CrushAlot wrote:

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.

The situation in Philly was one that Porzingis and his agents wanted no part of. They wouldn't release health information and Kristaps wouldn't work out privately for the Sixers prior to the draft. They wanted KP to go to the Knicks. Who created that situation in Philly where a player wouldn't release health info or workout?

martin wrote:

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.

I stopped reading after you tried to read Phil's mind.

I am not making an argument BTW, I am presenting fact. Knicks got a potential franchise player. Philly does not.

Phil's Knicks started with 1 draft pick over 3 years.

Those aren't arguments. Facts.

luck or smarts? Just saying "facts" is not enough. And what else do we have? Tony Wroten?

Hinkie made many moves that were brilliant. His drafts were obviously not his strong point though if you go through the drafts its hard to say that he definitely drafted the wrong guy at the time.

Jeff Van Gundy had a great interview with Zach Lowe that is a must listen to get a good perspective on Hinkie.

WaltLongmire wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

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.

Minnesota (I assume it was Flip) brought in KG and Prince, and even though both guys are in the twilight of their careers, you know their professionalism and experience have been important in the development of Minny's younger players, who also get to glimpse their championship rings every now and then.

You know that the vets we have on the Knicks helped KP and Grant deal with a disappointing season.

You look at the Lakers and realize that Bryant probably didn't have the desire to wet nurse some of their younger players because he was going through his swan song and because the team was not competitive. Maybe 10 years ago he would have been a better influence on Russell...who knows.

Sixers brought in Brand too late to help OK4...I'm not sure they had any veterans with prior success in the league on their original roster at the start of this season...Did they?

Instead you have OK4 and with 20 year old Christian Wood when the **** hit the fan at 4AM outside a club.

You can make a case that this mistake by Hinkie was as big as any other he made.

I agree with this. He should have brought in cheap veteran sitters.

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

martin wrote:

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.

I stopped reading after you tried to read Phil's mind.

I am not making an argument BTW, I am presenting fact. Knicks got a potential franchise player. Philly does not.

Phil's Knicks started with 1 draft pick over 3 years.

Those aren't arguments. Facts.

luck or smarts? Just saying "facts" is not enough. And what else do we have? Tony Wroten?

Hinkie made many moves that were brilliant. His drafts were obviously not his strong point though if you go through the drafts its hard to say that he definitely drafted the wrong guy at the time.

Jeff Van Gundy had a great interview with Zach Lowe that is a must listen to get a good perspective on Hinkie.

I listened to that. Was JVG the guy that talked about how worried he was about Brett Brown and what the losing was doing to him? I can't remember, but a guy I really respect spent a long time talking about Brown I believe on Lowe's show. I will have to listen to Jeff again.

I need to listen to it again as well. Its wasn't just fair and balanced on Hinkie and the sixers but he discussed many different things.

One of the best interviews I've heard.

WaltLongmire wrote:Figured I would throw this into the pot since Morey and Hinkie are seen as a two-headed monster by some...

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/718876118435147776

Saturday, April 9, 2016
Rockets to evaluate GM Daryl Morey, interim coach J.B. Bickerstaff after season
By Marc Stein and Calvin Watkins
ESPN Staff Writer

The Houston Rockets are planning a comprehensive evaluation of all facets of the organization at the end of this highly disappointing season that will put general manager Daryl Morey and interim coach J.B. Bickerstaff under the microscope, according to league sources.

Sources told ESPN that the Rockets believe every aspect of the organization -- coaching staff, front office and, of course, their roster -- must be subject to a thorough review in the wake of Houston's slide to a 38-41 outfit that's at serious risk to miss the playoffs after damaging losses this week to Dallas and Phoenix.

Houston won 56 games and reached the Western Conference finals last season.

Rockets owner Leslie Alexander has publicly acknowledged that Bickerstaff -- who replaced Kevin McHale in an interim role just 11 games into this season -- would have to be assessed at season's end.

Significant roster changes are likewise expected, with free agent-to-be Dwight Howard widely anticipated to move elsewhere and little certain beyond the Rockets' presumed intention to reload around star guard James Harden.

Sources say Morey, whose contract runs through the 2017-18 season, ‎also faces some uncertainty in the wake of the Rockets' struggles. Morey's ever-bold approach to roster assembly won deserved kudos for bringing Harden (October 2012) and Howard (July 2013) to Houston in quick succession, but team chemistry has been a rising concern this season given the well-chronicled deterioration of the Harden-Howard relationship and the failed offseason gamble on guard Ty Lawson.

"You're asking the wrong guy about that," Morey told ESPN in a recent interview when asked about his job security. "That's Mr. Alexander's choice and all I do is my job every day. He makes that call."

After a 4-7 start, Houston made the stunning decision to part ways with McHale, who had barely begun the first year of a new three-year extension.

Bickerstaff has fared better, going 34-34 in his interim role, but Houston's defensive frailties and repeated inability to hold big leads have conspired to put the Rockets on par with the Chicago Bulls on the list of this season's most disappointing teams.

Bickerstaff, for his part, says he has not yet commenced discussions with management about his job status.

"No, not at all, that's not even a issue [or] a concern," Bickerstaff said of his future prior to the Rockets' loss to the Suns on Thursday night.‎

The Rockets have to finish the season with a three-game winning streak to reach .500 and avoid their first losing season since going 34-48 in 2005-06. Entering Saturday, Houston is one full game behind No. 8 Utah and three behind No. 7 Dallas.

Morey made many dumb moves. He let lowry go (horrible!!!), Howard is awful for their spread offense and is an overall terrible fit. Lin. Lawson ...

He did have some good runs and overachieved big time last year. He made the trade of the century with Harden.

This year is disappointing and too much turmoil going on there. Would not be shocked if he goes but I would say that he has more than a 50% chance to stay.