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

[Texas Chuck]

yeah bondom nailed it. You can't criticize the MCW pick and then criticize Philly for trading him at peak value.

[BullyKing]

I like how he slams Hinkie for not taking Giannis or Gobert when Ainge did the same exact thing. Difference is Ainge took Olynyk who could never fetch that Lakers pick.

[spearsy23]

yeah bondom nailed it. You can't criticize the MCW pick and then criticize Philly for trading him at peak value.

You can if he ends up with a worse player in the end. maybe you can't criticize the specific trade, but you can definitely criticize the gamblers philosophy. It's still too early to judge, but most GM's aren't given 5+ years to show improvement.

[BullyKing]

yeah bondom nailed it. You can't criticize the MCW pick and then criticize Philly for trading him at peak value.

You can if he ends up with a worse player in the end. maybe you can't criticize the specific trade, but you can definitely criticize the gamblers philosophy. It's still too early to judge, but most GM's aren't given 5+ years to show improvement.

I don't mean this to be accusatory but have you considered that they are simply measuring improvement by a metric other than just wins? As far as I can tell, wins is not how they're measuring improvement right now. Improvement is measured by whether the total team assets and outlook have improved from the prior year.

Certainly at some point, probably next year, wins will be the primary measure of improvement. Just don't think that's how they see it quite yet.

[HartfordWhalers]

I don't get the argument that look 2 picks out of the 49 after MCW played better than him so Hinkie failed.

Failed? Well the process is supposed to produce a certain outcome, and if that outcome doesn't come to pass at some point, is it ok to call it a failure? But it's only year 3. Way too early to conclude anything, right?

We *are* talking about rating the current progress though. And from the results so far, I would say Hinkie is a good drafter, but he doesn't significantly outperform his peers. Fair or not?

Not sure if you read my comment based upon your reply

There was a guy saying/implying Hinkie failed because Gobert and Giannis turned out better picks than MCW. Thats a ridiculous standard. Regardless of what you think of Hinkie's drafting, its an absurd standard and deserves to be pointed out its shallowness.

But in terms of how Hinkie has performed drafting, I would say he has outperformed.
Noel -- better than the 6th best guy drafted. Clearly.
MCW -- better than the 11th guy drafted. Clearly. And then traded for more.

Embiid -- a question mark, but worth the gamble.
Saric --Just voted best player not in the NBA. Better than the 12th pick in value.
KJ McDaniels -- better than the 32nd best guy drafted. Clearly.
Jerami Grant -- better than the 39nd best guy drafted. Clearly.

[spearsy23]

yeah bondom nailed it. You can't criticize the MCW pick and then criticize Philly for trading him at peak value.

You can if he ends up with a worse player in the end. maybe you can't criticize the specific trade, but you can definitely criticize the gamblers philosophy. It's still too early to judge, but most GM's aren't given 5+ years to show improvement.

I don't mean this to be accusatory but have you considered that they are simply measuring improvement by a metric other than just wins? As far as I can tell, wins is not how they're measuring improvement right now. Improvement is measured by whether the total team assets and outlook have improved from the prior year.

Certainly at some point, probably next year, wins will be the primary measure of improvement. Just don't think that's how they see it quite yet.

You can have all the 'assets' in the world and it makes no difference in the end. Assets are easy to squander.

[BullyKing]

You can if he ends up with a worse player in the end. maybe you can't criticize the specific trade, but you can definitely criticize the gamblers philosophy. It's still too early to judge, but most GM's aren't given 5+ years to show improvement.

I don't mean this to be accusatory but have you considered that they are simply measuring improvement by a metric other than just wins? As far as I can tell, wins is not how they're measuring improvement right now. Improvement is measured by whether the total team assets and outlook have improved from the prior year.

Certainly at some point, probably next year, wins will be the primary measure of improvement. Just don't think that's how they see it quite yet.

You can have all the 'assets' in the world and it makes no difference in the end. Assets are easy to squander.

I think the Thunder circa 2008 would disagree with that but it doesn't change the underlying point. Hinkie has shown improvement in the metric by which he is being judged right now.

[spearsy23]

I don't mean this to be accusatory but have you considered that they are simply measuring improvement by a metric other than just wins? As far as I can tell, wins is not how they're measuring improvement right now. Improvement is measured by whether the total team assets and outlook have improved from the prior year.

