Hinkie in Hindsight?

aHealthy3 · Post #161 » by **aHealthy3** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:09 am

Kobblehead wrote:Friendly reminder than Brandon Ingram was a very mediocre prospect and a terrible Top 5 selection.

I wouldn't go that far. Pretty much was the consensus #2 by all accounts at the time. Even in hindsight not really sure who went after him who they'd rather have. Maybe Jamal Murray.

XDevilBoiX · Post #162 » by **XDevilBoiX** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:01 am

Just wishful thinking here. You see Josh Harris on the court cheering for his team at the end of these past few games. Now that he is seeing the fruits of the labor that Hinkie did, would he be smart enough to fire the Coleangelos and bring back Hinkie to finish his work. BC has really done nothing except for the Ilyasova trade since taking over. Would he realized now that Hinkie was right in wanting to draft Porzinghis or trading Okafor to Boston for the Nets pick. That was all blocked by higher management, so who is to blame for that mismanagement?

76ciology · Post #163 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:06 am

If I would have to guess this is how Sixers/Hinkie's mentality to the rebuild and draft went.

The Process was about getting a superstar and winning a championship. Because like most GMs, they believe you can't make it to the finals without a superstar. And this was evident even prior to Hinkie's time with us gambling on Bynum. GMs like Morey and John Hammond also talked about it on some interviews.

With that said, when Hinkie drafts players he overvalues a player's ability to dominate a game. What separates superstars from regular player? It's their ability to dominate games. That's why we were able to be an elite defensive team with Embiid despite surrounding him with big defensive liabilities.

Noel can dominate, he was a dominant defensive player. Okafor can dominate, he was a dominant college scorer. Embiid can dominate, was a dominant two way player. Simmons can dominate, was a dominant all around player.

I don't think there's enough evidence that KP can dominate as a prospect. He's more like a 17ppg-7rpg-2bpg player to me back then, but then I'm not a pro NBA scout. I mean, until now, he's more of a very useful plus player that can turn out to be a star than a superstar player that can lead a team to the finals.

With that said, in three years of tanking, Sixers has 4 chances to end up with one possible superstar. I think Embiid is most likely to be one but it's good to have another chance of having one with Simmons because nowadays it takes more than one superstar to win a championship and it's just better to have back-up, always.

It also separates us from the other rebuilding teams. Lakers and Wolves have promising players but they need elite collective effort and chemistry to mimick a superstar player on court. Sixers on the other hand, just like the Cavs with LBJ, just need to place their superstar player and they immediate create super plus on court impact.

Bottom line, in getting a superstar, it's likely that the war is won but this war has some casualties and it's far from perfect.

XDevilBoiX · Post #164 » by **XDevilBoiX** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:27 am

76ciology wrote:If I would have to guess this is how Sixers/Hinkie's mentality to the rebuild and draft went.

The Process was about getting a superstar. Because like most GMs, they believe you can't make it to the finals without a superstar. And this was evident even prior to Hinkie's time with us gambling on Bynum. GMs like Morey and John Hammond also talked about it on some interviews.

With that said, when Hinkie drafts players he overvalues a player's ability to dominate a game. What separates superstars from regular player? It's their ability to dominate games. That's why we were able to be an elite defensive team with Embiid despite surrounding him with big defensive liabilities.

Noel can dominate, he was a dominant defensive player. Okafor can dominate, he was a dominant college scorer. Embiid can dominate, was a dominant two way player. Simmons can dominate, was a dominant all around player.

I don't think there's enough evidence that KP can dominate as a prospect. He's more like a 17ppg-7rpg-2bpg player to me back then, but then I'm not a pro NBA scout. I mean, until now, he's more of a very useful plus player that can turn out to be a star than a superstar player that can lead a team to the finals.

With that said, in three years of tanking, Sixers has 4 chances to end up with one possible superstar. I think Embiid is most likely to be one but it's good to have another chance of having one with Simmons because nowadays it takes more than one superstar to win a championship and it's just better to have back-up, always.

It also separates us from the other rebuilding teams. Lakers and Wolves have promising players but they need elite collective effort and chemistry to mimick a superstar player on court. Sixers on the other hand, just like the Cavs with LBJ, just need to place their superstar player and they immediate create super plus on court impact.

Bottom line, process is very likely a success. War is won but this war has some casualties and it's far from perfect.

I disagree, the war hasn't been won yet. The process was to get supertar player(s) and win the title(s), that was Hinkie's goal. We are 50% there, the process wasn't just to get superstars only.

