Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:hard to make any point to a crowd that has zero interest in being objective.

Hinkie may be a genius or he may just be an idiot (in peoples eyes). Every genius was first viewed as an idiot.

Is Hinkie making genius moves? We really have no clue since we are all pretty clueless even if we think that we are closet GM's.

We pretty much know the Hinkie is a genius and we know that he is experimenting. Is he making idiot moves? We have not idea. Will Hinkie be looked at in five years as the GM-genius that got us Lebron or the idiot GM who got us Embiid and made us the laughing stock that we still are.

I personally have no idea what the outcome will be since I am obviously not as good of a GM as many on this board are.

I live for objective. So let's be objective.

When is it permissible to begin objectively qualifying Hinkie's effectiveness?

I subjectively perceive there to be a dynamic among his fans or his non-critics who regard themselves as open-minded to give him further credit for engineering another bad year. Each additional sub-20 win season just gives him yet another lottery asset and as a natural extension yet another future season it'll require for his plan to see fruition.

So objectively, when can be start judging? When is it fair to expect to see something resembling the premise of the game as opposed to more lottery balls?

If 5 years from now the cycle continues can we try to draw conclusions?

I'm really asking?

I believe he took over a 34-win team. We are in year 3 and the team is regressing. It is safe to say that after 5 years, it is highly unlikely this team will even meet the 34-win season when Hinkie took over. So i think it is safe to start judging now, because they simply aren't pacing themselves fast enough for the torture the fan base has endured. But of course things can always change. They need luck.

fan based has been tortured for years. being a 34 win team is as bad as you can get. NBA purgatory. You don't win rings with Elton Brands and your franchise.

They need to draft a star! No other way to do it. They need as many chances as they can to draft a star and need to wait for as long as it takes unless fans are happy with being a 34 win team for the next 25 years.

mreinman wrote:fan based has been tortured for years. being a 34 win team is as bad as you can get.

I think the point of this thread is Hinkie is challenging that premise.

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:hard to make any point to a crowd that has zero interest in being objective.

Hinkie may be a genius or he may just be an idiot (in peoples eyes). Every genius was first viewed as an idiot.

Is Hinkie making genius moves? We really have no clue since we are all pretty clueless even if we think that we are closet GM's.

We pretty much know the Hinkie is a genius and we know that he is experimenting. Is he making idiot moves? We have not idea. Will Hinkie be looked at in five years as the GM-genius that got us Lebron or the idiot GM who got us Embiid and made us the laughing stock that we still are.

I personally have no idea what the outcome will be since I am obviously not as good of a GM as many on this board are.

I live for objective. So let's be objective.

When is it permissible to begin objectively qualifying Hinkie's effectiveness?

I subjectively perceive there to be a dynamic among his fans or his non-critics who regard themselves as open-minded to give him further credit for engineering another bad year. Each additional sub-20 win season just gives him yet another lottery asset and as a natural extension yet another future season it'll require for his plan to see fruition.

So objectively, when can be start judging? When is it fair to expect to see something resembling the premise of the game as opposed to more lottery balls?

If 5 years from now the cycle continues can we try to draw conclusions?

I'm really asking?

I believe he took over a 34-win team. We are in year 3 and the team is regressing. It is safe to say that after 5 years, it is highly unlikely this team will even meet the 34-win season when Hinkie took over. So i think it is safe to start judging now, because they simply aren't pacing themselves fast enough for the torture the fan base has endured. But of course things can always change. They need luck.

fan based has been tortured for years. being a 34 win team is as bad as you can get. NBA purgatory. You don't win rings with Elton Brands and your franchise.

They need to draft a star! No other way to do it. They need as many chances as they can to draft a star and need to wait for as long as it takes unless fans are happy with being a 34 win team for the next 25 years.

Detroit won a title... who was the star they drafted on that team?

I certainly agree... drafting a star seems like a prerequisite. Developing players is as well. So is building a team. You think these guys will stick around? Team sports isnt an algo...

Detroit was an anomaly in a number of ways.

Hinkie believes that first you need to draft that star and second, you need to build around them. He is trying to give himself as many chances as he can (before the fans start a mutiny).

He will need to hit big this off season and he will also need to start spending money and trading some assets for players. His window is closing.

mreinman wrote:

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:hard to make any point to a crowd that has zero interest in being objective.

Hinkie may be a genius or he may just be an idiot (in peoples eyes). Every genius was first viewed as an idiot.

Is Hinkie making genius moves? We really have no clue since we are all pretty clueless even if we think that we are closet GM's.

We pretty much know the Hinkie is a genius and we know that he is experimenting. Is he making idiot moves? We have not idea. Will Hinkie be looked at in five years as the GM-genius that got us Lebron or the idiot GM who got us Embiid and made us the laughing stock that we still are.

