Looks like the Embiid/Okafor tandem has mercifully been put to rest

[hookshot199]

I think the trial pairing was a way to avoid criticism from the people who would say "they should have tried Embiid and Okafor together!" before trading Okafor.

Now you know Okafor makes Embiid worse so you get rid of him.

Exactly.

Three weeks ago a vocal portion of the fanbase and a number of writers were screaming they had to try it. "It's coaching malpractice if you don't put your two 'best' players on the court together." Only took 2-3 games to show everyone it didn't work. They tried it for 6 games, and made even the biggest proponents beg for it to stop.

The front office and the coach knew this was nonsense. But they had to do it, because they would never hear the end of it, if they decided to ship Okafor out of here before ever trying it. They did the smart thing. They did it and got it out of the way before it could effect Ben Simmons' debut. Now that everyone is clear that Okafor has to be a backup they can trade him if they please, without backlash.

I said it was "coaching malpractice" not to try out both pairings - Okafor and Embiid and Noel and Embiid. I never would have said that Okafor was our second best player. Did you cherry-pick my comments?

[hookshot199]

To be honest I'm surprised that this got so much opposition. We are still in a time, where we can experiment, where wins are not a priority, if it can reap potentially benefits for the future (it would have been a lot harder to do the same next year, if it had potential). I do understand the opposition if it comes at the expense of player development and frustration to them and for hating Okafor.

Spoiler:

For a very liberal strategy of building a team, the team and the forum have been strikingly conservative (Hinkie said the same thing, that he considers himself relatively conservative in terms of risks). It's as if we are afraid to experiment and be patient for a second longer than necessary. Sports does not always follow logic, while the first 10 times you try, it might look terrible and in terms of production the expected linear progress is non-existant, but if at one point there is a game or two that the experiment succeeds, the growth can become exponential (in terms of player development and chemistry). It's not like Okafor lacks talent, it's the matter of fit and Okafor using the talent in an efficient manner. Positionless basketball worked only in theory until Spoelstra made it function (of course you need the right components). Twin towers doesn't seem like a modern and efficient way of playing basketball, but instead of trying and figuring out how it could potentially work and what needs to be done, we want to abandon it as soon as it looks terrible.

Call me a stubborn or in denial, but I hardly think 6 games proves that Okafor / Embiid can't work. So will the Simmons at PG people give up if he's bad at that after 6 games? what if he struggles at SF after 6 games... or PF?

These guys didn't have training camp to work together and Brown has done an incredibly poor job executing their pairing. In fact, Brown is probably the reason Noel-Embiid won't be very effective either if he keeps Embiid at the PF position when playing with another big. Sad. I've been a big Brown supporter, but I'm quickly loosing faith.

I'm not going to argue playing Okafor-Embiid together, i recognize its not ideal. But its incredibly poor execution will leave me wondering if it could have been more effective, with I don't know... an actual plan.

I'd rather call you smart and not short-sighted. As for trading Okafor, there's no logic to do it at the trade deadline. Wait for June and wait for a new coach. It would be stupid to make any sort of personnel move the new coach is onboard.

[TeamHigh]

I think the trial pairing was a way to avoid criticism from the people who would say "they should have tried Embiid and Okafor together!" before trading Okafor.

Now you know Okafor makes Embiid worse so you get rid of him.

Exactly.

Three weeks ago a vocal portion of the fanbase and a number of writers were screaming they had to try it. "It's coaching malpractice if you don't put your two 'best' players on the court together." Only took 2-3 games to show everyone it didn't work. They tried it for 6 games, and made even the biggest proponents beg for it to stop.

The front office and the coach knew this was nonsense. But they had to do it, because they would never hear the end of it, if they decided to ship Okafor out of here before ever trying it. They did the smart thing. They did it and got it out of the way before it could effect Ben Simmons' debut. Now that everyone is clear that Okafor has to be a backup they can trade him if they please, without backlash.

I said it was "coaching malpractice" not to try out both pairings - Okafor and Embiid and Noel and Embiid. I never would have said that Okafor was our second best player. Did you cherry-pick my comments?

