Do you agree with hinkie's rebuild plan for the sixers?

[nickhx2]

as a non 76er fan i love hinkie's plan.

i think it's the 100% rational thing to do in order to achieve a high level of competitiveness with the highest success rate possible. it is so difficult to get a superstar in this league, so making the best of the chances you have with the accumulation of high picks/players while minimizing controllable risk just seems like common sense.

[Crabman]

ch that year, but it was a non-existent pick).

-- The haul from moving down was:
Payton for
Saric
Orlando 2015 2nd
2017 Philly 1st (top 11 that year, top 8 the next year, if not 2 2nds).

Considering Philly was planning on taking Saric at 10 (Woj even reported the pick done), I think you absolutelyhave to call teh trade a massive win. Maybe the draft picks used is not, but the value from 10 to 12 was.

It really doesnt matter how he ranked both prospects, obviously, if he rated Saric higher than Payton than getting Saric and an asset is a better outcome than taking Saric at 10 but it still doesnt mean he made the most of the situation.

If Payton or anyone else drafted after Saric ends up being more valuable than Saric and the pick than it wasnt the best move he could have made, how he rated those prospects means nothing when determining how good that move was.

Also, there is no going rate for the value of moving up from 12 to 10, it all depends on whose available at each pick, sometimes it could be the difference between Austin Rivers and Jeremy Lamb and sometimes its difference between Paul George and Xavier Henry.

By your logic, if the Pacers rated Henry over PG and drafted PG only to trade him for Henry and another asset it would be a win since they rated Henry over George anyway.
Eventually the move will be judged by the value Hinikie got vs the value that was available to him with the #10 pick.

I get that the trade really offends some Orlando fans.

In terms of your comments:
1) Yes, if someone else turns out better then that better player would have been better. With 100% hindsight, you can do close to 100%. I'm really not sure how this is even a comment.
2) You can look at similar trades. Again, I'm not sure how you can say this straight faced.
3) If the Pacers were planning on taking Henry at 10, and instead got Henry and another asset then that is a win. Taking Henry might be a dumb idea to begin with -- the draft part -- but getting more assets to do so -- the trade portion -- is a great move. It shouldn't be that hard to separate the two things, although I understand some people approach it with considerable feelings.

Lol with the way hinkie is tanking, its most likely that the Magic would've never seen that first. I doubt Magic fans are riled up about losing 3 2nds when we have more than enough depth. Let's not forget that the Sixers are waiting 2-3 for Saric, and its possible when he does come over he skips the rookie contract. Let's see how Saric plays in the NBA, because Payton is a heck of a player with way more potential than Saric. He can do everything except shoot.

[Sixersftw]

Actually two other things I've been against: McDaniels trade and maybe not keeping Ish Smith considering they really didn't get anyone better.

I can't find the damn article but the Rumor was that Ish smith wanted an obscenely high contract. Hinkie made him an offer but due to his fantastic chemistry with NN he wanted real money and not Ish Smith money.

[CoreyGallagher]

Actually two other things I've been against: McDaniels trade and maybe not keeping Ish Smith considering they really didn't get anyone better.

I can't find the damn article but the Rumor was that Ish smith wanted an obscenely high contract. Hinkie made him an offer but due to his fantastic chemistry with NN he wanted real money and not Ish Smith money.

Is this the article you were referring to?

http://www.libertyballers.com/2015/5/5/8541741/sixers-tinder-is-ish-smith-a-long-term-fit

Seems he wanted guaranteed money and more than the NBA minimum which you can't blame him for, but would it have been worth re-signing him for that? He's a 26 year old would be back up, starting Canaan for some games is dreadful to watch, but it's only until either Marshall or Wroten return and then it's back to the bench for Cannan, or Ish if he had been re-signed. Then when the other PG of the aforementioned duo also gets healthy it's even further down the bench. Ish may not even make an NBA roster and he's got a connection here so he may eventually be back anyways.