I personally have no idea what the outcome will be since I am obviously not as good of a GM as many on this board are.

I live for objective. So let's be objective.

When is it permissible to begin objectively qualifying Hinkie's effectiveness?

I subjectively perceive there to be a dynamic among his fans or his non-critics who regard themselves as open-minded to give him further credit for engineering another bad year. Each additional sub-20 win season just gives him yet another lottery asset and as a natural extension yet another future season it'll require for his plan to see fruition.

So objectively, when can be start judging? When is it fair to expect to see something resembling the premise of the game as opposed to more lottery balls?

If 5 years from now the cycle continues can we try to draw conclusions?

I'm really asking?

I believe he took over a 34-win team. We are in year 3 and the team is regressing. It is safe to say that after 5 years, it is highly unlikely this team will even meet the 34-win season when Hinkie took over. So i think it is safe to start judging now, because they simply aren't pacing themselves fast enough for the torture the fan base has endured. But of course things can always change. They need luck.

fan based has been tortured for years. being a 34 win team is as bad as you can get. NBA purgatory. You don't win rings with Elton Brands and your franchise.

They need to draft a star! No other way to do it. They need as many chances as they can to draft a star and need to wait for as long as it takes unless fans are happy with being a 34 win team for the next 25 years.

Detroit won a title... who was the star they drafted on that team?

I certainly agree... drafting a star seems like a prerequisite. Developing players is as well. So is building a team. You think these guys will stick around? Team sports isnt an algo...

Detroit was an anomaly in a number of ways.

Hinkie believes that first you need to draft that star and second, you need to build around them. He is trying to give himself as many chances as he can (before the fans start a mutiny).

He will need to hit big this off season and he will also need to start spending money and trading some assets for players. His window is closing.

Drafting a star is nice. Taking a season when things are failing (see Knicks last year) is understandable. Losing intentially and purposly putting your players in a position to fail is disgusting. Zero chance of success with this idiot.

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:hard to make any point to a crowd that has zero interest in being objective.

Hinkie may be a genius or he may just be an idiot (in peoples eyes). Every genius was first viewed as an idiot.

Is Hinkie making genius moves? We really have no clue since we are all pretty clueless even if we think that we are closet GM's.

We pretty much know the Hinkie is a genius and we know that he is experimenting. Is he making idiot moves? We have not idea. Will Hinkie be looked at in five years as the GM-genius that got us Lebron or the idiot GM who got us Embiid and made us the laughing stock that we still are.

I personally have no idea what the outcome will be since I am obviously not as good of a GM as many on this board are.

I live for objective. So let's be objective.

When is it permissible to begin objectively qualifying Hinkie's effectiveness?

I subjectively perceive there to be a dynamic among his fans or his non-critics who regard themselves as open-minded to give him further credit for engineering another bad year. Each additional sub-20 win season just gives him yet another lottery asset and as a natural extension yet another future season it'll require for his plan to see fruition.

So objectively, when can be start judging? When is it fair to expect to see something resembling the premise of the game as opposed to more lottery balls?

If 5 years from now the cycle continues can we try to draw conclusions?

I'm really asking?

I believe he took over a 34-win team. We are in year 3 and the team is regressing. It is safe to say that after 5 years, it is highly unlikely this team will even meet the 34-win season when Hinkie took over. So i think it is safe to start judging now, because they simply aren't pacing themselves fast enough for the torture the fan base has endured. But of course things can always change. They need luck.

fan based has been tortured for years. being a 34 win team is as bad as you can get. NBA purgatory. You don't win rings with Elton Brands and your franchise.

They need to draft a star! No other way to do it. They need as many chances as they can to draft a star and need to wait for as long as it takes unless fans are happy with being a 34 win team for the next 25 years.

Detroit won a title... who was the star they drafted on that team?

I certainly agree... drafting a star seems like a prerequisite. Developing players is as well. So is building a team. You think these guys will stick around? Team sports isnt an algo...

Detroit was an anomaly in a number of ways.

Hinkie believes that first you need to draft that star and second, you need to build around them. He is trying to give himself as many chances as he can (before the fans start a mutiny).

He will need to hit big this off season and he will also need to start spending money and trading some assets for players. His window is closing.

Detroit built a team. I would say the anomaly is Phili... actually no, because Phili hasnt accomplished anything, they are just another bad team with bad management.

Drafting a star is nice. Taking a season when things are failing (see Knicks last year) is understandable. Losing intentially and purposly putting your players in a position to fail is disgusting. Zero chance of success with this idiot.

what did philly accomplish before hinkie?

why is it that this basketball talk gets you so angry and fired up?

martin wrote:

mreinman wrote:

martin wrote:Hinkie may have missed one of the biggest jackpots in the history of the last 10 years: KP.