Certainly at some point, probably next year, wins will be the primary measure of improvement. Just don't think that's how they see it quite yet.

You can have all the 'assets' in the world and it makes no difference in the end. Assets are easy to squander.

I think the Thunder circa 2008 would disagree with that but it doesn't change the underlying point. Hinkie has shown improvement in the metric by which he is being judged right now.

he isn't being judged right now, or at least he shouldn't be. That's my point, he was given an amazing opportunity by the owner, basically he doesn't have to do **** but trade every positive he had for a future asset for a few years and if he loses he can't be judged for it. That's not a negative on him, it's simply the reality of the situation. Collecting assets ultimately means nothing until you do something with those assets. Ask Elgin Baylor, he collected high picks for his entire GM career and all it made him was a crap GM.

Sam Presti is he same way, he has an amazing draft record that 28 other teams would love to have, if he had missed on those picks then asset collecting would've gotten him canned and shoved out the door. Ultimately Hinkie will be judged on what he does with his assets, not how many he collected.

[Curmudgeon]

I like how he slams Hinkie for not taking Giannis or Gobert when Ainge did the same exact thing. Difference is Ainge took Olynyk who could never fetch that Lakers pick.

I have on numerous occasions slammed Ainge for not taking Giannis. Olynyk was a horrible pick given the alternatives. Plus, Ainge gave assets to move up for Olynyk. Even worse, both Ainge and his son Austin went to Greece to scout Giannis personally. It scares the hell out of me that neither one knew what he was looking at.

But we were discussing the Sixers, not the Celtics.

[Clyde Frazier]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/AdamReisinger/status/665755602975617024[/tweet]

[basketballwacko2]

I'm sure this has been discussed on this board before, but the below article got me thinking about it again:

http://www.si.com/thecauldron/2015/10/16/philadelphia-76ers-sam-hinkie-joel-embiid-brett-brown-process

I tend to agree that the article borders on "negative diatribe", but posting it anyway as a jumping off point for discussion.

What are your thoughts on hinkie's rebuild plan? I'll come back later with more to say, but I tend to call it an "extreme tanking rebuild", which I don't entirely agree with. My main feeling is that he's made moves that have hindered actual team building and development, and now we're going into year 3 without much of a team in place.

Basically, I have no problem with building through the draft and acquiring assets, but it's the "extreme" or "rigid" nature of which hinkie's doing it that I question. Thoughts? Please vote in the poll as well.

The Sixers have a lot of picks and some young players but it's got to be tough on Sixer fans to endure all these loses year after year. If they were my team I'd want to see them start winning some games soon or I'd get impatient.

[Patsfan1081]

I like how he slams Hinkie for not taking Giannis or Gobert when Ainge did the same exact thing. Difference is Ainge took Olynyk who could never fetch that Lakers pick.

MCW was picked earlier so that arguement doesn't really fly, but yeah. No one should slam a GM for passing on a gamble with a high upside.

[Patsfan1081]

The only grudge I have with the Sixers is they are doing a disearvice to Noel/Okafor in not sourounding them with the correct tools to improve their game. Look at Minny, KG is a great influence on KAT and Rubio is huge for Wiggings and KAT's developement. Sixers had all the ammo to go out and trade for a Tyrus Jones or even Cameron Payne, even if they didn't think they were the pg of the future. You don't have to bring in a player the calibure of KG, but not having one or two vets to teach the bigs the riggers of the nba will hurt them in the long run. I'm not saying to go waste money on a aging vet on his last leg, but even signing a guy that's been in the league three or four years that has gone against the leagues elite bigs.

[Foshan]

I'm sure this has been discussed on this board before, but the below article got me thinking about it again:

http://www.si.com/thecauldron/2015/10/16/philadelphia-76ers-sam-hinkie-joel-embiid-brett-brown-process

I tend to agree that the article borders on "negative diatribe", but posting it anyway as a jumping off point for discussion.

What are your thoughts on hinkie's rebuild plan? I'll come back later with more to say, but I tend to call it an "extreme tanking rebuild", which I don't entirely agree with. My main feeling is that he's made moves that have hindered actual team building and development, and now we're going into year 3 without much of a team in place.

