ChuckBuck wrote:

mreinman wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

mreinman wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Thing with Hinkie's (Stinkie?) plan is at some point you have cash all those lottery balls for wins, right?

Having tons of picks and cap space are nice, but not if this plan is going 4 or 5 years or longer.

Ends have to justify the means eventually.

That still remains to be determined.

How about if he was hit by a bus tomorrow, did he put the next GM in a good position?

Not really. I mean they got rid of 2 or 3 pieces(probably more) that should've grew as core players here.

Didn't MCW win rookie of the year?

so what. People thought THJ was gonna be great too.

MCW has huge issues and that trade was brilliant.

Don't know about brilliant. I mean MCW wasn't the problem they sucked, lack of talent on the team was.

The Lakers pick the Sixers will be receiving is protected for selections 1-5 in 2015, 1-3 in 2016 and 1-3 in 2017 and unprotected in 2018

Bad news when you see where the Lakers are headed again this year. Could've had a potential #1 pick, but since it's protected...OH Well.

Stinkie, I mean Hinkie does it again.

The sixers are running similar system to Houston. In that system you can't have your lead guard shooting 25% from 3.

mreinman wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

mreinman wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

mreinman wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Thing with Hinkie's (Stinkie?) plan is at some point you have cash all those lottery balls for wins, right?

Having tons of picks and cap space are nice, but not if this plan is going 4 or 5 years or longer.

Ends have to justify the means eventually.

That still remains to be determined.

How about if he was hit by a bus tomorrow, did he put the next GM in a good position?

Not really. I mean they got rid of 2 or 3 pieces(probably more) that should've grew as core players here.

Didn't MCW win rookie of the year?

so what. People thought THJ was gonna be great too.

MCW has huge issues and that trade was brilliant.

Don't know about brilliant. I mean MCW wasn't the problem they sucked, lack of talent on the team was.

The Lakers pick the Sixers will be receiving is protected for selections 1-5 in 2015, 1-3 in 2016 and 1-3 in 2017 and unprotected in 2018

Bad news when you see where the Lakers are headed again this year. Could've had a potential #1 pick, but since it's protected...OH Well.

Stinkie, I mean Hinkie does it again.

The sixers are running similar system to Houston. In that system you can't have your lead guard shooting 25% from 3.

The whole point is whether or not the trade(s) made for flexibility for additional moves and signings to make will end up in cashing in a prized free agent.

If you were a top free agent, would you sign with the shyt-hole franchise knowing the future of the franchise hinged on Embiid's paper machete foot? Okafor though a stat collector, doesn't impact the game in wins and losses.

Can't remember the last time a big time free agent signed with Philly. I don't see them exit the dumpster fire anytime soon...

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Thing with Hinkie's (Stinkie?) plan is at some point you have cash all those lottery balls for wins, right?

Which indirectly brings up the essential pitfall.

Forgetting the risk of picking a big man with an injury on purpose, we'll forgive that and assume Emiid goes on to have a good career.

The problem is - IF executed as designed, Philly is going to have to PAY all these lottery pick, in rapid succession (sometimes in the same year) and it'll be in new NBA money. Maybe Philly will be prepared to pay huge luxury tax bills and approach $150m+ payrolls (though I'm doubtful), but they'll have to IF the players turn out to be stars and if you want them to get 4-5 years of dev time together to get it together (ala OKC, who btw, couldn't keep Harden).

If not, if they're just a constantly revolving door of trade fodder, while maybe in 2-4 years they might field a competitive team, they'll never make a run at title.

I see the idea… I get the appeal go the idea of getting another top 3 pick, maybe another top 6 pick if Lakers fall just the right place, and another 2 first rounders.

But then again, down the road, EVERYONE is gonna get HUGE raises in rapid succession, or moved.

I see the theory, I just don't see the pragmatic reality in which Philly fields a core of 4-5 lottery picks well into their development, individually and as a unit.

Philly is trying to position themselves for one big harden type trade.

Big Harden type trades are VERY usual.

And Harden had to be paid too.