Are you "a vocal portion of the fanbase and a number of writers"? Pretty sure you're just a single data point.

[hookshot199]

Exactly.

Three weeks ago a vocal portion of the fanbase and a number of writers were screaming they had to try it. "It's coaching malpractice if you don't put your two 'best' players on the court together." Only took 2-3 games to show everyone it didn't work. They tried it for 6 games, and made even the biggest proponents beg for it to stop.

The front office and the coach knew this was nonsense. But they had to do it, because they would never hear the end of it, if they decided to ship Okafor out of here before ever trying it. They did the smart thing. They did it and got it out of the way before it could effect Ben Simmons' debut. Now that everyone is clear that Okafor has to be a backup they can trade him if they please, without backlash.

I said it was "coaching malpractice" not to try out both pairings - Okafor and Embiid and Noel and Embiid. I never would have said that Okafor was our second best player. Did you cherry-pick my comments?

Are you "a vocal portion of the fanbase and a number of writers"? Pretty sure you're just a single data point.

I don't get your point. I've concluded a long time ago that Noel is a superior player to Okafor because I believe in defense. I was delighted when Embiid spoke out in support of his "best friend." There is no choice but to trade Okafor (and not Noel) if you want to have any sort of defensive identity. The question is when and how - and for what.

And I really get irritated when people raise D'Angelo Russell in this discussion. Both Russell and Okafor will find their places in the NBA. Neither will be a star. Neither is sufficiently athletic.

But I still don't know what you're alluding to. I am vocal. Yes. I am not stupid. You don't let Brown have a say in this debate any longer. He's a dead man walking. Sort it out in April and May when the new coach is on board. There are very few centers in the draft, none in the top 10. You don't shoot yourself in the you-know-what to make a point that Hinkie made a substandard pick.

[LloydFree]

I think the trial pairing was a way to avoid criticism from the people who would say "they should have tried Embiid and Okafor together!" before trading Okafor.

Now you know Okafor makes Embiid worse so you get rid of him.

Exactly.

Three weeks ago a vocal portion of the fanbase and a number of writers were screaming they had to try it. "It's coaching malpractice if you don't put your two 'best' players on the court together." Only took 2-3 games to show everyone it didn't work. They tried it for 6 games, and made even the biggest proponents beg for it to stop.

The front office and the coach knew this was nonsense. But they had to do it, because they would never hear the end of it, if they decided to ship Okafor out of here before ever trying it. They did the smart thing. They did it and got it out of the way before it could effect Ben Simmons' debut. Now that everyone is clear that Okafor has to be a backup they can trade him if they please, without backlash.

I said it was "coaching malpractice" not to try out both pairings - Okafor and Embiid and Noel and Embiid. I never would have said that Okafor was our second best player. Did you cherry-pick my comments?

Man, get over yourself. Your not the only guy that kept parroting that "Malpractice" line. Your posts rarely register in my mind. You don't even post that often. If I meant you, I would have no problem quoting your direct post. You aren't the only guy here, who doesn't know what he's talking about.

[hookshot199]

Exactly.

Three weeks ago a vocal portion of the fanbase and a number of writers were screaming they had to try it. "It's coaching malpractice if you don't put your two 'best' players on the court together." Only took 2-3 games to show everyone it didn't work. They tried it for 6 games, and made even the biggest proponents beg for it to stop.

The front office and the coach knew this was nonsense. But they had to do it, because they would never hear the end of it, if they decided to ship Okafor out of here before ever trying it. They did the smart thing. They did it and got it out of the way before it could effect Ben Simmons' debut. Now that everyone is clear that Okafor has to be a backup they can trade him if they please, without backlash.

I said it was "coaching malpractice" not to try out both pairings - Okafor and Embiid and Noel and Embiid. I never would have said that Okafor was our second best player. Did you cherry-pick my comments?

Man, get over yourself. Your not the only guy that kept parroting that "Malpractice" line. Your posts rarely register in my mind. You don't even post that often. If I meant you, I would have no problem quoting your direct post. You aren't the only guy here, who doesn't know what he's talking about.