If KP progresses as he has - even if that levels off after a bit - should we conclude Hinkie has failed?

Did he scout KP enough? Looks like the answer is No.

I think Hinkie's Sixers experiment is based off of getting a franchise player in the draft, if that is the case, why didn't he draft KP over OK4? OK4 was the safer pick, right?

Absolutely agree! I think that he caved to the fan based by taking Ok4. Could you imagine how many crying kids there would have been in Philly if he took kp? He would have had to go into hiding.

He did scout KP. From what I read, no other GM saw him more in person overseas.

Again, was this bad luck or bad move? What would phil have done if he had the #3 pick? I would love to think that he would have taken KP but I think that he takes Ok4.

And with all the Hinkie talk, how about Kupchak? At least he has a city that can attract players.

Caving to fans based by taking OK4 is not believable in this Hinkie premise, remember he is failing all over the place and that is the norm. He doesn't care what fans think.

I would agree with you but this being year 3, I think that he is thinking about trying to keep his job.

mreinman wrote:

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:hard to make any point to a crowd that has zero interest in being objective.

Hinkie may be a genius or he may just be an idiot (in peoples eyes). Every genius was first viewed as an idiot.

Is Hinkie making genius moves? We really have no clue since we are all pretty clueless even if we think that we are closet GM's.

We pretty much know the Hinkie is a genius and we know that he is experimenting. Is he making idiot moves? We have not idea. Will Hinkie be looked at in five years as the GM-genius that got us Lebron or the idiot GM who got us Embiid and made us the laughing stock that we still are.

I personally have no idea what the outcome will be since I am obviously not as good of a GM as many on this board are.

I live for objective. So let's be objective.

When is it permissible to begin objectively qualifying Hinkie's effectiveness?

I subjectively perceive there to be a dynamic among his fans or his non-critics who regard themselves as open-minded to give him further credit for engineering another bad year. Each additional sub-20 win season just gives him yet another lottery asset and as a natural extension yet another future season it'll require for his plan to see fruition.

So objectively, when can be start judging? When is it fair to expect to see something resembling the premise of the game as opposed to more lottery balls?

If 5 years from now the cycle continues can we try to draw conclusions?

I'm really asking?

I believe he took over a 34-win team. We are in year 3 and the team is regressing. It is safe to say that after 5 years, it is highly unlikely this team will even meet the 34-win season when Hinkie took over. So i think it is safe to start judging now, because they simply aren't pacing themselves fast enough for the torture the fan base has endured. But of course things can always change. They need luck.

fan based has been tortured for years. being a 34 win team is as bad as you can get. NBA purgatory. You don't win rings with Elton Brands and your franchise.

They need to draft a star! No other way to do it. They need as many chances as they can to draft a star and need to wait for as long as it takes unless fans are happy with being a 34 win team for the next 25 years.

Detroit won a title... who was the star they drafted on that team?

I certainly agree... drafting a star seems like a prerequisite. Developing players is as well. So is building a team. You think these guys will stick around? Team sports isnt an algo...

Detroit was an anomaly in a number of ways.

Hinkie believes that first you need to draft that star and second, you need to build around them. He is trying to give himself as many chances as he can (before the fans start a mutiny).

He will need to hit big this off season and he will also need to start spending money and trading some assets for players. His window is closing.

Detroit built a team. I would say the anomaly is Phili... actually no, because Phili hasnt accomplished anything, they are just another bad team with bad management.

Drafting a star is nice. Taking a season when things are failing (see Knicks last year) is understandable. Losing intentially and purposly putting your players in a position to fail is disgusting. Zero chance of success with this idiot.

what did philly accomplish before hinkie?

why is it that this basketball talk gets you so angry and fired up?

mreinman wrote:what did philly accomplish before hinkie?

Immediately before?

The made the postseason the same year thy picked #2 in the draft.

They made the postseason the next season and won a first round postseason series.

They were decimated by injuries the following season… and then came Hinkie.

Now playing in postseason games is a positive for any professional sport franchise.

If by "what the did accomplish" you solely mean championships, but that regard all but 2 or 3 teams should be tanking.

If your criteria is more liberal, they put a team on the floor that played meaningful games, in the regular season and postseason.

mreinman wrote:

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:hard to make any point to a crowd that has zero interest in being objective.

Hinkie may be a genius or he may just be an idiot (in peoples eyes). Every genius was first viewed as an idiot.

Is Hinkie making genius moves? We really have no clue since we are all pretty clueless even if we think that we are closet GM's.

We pretty much know the Hinkie is a genius and we know that he is experimenting. Is he making idiot moves? We have not idea. Will Hinkie be looked at in five years as the GM-genius that got us Lebron or the idiot GM who got us Embiid and made us the laughing stock that we still are.

