully 2 of the Noel, Embiid, MCW, Saric combo are legit players maybe then we go for a Bledsoe type then. Right now? it is questionable...and regardless, it wasn't realistic. The Suns would probably match and if not I doubt we were an ideal location for Bledsoe at the moment anyway...it takes two to tango afterall. Same w/ Parsons and Hayward. It is very very rare that teams let true talents go without matching. Parsons only got away because of the Bosh situation. It was more so Cuban trying to **** over Morey too. So who exactly where we going to sign that was going to help us longterm, exactly? I hear names like Jarrett Jack and Jeremy Lin thrown about and I am very confused that now the moves we made in the past are considered to be the right moves...when I distinctly remember those moves being stupid as hell and we were overpaying scrubs..... Jarrett Jack helps us right now...not so much in the future.

I really can't believe some people are really suggesting that signing mid tier players right now to win maybe a few more games is the best option...all in the name of some misguided pursuit of honor and ****. Is 25 wins that much better than 19?

Seems like overly simplistic thinking. You win with a combination of youth and experience and you get that experience when it is very good, still quite young, and there is a realistic opportunity to get it.

Bledsoe was going to get matched and even if not...he wouldn't come here for the same reasons Klay apparently wouldn't.

Parsons was basically considered to be unavailable until Cuban jumped in. Hinkie wouldn't have done that to his mentor.

Hayward got max which probably is too much...Utah obviosusly would have matched.

It's not overly simplistic thinking...it is common sense really. Unless the guy you sign can help us longterm, it doesn't make sense to sign him.

Those were the only 3 guys I would have signed...anyone else is pointless for this team as they are currently built. Jarrett Jack and the like does nothing because by the time we are actually good, he doesn't do much for us and honestly I don't think he'd want to waste the last few years of his career here and he also would take away minutes from Wroten and the likes.


and again...nto seeing how signing one random dude actually changes much in terms of anything. NO ONE we sign would do anything but maybe add a win here or there..big deal.

So if no one was worth signing or wouldn't of come anyway, then why have so much cap space?

[76ciology]

Doesn't matter. We got the top 2 guys in the past two drafts by not having the no.1 overall picks.

[guest81]

Fact: the people who b**** about tanking are either:

a) over 45 and remember the good old days of walking 5 miles uphill barefoot in the snow to school, and will constantly tell you about the "integrity of the game" and the benefits of "healthy and fair effort and competition".

b) jealous fans of treadmills who wish that someday their owner would let them tank.

c) people who care far too deeply about public perception and will follow along to whatever the flavor of the week is.

Truth: you HAVE TO HAVE a superstar to win a title in the NBA. It's almost indisputable. Yes, you can tell me about the '04 Pistons and I can tell you they had 4 all stars, the DPOY, the 6th man of the year, and a top 3 PG. So is THAT a more viable working model than tanking to get a superstar??? I think not.

The point of professional sports is NOT to compete, it's NOT to show sportsmanship, and it's NOT for love of the game. All those things are NICE, but the POINT is to WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS. Doesn't matter how you accomplish it. No one likes the Patriots now, right? Just a bunch of cheaters, right? Did the NFL take away those 3 rings? No? Then they still won. WHO CARES what people say now, all The Hoodie has to do is point to his left hand with 3 rings. Did cheating diminish those rings? Are they somehow less valid? Well, do the history books still list the Pats as 3 time champs? Then no, history still says they won 3 Super Bowls.

The reason I say all of that is the exact same applies to the Sixers. If Hinkie builds them into a back to back champion in 2019 and 2020, will we remember they threw away the 2015 season purposely? Unequivocally the answer is no. Quick, what was OKC's record in 2009? Seattle was a 31 win treadmill in 2007 who lucked into the 2nd pick and Kevin Durant. They then tanked and won only 43 games the next two years combined; drafting Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden in the process. (Oh yeah, and moving to OKC) They then shot up to 50 wins and have been a legit contender since. Everyone seems to forget this is only the Sixers 2nd year of tanking. I'm not saying the Sixers are going to have the same success, but I could easily see the Sixers going .500 next year if Embiid is right and the guy drafted this summer is a player. So we sit through one more mulligan year. The only reason anyone cares about it is because Hinkie doesn't care about public perception. Well, neither do I. As the saying goes: hate the game, not the player. Tank on, friends! (Sorry for the novel, this is a pet peeve topic lol)

Yes that is the way it works, and that's why the 76ers are doing that. I don't think anybody is questioning that. The problem being, is that that system blows . Let's be honest, if the plan all comes together for the 76ers and they are a title contender, were talking AT LEAST 5 years from now. That would be around the time Emlid would be coming into his peak along with the other players in that core. That's a hell of a long time. That is way to long a wait for a fanbase to expect results.