76ciology · Post #165 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:34 am

XDevilBoiX wrote:
76ciology wrote:If I would have to guess this is how Sixers/Hinkie's mentality to the rebuild and draft went.

The Process was about getting a superstar. Because like most GMs, they believe you can't make it to the finals without a superstar. And this was evident even prior to Hinkie's time with us gambling on Bynum. GMs like Morey and John Hammond also talked about it on some interviews.

With that said, when Hinkie drafts players he overvalues a player's ability to dominate a game. What separates superstars from regular player? It's their ability to dominate games. That's why we were able to be an elite defensive team with Embiid despite surrounding him with big defensive liabilities.

Noel can dominate, he was a dominant defensive player. Okafor can dominate, he was a dominant college scorer. Embiid can dominate, was a dominant two way player. Simmons can dominate, was a dominant all around player.

I don't think there's enough evidence that KP can dominate as a prospect. He's more like a 17ppg-7rpg-2bpg player to me back then, but then I'm not a pro NBA scout. I mean, until now, he's more of a very useful plus player that can turn out to be a star than a superstar player that can lead a team to the finals.

With that said, in three years of tanking, Sixers has 4 chances to end up with one possible superstar. I think Embiid is most likely to be one but it's good to have another chance of having one with Simmons because nowadays it takes more than one superstar to win a championship and it's just better to have back-up, always.

It also separates us from the other rebuilding teams. Lakers and Wolves have promising players but they need elite collective effort and chemistry to mimick a superstar player on court. Sixers on the other hand, just like the Cavs with LBJ, just need to place their superstar player and they immediate create super plus on court impact.

Bottom line, process is very likely a success. War is won but this war has some casualties and it's far from perfect.

I disagree, the war hasn't been won yet. The process was to get supertar player(s) and win the title(s), that was Hinkie's goal. We are 50% there, the process wasn't just to get superstars only.

Sorry, yeah it also includes winning the championship thus the need of a superstar. I'll edit the last part.

GlenRiceARoni · Post #166 » by **GlenRiceARoni** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:37 am

Its really not "hindsight". Only Grade A morons were trashing Hinkie.

It was obvious from the beginning Hinkie was going to succeed in building a highly competitive team.

Those same morons can now be identified saying "They havent even made the playoffs yet"

Right, they havent made the playoffs yet. Just like the sun hasn't come up tomorrow yet. But its still a foregone conclusion.

These same people will say "yeah but they lost a lot of games and he drafted okafor over Porzingis" when Embiid is stomping out Lebron in the playoffs in ~2-4 seasons.

Hinkie has created a monster that will awaken in 2018 precisely 200 years after Mary Shelley published Frankenstein in 1818 A.D.

I don't think for one second this is coincidental. Hinkie is well educated and a fan of Classic British Lit

kriss73 · Post #167 » by **kriss73** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:44 am

I agree.
I think the number of people he is currently following on twitter is not coincidental

76ciology · Post #168 » by **76ciology** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 9:34 am

I'd also like to add..

Many overlooked the mentality going from Ed Snyder to Josh Harris.

Ed Snyder was comfortable in being mediocre as long as he is getting short term income. In short, he was pro Iggy.

Josh Harris is an investor who likes future pay-offs. The thirst for superstar started with Josh Harris when we went for Andrew Bynum. He bought Sixers in 2011, Bynum deal was done in 2012.

The problem was we went all in. We just had a different approach (diverse betting/hedging) with Hinkie with all the picks and future picks.

Sort of my point is, we are in good hands with this owner despite Hinkie's departure.

GlenRiceARoni · Post #169 » by **GlenRiceARoni** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:01 am

Josh Harris is an investor who likes future pay-offs. The thirst for superstar started with Josh Harris when we went for Andrew Bynum. He bought Sixers in 2011, Bynum deal was done in 2012.

Sort of my point is, we are in good hands with this owner despite Hinkie's departure.

Eh, I'm pretty sure Josh Harris was a LBO (leveraged buyout) guy in his finance career.

They get paid by buying companies, loading them up with debt (leverage), stripping them to the core of costs, and trying to increase the value of the company as quickly as possible so they can sell it for profit.

The longer they hold a company the less profit % they can make selling it because of the leverage and subsequent debt service. They're looking to get in and get out ASAP.

Given that they only paid ~$280m and the franchise would probably sell for ~$1billion just six years later i wouldn't be surprised to see him sell soon.