I personally have no idea what the outcome will be since I am obviously not as good of a GM as many on this board are.

I live for objective. So let's be objective.

When is it permissible to begin objectively qualifying Hinkie's effectiveness?

I subjectively perceive there to be a dynamic among his fans or his non-critics who regard themselves as open-minded to give him further credit for engineering another bad year. Each additional sub-20 win season just gives him yet another lottery asset and as a natural extension yet another future season it'll require for his plan to see fruition.

So objectively, when can be start judging? When is it fair to expect to see something resembling the premise of the game as opposed to more lottery balls?

If 5 years from now the cycle continues can we try to draw conclusions?

I'm really asking?

I believe he took over a 34-win team. We are in year 3 and the team is regressing. It is safe to say that after 5 years, it is highly unlikely this team will even meet the 34-win season when Hinkie took over. So i think it is safe to start judging now, because they simply aren't pacing themselves fast enough for the torture the fan base has endured. But of course things can always change. They need luck.

fan based has been tortured for years. being a 34 win team is as bad as you can get. NBA purgatory. You don't win rings with Elton Brands and your franchise.

They need to draft a star! No other way to do it. They need as many chances as they can to draft a star and need to wait for as long as it takes unless fans are happy with being a 34 win team for the next 25 years.

Detroit won a title... who was the star they drafted on that team?

I certainly agree... drafting a star seems like a prerequisite. Developing players is as well. So is building a team. You think these guys will stick around? Team sports isnt an algo...

Detroit was an anomaly in a number of ways.

Hinkie believes that first you need to draft that star and second, you need to build around them. He is trying to give himself as many chances as he can (before the fans start a mutiny).

He will need to hit big this off season and he will also need to start spending money and trading some assets for players. His window is closing.

Detroit built a team. I would say the anomaly is Phili... actually no, because Phili hasnt accomplished anything, they are just another bad team with bad management.

Drafting a star is nice. Taking a season when things are failing (see Knicks last year) is understandable. Losing intentially and purposly putting your players in a position to fail is disgusting. Zero chance of success with this idiot.

what did philly accomplish before hinkie?

why is it that this basketball talk gets you so angry and fired up?

they have gotten worse under Hinkie. I think thats the point. What did I say that indicated I am angry or fired up? Stange statement.

your tone seems like you are ready to smash your keyboard. Perhaps it unintentional, but that is the way its coming across.

I like conversing with you and just hope we can keep it civil and respectful. I am sure that I can do the same and sometimes can take it a bit too far.

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:what did philly accomplish before hinkie?

Immediately before?

The made the postseason the same year thy picked #2 in the draft.

They made the postseason the next season and won a first round postseason series.

They were decimated by injuries the following season… and then came Hinkie.

Now playing in postseason games is a positive for any professional sport franchise.

If by "what the did accomplish" you solely mean championships, but that regard all but 2 or 3 teams should be tanking.

If your criteria is more liberal, they put a team on the floor that played meaningful games, in the regular season and postseason.

so I guess that it depends on what the end game is.

Okay, what is it?

Championship or bust?

I'd again argue if that is the criteria, all about the Warriors, Cavs, Spurs, maybe another team or two should be tanking right now.

How was that last philly team getting a star? No way they were gonna be contenders with that team.

Traded up one spot to draft Leonard in 2011? Drafted Butler?

Drafted Green or Middleton in 2012?

Drafted Gobert or Antetokounmpo in 2013?

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:what did philly accomplish before hinkie?

Immediately before?

The made the postseason the same year thy picked #2 in the draft.

They made the postseason the next season and won a first round postseason series.

They were decimated by injuries the following season… and then came Hinkie.

Now playing in postseason games is a positive for any professional sport franchise.

If by "what the did accomplish" you solely mean championships, but that regard all but 2 or 3 teams should be tanking.

If your criteria is more liberal, they put a team on the floor that played meaningful games, in the regular season and postseason.

so I guess that it depends on what the end game is.

Okay, what is it?

Championship or bust?

I'd again argue if that is the criteria, all about the Warriors, Cavs, Spurs, maybe another team or two should be tanking right now.

How was that last philly team getting a star? No way they were gonna be contenders with that team.

Traded up one spot to draft Leonard in 2011? Drafted Butler?

Drafted Green or Middleton in 2012?

Drafted Gobert or Antetokounmpo in 2013?

so you want them to rely on hitting a home run in the draft? that is exactly what hinkie preaches against.

and yes, he is going all in (or bust) to hit on a franchise pick.

Do you believe that? He needs to hit a homerun, that's what his premise is, isn't it? That's why all the asset collection, etc.