Basically, I have no problem with building through the draft and acquiring assets, but it's the "extreme" or "rigid" nature of which hinkie's doing it that I question. Thoughts? Please vote in the poll as well.

The Sixers have a lot of picks and some young players but it's got to be tough on Sixer fans to endure all these loses year after year. If they were my team I'd want to see them start winning some games soon or I'd get impatient.

It is tough as a sixers fan. You will see quite a few tempers flare in our game threads... But most fans remember where we've been for the last 10+ years, and that is total middle of the road-suck. I can suffer through this year with the hope to not be in that put for the next decade.

[Patsfan1081]

If this is your opinion, you haven't seen him. They've been much worse since he got there. He still can't shoot or really do much of anything offensively. And they got a top 5 or so pick for him.

You are just making my point that MCW wasn't a good pick. As far as flipping him for Laker pick (which is top 3 protected for the next two years and in any event may not even be a top 10 pick if you believe what the Laker fans here are saying about the "new and improved" Lakers) Hinkie was just kicking the can down the road.

That's the problem with Hinkie's approach: the present sucks, the foreseeable future sucks, but at some mystical, magical point in the future the angel Gabriel will blow his trumpet and the team's resurrection will be at hand.

How many years before they win even 40 games? I'm guessing at least three.

So he made a pick that won ROY in a bad year, you criticized him for trading the player for value above what he should have fetched? You're reaching. And the goal is for them to not become what Boston looks like right now, a bunch of mediocre assets with no distinct plan or future. Yeah, maybe it takes a few years to get there, but its better than being stuck in the middle for the foreseeable future. As a fan of neither team and a team who's currently contending, I'd much rather be a Philly fan than Boston, or for that matter any east team outside Milwaukee, Cleveland, or maybe 2-3 others at most. Hinkie did what Ainge hasn't, traded assets at peak value.

How is Boston a team stuck in the middle? Sorry, it's just really difficult to take anyone serious when they use the arguement of Boston having no assets and being stuck as a treadmill team, especially after just recently gutting their team. The truth is GMrs attempt to compare their rebuilds to teams like Philly and Orlando when in fact most teams in the bottom of the east have been drafting in the lottery for years and have been in a sense rebuilding for a lot longer. Boston hasn't started reaping the benifits of trading away their best players yet you want to declare them middling assets befor the fact. Boston was one spot lower in attendance then the Thunder last year, a team filled with stars. We get to watch this team compete while being excited for the draft lottery, having tons of picks for the next couple years. The third youngest team in the league with the most first round picks in the next three years, that doesn't sound like the formula to a treadmill team. The Thunder losing Durant in free agency than finishing similar to how they did last season sounds more like a treadmill team to me.

[bondom34]

You are just making my point that MCW wasn't a good pick. As far as flipping him for Laker pick (which is top 3 protected for the next two years and in any event may not even be a top 10 pick if you believe what the Laker fans here are saying about the "new and improved" Lakers) Hinkie was just kicking the can down the road.

That's the problem with Hinkie's approach: the present sucks, the foreseeable future sucks, but at some mystical, magical point in the future the angel Gabriel will blow his trumpet and the team's resurrection will be at hand.

How many years before they win even 40 games? I'm guessing at least three.

So he made a pick that won ROY in a bad year, you criticized him for trading the player for value above what he should have fetched? You're reaching. And the goal is for them to not become what Boston looks like right now, a bunch of mediocre assets with no distinct plan or future. Yeah, maybe it takes a few years to get there, but its better than being stuck in the middle for the foreseeable future. As a fan of neither team and a team who's currently contending, I'd much rather be a Philly fan than Boston, or for that matter any east team outside Milwaukee, Cleveland, or maybe 2-3 others at most. Hinkie did what Ainge hasn't, traded assets at peak value.

How is Boston a team stuck in the middle? Sorry, it's just really difficult to take anyone serious when they use the arguement of Boston having no assets and being stuck as a treadmill team, especially after just recently gutting their team. The truth is GMrs attempt to compare their rebuilds to teams like Philly and Orlando when in fact most teams in the bottom of the east have been drafting in the lottery for years and have been in a sense rebuilding for a lot longer. Boston hasn't started reaping the benifits of trading away their best players yet you want to declare them middling assets befor the fact. Boston was one spot lower in attendance then the Thunder last year, a team filled with stars. We get to watch this team compete while being excited for the draft lottery having tons of picks for the next couple years. If the Thunder lose Durant next year I'd say they be in much more of a position to be a treadmill team.