If you weren't so obnoxious, yours wouldn't register in mine. And yes, I don't post that often because I have day job. Anyway, enjoy the New Year…and chill!

[LloydFree]

I said it was "coaching malpractice" not to try out both pairings - Okafor and Embiid and Noel and Embiid. I never would have said that Okafor was our second best player. Did you cherry-pick my comments?

Man, get over yourself. Your not the only guy that kept parroting that "Malpractice" line. Your posts rarely register in my mind. You don't even post that often. If I meant you, I would have no problem quoting your direct post. You aren't the only guy here, who doesn't know what he's talking about.

If you weren't so obnoxious, yours wouldn't register in mine. And yes, I don't post that often because I have day job. Anyway, enjoy the New Year…and chill!

[CoreyGallagher]

Only took 2-3 games to show everyone it didn't work. They tried it for 6 games, and made even the biggest proponents beg for it to stop.

For 3 games - when they weren't starting together and used sparingly, with consideration of match-ups - they had a noticeably positive net rating. Then they began starting together and playing a lot of minutes together despite match-ups.

[P-K4]

I can't see anybody giving us a good wing/backcourt player for Okafor at this point. We may have to trade someone like either Ilyasova or Stauskas along with Okafor in order to get something useful (i.e. Powell or Ross?) back.

[hookshot199]

Only took 2-3 games to show everyone it didn't work. They tried it for 6 games, and made even the biggest proponents beg for it to stop.

For 3 games - when they weren't starting together and used sparingly, with consideration of match-ups - they had a noticeably positive net rating. Then they began starting together and playing a lot of minutes together despite match-ups.

Dear Corey, I didn't write that quote. "Only took 2-3 games…" I'm not saying it's inaccurate. But I believe it was the person who goes by the name LloydFree. Check the source.Thanks

[76ers 2020]

I can't see anybody giving us a good wing/backcourt player for Okafor at this point. We may have to trade someone like either Ilyasova or Stauskas along with Okafor in order to get something useful (i.e. Powell or Ross?) back.

Just think a couple of months ago some people were demanding Avery Bradley and the Nets pick.

[TTP]

I can't see anybody giving us a good wing/backcourt player for Okafor at this point. We may have to trade someone like either Ilyasova or Stauskas along with Okafor in order to get something useful (i.e. Powell or Ross?) back.

I'd be shocked if we could get Powell or Ross for all three of those guys now. I don't even like Ross but both Powell and Ross have seen their value increase as the season has progressed, while Okafor has seen his decrease. With every game that passes, the difference in value becomes greater. We needed to make a move months ago.

This is why it was frustrating to hear everyone argue "we need to give him more of a chance before we move him". Well, we've given him that chance and he's failed and his value is likely a fraction of what it was over the summer when the "haters" were begging that we move him before the rest of the league catches on.

[CoreyGallagher]

Dear Corey, I didn't write that quote. "Only took 2-3 games…" I'm not saying it's inaccurate. But I believe it was the person who goes by the name LloydFree. Check the source.Thanks

Whoopsies, deleted wrong quote tag.

[hookshot199]

Dear Corey, I didn't write that quote. "Only took 2-3 games…" I'm not saying it's inaccurate. But I believe it was the person who goes by the name LloydFree. Check the source.Thanks

Whoopsies, deleted wrong quote tag.

No problem. Happy New Year.

One aside: The thing everyone forgets about Hinkie is that he was stingy to a fault. He wouldn't even give up second round picks - until JC made him give up to made him trade two for Ish.

The Okafor pick did not turn out as many prognosticators would have thought - he was ranked third on many people's boards. But than the Lakers' selection of Russell at two must be giving Jim Buss ulcers. Then again, they're both young. They'll find their place - just not on the Sixers, at least with respect to Okafor.

At least I hope the Colangelos opt for Noel. Again, all the best in 2017.

[LongLiveHinkie]

If the Sixers start playing better without Embiid and Okafor together, and they randomly go back to playing them together again, then that will be definitive proof that winning isn't their top priority. That showcasing Okafor, tanking, or something else is.

Hell, going back to that tandem if would be a harder tank move than anything Hinkie ever did. Hinkie never took away something that worked, he just made sure nothing would work from the start.