[Sixersftw]

Actually two other things I've been against: McDaniels trade and maybe not keeping Ish Smith considering they really didn't get anyone better.

I can't find the damn article but the Rumor was that Ish smith wanted an obscenely high contract. Hinkie made him an offer but due to his fantastic chemistry with NN he wanted real money and not Ish Smith money.

Is this the article you were referring to?

http://www.libertyballers.com/2015/5/5/8541741/sixers-tinder-is-ish-smith-a-long-term-fit

Seems he wanted guaranteed money and more than the NBA minimum which you can't blame him for, but would it have been worth it re-signing him for that? He's a 26 year old would be back up, starting Canaan for some games is dreadful to watch, but it's only until either Marshall or Wroten return and then it's back to the bench for Cannan, or Ish if he had been re-signed. Then when the other of the PG duo gets healthy it's even further down the bench. Ish may not even make an NBA roster and he's got a connection here so he may eventually be back anyways.

Naw, it might have been a tweet but it was clearly too high. I don't blame him for trying to get himself more money but there is no way he should be signed for anything above the minimum imo.

[j_n]

In terms of your comments:
1) Yes, if someone else turns out better then that better player would have been better. With 100% hindsight, you can do close to 100%. I'm really not sure how this is even a comment.
2) You can look at similar trades. Again, I'm not sure how you can say this straight faced.
3) If the Pacers were planning on taking Henry at 10, and instead got Henry and another asset then that is a win. Taking Henry might be a dumb idea to begin with -- the draft part -- but getting more assets to do so -- the trade portion -- is a great move. It shouldn't be that hard to separate the two things, although I understand some people approach it with considerable feelings.

1. Obviously there is no certainty, being a good GM is about evaluating talent and trying to quantify it in terms of value.

2. You cant, the circumstances are always different, the #1 pick in the 2003 draft would doesnt have the same value of the #1 pick in the 2006 draft, are you telling me that in a draft with 60 all star caliber prospect the value of the 60th pick would a protected 2nd rounder or cash?
Orlando didnt trade for the #10 pick, they traded for Elfrid Payton.

3. But the only reason that the Grizzlies would agree to the trade is because they value PG equal to or more than they value Henry + asset.
Its basically like offering your 10,000 dollar car for 5,000 and right before you close the sale you negotiate and get 500 dollar bike, yeah, negotiating for the bike was a win and its certainly an improvement from your prior situation but its still a net loss, and the only reason you were able to negotiate for the extra bike is because you undervalued your car and they buyer knew that.

[HartfordWhalers]

In terms of your comments:
1) Yes, if someone else turns out better then that better player would have been better. With 100% hindsight, you can do close to 100%. I'm really not sure how this is even a comment.
2) You can look at similar trades. Again, I'm not sure how you can say this straight faced.
3) If the Pacers were planning on taking Henry at 10, and instead got Henry and another asset then that is a win. Taking Henry might be a dumb idea to begin with -- the draft part -- but getting more assets to do so -- the trade portion -- is a great move. It shouldn't be that hard to separate the two things, although I understand some people approach it with considerable feelings.

1. Obviously there is no certainty, being a good GM is about evaluating talent and trying to quantify it in terms of value.

2. You cant, the circumstances are always different, the #1 pick in the 2003 draft would doesnt have the same value of the #1 pick in the 2006 draft, are you telling me that in a draft with 60 all star caliber prospect the value of the 60th pick would a protected 2nd rounder or cash?
Orlando didnt trade for the #10 pick, they traded for Elfrid Payton.

3. But the only reason that the Grizzlies would agree to the trade is because they value PG equal to or more than they value Henry + asset.
Its basically like offering your 10,000 dollar car for 5,000 and right before you close the sale you negotiate and get 500 dollar bike, yeah, negotiating for the bike was a win and its certainly an improvement from your prior situation but its still a net loss, and the only reason you were able to negotiate for the extra bike is because you undervalued your car and they buyer knew that.

