mreinman wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

mreinman wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Y wasn't he able to find high win share gems from around the league to build a winning team while also stockpiling assets for the future?

Trading MCW was fine, but his value was huge at the time. They could have gotten a really good player back.

Any GM could do what Hinkie did if they don't have to show results in the win column. But since most Gms know they need to also have results they don't.

high win share guys are expensive and most GM's are not as dumb as fans and look for high metric guys.

MCW was robbery! Could not dream of getting more. Most GM's realized what MCW was and is.

Gm's don't have the stomach to do what he did or the brains to fuk with the cap like he did.

Some of his moves like Javhale were gems ... not sure he got basketball though. Great guy to work for an organization but probably not a good eye test GM.

My main issue with his moves is he spent 3 years doing all of this and didn't land one player who we know for certain is part of their core. We have no idea who will be left on that team. At the very least if he was going to do all of this, at least land a player or 2 that you know will be part of this thing long term. At least Phil did that with KP. A fan base can root for a young, but bad team, if they see a bright future with a couple of players currently on the roster. There is no future with that entire roster. No players to fall back on knowing they will be there even next season and for future seasons. The assets are nice in theory, that's about it.

so phil got KP while he got Ok4 who phil would almost certainly have taken (of course can't say for sure though many will yell that of course phil would have still taken KP - BS).

What else does phil have?

Philly has a treasure chest of chips.

Of course Phil would have taken Okafor. And once Okafor was gone he also could have taken Winslow, or Mudiay, or Kaminsky etc. So it's not like KP was the obvious choice, and it's not like Hinkie would have definitely taken KP with the 4th pick. But he's the thing, Phil is not building thru the draft like Hinkie is. Hinkie sold everyone on his ability to draft a star player with all of these picks. So he has had how many lottery picks? And he has yet to land 1 player who is a definite part of their future. That is 1 less than Phil no matter how you spin it. And as far as his treasure chest of chips, yes he has some chips, but if a big time player becomes available, how many other teams have more chips to land that player before Philly does? Boston for a definite one. And there are a ton of other teams that it can be argued have better chips to land an elite player. So Philly not only failed to land a star via draft, but they might not even be able to put together the most appealing package when they decide to make a move for real players who can help them win. We will have to see.

draft picks have a huge luck factor. And, philly has to build through the draft or make a smart trade because no top FA has ever signed in philly or at least none since I have been a fan.

Yes draft picks do have a huge luck factor, which is why if you are going to go all-in, you better be extremely lucky. We were luckier with our one lottery pick than they were in their 5 or 6 combined.

But targeting win share players is something they could have controled. If Hinkie was mertic guy deep in analytics. Why wasn't he able to find gems over the 3 yr span slowly piece by piece putting together a decent roster. While also making moves to collect assets? Shouldn't they be uncovering gems through analytics on a more consistent basis?

newyorknewyork wrote:The draft is hit or miss. I don't knock him to much for the misses in the draft. Then again at the same time what type of foundation did they bring draft picks into. If your going to go all in on draft picks then they should be brought into a environment that nurtures them into the players amd people they drafted them to be.

But targeting win share players is something they could have controled. If Hinkie was mertic guy deep in analytics. Why wasn't he able to find gems over the 3 yr span slowly piece by piece putting together a decent roster. While also making moves to collect assets? Shouldn't they be uncovering gems through analytics on a more consistent basis?

If Hinkie was such a metrics guy, he could have built a team along the same model as Boston did while accumulating draft picks. For some reason people feel like you need to go one direction and do that 100%. Why can't you rebuilt thru the draft and put together a good team at the same time? Boston did. Why can't you maintain a winning veteran group and infuse young players into that core group at the same time? San Antonio did. It doesn't have to be one direction or the other. Good GM's can do both at the same time.

martin wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:The draft is hit or miss. I don't knock him to much for the misses in the draft. Then again at the same time what type of foundation did they bring draft picks into. If your going to go all in on draft picks then they should be brought into a environment that nurtures them into the players amd people they drafted them to be.