That may have something to do with forcing Hinkie out if they weren't sure he was capable or would subscribe to their timeline to increase the value of the franchise by putting a winning product on the floor.

Im not privvy to all the details behind their team purchase but finance and real estate moguls tend to stick to their core business strategies even with their personal investments.

I'd be kinda surprised if at least initially they didnt purchase the team with debt and intend to attempt to sell it for a big profit.

If the 76ers make a big splash with the Simmons & Embiid pairing and a low payroll it sure is a sexy team to buy.

--------------------------------------------------------------Hinkie has created a monster that will awaken in 2018 precisely 200 years after Mary Shelley published Frankenstein in 1818 A.D.
I don't think for a second this is coincidental as Hinkie is well educated and a fan of Classic British Lit

Post #170 » by **HartfordWhalers** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 2:18 pm

GlenRiceARoni wrote:

Josh Harris is an investor who likes future pay-offs. The thirst for superstar started with Josh Harris when we went for Andrew Bynum. He bought Sixers in 2011, Bynum deal was done in 2012.

Sort of my point is, we are in good hands with this owner despite Hinkie's departure.

Eh, I'm pretty sure Josh Harris was a LBO (leveraged buyout) guy in his finance career.

They get paid by buying companies, loading them up with debt (leverage), stripping them to the core of costs, and trying to increase the value of the company as quickly as possible so they can sell it for profit.

The longer they hold a company the less profit % they can make selling it because of the leverage and subsequent debt service. They're looking to get in and get out ASAP.

Given that they only paid ~$280m and the franchise would probably sell for ~$1billion just six years later i wouldn't be surprised to see him sell soon.

That may have something to do with forcing Hinkie out if they weren't sure he was capable or would subscribe to their timeline to increase the value of the franchise by putting a winning product on the floor.

Im not privvy to all the details behind their team purchase but finance and real estate moguls tend to stick to their core business strategies even with their personal investments.

I'd be kinda surprised if at least initially they didnt purchase the team with debt and intend to attempt to sell it for a big profit.

If the 76ers make a big splash with the Simmons & Embiid pairing and a low payroll it sure is a sexy team to buy.

--------------------------------------------------------------Hinkie has created a monster that will awaken in 2018 precisely 200 years after Mary Shelley published Frankenstein in 1818 A.D.
I don't think for a second this is coincidental as Hinkie is well educated and a fan of Classic British Lit

NBA teams aren't a normal personal investment. They are also a consumption good for the super rich, who often like to show up courtside, bask in the team's appeal to the fans, etc. Balmer didn't buy the Clippers to have a diversified portfolio, but because it would be cool to own the Clippers.

Based off how Harris acts towards the team, I would have him in a similar camp. That said, there was talk about him trying to buy into a London NFL franchise which would require (1) NFL expansion and (2) selling the Sixers. If a 'more cool' toy comes along, I think he cashes out. Without that, I don't see him giving up a hard to purchase vanity toy like being a majority NBA owner.

smittybanton · Post #171 » by **smittybanton** » Sat Jan 21, 2017 5:39 pm

Bring Back Hinkie!!!

Dead ass serious. If Bryan "Relationships" Colangelo can't convert our metric ton of accumulated assets into a stud player by February's trade deadline, we ought to stop chanting Trust the Process and start yelling Bring Back Hinkie!

Nothing of yesterday's win or the ones before them derive from Bryan. Jerry Colangelo said he didn't believe in the process, yet undrafted free agent TJ McConnell has outplayed BC's $9M signee Sergio Rodriguez. While undrafted free agent Robert Covington wins the game with those last to three pointers.

Instead of BC's second $9M signee Gerald Henderson, the other 20% of last night’s starting lineup was Nik Stauskas, plucked off the scrap heap along with a first round draft pick and swap rights that WILL BE USED THIS YEAR.

BC’s boys, Sergio and Gerald, went a combined 4-17 (1-5, 3pt), neither of them getting to the line once.

Ersan Ilyasova? Good trade. But even there, the process worked. A second round pick, Jerami Grant, was converted into a useful player and a future first round pick.

Nice trade and all, Bryan. But you said you were here to accelerate the process, and your dad went on and on an interview about how we need someone who can "pull the trigger." Well, stop pump-faking! Only because of that trade does BC have a pinky finger on this winning streak, otherwise he'd have no hand in at all.

Yes, this is a different standard than that applied to Hinkie. Because both are being judged on what they said they were going to do. So the question is simply, what has Bryan Colangelo done to accelerate the process?