Currently, they sort of are. Their entire chest of assets are middling picks depending on how bad BKN is. And the Thunder would still without Durant have 2 guys better than anyone on Boston. I never said Boston had no assets, I said mediocre. They don't have anyone on the roster w/ as much potential as Philly and about as many high end draft assets, probably less.

[Foshan]

The only grudge I have with the Sixers is they are doing a disearvice to Noel/Okafor in not sourounding them with the correct tools to improve their game. Look at Minny, KG is a great influence on KAT and Rubio is huge for Wiggings and KAT's developement. Sixers had all the ammo to go out and trade for a Tyrus Jones or even Cameron Payne, even if they didn't think they were the pg of the future. You don't have to bring in a player the calibure of KG, but not having one or two vets to teach the bigs the riggers of the nba will hurt them in the long run. I'm not saying to go waste money on a aging vet on his last leg, but even signing a guy that's been in the league three or four years that has gone against the leagues elite bigs.

I get that it would be nice to have better players now to put around Jah/Noel... But we just need a little more time. Min has a 10 year tanking head start on us, of course they should be in a better place than we are now.

While many sixers fans would have LOVED to make a move for Jones/Payne at the draft, I got to say I'm glad we didn't. Why waste assets for someone who isn't the long term guy? The guy we ended up with (TJ lolz) is way out playing the other two, and we did give money to a young vet in Marshall. Jimmie has to walk a very fine line in helping get Noel&Jah the ball, but not winning games with vets who will have no long term place aside from messing our pick up (we learned that lesson the hard way with Andre Miller way back )

I guess I say all that to say, it's just not as black and white as it seems. inthink it is funny people talk about about how a losing culture will get in... I think the Iggy years ingrained in Us a losing culture. We were never good enough to make noise in the playoffs and we kinda just got stuck in that rut. It was pseudo-winning, but if you never really have a chance to win what's the point?

[Patsfan1081]

So he made a pick that won ROY in a bad year, you criticized him for trading the player for value above what he should have fetched? You're reaching. And the goal is for them to not become what Boston looks like right now, a bunch of mediocre assets with no distinct plan or future. Yeah, maybe it takes a few years to get there, but its better than being stuck in the middle for the foreseeable future. As a fan of neither team and a team who's currently contending, I'd much rather be a Philly fan than Boston, or for that matter any east team outside Milwaukee, Cleveland, or maybe 2-3 others at most. Hinkie did what Ainge hasn't, traded assets at peak value.

How is Boston a team stuck in the middle? Sorry, it's just really difficult to take anyone serious when they use the arguement of Boston having no assets and being stuck as a treadmill team, especially after just recently gutting their team. The truth is GMrs attempt to compare their rebuilds to teams like Philly and Orlando when in fact most teams in the bottom of the east have been drafting in the lottery for years and have been in a sense rebuilding for a lot longer. Boston hasn't started reaping the benifits of trading away their best players yet you want to declare them middling assets befor the fact. Boston was one spot lower in attendance then the Thunder last year, a team filled with stars. We get to watch this team compete while being excited for the draft lottery having tons of picks for the next couple years. If the Thunder lose Durant next year I'd say they be in much more of a position to be a treadmill team.

Currently, they sort of are. Their entire chest of assets are middling picks depending on how bad BKN is. And the Thunder would still without Durant have 2 guys better than anyone on Boston. I never said Boston had no assets, I said mediocre. They don't have anyone on the roster w/ as much potential as Philly and about as many high end draft assets, probably less.

So you can see the future and where every pick will land? A lot can happen in the nba, this isn't mlb, a player like Noel isn't tide down for eight years and can leave in free agency. Predicting your team in five years is a pipe dream. Boston was the third youngest team going into last year, tied with Orlando, yet people's belief is that Orlando's young players will develope, while Bostons young players won't. Boston doesn't have a team journeymen, their players will build their value. You just can't dismantle a team and build it back up the in a year.People can agree and disagree with the value of an asset but I'm putting more stock on what the team puts out on the court today and more stock in what the management team has already accomplished. Hinke has done something anyone can do, I admit has made some good trades, but he hasn't put together a winning team.