I forget the depths some people go to.

The 10th pick in an average draft isn't remotely like comparing the difference between Lebron and Bargs. This comparison is cartoon-esque, and yet you are posting it pretending to be serious.

If you want a car metaphor here is one that actually fits:
The sixers were buying a car for 10,000. It was the car they wanted. But instead, they got a free washing machine, drier, and a nav pakage thrown in. And the car they wanted all along. All for the 10,000 the car was going to cost them, because they did that deal.

You can argue they were picking the wrong car from the get go, but getting a lot extra free with the car is clearly a good deal versus just the car.

[I doubt Magic fans are riled up about losing 3 2nds when we have more than enough depth.

Feel free to post a "best offer for 2018 Philly top 8 protected, if not 2 2nds". I'm going on a limb and saying thats worth more than 2 2nds, so obviously you are misstating the value.

In terms of finding a Magic fan riled up, well, this thread has at least one...

[mksp]

I'm on board with the plan, for the record.

As always, my simple question for detractors is, what would you have done differently?

The Embiid pick was a risk, but whom would you have drafted instead? It was bad luck that PHI wasn't in position to draft Andrew Wiggins.

Should Hinkie have taken Mudiay instead of Okafor (I would have been happy if he did!)? Maybe? Time will tell. It's hard to argue against the pick though.

In a vacuum, the MCW trade was great value. As was the Noel trade. And the Saric trade. And the Stauskas trade.

If the lottery balls played out a little bit differently, Hinkie is running out a starting-5 with Andrew Wiggins, Nerlens Noel and KAT , and everybody is happy.

Everyone seems to love the Orlando rebuild, because it's been decidedly linear (SG? Oladipo, check. C? Vucevic, check. PF? Aaron Gordon, check. PG? Payton, check), and they're young, and vaguely "fun." But Philly's rebuild hasn't played out that way. Orlando was also starting from a better position (with the Howard trade), and is a year ahead.

Things don't always play out perfectly.

Hinkie has done well, with the way the various situations and decisions have expressed themselves (as Chip Kelly would say).

[Crabman]

In terms of your comments:
1) Yes, if someone else turns out better then that better player would have been better. With 100% hindsight, you can do close to 100%. I'm really not sure how this is even a comment.
2) You can look at similar trades. Again, I'm not sure how you can say this straight faced.
3) If the Pacers were planning on taking Henry at 10, and instead got Henry and another asset then that is a win. Taking Henry might be a dumb idea to begin with -- the draft part -- but getting more assets to do so -- the trade portion -- is a great move. It shouldn't be that hard to separate the two things, although I understand some people approach it with considerable feelings.

1. Obviously there is no certainty, being a good GM is about evaluating talent and trying to quantify it in terms of value.

2. You cant, the circumstances are always different, the #1 pick in the 2003 draft would doesnt have the same value of the #1 pick in the 2006 draft, are you telling me that in a draft with 60 all star caliber prospect the value of the 60th pick would a protected 2nd rounder or cash?
Orlando didnt trade for the #10 pick, they traded for Elfrid Payton.

3. But the only reason that the Grizzlies would agree to the trade is because they value PG equal to or more than they value Henry + asset.
Its basically like offering your 10,000 dollar car for 5,000 and right before you close the sale you negotiate and get 500 dollar bike, yeah, negotiating for the bike was a win and its certainly an improvement from your prior situation but its still a net loss, and the only reason you were able to negotiate for the extra bike is because you undervalued your car and they buyer knew that.

I forget the depths some people go to.

The 10th pick in an average draft isn't remotely like comparing the difference between Lebron and Bargs. This comparison is cartoon-esque, and yet you are posting it pretending to be serious.