If the "process" is reliant upon another team completing the process with them, that just highlights its shortcomings.

I GET why some fans like the idea of it. It's why trade checkers exist, because imagining the moving parts is fun and entertaining. I just doubt it actually comes up that way.

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Thing with Hinkie's (Stinkie?) plan is at some point you have cash all those lottery balls for wins, right?

Which indirectly brings up the essential pitfall.

Forgetting the risk of picking a big man with an injury on purpose, we'll forgive that and assume Emiid goes on to have a good career.

The problem is - IF executed as designed, Philly is going to have to PAY all these lottery pick, in rapid succession (sometimes in the same year) and it'll be in new NBA money. Maybe Philly will be prepared to pay huge luxury tax bills and approach $150m+ payrolls (though I'm doubtful), but they'll have to IF the players turn out to be stars and if you want them to get 4-5 years of dev time together to get it together (ala OKC, who btw, couldn't keep Harden).

If not, if they're just a constantly revolving door of trade fodder, while maybe in 2-4 years they might field a competitive team, they'll never make a run at title.

I see the idea… I get the appeal go the idea of getting another top 3 pick, maybe another top 6 pick if Lakers fall just the right place, and another 2 first rounders.

But then again, down the road, EVERYONE is gonna get HUGE raises in rapid succession, or moved.

I see the theory, I just don't see the pragmatic reality in which Philly fields a core of 4-5 lottery picks well into their development, individually and as a unit.

Philly is trying to position themselves for one big harden type trade.

Big Harden type trades are VERY usual.

And Harden had to be paid too.

If the "process" is reliant upon another team completing the process with them, that just highlights its shortcomings.

I GET why some fans like the idea of it. It's why trade checkers exist, because imagining the moving parts is fun and entertaining. I just doubt it actually comes up that way.

They have the assets to make a huge splash. They need to find that one big trade ... Houston pulled it off with many fewer assets.

Houston was a 42 win team when it got Harden. AND they had cap room on top of that.

Until Philly stops being a 15-20 win team, that 'big splash' isn't going to mean that much for Philly, and it took Houston 3 years and MORE big signings just to reach their high water mark, and I'm not sure they're headed in the right direction.

I for one think that they will either be crazy good in 3 years or at least still have many assets.

"Assets" meaning what? How many years can assets NOT equal wins and it's cool?

ANY idiot can lose 65 games on purpose and sit in the lottery selection chair.

And the any idiot who is doing it hasn't exactly distinguished himself (so far) with his selections.

If its enviable to be in the position they're in by being a 17 win team for half a decade, I don't know what the point of competitive basketball is anymore.

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Thing with Hinkie's (Stinkie?) plan is at some point you have cash all those lottery balls for wins, right?

Which indirectly brings up the essential pitfall.

Forgetting the risk of picking a big man with an injury on purpose, we'll forgive that and assume Emiid goes on to have a good career.

The problem is - IF executed as designed, Philly is going to have to PAY all these lottery pick, in rapid succession (sometimes in the same year) and it'll be in new NBA money. Maybe Philly will be prepared to pay huge luxury tax bills and approach $150m+ payrolls (though I'm doubtful), but they'll have to IF the players turn out to be stars and if you want them to get 4-5 years of dev time together to get it together (ala OKC, who btw, couldn't keep Harden).

If not, if they're just a constantly revolving door of trade fodder, while maybe in 2-4 years they might field a competitive team, they'll never make a run at title.

I see the idea… I get the appeal go the idea of getting another top 3 pick, maybe another top 6 pick if Lakers fall just the right place, and another 2 first rounders.

But then again, down the road, EVERYONE is gonna get HUGE raises in rapid succession, or moved.

I see the theory, I just don't see the pragmatic reality in which Philly fields a core of 4-5 lottery picks well into their development, individually and as a unit.

Philly is trying to position themselves for one big harden type trade.

Big Harden type trades are VERY usual.

And Harden had to be paid too.

If the "process" is reliant upon another team completing the process with them, that just highlights its shortcomings.

