76ers will become dynasty in 10 years

[Unbreakable99]

The people who hate on the Sixers' plan are Neanderthals. It's just that simple. They are clueless and are just embarrassing themselves with each post.

Lmao. I really feel bad for Sixer fans for having to defend themselves with posters like you ruining the rep of the fanbase.

Thank you for your input. Do you feel better about yourself and able to sleep better tonight now that you got that off of your chest?

[joyeuxnoel]

The 76ers didn't even had a NBA Roster which deserves this name for the last 2-3 years and you discuss a Dynasty????
They're lucky if they contend just one season out of the 10!

There are 29 Teams in the NBA that got a chance as good as or better than the 76ers.

Take a look at the Warriors and their emergence as contenders. If they would've been run like the 76ers, Curry would already be traded for draftpicks and the players drafted with that picks would be traded for new draftpicks.

I say them becoming the new (old)Clippers is highly more probable, than them becoming the new (old)Lakers (funny how the LA teams switched fortunes )

statistically yes, realistically no

most teams in the nba will never sniff contender status, the nba is top heavy. teams like the kings, hornets, nets, pistons will never contend with their current management

[tha_rock220]

I don't know that much about the CBA but

But Presti was having to operate under a tight salary cap, which is something Hinkie will not have to deal with. By the time Nerlens Noel, Joel Embiid, Dario Saric and others finish their rookie scale contracts, the salary cap will be well over $100 million — and teams will be able to carry at least three max players on their roster.

Isn't this kinda like saying "imagine how much more stuff everyone will be able to buy if we print enough money to give them all $1,000,000?"

The max is a percentage of the cap. If Philly offers one guy the current max for five years, they'll be able to get two more max contracts after the cap jump. Good luck finding that person though.

[James40]

It's amazing how 76er threads have a life of their own. Has there ever been a team that has such a poor record over a two-year period that is talked about as much? I admit that Hinkie's plan has caught and held my attention. If all of the "what if's" come up aces for the 76ers, it will be one nasty team to deal with for years.

Sixers fans can't even touch Flyers fans in this regard, "The Stepfords" 15 -20,000 wackos act like they won the cup 2 years ago, even though it's been what? 40 years. Snyder could tell them all to eat a **** sandwich, and they would.

[lordjeff05]

You're trying to argue logic with a guy who doesn't care about logical consistency. Would I trade Wiggins for Embiid and Saric? Of course not, I'm not trading a guy who has played for two guys who have yet to play in an NBA game. Would I trade KAT for Noel and Russell? Of course not, I'm not trading the guy who has never played in the NBA for one who has.

Also, we're too understand the Wolves "had pride" in that POS they put out last year (or the 10 years before that one)?

Man, for someone who didn't care to engage in the conversation you sure put a lot of time and effort...engaging in the conversation.

First of all the logical consistency argument is really bogus. The two different trade scenarios are only logically inconsistent if a) the reasons for not playing in the NBA are the same and b) of that is the only relevant factor in measuring trade value.

For instance, take Embiid vs. KAT. Under your analysis, these two should be the same because they "didn't play." Now, I know you don't actually believe that. Also, I'd bet that you don't really think I believe that either. One player was sidelined with a pretty major injury for the entire year, though he seems to be ready to go for next year. The other player just finished a very impressive college year where he was healthy and excelled. Neither played in the NBA last year but the difference reasons for that, age vs. injury, sure mean a whole lot right?

When did I ever make the premise that the entire value of a prospect is based on whether or not they've played. There's more to the value discussion than just whether or not they've played in the NBA yet. It's not just relevant that Wiggins played. It's relevant that he played, improved steadily throughout the year, and in a rookie of the year campaign averaged 20 points a game on 15 shots post all star break. Some people wanted to see a more all around game, but the pieces are there for him to be a superstar. Kevin Durant started with the same kind of single minded focus and has developed an all around game. You can say the same about Noel, actually. I just don't think you can say the same to the extent that he and DeAngelo Russell equal KAT as a pro prospect due to KAT's potential.