[Patsfan1081]

The only grudge I have with the Sixers is they are doing a disearvice to Noel/Okafor in not sourounding them with the correct tools to improve their game. Look at Minny, KG is a great influence on KAT and Rubio is huge for Wiggings and KAT's developement. Sixers had all the ammo to go out and trade for a Tyrus Jones or even Cameron Payne, even if they didn't think they were the pg of the future. You don't have to bring in a player the calibure of KG, but not having one or two vets to teach the bigs the riggers of the nba will hurt them in the long run. I'm not saying to go waste money on a aging vet on his last leg, but even signing a guy that's been in the league three or four years that has gone against the leagues elite bigs.

I get that it would be nice to have better players now to put around Jah/Noel... But we just need a little more time. Min has a 10 year tanking head start on us, of course they should be in a better place than we are now.

While many sixers fans would have LOVED to make a move for Jones/Payne at the draft, I got to say I'm glad we didn't. Why waste assets for someone who isn't the long term guy? The guy we ended up with (TJ lolz) is way out playing the other two, and we did give money to a young vet in Marshall. Jimmie has to walk a very fine line in helping get Noel&Jah the ball, but not winning games with vets who will have no long term place aside from messing our pick up (we learned that lesson the hard way with Andre Miller way back )

I guess I say all that to say, it's just not as black and white as it seems. inthink it is funny people talk about about how a losing culture will get in... I think the Iggy years ingrained in Us a losing culture. We were never good enough to make noise in the playoffs and we kinda just got stuck in that rut. It was pseudo-winning, but if you never really have a chance to win what's the point?

I'm not saying these guys will be affected by losing, I just believe having someone like KG around KAT is a big advantage that Okafor doesn't have. I don't agree that trading for a guy like Payne would have been wasting an asset either. Even if you go out and draft a guy like Dunn next season you would have still built up a good asset in Payne or have what a lot of teams are missing, a good backup pg. Maybe TJ turns out to be a really good pg, the benifits of having a good distributer and defensive backcourt seem crucial in a big mans development. Sadly, even if TJ has a good season he would have the value of a pg drafted in the first round that had a decent rookie season also.

[bondom34]

How is Boston a team stuck in the middle? Sorry, it's just really difficult to take anyone serious when they use the arguement of Boston having no assets and being stuck as a treadmill team, especially after just recently gutting their team. The truth is GMrs attempt to compare their rebuilds to teams like Philly and Orlando when in fact most teams in the bottom of the east have been drafting in the lottery for years and have been in a sense rebuilding for a lot longer. Boston hasn't started reaping the benifits of trading away their best players yet you want to declare them middling assets befor the fact. Boston was one spot lower in attendance then the Thunder last year, a team filled with stars. We get to watch this team compete while being excited for the draft lottery having tons of picks for the next couple years. If the Thunder lose Durant next year I'd say they be in much more of a position to be a treadmill team.

Currently, they sort of are. Their entire chest of assets are middling picks depending on how bad BKN is. And the Thunder would still without Durant have 2 guys better than anyone on Boston. I never said Boston had no assets, I said mediocre. They don't have anyone on the roster w/ as much potential as Philly and about as many high end draft assets, probably less.

So you can see the future and where every pick will land? A lot can happen in the nba, this isn't mlb, a player like Noel isn't tide down for eight years and can leave in free agency. Predicting your team in five years is a pipe dream. Boston was the third youngest team going into last year, tied with Orlando, yet people's belief is that Orlando's young players will develope, while Bostons young players won't. Boston doesn't have a team journeymen, their players will build their value. You just can't dismantle a team and build it back up the in a year.People can agree and disagree with the value of an asset but I'm putting more stock on what the team puts out on the court today and more stock in what the management team has already accomplished. Hinke has done something anyone can do, I admit has made some good trades, but he hasn't put together a winning team.

I never said I could see the future, but the Nets pick looks awesome. Philly has the Lakers and Kings for like 3 years. I never mentioned Orlando (and like Boston's future over theirs). My issue w/ Boston is outside Smart, I don't see a high end young player on the roster (a guy who's a top 3 player on a true contender). They're entirely dependent right now on those Nets picks for that.

And I brought Boston in to the convo b/c I knew he's a Boston fan to relate to his team.