I GET why some fans like the idea of it. It's why trade checkers exist, because imagining the moving parts is fun and entertaining. I just doubt it actually comes up that way.

They have the assets to make a huge splash. They need to find that one big trade ... Houston pulled it off with many fewer assets.

Houston was a 42 win team when it got Harden. AND they had cap room on top of that.

Until Philly stops being a 15-20 win team, that 'big splash' isn't going to mean that much for Philly, and it took Houston 3 years and MORE big signings just to reach their high water mark, and I'm not sure they're headed in the right direction.

I for one think that they will either be crazy good in 3 years or at least still have many assets.

"Assets" meaning what? How many years can assets NOT equal wins and it's cool?

ANY idiot can lose 65 games on purpose and sit in the lottery selection chair.

And the any idiot who is doing it hasn't exactly distinguished himself (so far) with his selections.

If its enviable to be in the position they're in by being a 17 win team for half a decade, I don't know what the point of competitive basketball is anymore.

well then maybe you should judge this idiot in three years before we think that he is just another idiot?

Why, you've judged him not to be an idiot. You haven't expressed an agnostic 'wait-and-see' regard for "the process", you've made the same evaluation looking into the future and just come up with a different conclusion/observation.

So telling me to wait three years applies to you equally to you as to me, but you aren't waiting either.

not any idiot can compile the assets that he compiled. This idiot is an asset compiler and there is no better idiot at doing that.

How can you evaluate him against anyone else to say that? NO ONE is TRYING to lose as badly as he is on purpose for such an extended period if time.

He has NO PEER is this regard. Comparing him favorably to anyone is irrelevant.

Maybe he is not the guy that eventually gets them to the next level but if he hands it off to another GM (idiot :-) ) at this point, he sure put the new idiot in a great position.

I'll refer you to my previous post. Whoever inherits this is going to be faced with what OKC faced, having to pay a LOT of players big money (one way or another) all at the same time.

I do find it fascinating how for some fans the notion of maybe being good someday is SOO appealing.

I suspect the process is a shell game.

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Thing with Hinkie's (Stinkie?) plan is at some point you have cash all those lottery balls for wins, right?

Which indirectly brings up the essential pitfall.

Forgetting the risk of picking a big man with an injury on purpose, we'll forgive that and assume Emiid goes on to have a good career.

The problem is - IF executed as designed, Philly is going to have to PAY all these lottery pick, in rapid succession (sometimes in the same year) and it'll be in new NBA money. Maybe Philly will be prepared to pay huge luxury tax bills and approach $150m+ payrolls (though I'm doubtful), but they'll have to IF the players turn out to be stars and if you want them to get 4-5 years of dev time together to get it together (ala OKC, who btw, couldn't keep Harden).

If not, if they're just a constantly revolving door of trade fodder, while maybe in 2-4 years they might field a competitive team, they'll never make a run at title.

I see the idea… I get the appeal go the idea of getting another top 3 pick, maybe another top 6 pick if Lakers fall just the right place, and another 2 first rounders.

But then again, down the road, EVERYONE is gonna get HUGE raises in rapid succession, or moved.

I see the theory, I just don't see the pragmatic reality in which Philly fields a core of 4-5 lottery picks well into their development, individually and as a unit.

Philly is trying to position themselves for one big harden type trade.

Big Harden type trades are VERY usual.

And Harden had to be paid too.

If the "process" is reliant upon another team completing the process with them, that just highlights its shortcomings.

I GET why some fans like the idea of it. It's why trade checkers exist, because imagining the moving parts is fun and entertaining. I just doubt it actually comes up that way.

They have the assets to make a huge splash. They need to find that one big trade ... Houston pulled it off with many fewer assets.

Houston was a 42 win team when it got Harden. AND they had cap room on top of that.

Until Philly stops being a 15-20 win team, that 'big splash' isn't going to mean that much for Philly, and it took Houston 3 years and MORE big signings just to reach their high water mark, and I'm not sure they're headed in the right direction.

I for one think that they will either be crazy good in 3 years or at least still have many assets.

"Assets" meaning what? How many years can assets NOT equal wins and it's cool?