[ComeAtMeBro]

The short answer to your pretty long OP is:
No.

A longer answer: Dynasties often include the best player on the planet. Are the Sixers anywhere close to having a top 5 player on the planet or even the best player? No, they aren't.

Embiid will be dominant, and Russell will be top 10 player esque In his peak.

[Foye]

The short answer to your pretty long OP is:
No.

A longer answer: Dynasties often include the best player on the planet. Are the Sixers anywhere close to having a top 5 player on the planet or even the best player? No, they aren't.

Embiid will be dominant, and Russell will be top 10 player esque In his peak.

You can say that without either one ever playing in an actual NBA basketball game? I want your visionary skills.
Or can you at least tell me next weeks lotto numbers?

[TKainZero]

Philly should throw the max at young wing players.
Right?

Leonard
Butler

If they land a wing to go with the bigs and a guard this draft? Maybe get kj mcdaniels back?

[stopstandthere]

Fortune teller will let you know.

[Snotbubbles]

Let's say that it's true that the Sixers hit on every draft pick, the problem will come with affording them. One of the problems that comes with great success at the top of the draft, you have to pay everyone that second contract and we can see what happens when you don't (OKC). SO yeah, maybe Embidd/Noel/Saric/This guy this year/Some guy next year are all really good but that window isn't open for a decade, it's probably smaller and then you have the problem of having to make the right decision. And then get lucky.

New Orleans, SOLELY because they have Davis, is more likely to be a dynasty because dynasties in almost all cases have a top 3 (at worst) player on their team and Philly, even if guys max out, probably doesn't have that.

OKC could have kept Harden, they chose not to.

The Sixers don't really need to hit on one guy, Houston didn't draft their superstar, but what Houston did have were the assets to do a sign and trade with a team who didn't/wouldn't go in the luxury tax area. If the Sixers hit on every draft, they would most certainly be a dynasty. Deciding which superstar to keep should they all reach their potential would be such an awful problem to have.

One, the point about Harden is that it becomes hard for teams to justify giving out four or five max contracts so there becomes an issue when you say they're going to hit on all these contracts.

Two, Houston has won what, two playoff series in three years with Harden? Now they're a dynasty?

Three, name me a team that played in multiple conference finals (which is the baseline of a dynasty or any top team) that wasn't built around a top 3 player? The only one was Detroit and they did it against a heavily diluted NBA due to the HS rule and the fact that the best players in the league (KG, Duncan, Nash, Kobe, Shaq) spent the majority of that time in the West and once the East built themselves up with top 5 players (LeBron, Wade) all of the sudden, the Pistons stop winning.

1. I'm not saying the Sixers will hit on every pick, I said if they did, they'd be a dynasty. I never said they could keep 4 or 5 max contracts, but trying to decide which potential star to trade isn't a bad position to be in.

2. No one said Houston was a dynasty. Houston is a serious contender for a title though. They got their star players from trade and FA. Ergo, the Sixers don't need to draft a star to obtain one. Please follow along.

3. The Dallas Mavericks were consistently going on playoff runs. Dirk won an MVP award, but throughout his career, he wasn't considered a top 3 or even a top 5 player. He probably hovered around 10-12.

[Johnny Firpo]

Well, they do have the second best young roster in the NBA behind the Wolves with blue chip prospects. If anyone is going to have a dynasty, it will probably be one of those two teams.

[DanTown8587]

1. I'm not saying the Sixers will hit on every pick, I said if they did, they'd be a dynasty. I never said they could keep 4 or 5 max contracts, but trying to decide which potential star to trade isn't a bad position to be in.

This is the problem with Philly: Their two "oldest" players will be two way centers hopefully which means it's not hard to see those two, even if neither one is a top 20 player in this league, getting a max contract. Teams will have money to burn and teams will always have a need for young big men. I think Philly has done well for themselves but due to luck and lack of availability, they don't have that superstar talent that tanking is designed to give them. They have a lot of solid players on their team but who's their star among stars? I would almost argue that it really doesn't matter how good Noel, Embiid, Saric or any other future pick is, the guy they HAVE to hit on is the #3 pick in this draft and he has to be an efficient #1 option for them to compete down the line.