Perhaps more importantly, I argue that Bryan has destroyed more value than he's earned. I like TLC, but I still believe Dejounte Murray and Patrick McCaw would've been better picks. Malcolm Brogdon wasn't one of my favorites, but it'd sure be nice to have him here now. But that's been no real crime, as TLC has shown some promise.

No, the real charges are that he's squandered our cap space and the value of our future first round picks. Last summer, when others didn't believe in the process, was the time to strike big!

The moment we got Ben Simmons should have triggered a) a trade including a big man and some combination of our 2018-2021 first round picks, b) maximum salary offers to young burgeoning players who fit between Simmons and Joel Embiid.

By being frugal, we got no impact free agents last summer, yet there are no impact free agents this summer who are expected to move from their team to the Sixers, especially considering how much harder the new CBA makes it to pry guys coming off their rookie contract from their incumbent teams.

It is highly unlikely we're getting Jrue Holiday, Gordon Hayward, Kentavious Caldwell or Otto Porter. The CBA allows their current teams, who need each of them very much, to match the RFAs and outbid with the UFA's by tens of millions of dollars.

Last summer, two young wing players getting better each year, Evan Fournier and Kent Bazemore signed for significantly less than the rookie maximum. So long as the owner is willing to pay the luxury tax, we could've maxxed them out for $45M, and still had space to sign another free agent this year, and STILL use Bird Rights to go over the cap to re-sign Nerlens if we want. That’s how dope Hinkie set us up.

But noooo.

Now, I concede that max offers to Fournier and Bazemore is a debatable move. However, there’s absolutely no question in my mind that Colangelo should’ve and Hinkie would’ve traded our future first round picks last summer before they plummeted in value with our growing success this year.

The Sixers 2018-2020 first round draft picks were worth a mint back then. Everyone, even the most ardent believers in the process, insisted that I was plum loco and crazy for wanting to offer THREE first round picks along with a big man (Okafor) to those teams for Butler or Brandon Ingram or Russell.

But now assess where those picks will probably land. Those picks will be in the 20s and maybe even 25-30! Plus, we'd still have Sacramento's 2019 pick--which also allows us to trade '18-20 without violating the Stepien Rule.

Hinkie was criticized for viewing everything as an asset, buying low and selling high. Best believe he understood the diminishing value of those picks.

This is not hindsight. I wrote numerous fanposts pushing for this at the time it was going down. I'm sorry, I firmly believe that we could've been sitting on an NBA2K17 team with Ben Simmons, D'Angelo Russell, Kent Bazemore, Evan Fournier, Nik Stauskas, Robert Covington, Dario Saric, Embiid, Nerlens Noel, TJ Maxx, [Grant/OKC2020] PHI/SAC17, LAL17, SAC19, etc.....

Hinkie said the best teams don't get there gradually, they make large leaps. I believe his endgame was going to be implemented last season. Not because he revealed it to me in a dream, but because it just made sense to take advantage of the league when they didn't believe in the process. That's what a hedge fund manager does.

BC didn’t believe in the process so I understand why he wouldn’t commit. So this mistake lands squarely on Josh Harris for pulling the plug, for not having the patience to see it through. In the Big Short, the few who bet against housing market had to fend off their own investors who couldn’t wait and lacked confidence in the strategy. The parallel between them and Sam is not lost.
There’s a positive to this.

Bryan Colangelo is aware of all of this. He knows he has to do something to put his stamp on the team. He’s got to feel a slight bit of discomfort every time fans chant Trust the Process. Imagine we get the #1 pick because of a swap with Sacramento and also get the Lakers pick between #4-6. Once again, we take a major step forward having nothing to do with Bryan’s ‘leadership’ or institution of a “winning culture”.

The truth of the matter as I see it is that Jerry Colangelo saw the Sixers from afar as his last chance to win an NBA title. Knowing the league as he does, Jerry was able to corral all of Hinkie’s opponents, and then claimjump a gold mine. If we recognize this and remind them that we are not fooled, that puts more pressure on Bryan to do something that truly contributes to championship contention.

D'Angelo Russell and Jimmy Butler can still be had. If Bryan can't get either of them by the trade deadline, then Josh Harris, Adam Silver and everyone need to admit they were wrong, go to Palo Alto hat in hand, and offer Hinkie a huge, long term contract with a title like "Czar of Basketball Operations" or something more fitting...