ANY idiot can lose 65 games on purpose and sit in the lottery selection chair.

And the any idiot who is doing it hasn't exactly distinguished himself (so far) with his selections.

If its enviable to be in the position they're in by being a 17 win team for half a decade, I don't know what the point of competitive basketball is anymore.

well then maybe you should judge this idiot in three years before we think that he is just another idiot?

Why, you've judged him not to be an idiot. You haven't expressed an agnostic 'wait-and-see' regard for "the process", you've made the same evaluation looking into the future and just come up with a different conclusion/observation.

So telling me to wait three years applies to you equally to you as to me, but you aren't waiting either.

not any idiot can compile the assets that he compiled. This idiot is an asset compiler and there is no better idiot at doing that.

How can you evaluate him against anyone else to say that? NO ONE is TRYING to lose as badly as he is on purpose for such an extended period if time.

He has NO PEER is this regard. Comparing him favorably to anyone is irrelevant.

Maybe he is not the guy that eventually gets them to the next level but if he hands it off to another GM (idiot :-) ) at this point, he sure put the new idiot in a great position.

I'll refer you to my previous post. Whoever inherits this is going to be faced with what OKC faced, having to pay a LOT of players big money (one way or another) all at the same time.

I do find it fascinating how for some fans the notion of maybe being good someday is SOO appealing.

I suspect the process is a shell game.

I know he is not an idiot based on what I have read about him. He is obviously extremely intelligent.

Other teams have tanked but of course not like this. He is tanking better than anyone and he will force rule changes.

I look at what he has compiled and its beyond belief that this was even possible. Some of his trades were brilliant.

Curious, have you read about him?

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Thing with Hinkie's (Stinkie?) plan is at some point you have cash all those lottery balls for wins, right?

Which indirectly brings up the essential pitfall.

Forgetting the risk of picking a big man with an injury on purpose, we'll forgive that and assume Emiid goes on to have a good career.

The problem is - IF executed as designed, Philly is going to have to PAY all these lottery pick, in rapid succession (sometimes in the same year) and it'll be in new NBA money. Maybe Philly will be prepared to pay huge luxury tax bills and approach $150m+ payrolls (though I'm doubtful), but they'll have to IF the players turn out to be stars and if you want them to get 4-5 years of dev time together to get it together (ala OKC, who btw, couldn't keep Harden).

If not, if they're just a constantly revolving door of trade fodder, while maybe in 2-4 years they might field a competitive team, they'll never make a run at title.

I see the idea… I get the appeal go the idea of getting another top 3 pick, maybe another top 6 pick if Lakers fall just the right place, and another 2 first rounders.

But then again, down the road, EVERYONE is gonna get HUGE raises in rapid succession, or moved.

I see the theory, I just don't see the pragmatic reality in which Philly fields a core of 4-5 lottery picks well into their development, individually and as a unit.

Philly is trying to position themselves for one big harden type trade.

Big Harden type trades are VERY usual.

And Harden had to be paid too.

If the "process" is reliant upon another team completing the process with them, that just highlights its shortcomings.

I GET why some fans like the idea of it. It's why trade checkers exist, because imagining the moving parts is fun and entertaining. I just doubt it actually comes up that way.

They have the assets to make a huge splash. They need to find that one big trade ... Houston pulled it off with many fewer assets.

Houston was a 42 win team when it got Harden. AND they had cap room on top of that.

Until Philly stops being a 15-20 win team, that 'big splash' isn't going to mean that much for Philly, and it took Houston 3 years and MORE big signings just to reach their high water mark, and I'm not sure they're headed in the right direction.

I for one think that they will either be crazy good in 3 years or at least still have many assets.

"Assets" meaning what? How many years can assets NOT equal wins and it's cool?

ANY idiot can lose 65 games on purpose and sit in the lottery selection chair.

And the any idiot who is doing it hasn't exactly distinguished himself (so far) with his selections.

If its enviable to be in the position they're in by being a 17 win team for half a decade, I don't know what the point of competitive basketball is anymore.

well then maybe you should judge this idiot in three years before we think that he is just another idiot?