If you want a car metaphor here is one that actually fits:
The sixers were buying a car for 10,000. It was the car they wanted. But instead, they got a free washing machine, drier, and a nav pakage thrown in. And the car they wanted all along. All for the 10,000 the car was going to cost them, because they did that deal.

You can argue they were picking the wrong car from the get go, but getting a lot extra free with the car is clearly a good deal versus just the car.

[I doubt Magic fans are riled up about losing 3 2nds when we have more than enough depth.

Feel free to post a "best offer for 2018 Philly top 8 protected, if not 2 2nds". I'm going on a limb and saying thats worth more than 2 2nds, so obviously you are misstating the value.

In terms of finding a Magic fan riled up, well, this thread has at least one...

I remember it was top 12 protected (as reported by Robbins from OS)? Anyway, its likely Hinkie would've made extra moves to tank that year and keep the pick anyway. The other magic fan made a good point though, we didn't exactly trade the 12th pick for the 10th. We traded a guy that we have to wait for two or three years to sign, for the best PG in the draft.

[HartfordWhalers]

1. Obviously there is no certainty, being a good GM is about evaluating talent and trying to quantify it in terms of value.

2. You cant, the circumstances are always different, the #1 pick in the 2003 draft would doesnt have the same value of the #1 pick in the 2006 draft, are you telling me that in a draft with 60 all star caliber prospect the value of the 60th pick would a protected 2nd rounder or cash?
Orlando didnt trade for the #10 pick, they traded for Elfrid Payton.

3. But the only reason that the Grizzlies would agree to the trade is because they value PG equal to or more than they value Henry + asset.
Its basically like offering your 10,000 dollar car for 5,000 and right before you close the sale you negotiate and get 500 dollar bike, yeah, negotiating for the bike was a win and its certainly an improvement from your prior situation but its still a net loss, and the only reason you were able to negotiate for the extra bike is because you undervalued your car and they buyer knew that.

I forget the depths some people go to.

The 10th pick in an average draft isn't remotely like comparing the difference between Lebron and Bargs. This comparison is cartoon-esque, and yet you are posting it pretending to be serious.

If you want a car metaphor here is one that actually fits:
The sixers were buying a car for 10,000. It was the car they wanted. But instead, they got a free washing machine, drier, and a nav pakage thrown in. And the car they wanted all along. All for the 10,000 the car was going to cost them, because they did that deal.

You can argue they were picking the wrong car from the get go, but getting a lot extra free with the car is clearly a good deal versus just the car.

[I doubt Magic fans are riled up about losing 3 2nds when we have more than enough depth.

Feel free to post a "best offer for 2018 Philly top 8 protected, if not 2 2nds". I'm going on a limb and saying thats worth more than 2 2nds, so obviously you are misstating the value.

In terms of finding a Magic fan riled up, well, this thread has at least one...

I remember it was top 12 protected (as reported by Robbins from OS)? Anyway, its likely Hinkie would've made extra moves to tank that year and keep the pick anyway. The other magic fan made a good point though, we didn't exactly trade the 12th pick for the 10th. We traded a guy that we have to wait for two or three years to sign, for the best PG in the draft.

Top 11 in 2017, top 8 in 2018. {I really don't see Philly still bottom 8 in 2018, 3 drafts from now but thats another debate...}

I'm fine with Orlando fans saying it was worth it for the team to move up because otherwise Payton isn't there. It can be a win win. But Philly was taking Saric anyway, and the idea that adding that conditional 1st, a high 2nd (turned out 35) and still getting the guy you were all set on isn't a great deal is baffling.

[the_process]

I get that the trade really offends some Orlando fans.

In terms of your comments:
1) Yes, if someone else turns out better then that better player would have been better. With 100% hindsight, you can do close to 100%. I'm really not sure how this is even a comment.
2) You can look at similar trades. Again, I'm not sure how you can say this straight faced.
3) If the Pacers were planning on taking Henry at 10, and instead got Henry and another asset then that is a win. Taking Henry might be a dumb idea to begin with -- the draft part -- but getting more assets to do so -- the trade portion -- is a great move. It shouldn't be that hard to separate the two things, although I understand some people approach it with considerable feelings.