[TTP]

Dear Corey, I didn't write that quote. "Only took 2-3 games…" I'm not saying it's inaccurate. But I believe it was the person who goes by the name LloydFree. Check the source.Thanks

Whoopsies, deleted wrong quote tag.

No problem. Happy New Year.

One aside: The thing everyone forgets about Hinkie is that he was stingy to a fault. He wouldn't even give up second round picks - until JC made him give up to made him trade two for Ish.

The Okafor pick did not turn out as many prognosticators would have thought - he was ranked third on many people's boards. But than the Lakers' selection of Russell at two must be giving Jim Buss ulcers. Then again, they're both young. They'll find their place - just not on the Sixers, at least with respect to Okafor.

At least I hope the Colangelos opt for Noel. Again, all the best in 2017.

I don't think stingy is the right word. He seemed to value second round picks more than others, thus it wouldn't make much sense for him to trade them away. The Ish trade was terrible.

[ExplosionsInDaSky]

I thought Okafor coming off the bench was working fine. Once they started together it got bad.

[hookshot199]

Whoopsies, deleted wrong quote tag.

No problem. Happy New Year.

One aside: The thing everyone forgets about Hinkie is that he was stingy to a fault. He wouldn't even give up second round picks - until JC made him give up to made him trade two for Ish.

The Okafor pick did not turn out as many prognosticators would have thought - he was ranked third on many people's boards. But than the Lakers' selection of Russell at two must be giving Jim Buss ulcers. Then again, they're both young. They'll find their place - just not on the Sixers, at least with respect to Okafor.

At least I hope the Colangelos opt for Noel. Again, all the best in 2017.

I don't think stingy is the right word. He seemed to value second round picks more than others, thus it wouldn't make much sense for him to trade them away. The Ish trade was terrible.

What are we going to do with 10-15 second round picks over the next six years? That's on top of seven or eight first-round picks, our own plus LA's and Sacramento's. At some point they have no value. It's just arithmetic.

[TTP]

No problem. Happy New Year.

One aside: The thing everyone forgets about Hinkie is that he was stingy to a fault. He wouldn't even give up second round picks - until JC made him give up to made him trade two for Ish.

The Okafor pick did not turn out as many prognosticators would have thought - he was ranked third on many people's boards. But than the Lakers' selection of Russell at two must be giving Jim Buss ulcers. Then again, they're both young. They'll find their place - just not on the Sixers, at least with respect to Okafor.

At least I hope the Colangelos opt for Noel. Again, all the best in 2017.

I don't think stingy is the right word. He seemed to value second round picks more than others, thus it wouldn't make much sense for him to trade them away. The Ish trade was terrible.

What are we going to do with 10-15 second round picks over the next six years? That's on top of seven or eight first-round picks, our own plus LA's and Sacramento's. At some point they have no value. It's just arithmetic.

Why at the bolded? I disagree.

They can always be used for stashes or future trades. There are plenty of guys I like that fall to the second round each year. The more stashes the better.

Also, rosters are going to be expanding to 17 with the additional D-League flex slots. If anything, seconds have more value now than they did when we acquired them.

[hookshot199]

I don't think stingy is the right word. He seemed to value second round picks more than others, thus it wouldn't make much sense for him to trade them away. The Ish trade was terrible.

What are we going to do with 10-15 second round picks over the next six years? That's on top of seven or eight first-round picks, our own plus LA's and Sacramento's. At some point they have no value. It's just arithmetic.

Why at the bolded? I disagree.

They can always be used for stashes or future trades. There are plenty of guys I like that fall to the second round each year. The more stashes the better.

Also, rosters are going to be expanding to 17 with the additional D-League flex slots. If anything, seconds have more value now than they did when we acquired them.

Sorry, we disagree. We were 1-30 when Ish re-joined the team. So you would have preferred we finish 2-80 or 3-79? Hinkie, despite the fact I think the city should build a statue for him, damaged Okafor and Noel's value by not signing even a veteran point guard. Two second-round picks are meaningless in the grand scheme of things. There are only so many roster spots.