Why, you've judged him not to be an idiot. You haven't expressed an agnostic 'wait-and-see' regard for "the process", you've made the same evaluation looking into the future and just come up with a different conclusion/observation.

So telling me to wait three years applies to you equally to you as to me, but you aren't waiting either.

not any idiot can compile the assets that he compiled. This idiot is an asset compiler and there is no better idiot at doing that.

How can you evaluate him against anyone else to say that? NO ONE is TRYING to lose as badly as he is on purpose for such an extended period if time.

He has NO PEER is this regard. Comparing him favorably to anyone is irrelevant.

Maybe he is not the guy that eventually gets them to the next level but if he hands it off to another GM (idiot :-) ) at this point, he sure put the new idiot in a great position.

I'll refer you to my previous post. Whoever inherits this is going to be faced with what OKC faced, having to pay a LOT of players big money (one way or another) all at the same time.

I do find it fascinating how for some fans the notion of maybe being good someday is SOO appealing.

I suspect the process is a shell game.

I know he is not an idiot based on what I have read about him. He is obviously extremely intelligent.

Other teams have tanked but of course not like this. He is tanking better than anyone and he will force rule changes.

I look at what he has compiled and its beyond belief that this was even possible. Some of his trades were brilliant.

Curious, have you read about him?

No, and I didn't call him an idiot. "Any idiot" is a colloquialism which generally means it doesn't take a smart person to figure it out. Hinkie may be smart, but my point was anyone here can devise the strategy of losing on purpose, and having as low a payroll as possible on purpose and putting a sign on the lawn that says "everything for sale, interesting trades considered".

I don't question any specific trades that were made, I question the viability of the "stockpile" strategy, IF the purpose is to actual compete on the court and not just perpetually be the most elastic team in the league, and I suspect they're more on the path to elasticity than actually competitive.

Put again, in this day and age, I suspect some fans favor the former. So long as the get to dream on the team all the flexibility may someday afford, the losing is okay.

As you say, he is "tanking better than anyone". This is a utter bastardization of what you're supposed to be better at in the NBA.

btw, do you remember the year that GSW tanked really hard? Tanking is a loop hole that should be closed but right now its not.

Philly has also been quite competitive this year despite losing (many close games).

Don't know if you have (you have not answered) read about hinkie and about Philly's system both on and off the court but its quite interesting and I am really curious to see what the outcome will be. It may go down as brilliant or an epic failure (doubt it since the worst case scenario would be that a new GM comes in and has many assets to work with).

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:btw, do you remember the year that GSW tanked really hard? Tanking is a loop hole that should be closed but right now its not.

You can't close it, there is no rule you can write that possibly wouldn't have the effect of penalizing a team losing genuinely.

Philly has also been quite competitive this year despite losing (many close games).

Just. Stop.

They have the worst point differential in the league by a wide margin and significantly worse than their own point differential the last two years.

They're awful… on purpose.

Don't know if you have (you have not answered) read about hinkie and about Philly's system both on and off the court but its quite interesting and I am really curious to see what the outcome will be. It may go down as brilliant or an epic failure (doubt it since the worst case scenario would be that a new GM comes in and has many assets to work with).

I answered no.

And my point is, I don't think it works even if it works.

I am sure that you looked at the game logs before you quoted the differential? Of course you didnt because you just want to be a dik as usual.

And, nobody really cares what you think. Just another dummy talking in absolutes about sh1t that you know nothing about.

You, the genius know that outcome and have stamped it is as stupid ... great. How stupid.

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:I am sure that you looked at the game logs before you quoted the differential?

And I imagine you've compared the game logs against something objective for a comparison, say against last seasons to see if there is any actual progress/difference?

Or is your obvious high regard for what Hinkie is doing making you see what you want to see?

But I'm all ears. What have you objectively compared their game logs to?

Of course you didnt because you just want to be a dik as usual.

And, nobody really cares what you think. Just another dummy talking in absolutes about sh1t that you know nothing about.