Lol with the way hinkie is tanking, its most likely that the Magic would've never seen that first. I doubt Magic fans are riled up about losing 3 2nds when we have more than enough depth. Let's not forget that the Sixers are waiting 2-3 for Saric, and its possible when he does come over he skips the rookie contract. Let's see how Saric plays in the NBA, because Payton is a heck of a player with way more potential than Saric. He can do everything except shoot.

The pick was top 11 protected 2017, top 8 protected 2018, then 2 2nds. Most likely Orlando would've gotten the pick. It was a valuable pick to have.

[Crabman]

I forget the depths some people go to.

The 10th pick in an average draft isn't remotely like comparing the difference between Lebron and Bargs. This comparison is cartoon-esque, and yet you are posting it pretending to be serious.

If you want a car metaphor here is one that actually fits:
The sixers were buying a car for 10,000. It was the car they wanted. But instead, they got a free washing machine, drier, and a nav pakage thrown in. And the car they wanted all along. All for the 10,000 the car was going to cost them, because they did that deal.

You can argue they were picking the wrong car from the get go, but getting a lot extra free with the car is clearly a good deal versus just the car.



Feel free to post a "best offer for 2018 Philly top 8 protected, if not 2 2nds". I'm going on a limb and saying thats worth more than 2 2nds, so obviously you are misstating the value.

In terms of finding a Magic fan riled up, well, this thread has at least one...

I remember it was top 12 protected (as reported by Robbins from OS)? Anyway, its likely Hinkie would've made extra moves to tank that year and keep the pick anyway. The other magic fan made a good point though, we didn't exactly trade the 12th pick for the 10th. We traded a guy that we have to wait for two or three years to sign, for the best PG in the draft.

Top 11 in 2017, top 8 in 2018.

I'm fine with Orlando fans saying it was worth it for the team to move up because otherwise Payton isn't there. It can be a win win. But Philly was taking Saric anyway, and the idea that adding that conditional 1st, a high 2nd (turned out 35) and still getting the guy you were all set on isn't a great deal is baffling.

Like I said OS reported it lotto protected in 2017, top 12 in 2018. I never said it wasn't a good deal of Philly, but lets not act like it was a rip off for the Magic like some people claim. Its very likely that the Sixers liked Payton as well. Hinkie even sang his praises after the draft. It was an option that they keep him and trade MCW (which happened a couple months later) because it was an option for the Magic to refuse the deal. We don't know how much they preferred Saric over Payton (or if they even did). When you say they wanted Saric, it seems like you're implying they didn't really want Payton on their team. My point is we dont know that for sure. He might've been fine with either.

[Crabman]

Nvmind I guess I misread the OS report.

[HartfordWhalers]

I remember it was top 12 protected (as reported by Robbins from OS)? Anyway, its likely Hinkie would've made extra moves to tank that year and keep the pick anyway. The other magic fan made a good point though, we didn't exactly trade the 12th pick for the 10th. We traded a guy that we have to wait for two or three years to sign, for the best PG in the draft.

Top 11 in 2017, top 8 in 2018.

I'm fine with Orlando fans saying it was worth it for the team to move up because otherwise Payton isn't there. It can be a win win. But Philly was taking Saric anyway, and the idea that adding that conditional 1st, a high 2nd (turned out 35) and still getting the guy you were all set on isn't a great deal is baffling.

Like I said OS reported it lotto protected in 2017, top 12 in 2018. I never said it wasn't a good deal of Philly, but lets not act like it was a rip off for the Magic like some people claim. Its very likely that the Sixers liked Payton as well. Hinkie even sang his praises after the draft. It was an option that they keep him and trade MCW (which happened a couple months later) because it was an option for the Magic to refuse the deal. We don't know how much they preferred Saric over Payton (or if they even did). When you say they wanted Saric, it seems like you're implying they didn't really want Payton on their team. My point is we dont know that for sure. He might've been fine with either.