But targeting win share players is something they could have controled. If Hinkie was mertic guy deep in analytics. Why wasn't he able to find gems over the 3 yr span slowly piece by piece putting together a decent roster. While also making moves to collect assets? Shouldn't they be uncovering gems through analytics on a more consistent basis?

If Hinkie was such a metrics guy, he could have built a team along the same model as Boston did while accumulating draft picks. For some reason people feel like you need to go one direction and do that 100%. Why can't you rebuilt thru the draft and put together a good team at the same time? Boston did. Why can't you maintain a winning veteran group and infuse young players into that core group at the same time? San Antonio did. It doesn't have to be one direction or the other. Good GM's can do both at the same time.

I'll take your statement 1 further. GM's and presidents should be doing a ton of things at the same time to better team. DLeague team. Creating environment for young kids to learn, train, grow up. Scouting. Fusing vets with yoot (as you mention). Building assets, being flexible with cap space down the line.

I complete agree. Culture and everything involved in it is just as important, or more important, than the personnel moves. Hinkie literally did nothing but collect and move around a bunch of pieces. He approached his job with zero regard for anything other than collecting assets, many of which were actual human beings. He was probably big into collecting basketball cards back in the day (as were a lot of us.) He approached it like collecting and trading cards.

martin wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

mreinman wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Y wasn't he able to find high win share gems from around the league to build a winning team while also stockpiling assets for the future?

Trading MCW was fine, but his value was huge at the time. They could have gotten a really good player back.

Any GM could do what Hinkie did if they don't have to show results in the win column. But since most Gms know they need to also have results they don't.

high win share guys are expensive and most GM's are not as dumb as fans and look for high metric guys.

MCW was robbery! Could not dream of getting more. Most GM's realized what MCW was and is.

Gm's don't have the stomach to do what he did or the brains to fuk with the cap like he did.

Some of his moves like Javhale were gems ... not sure he got basketball though. Great guy to work for an organization but probably not a good eye test GM.

My main issue with his moves is he spent 3 years doing all of this and didn't land one player who we know for certain is part of their core. We have no idea who will be left on that team. At the very least if he was going to do all of this, at least land a player or 2 that you know will be part of this thing long term. At least Phil did that with KP. A fan base can root for a young, but bad team, if they see a bright future with a couple of players currently on the roster. There is no future with that entire roster. No players to fall back on knowing they will be there even next season and for future seasons. The assets are nice in theory, that's about it.

so phil got KP while he got Ok4 who phil would almost certainly have taken (of course can't say for sure though many will yell that of course phil would have still taken KP - BS).

What else does phil have?

Philly has a treasure chest of chips.

Phil has a franchise potential player with 1 draft pick over 3 years and Philly had the opportunity at one with a mountain of assets and failed. End of story.

When making an argument you can't just make up a strawman scenario of your own picking and then use it as the argument, that's called BS

No. Your argument is horrible. Phil picked a guy after philly picked who phil would have picked. That is called lucky. You are not even trying here.

Ok4 may be a good player anyway but again, luck is luck and luck counts.

And, we are not just talking about that draft. Hinkie left the next guy with a stockpile even if he was not a good judge of talent. He was still good at amassing assets.

You sound like a homer, not a fair and balanced mod.

The premise of building through the draft in philly is smart. Did he draft well? Not really. Part of that was getting quite unlucky.

The plan is still in place however, now they have better bball guys who will (hopefully) use the assets that he amassed.

And, I would not hire Hinkie to be a GM but I would definitely like a guy like that in the back office.

callmened wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:The draft is hit or miss. I don't knock him to much for the misses in the draft. Then again at the same time what type of foundation did they bring draft picks into. If your going to go all in on draft picks then they should be brought into a environment that nurtures them into the players amd people they drafted them to be.