2. No one said Houston was a dynasty. Houston is a serious contender for a title though. They got their star players from trade and FA. Ergo, the Sixers don't need to draft a star to obtain one. Please follow along.

Houston was amazingly active in moving players and contracts to always ensure they had assets; it wasn't like they just drafted and held guys. Until I see Philly make a move to acquire talent at the cost of other talent, it's just hope that they have the right assets for a trade. And considering Philly is hopefully going to have four top five picks in four years on their roster, it's more likely someone picks off a player FROM Philly than Philly gets one. Because after all this losing, what established player wants to play on the Sixers? The Rockets were always trying to win.

3. The Dallas Mavericks were consistently going on playoff runs. Dirk won an MVP award, but throughout his career, he wasn't considered a top 3 or even a top 5 player. He probably hovered around 10-12.

The Mavericks Playoff History Under Dirk (since his second year in league)
Missed Playoffs - 1
Lost 1st Round - 7
Lost 2nd Round - 4
Lost WCF - 1
Lost NBA Finals - 1
Won NBA Finals - 1

If that's the "run" the Sixers go on, I think it's safe to say that's terribly disappointing considering how much losing they've endured for a chance to be great.

Just as an aside, a lot of teams have draft picks in the top 5/10 over multiple years and don't have the Thunder's luck when they do it and this has always been the problem with going through the draft: through no fault of your own, if the players aren't there, it doesn't matter.

[Prokorov]

im not convinced the sixers will even be a perrenial playoff team, let alone win a championship. I'm not really understanding their direction. They have been terrible for 3 straight years now. they traded the rookie of the year away and last year drafted 1 guy who still hasnt played a game and a guy overseas who we dont know when he will be back. this year they will be taking another rookie.

They dont have any veterans with winning expierence to help mentor these kids, and half of their young top picks have even seen much court time. it seems to me like they are 2 years away from being 2 years away from being a playoff team.

By the time saric is over or embiid becomes a top 20 player, will noel even still be on the team or would he look to sign for max dollar is like NY or LA or something? im not saying he walks but its a legitimate question. If they all star and embiid is a star are they able to bring in 1 or 2 other stars in their prime to help contend? i mean i think every philly fan would sign up now if embiid became anthony davis, and davis has been in the league and a star for a few years and isnt contending yet.

I think philly is going to need to get REALLY lucky. they need 2 of their young guys to become top10-20 players and get them all to stay and get a few guys in their prime to come to philly or trade for them and have them mesh together.

dynasty talk is crazy, championship talk seems a reach, and playoff talk seem premature.

lets see one of their guys become a top 20 player then think about thta other stuff

[sixerswillrule]

They have been terrible for 3 straight years now.

Two years.

Amazing how people keep thinking it's been longer.

[Prokorov]

They have been terrible for 3 straight years now.

Two years.

Amazing how people keep thinking it's been longer.

34-48 is a bad season... maybe not tanking terrible, but still bad.

either way 3 straight years not in the playoffs and maybe another 3-4 before they see it again. i just dont see the logic. its one thing to build through youth, but to build throug youth while trading the guys you drafted and taking guys who wont be ready for a few years i just dont see it being a sound model.

[snoopdogg88]

i would be very very surprised if we are still missing the playoffs for another 3-4 years.

I see one more playoff-less season in 2015-16, then we ramp it up for the 2016-17 season and push for a playoff run.

Having 4 1st round picks in the 2016 Draft and Saric possibly coming over will be the moment of truth. Hinkie will either be in a position to target a star with all his assets or go all in one way or another.

[psualltheway5]

They have been terrible for 3 straight years now.

Two years.

Amazing how people keep thinking it's been longer.