Look at the NFL. Back in the day it was all about dynasties. Steelers, Cowboys. 49ers. Now a day, there are no dynasties. And the NFL is so much better because of it. You can go from worst to title contender in 3 years, so fans always have something to be excited about.

If the NBA was like that, they would be clearly the 2nd most popular sport. Getting rid of tanking is just one part of the big problem. Give credit to Silver for doing something that's for the fans and not the owners like most commissioners do.

[Mik317]

Seems like overly simplistic thinking. You win with a combination of youth and experience and you get that experience when it is very good, still quite young, and there is a realistic opportunity to get it.

Bledsoe was going to get matched and even if not...he wouldn't come here for the same reasons Klay apparently wouldn't.

Parsons was basically considered to be unavailable until Cuban jumped in. Hinkie wouldn't have done that to his mentor.

Hayward got max which probably is too much...Utah obviosusly would have matched.

It's not overly simplistic thinking...it is common sense really. Unless the guy you sign can help us longterm, it doesn't make sense to sign him.

Those were the only 3 guys I would have signed...anyone else is pointless for this team as they are currently built. Jarrett Jack and the like does nothing because by the time we are actually good, he doesn't do much for us and honestly I don't think he'd want to waste the last few years of his career here and he also would take away minutes from Wroten and the likes.


and again...nto seeing how signing one random dude actually changes much in terms of anything. NO ONE we sign would do anything but maybe add a win here or there..big deal.

So if no one was worth signing or wouldn't of come anyway, then why have so much cap space?

For the future when it is worth signing those guys or to facilitate lopsided trades....

Cap Space is useful for more than overpaying scrubs.

[guest81]

Doesn't matter. We got the top 2 guys in the past two drafts by not having the no.1 overall picks.

Paul George, Dirk, Kobe, Tony Parker, Ty Lawson, Zach Randolph, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, Rondo, Lowrly, Milsap, Marc Gasol, Hibbert, Ibaka. All non lottery picks. You don't need to tank to get a franchise player

[guest81]

Bledsoe was going to get matched and even if not...he wouldn't come here for the same reasons Klay apparently wouldn't.

Parsons was basically considered to be unavailable until Cuban jumped in. Hinkie wouldn't have done that to his mentor.

Hayward got max which probably is too much...Utah obviosusly would have matched.

It's not overly simplistic thinking...it is common sense really. Unless the guy you sign can help us longterm, it doesn't make sense to sign him.

Those were the only 3 guys I would have signed...anyone else is pointless for this team as they are currently built. Jarrett Jack and the like does nothing because by the time we are actually good, he doesn't do much for us and honestly I don't think he'd want to waste the last few years of his career here and he also would take away minutes from Wroten and the likes.


and again...nto seeing how signing one random dude actually changes much in terms of anything. NO ONE we sign would do anything but maybe add a win here or there..big deal.

So if no one was worth signing or wouldn't of come anyway, then why have so much cap space?

For the future when it is worth signing those guys or to facilitate lopsided trades....

Cap Space is useful for more than overpaying scrubs.

So in the future with the cap going wayy up where everyone will have cap space?

[Mik317]

Doesn't matter. We got the top 2 guys in the past two drafts by not having the no.1 overall picks.

Paul George, Dirk, Kobe, Tony Parker, Ty Lawson, Zach Randolph, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, Rondo, Lowrly, Milsap, Marc Gasol, Hibbert, Ibaka. All non lottery picks. You don't need to tank to get a franchise player

Only Kobe and Dirk are Franchise Players from that list. Kobe was drafted in a time where HS were risky and Kobe allegedly didn't want to be drafted by certain teams. Dirk was a euro player who no one knew about. Scouting has gotten much better..neither guy would fall that far in todays world.

also we didn't tank for a decade....sure didn't get any franchise players then. soooooooo

So in the future with the cap going wayy up where everyone will have cap space?

again..it can be used for other things besides just signing dudes. and if it goes up we'd still have more money than other teams........ Now is just not the time to use it.

[wickedwrister]

Doesn't matter. We got the top 2 guys in the past two drafts by not having the no.1 overall picks.

Disagree completely. How would Hinkie look if Giannis, Noel, MCW and Oladipo went 1-4 in the previous draft Or if Embiid doesn't get hurt and he and Wiggins go 1-2 this past year. His picks probably look as great. Can't always count on other teams not taking the guy you want/need. It helps to have the top pick to have the best shot to get the guy you want.