But targeting win share players is something they could have controled. If Hinkie was mertic guy deep in analytics. Why wasn't he able to find gems over the 3 yr span slowly piece by piece putting together a decent roster. While also making moves to collect assets? Shouldn't they be uncovering gems through analytics on a more consistent basis?

agree 100%. if he was such a genious then why not find these diamonds in the rough. ill credit him for finding Covington but who else? i think the truth was theyre just trying to lose as cheaply as possible

I would agree with this.

mreinman wrote:

martin wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

mreinman wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Y wasn't he able to find high win share gems from around the league to build a winning team while also stockpiling assets for the future?

Trading MCW was fine, but his value was huge at the time. They could have gotten a really good player back.

Any GM could do what Hinkie did if they don't have to show results in the win column. But since most Gms know they need to also have results they don't.

high win share guys are expensive and most GM's are not as dumb as fans and look for high metric guys.

MCW was robbery! Could not dream of getting more. Most GM's realized what MCW was and is.

Gm's don't have the stomach to do what he did or the brains to fuk with the cap like he did.

Some of his moves like Javhale were gems ... not sure he got basketball though. Great guy to work for an organization but probably not a good eye test GM.

My main issue with his moves is he spent 3 years doing all of this and didn't land one player who we know for certain is part of their core. We have no idea who will be left on that team. At the very least if he was going to do all of this, at least land a player or 2 that you know will be part of this thing long term. At least Phil did that with KP. A fan base can root for a young, but bad team, if they see a bright future with a couple of players currently on the roster. There is no future with that entire roster. No players to fall back on knowing they will be there even next season and for future seasons. The assets are nice in theory, that's about it.

so phil got KP while he got Ok4 who phil would almost certainly have taken (of course can't say for sure though many will yell that of course phil would have still taken KP - BS).

What else does phil have?

Philly has a treasure chest of chips.

Phil has a franchise potential player with 1 draft pick over 3 years and Philly had the opportunity at one with a mountain of assets and failed. End of story.

When making an argument you can't just make up a strawman scenario of your own picking and then use it as the argument, that's called BS

No. Your argument is horrible. Phil picked a guy after philly picked who phil would have picked. That is called lucky. You are not even trying here.

Ok4 may be a good player anyway but again, luck is luck and luck counts.

And, we are not just talking about that draft. Hinkie left the next guy with a stockpile even if he was not a good judge of talent. He was still good at amassing assets.

You sound like a homer, not a fair and balanced mod.

The premise of building through the draft in philly is smart. Did he draft well? Not really. Part of that was getting quite unlucky.

The plan is still in place however, now they have better bball guys who will (hopefully) use the assets that he amassed.

And, I would not hire Hinkie to be a GM but I would definitely like a guy like that in the back office.

mreinman wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:The draft is hit or miss. I don't knock him to much for the misses in the draft. Then again at the same time what type of foundation did they bring draft picks into. If your going to go all in on draft picks then they should be brought into a environment that nurtures them into the players amd people they drafted them to be.

But targeting win share players is something they could have controled. If Hinkie was mertic guy deep in analytics. Why wasn't he able to find gems over the 3 yr span slowly piece by piece putting together a decent roster. While also making moves to collect assets? Shouldn't they be uncovering gems through analytics on a more consistent basis?

a decent argument but high WS guys are expensive now that GM's are all less dumb.

They have 2 players at the league average of 100. WS48 or higher. 2! None of them get real quality mins. On the bright side most of them get paid under league average so good job by Hinkie there. You liked Corey Joseph from SA, said he was a solid win share player on the rise. Y wasn't he adding those type of players who aren't expensive over the 3 yr span?

