og15 wrote:esqtvd wrote:og15 wrote:I actually think it is a very smart move for teams that are nowhere near luxury, and some not even at the salary floor to take on bad / unwanted contracts in exchange for picks. I'm not sure why that would be a bad thing.
Just sharing the info. It was fairly brilliant, though when you do it for 2 or 3 years while averaging 20 wins a year, it's a farce.
Hinkie didn't just tank, he scorched the earth, like Rachel Phelps.
Hey, if you're going to tank, go all in until you get what you want, lol. That's better than the teams who still suck but can't tank properly. You're being generous with 20 wins though, didn't they win under 20 games three seasons in a row, including 10 wins?
About the Fultz pick though, that was not Hinkie's decision, but let's not proclaim him a future bust after just one sort of season.
Right you are--47-195, with seasons of 19, 18, and 10 wins.
the worst three-year span in NBA history, sinking even lower than the .187 winning percentage posted by the Dallas Mavericks from 1991-92 through 1993-94.
Was it worth it? I don't think so. But some do.

His Process 1.0 was a complete failure [Michael Carter-Williams, Noel Noelle, Jahlil Okafor, KD McDaniels, Jerami Grant], and 2.0 rides completely on Embiid's health. Even still, it's widely agreed they're still a stud FA short.
The ultimate goal of The Process was to get one of those ungettable players like Jordan, Kobe, or Duncan who almost assure you of a championship somewhere along the way. But they probably still don't have one.
________________________________
As for Fultz [true, not Hinkie's fault], I saw some video of his 'retooled' jump shot, and it looks flat and instead of rising vertically, it looks like he's pushing toward the basket, which of course is easier to guard if not block. We shall see. Regardless, giving up Sacramento's pick next year to move up 2 slots [they could have got 6-7 swingman Jaylen Brown at #3] was questionable at best.