You, the genius know that outcome and have stamped it is as stupid ... great. How stupid.

Ah, the name calling/'nobody really cares what YOU think' ploy. Always an effective rebuttal.

Once again, you don't know the outcome either and have a subjective opinion about what will happen no different than I do.

Good news is I don't have to misspell hypocrite to get it past the censor bot.

I am just a fan and I have no idea what the outcome is. I am certainly not stupid to state an uninformed opinion about what the future holds as fact.

I have actually watched many of their games.

I have tried numerous times to converse with you respectfully (check the thread) and you obviously can't do this.

You are just another silly fan who over evaluates themselves.

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:I am just a fan and I have no idea what the outcome is. I am certainly not stupid to state an uninformed opinion about what the future holds as fact.

You: "I for one think that they will either be crazy good in 3 years or at least still have many assets. Better than my forecasts for many other teams.

Me: "I don't think it works even if it works."

So somehow you've worked it out in your head that you expressing what you think is just being a fan, and me expressing what I think in the exact same manner is stating my "opinion as fact."

I can see why you admire roster flexibility. That's a VERY flexible way to look at things.

I have actually watched many of their games.

Which is why I asked YOU what are you comparing them to.

I went back and read your posts and think that your arguments are fair and not in absolute terms. My bad on that.

Hinkie is extremely polarizing, there are those who despise him and those who are enamored by what he is doing (many of them geeks) and are watching closely to see what will be the outcome. I am one of those who are watching them closely. I could care less about philly, never have. I find this quite intriguing. I followed Morey the same way and love that he is doing a lot of experimenting, especially with his D-league team.

10 years ago, 95 percent of NBA fans (and teams) would have said that advanced analytics in bball was stupid. Today, 95% have jump on the bandwagon. I think that Hinkie is testing waters that nobody dared to test. Is he flailing a bit? Perhaps he is, but he has also pulled off some stunners. And he is also extremely data driven (which I really like).

I don't care if this takes a number of years, perhaps because I am not a philly fan. I am glad that this is being done even it is experimental. Its fascinating.

Chucking up 40 threes a game maybe considered insane too but I would love to see it tried (morey is testing this in the d-league). Who would have thought that we would be where we are now with the 3 point attempt rate? Everyone thought that it was stupid ... they were all wrong.

Hinkie is running a controversial experiment. Many think it is brilliant and many think that it is insane. Perhaps its a little of both ... lets see how it plays out.

mreinman wrote:Also,

They lost to cleveland at home 107-100. It was a very competitive game. Actually blew a big lead.

Lost at Milwaukee 91-87. That is pretty damn competitive.

They lost at cleveland 108-102. Philly at half time, played badly in the 3rd and then outscored them in the fourth.

They lost at the Spurs 92-83. Philly won the second and fourth quarter. That is not easy to do in SA.

This is not a team that is not trying to win. They just don't have that goto guy. One player can change everything. They have also given themselves a ton of chances at hitting big in the lotto.

Saric is also a really nice asset that will hopefully be coming soon.

Embiid has been a bust but its not like there was an obvious pass up.

I don't think any team, no matter how bad, loses by 15 every night. If you appreciate advance stats then you know differential is one of the more respected indicators, across all sports.

For every close game they'd played, they've been blown out two more. For every bad team I think I can show you a game every 3 or 4 where they kept it to single digits.

As to "the process" I'll again say I have less of an issue with the theory of stockpiling a bunch of good young players and more of an issue of what happens then?

Do you pay them all? Going with a roster of 6-8 HIGH lottery picks? If you do, you aren't getting a solid bench. IF they turn out to be anything, they're all going to be commanding $20 before you know it.

Do you just keep turning them over when they get too expensive?

Houston got Harden because they could pay him (immediately) when OKC couldn't and you could project what adding him to a 42 win team could mean. Is Philly gonna be in either of those positions? Good enough that a Harden does something for them AND willing to pay him?

To be up front, these are what prompted my original comment:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/666256646163705856

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/666256894948806657

Not only are they historically bad, they're somehow top heavy too.

I don't like the sound of that mix.