But the thing is, you are just factually wrong.

Edit: Looks like you found it.

And yes, unless WOJ and everyone else is wrong, the Sixers did prefer Saric. Personally, I'm going to trust them.

[Clyde Frazier]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/executives/hinkisa99x.html

Ok, so as i said earlier in the thread, I have no problem with a full blowup rebuild through the draft as well as acquiring assets. As a knicks fan, this is something we were clamoring for since the ewing trade, and it really never happened. We've at least half done that now with drafting porzingis and grant as well as bringing in other young talent on the roster.

Anyway, my issue with hinkie is his extreme "best player available" plan when it comes to the draft. I think he's intentionally drafting players he knows won't play the following season to continue to increase the sixers' draft position each year. He's now done it with 3 players in noel, embiid and saric. This blatantly goes against team building in my opinion. You have a coach in brett brown who's specifically known for developing young talent, and in the process you aren't building a team.

I understand that brown is all in, and he has job security, but i have to think his patience is starting to wane with all the losing. Not to mention when he sees young guys get traded after putting in all the work on developing them (he was pretty vocal about this when they traded brandon davies). Going into year 3, you have 2 legit pieces in noel and okafor, and a bunch of spare parts (i'm actually a big fan of wroten and canaan, but they both have holes in their games). Building chemistry matters, and the sixers aren't close to that yet.

Then you look at their current injuries, and a weak roster becomes even weaker:

http://www.foxsports.com/nba/philadelphia-76ers-team-injuries

I wasn't in love with the noel deal (or embiid pick) solely for this reason. Holiday was a legit 2 way PG with size that I wouldn't have given up on. Obviously he's had serious injuries since then, so i'm not clinging to that as much. I feel like hinkie is going all out with risk here. He may never hit the home run.

Agree with the sentiments that i'd rather be the magic now than the sixers. Celtics have to try to make some moves or they may end up being a treadmill team. We'll see what happens.

[Crabman]

Top 11 in 2017, top 8 in 2018.

I'm fine with Orlando fans saying it was worth it for the team to move up because otherwise Payton isn't there. It can be a win win. But Philly was taking Saric anyway, and the idea that adding that conditional 1st, a high 2nd (turned out 35) and still getting the guy you were all set on isn't a great deal is baffling.

Like I said OS reported it lotto protected in 2017, top 12 in 2018. I never said it wasn't a good deal of Philly, but lets not act like it was a rip off for the Magic like some people claim. Its very likely that the Sixers liked Payton as well. Hinkie even sang his praises after the draft. It was an option that they keep him and trade MCW (which happened a couple months later) because it was an option for the Magic to refuse the deal. We don't know how much they preferred Saric over Payton (or if they even did). When you say they wanted Saric, it seems like you're implying they didn't really want Payton on their team. My point is we dont know that for sure. He might've been fine with either.

But the thing is, you are just factually wrong.

Edit: Looks like you found it.

And yes, unless WOJ and everyone else is wrong, the Sixers did prefer Saric. Personally, I'm going to trust them.

So what about the fact that Chicago could've picked Saric? Or that the Magic could've kept him? If the Sixers loved him so much over Payton they wouldn't have taken the gamble. They would've just picked Saric. You don't pass up on your guy, and that's exactly what Hennigan did when he traded for Payton. Its not like I'm making this up, Saric could've been unattainable to the sixers, and Hinkie said in his post draft interview that he liked Payton.