Post #172 » by **sixers hoops** » Sat Jan 21, 2017 6:10 pm

I again thought Hinkie was masterful at phase 1 teardown of the rebuild, and thought he deserved a shot at actually building the team with the assets he collected.

He will end up on the right side of history, however, there are too many obstacles to him coming back. I think ownership sees Colangelo as better equipped to construct a winning roster and are not interested in placing Hinkie above him. And Hinkie resigned because he wanted final say of basketball operations.

Unbreakable99 · Post #173 » by **Unbreakable99** » Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:34 pm

I probably love Hinkie more than anyone but that ship has sailed. I wish he weren't fired and would rather have him but he's not coming back. I doubt he would even want to come back to be GM for the Sixers if he was asked. I'm not the biggest BC fan but so far he hasn't done anything that I didn't like. I like that he didn't accelerate any process and stayed the course. He talks a good game but look at his actions. He liked what Hinkie did. He's not rushing anything. He can't come out and say Hinkie did great by tanking but he does believe that.

LloydFree · Post #174 » by **LloydFree** » Sat Jan 21, 2017 9:23 pm

I'm greatful that Hinkie was GM for the last few years, because he did what should have been done long before. He tore it all of the way down in a perceived strong draft year. He made about 4-5 genius trades to get us a treasure chest of draft picks. He drafted Embiid. But I'm not going to be crying about him forever, because I don't know what he would have done, once he finally start using the assets to build a team. He could be another Sam Presti, and EFF up a Championship caliber core, by outsmarting himself. Hinkie was great while he was here, but it's time to move on. You'd think we were watching him play on the court every night, the way people carry on about him.

Norman Dale · Post #175 » by **Norman Dale** » Sat Jan 21, 2017 11:16 pm

It's annoying as a Sixers fan that the every imperfect part of Hinkie's time at the helm is glossed over or blamed on something/someone else and since he left he's given credit for what he mystically would have done.

He did a great job tearing down the treadmill team and replenishing/accumulating the war chest of assets that was there when he resigned. He's gone. While very effective, he wasn't perfect and he's not coming back. If you're a fan of the team enjoy the fruits of his labor, but move on...he has.

eskimo · Post #176 » by **eskimo** » Sat Jan 21, 2017 11:49 pm

Hinkie was great but wouldn't come back here without new owners.

I also think searching for that 3rd piece before we get a chance to see what Embiid and Simmons look like on the floor is unwise. At the very least I would suggest waiting for the offseason before pulling off any move. At that point draft values will be at their highest and the value of the actual picks will be much more tangible after the lottery. Teams will scout this next deep group of kids and will fall in love with one of them and agree to a more favorable trade than can be negotiated now.

MoeGreene · Post #177 » by **MoeGreene** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 1:53 am

In theory, I would agree, but I think having Simmons back will only emphasize the need already shown for a PG or SG who can shoot. So, yea waiting till the offseason is fine. Not fun. But fine.

#bringbackHinkie2018

eskimo wrote:Hinkie was great but wouldn't come back here without new owners.

I also think searching for that 3rd piece before we get a chance to see what Embiid and Simmons look like on the floor is unwise. At the very least I would suggest waiting for the offseason before pulling off any move. At that point draft values will be at their highest and the value of the actual picks will be much more tangible after the lottery. Teams will scout this next deep group of kids and will fall in love with one of them and agree to a more favorable trade than can be negotiated now.

76ciology · Post #178 » by **76ciology** » Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:06 am

Why should we hurry when there isn't good offers out there? Might as well put pressure in other teams near deadline or trade with one of our assets in 2017 draft.

For now, TJ is good at PG. Rock, Hendo, Ilyasova and sometimes Sauce are good at forward. Biid is playing like a superstar with much depth at C.

Hell, in the bigger picture, we might even be making a mistake with winning this much.

Post #179 » by **HartfordWhalers** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:20 pm

The ringer gives Sam Hinkie EoTY -- https://theringer.com/our-2016-17-nba-midseason-award-winners-5fffe5229078#.fc9kvvly3

Upperclass · Post #180 » by **Upperclass** » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:43 pm

Hinkie should've never been fired. I said as much on the general board the day he was let go. Colangelo will probably prove to be a subpar replacement as he's been at every stop. But ironically.. i think Bryan and Hinkie could've worked well together if Hinkie was given final say. I think Hinkie is an amazing basketball mind and talent evaluator, but I dont know if he knows how to bring in established talent to augment his assessment and assortment of "potential" players.