If Hinkie gets to control who the Sixers can get it puts them in a much better position than hoping someone falls to them.

[Kobblehead]

I find myself hoping Giannis winds up a bust for the sole fact of the ridiculous overhype of him on the General Board. You got Bucks fans pretending he doesn't have flaws and comparing him to Scotty Pippen.

[Eyeamok]

never mind. My points were already made way above me.

carry on! Nothing to see here.

[Ericb5]

Doesn't matter. We got the top 2 guys in the past two drafts by not having the no.1 overall picks.

Paul George, Dirk, Kobe, Tony Parker, Ty Lawson, Zach Randolph, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, Rondo, Lowrly, Milsap, Marc Gasol, Hibbert, Ibaka. All non lottery picks. You don't need to tank to get a franchise player

Only Kobe and Dirk are Franchise Players from that list. Kobe was drafted in a time where HS were risky and Kobe allegedly didn't want to be drafted by certain teams. Dirk was a euro player who no one knew about. Scouting has gotten much better..neither guy would fall that far in todays world.

also we didn't tank for a decade....sure didn't get any franchise players then. soooooooo

So in the future with the cap going wayy up where everyone will have cap space?

again..it can be used for other things besides just signing dudes. and if it goes up we'd still have more money than other teams........ Now is just not the time to use it.

Kobe was picked 13th, and he would have gone 8th to the Nets had his agent not scared them off. Nowitzki was 8th or 9th too. Paul George was 10th. I agree that great players are found outside of the lottery sometimes, but let's not cloud the argument with inaccuracies.

[Chamberlainship]

And I don't have equivalent numbers for TV ratings, but remember the way it generally works is that these teams sign long term TV contracts with some local station. I doubt the actions of the Sixers will impact an 8 year contract all that much.

I'm wondering if the deals with Comcast regarding the arena and the local TV rights might make the temptation to tank more compelling:

The acquisition does not include the Wells Fargo Center, where the Sixers play in South Philadelphia, or the Philadelphia Flyers, both of which are also owned by Comcast (NASDAQ:CMCSA, CMCSK) unit Comcast-Spectacor.

. . . .

The value of the Sixers was not as great because the team is locked into a long-term lease deal at the Wells Fargo Center and a long-term broadcasting contract with Comcast SportsNet, which has the team's television rights through 2029.

Poor local TV ratings and arena revenue may not hurt the sixers as much as it would some other teams.

[guest81]

Paul George, Dirk, Kobe, Tony Parker, Ty Lawson, Zach Randolph, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, Rondo, Lowrly, Milsap, Marc Gasol, Hibbert, Ibaka. All non lottery picks. You don't need to tank to get a franchise player

Only Kobe and Dirk are Franchise Players from that list. Kobe was drafted in a time where HS were risky and Kobe allegedly didn't want to be drafted by certain teams. Dirk was a euro player who no one knew about. Scouting has gotten much better..neither guy would fall that far in todays world.

also we didn't tank for a decade....sure didn't get any franchise players then. soooooooo

So in the future with the cap going wayy up where everyone will have cap space?

again..it can be used for other things besides just signing dudes. and if it goes up we'd still have more money than other teams........ Now is just not the time to use it.

Kobe was picked 13th, and he would have gone 8th to the Nets had his agent not scared them off. Nowitzki was 8th or 9th too. Paul George was 10th. I agree that great players are found outside of the lottery sometimes, but let's not cloud the argument with inaccuracies.

you don't need to tank to get the 8-10th pick

[guest81]

Doesn't matter. We got the top 2 guys in the past two drafts by not having the no.1 overall picks.

Paul George, Dirk, Kobe, Tony Parker, Ty Lawson, Zach Randolph, Al Jefferson, Josh Smith, Rondo, Lowrly, Milsap, Marc Gasol, Hibbert, Ibaka. All non lottery picks. You don't need to tank to get a franchise player

Only Kobe and Dirk are Franchise Players from that list. Kobe was drafted in a time where HS were risky and Kobe allegedly didn't want to be drafted by certain teams. Dirk was a euro player who no one knew about. Scouting has gotten much better..neither guy would fall that far in todays world.

also we didn't tank for a decade....sure didn't get any franchise players then. soooooooo

So in the future with the cap going wayy up where everyone will have cap space?

again..it can be used for other things besides just signing dudes. and if it goes up we'd still have more money than other teams........ Now is just not the time to use it.

You have impossibly high standards to what a franchise player is