[HartfordWhalers]

Like I said OS reported it lotto protected in 2017, top 12 in 2018. I never said it wasn't a good deal of Philly, but lets not act like it was a rip off for the Magic like some people claim. Its very likely that the Sixers liked Payton as well. Hinkie even sang his praises after the draft. It was an option that they keep him and trade MCW (which happened a couple months later) because it was an option for the Magic to refuse the deal. We don't know how much they preferred Saric over Payton (or if they even did). When you say they wanted Saric, it seems like you're implying they didn't really want Payton on their team. My point is we dont know that for sure. He might've been fine with either.

But the thing is, you are just factually wrong.

Edit: Looks like you found it.

And yes, unless WOJ and everyone else is wrong, the Sixers did prefer Saric. Personally, I'm going to trust them.

So what about the fact that Chicago could've picked Saric? Or that the Magic could've kept him? If the Sixers loved him so much over Payton they wouldn't have taken the gamble. They would've just picked Saric. You don't pass up on your guy, and that's exactly what Hennigan did when he traded for Payton. Its not like I'm making this up, Saric could've been unattainable to the sixers, and Hinkie said in his post draft interview that he liked Payton.

It is hilarious that your are trying to cite Hinkie, when Hinkie confirmed that they took Payton to hold Orlando hostage. This is comical.

There was a risk that Chicago messed up the deal, or that Orlando wasn't all in on Payton as the Sixers intel said they were. Still Hinkie took the gamble, and was rewarded.

[j_n]

I forget the depths some people go to.

The 10th pick in an average draft isn't remotely like comparing the difference between Lebron and Bargs. This comparison is cartoon-esque, and yet you are posting it pretending to be serious.

Im not saying that he is or that he isnt, for all we know Payton could be out of the league while Saric an the pick become superstars. the point is that not all draft picks have the same value, the highest value of a draft pick is the best player available to use it on, of course you also have to consider contracts and all but there is no going rate for any specific pick, the value is always determined by whose available.

If you want a car metaphor here is one that actually fits:
The sixers were buying a car for 10,000. It was the car they wanted. But instead, they got a free washing machine, drier, and a nav pakage thrown in. And the car they wanted all along. All for the 10,000 the car was going to cost them, because they did that deal.

Im not arguing with the notion that Hinkie improved his situation, my point is that getting a better deal than the one you originaly wanted to make doesnt mean it was a good deal.

You can argue they were picking the wrong car from the get go, but getting a lot extra free with the car is clearly a good deal versus just the car.

I agree, by making the deal Hinkie clearly improved his situation but unless the player he wanted all along + the assets he got ends up being worth more than the one he passed on, you cant really say he made a good deal or that he won the trade.

[HartfordWhalers]

So, by your methodology no trade can be measured as good or bad until long after everything (including the random stuff) happens after.

That also strikes me as meaningless.

Sixers got the prospect they wanted, and a prospect viewed as at least as good if not better by most experts, along with other assets.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140607112021/http://www.draftexpress.com/rankings/Top-100-Prospects/
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2014/insider/story/_/id/11069368/nba-draft-2014-ranking-prospects-tiers

Seems a pretty clear win to me.

[pacers33granger]

It seems the biggest thing that has turned certain people off with Hinkie's plan is trading guys for future assets. But wouldn't you want your team to trade guys who aren't in future plans when they're value is high and as soon as you figure that out? There was no point in keeping MCW if you could get a valuable first for him and you don't really want to pay him past his rookie deal. Any time they kept him longer his value almost assuredly goes down.

Those future assets will get them keepers, either through the draft or trades. One issue contenders run into is having few assets to add the pieces to their team to put them over the top. If things work out for the Sixers in the next two years, they could have only Noel to pay among their young guys, somewhere around 40 mil in cap space (possibly), all their own future picks, and at least 1 future first from Sacramento and 10 future 2nds to trade (plus a bunch of cheap young guys still). And who knows what Hinkie will add to those assets between now and then.

This process was always going to take awhile, but really it's starting to take shape. I expect most to start believing in it once they get a top level guard prospect or two. They just haven't been in the right position to grab one yet.