If Hinkie wasn't able to do it with that amount of cap space he had and assets due to being expensive. Then there really can't be any expectations for Phil to be able to do so. Something would have to give.

callmened wrote:my thoughts on sam hinkie:

- courageous smart dude who tried to help his team thru the draft. fine but he never drafted well
- in doing so he made a mockery of the NBA and a great bball city by tanking
- probably deserved to finish what he started BUT who was to say that this wouldnt go on forever
- i have no problem building thru the draft, my beef is him being cheap by not spending on players
- im not mad he is leaving but its concerning that hes being replaced by colangelo's son - i hate nepotism

Overall = he did his job by putting them in a great position to win. by taking an extreme approach he put his rep (and coach brown's rep) on the line and he paid for it. unfortunately, someone else will enjoy the fruits of his labor

PS = this should scare the HELL out of the knicks. not only have the sixers accumulated good young, cheap talent but they also have over $70 in cap space. they can outbid anyone we go after (i.e jennings, bazemore etc). Free agents always go where the money is. now the stigman of losing is GONE once hinkie left

So they can overpay for mediocre talent, wasn't that what Hinkie was getting away from in the first place. He couldnt evaluate talent and He created one of the worst team cultures in professional sports. Its great for basketball that this guy is out of a job

Jmpasq wrote:

callmened wrote:my thoughts on sam hinkie:

- courageous smart dude who tried to help his team thru the draft. fine but he never drafted well
- in doing so he made a mockery of the NBA and a great bball city by tanking
- probably deserved to finish what he started BUT who was to say that this wouldnt go on forever
- i have no problem building thru the draft, my beef is him being cheap by not spending on players
- im not mad he is leaving but its concerning that hes being replaced by colangelo's son - i hate nepotism

Overall = he did his job by putting them in a great position to win. by taking an extreme approach he put his rep (and coach brown's rep) on the line and he paid for it. unfortunately, someone else will enjoy the fruits of his labor

PS = this should scare the HELL out of the knicks. not only have the sixers accumulated good young, cheap talent but they also have over $70 in cap space. they can outbid anyone we go after (i.e jennings, bazemore etc). Free agents always go where the money is. now the stigman of losing is GONE once hinkie left

So they can overpay for mediocre talent, wasn't that what Hinkie was getting away from in the first place. He couldnt evaluate talent and He created one of the worst team cultures in professional sports. Its great for basketball that this guy is out of a job

in his 13 page manifesto, he said that theres always a 20% chance of getting a franchise superstar in the draft. his plan was to tank for 5 yrs and bet the odds that in one of those yrs he would get a franchise player. CUTE tactic but the NBA is and should be about WINNING. im happy hes out

callmened wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:

callmened wrote:my thoughts on sam hinkie:

- courageous smart dude who tried to help his team thru the draft. fine but he never drafted well
- in doing so he made a mockery of the NBA and a great bball city by tanking
- probably deserved to finish what he started BUT who was to say that this wouldnt go on forever
- i have no problem building thru the draft, my beef is him being cheap by not spending on players
- im not mad he is leaving but its concerning that hes being replaced by colangelo's son - i hate nepotism

Overall = he did his job by putting them in a great position to win. by taking an extreme approach he put his rep (and coach brown's rep) on the line and he paid for it. unfortunately, someone else will enjoy the fruits of his labor

PS = this should scare the HELL out of the knicks. not only have the sixers accumulated good young, cheap talent but they also have over $70 in cap space. they can outbid anyone we go after (i.e jennings, bazemore etc). Free agents always go where the money is. now the stigman of losing is GONE once hinkie left

So they can overpay for mediocre talent, wasn't that what Hinkie was getting away from in the first place. He couldnt evaluate talent and He created one of the worst team cultures in professional sports. Its great for basketball that this guy is out of a job

in his 13 page manifesto, he said that theres always a 20% chance of getting a franchise superstar in the draft. his plan was to tank for 5 yrs and bet the odds that in one of those yrs he would get a franchise player. CUTE tactic but the NBA is and should be about WINNING. im happy hes out

Even with that he was trading for other teams draft picks. So his team didn't specifically need to suck in order to have a high amount of draft picks. In the first draft which they landed Noel and MCW. CJ McCollum #10, Golbert #27, Crabbe #31, Schroder #17 Deing #21 were some of the better players taken in that draft and were other then CJ all mid to late round draft picks. So just like you can get lucky in the lottery and find a high quality player you can find one with mid to late round draft picks. True genius wouldn't be putting all his eggs into a 20% chance. It would be finding ways to use that 20% chance with house money.