34-48 is a bad season... maybe not tanking terrible, but still bad.

either way 3 straight years not in the playoffs and maybe another 3-4 before they see it again. i just dont see the logic. its one thing to build through youth, but to build throug youth while trading the guys you drafted and taking guys who wont be ready for a few years i just dont see it being a sound model.

That was the year Bynum was hurt. So they really weren't terrible considering.

[sixerswillrule]

They have been terrible for 3 straight years now.

Two years.

Amazing how people keep thinking it's been longer.

34-48 is a bad season... maybe not tanking terrible, but still bad.

either way 3 straight years not in the playoffs and maybe another 3-4 before they see it again. i just dont see the logic. its one thing to build through youth, but to build throug youth while trading the guys you drafted and taking guys who wont be ready for a few years i just dont see it being a sound model.

The Sixers had an average of 37 wins between Iverson and Hinkie (06-07 to 12-13). That 34 win season was apart of that era. That season was BEFORE this entire plan started. We had Jrue Holiday, Evan Turner, Spencer Hawes, and Thaddeus Young then. Hinkie was hired in May 2013 and traded Jrue on draft night. That's when this all began.

Two years. It's been two years.

[wickedwrister]

They have been terrible for 3 straight years now.

Two years.

Amazing how people keep thinking it's been longer.

34-48 is a bad season... maybe not tanking terrible, but still bad.

either way 3 straight years not in the playoffs and maybe another 3-4 before they see it again. i just dont see the logic. its one thing to build through youth, but to build throug youth while trading the guys you drafted and taking guys who wont be ready for a few years i just dont see it being a sound model.

Slightly tangential but I think there is something important here. They blew up a capped out 34 win team, that's exactly what they were when Hinkie took the game. The logic is basically you can stick with that and win 30-40 games for the next few years or you can go a different way. People keep asking "what free agent is going to come to Philly with all the losing?" What free agent was going to come here to join Evan Turner and Spencer Hawes?

Free agents go where they can win, Philly hasn't won anything or been in a position to win anything for over a decade. In hockey no one cares that the Penguins tanked for their stars. Players aren't going to avoid Golden State because they tanked a few years ago to get Barnes, they care about the present not the past. The Spurs tanked like crazy to get Duncan yet no one is saying "I don't want to go to San Antonio because they created a culture of losing 20 years ago. Hell free agents still want to go play with Duncan who will be retired sooner than later.

If just one of the guys they got from tanking (Embiid or 2015 #3) turns out to be a star player then no player is going to care how the Sixers got them, just that they are there.

[KrazyP]

Tanking in order to build a "dynasty" through lottery picks is a fool's gamble that may or may not pay off. If it pays off, that said fool will appear as a genius even though they're just a fool that got lucky.

I present you with exhibit A.
-------------------------------------
1999 - #1 - Elton Brand
2000 - #4 - Marcus Fizer
2001 - #2 - Tyson Chandler
2001 - #4 - Eddy Curry
2002 - #1 - Jay Williams
2003 - #7 - Kirk Hinrich
2004 - #3 - Ben Gordon
2004 - #6 - Loul Deng
2006 - #4 - Tyrus Thomas
2007 - #9 - Joakim Noah
2008 - #1 - Derrick Rose

11 high lottery picks (3 of which were #1). How many championships have the Bulls won? Have they even reached that finals yet? Isn't it also ironic that their best current player is arguably Jimmy Butler who was drafted 30th overall?

I present you with exhibit B.
---------------------------------------
A fundamental piece of every dynasty is a generational talent.

NBA dynasties over the last 25 years.

Bulls - Michael Jordan
Spurs - Tim Duncan
Lakers - Shaq/Kobe

These types of players are available once every 10 yrs.....maybe every 5 yrs if you are lucky. Tanking does not guarantee you will get one of these guy regardless of how skilled your GM is at putting a losing team together.

The road to becoming a chmpionship team is a long difficult one with many random variables along the way that have to go in your favour. There are no guarantees regardless of what strategy you employ. Anybody who tries to tell you otherwise is a fool.