OT Sam Hinkie

[nomar]

You are right. You don't understand. Basketball, as a form of entertainment, is not something anyone is required to watch or pay for. If you don't like what the Sixers are doing, don't go. Don't watch. Vote with your wallet.

What Hinkie inherited was a team devoid of current quality assets and devoid of valuable future picks. Things were AWFUL. He presented options to Sixer management about how they could become a) competitive (i.e. playoff caliber) or b) how they could potentially compete for championships. Each required a different strategy and different sacrifices.

The management chose to go "all in" and try to compete for a chip -- something that Sam began to engineer. He was open/honest that it would take time and be painful. As a lifelong Sixers fan that was tired of the mediocrity that existed post Iverson, I was FULLY on board with his process. I am smart enough to know that all Sam did was take a step back in hopes of taking 2 steps forward. There aren't/weren't guarantees. He put the Sixers in position to gain assets and optionality in order to obtain superstars -- via trades, draft, and even FAs.

The plan is midstream and I am deeply upset that the Sixer management, of which I know a couple, actually made the recent decision they did.

Of course ownership wants to separate customers from their wallets...and guess what, so does UConn. Wake up. This is a capitalistic society.

Sounds like Stockholm Syndrome. Will, it's not your fault.

By the way, I do go to games (2-3 per season) and I have NBA League Pass. I've watched no less than 70 games/year since Hinkie took over. Despite all the losing I still would rather watch the Sixers hustle and play hard in a losing effort than watch the Knicks or Nets do anything.

The question i would ask you...when UConn fell on hard times did you abandon them or watch the games? I watched them all.

If Warde Manuel dismissed all of Kevin Ollie's best players so we would purposely lose games, you bet your @ss I would have found another team to watch

 

[Waquoit]

That this strategy has widespread support is just more proof the NBA sucks. The fact that tanking is acceptable is outrageous. Let's call it what it is - losing on purpose. Or if that's too strong, not trying to win. Didn't the Black Sox get banned for doing the same thing? Why would anyone buy a season ticket? That's why the EPL is so great. Every game played means something. Every team tries to win every game. That's sports, competition, trying to win,

 

[WhartonHusky]

Sounds like Stockholm Syndrome. Will, it's not your fault.


If Warde Manuel dismissed all of Kevin Ollie's best players so we would purposely lose games, you bet your @ss I would have found another team to watch

Until the new players turned into a championship caliber team -- then you'd be right back on the bandwagon. When you are a diehard, you don't consider those options. Just ask Cubs fans.

 

[WhartonHusky]

EPL? Really? Clearly you don't follow Chelsea. Never seen a team quit on their coach quite like that.

Tanking exists in all major sports. Wake up fellas.

 

[WhartonHusky]

Curious....is it ok for the GSW to rest their starters? Ok for San Antonio to rest the big 3 on back-to-backs? I mean, by sitting the stars you are obviously not "trying to win".

 

[nomar]

Until the new players turned into a championship caliber team -- then you'd be right back on the bandwagon. When you are a diehard, you don't consider those options. Just ask Cubs fans.

I don't need to ask a Cubs fan. Look at my handle, dude.

I understand that deep down, the strategy was aimed at maximizing the team's chance at winning a title -- as opposed to, say, what the Indians' owner was doing in Major League -- but at a certain point you have to get angry at the team for picking a strategy that was (a) guaranteed to produce a garbage team for a period of years, (b) likely to alienate a lot of players and agents, and (c) unlikely to produce a title. No? Where do you draw the line? Simply having a plan? Because that's all that happened. And the plan was hardly genius. Hinkie may be smart, but as you point out, he was hardly the first person to think, "Gosh, if we win 5 games a year, we have a good chance of repeatedly getting the first pick in the draft."

As Fishy said, he had stones. I'll give him that. Stones to try it, knowing that he would tick off a lot of Sixers fans (excluding certain people who were going to give him a free pass simply because he had a plan and traded an overrated ROY).

Agents can have long memories. We'll see whether this has any long-term ramifications in terms of FA signings.

You're a good fan for watching that garbage team 70+ times a year, not because you're giving Hinkie a pass. You chose to do that, and I respect that you haven't turned on him. But you have the right to. Sixers fans have the right to be angry.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

That this strategy has widespread support is just more proof the NBA sucks.

That's just a "get off my lawn" argument from someone who's proud of not watching the NBA. There's plenty of vocalized opposition to tanking and you can be sure the league is considering how to address it.

As for the process, I really don't give a ___ about Sam Hinkie or the Sixers, but we're talking about basketball here. It's five guys. It doesn't take a decade to build a competent team, especially when you get a top pick every single year. How the ___ are the Houston Astros competitive before the 76ers? I appreciate Ms. Hinkie taking the time to post on the Boneyard, but I've never understood the notion that rebuilding an NBA team is some sort of generational project. I'm curious as to what Ms. Hinkie thinks is a reasonable time frame for the 76ers challenging for anything meaningful. A decade? Two decades? If that's the case, what the ____ is the point?

 

[nomar]

Curious....is it ok for the GSW to rest their starters? Ok for San Antonio to rest the big 3 on back-to-backs? I mean, by sitting the stars you are obviously not "trying to win".

Really? This is a very bad comparison.

When a team rests its starters, it still wants to win. It sees the value of rest as being higher than the value of a win, but it still wants the win. It's not sitting starters to increase the chance of losing the game.

 

[Dogdeacon]

Hinkie's claims that he doesn't have an advantage in that area is not because he doesn't think they are good at drafting, it's that they think almost nobody is much better than anyone else. There is a reason that expected player value correlates HIGHLY with draft slot, and that is because in the aggregate we are quite good at consensus pre-draft order and that GMs generally draft well. It's not a crapshoot.

It is true that someone who is good at drafting would optimize a tanking/drafting strategy, but there's so much random noise, small sample sizes, reliance on who drafts ahead of you, and other things that we cannot in good faith proclaim people good drafters. That article is giving too much credit to single picks. ESPN did an analysis of who the best drafters were based on players productions over their career, and the guy who rated as the best drafter also drafted Andrea Bargnani, enough said.

You are wrong there, listen to the LowePost podcast. Hinkie specifically says that if you are going to emphasize the draft than you better damn well invest in drafting evaluations/scouting so that you can improve & exceed other's performance. He knew they had to be both lucky & good for their draft emphasis strategy to succeed and fact is to this point they were neither.

I cannot think of one other instance in business, sports, education etc.. where purposefully being terrible is a viable strategy. Conceptually, the lottery system is supposed to help balance the league. It used to be the biggest negative was potentially great players getting stuck on perpetually poorly run franchise's like the Clippers (hmm, they might be a case study most similar to what happens with Hinkie's consecutive tanking strategy) and those players' potential is diminished. Guys like Demarcus Cousins or pretty much every Clippers 1st rounder from Benoit Benjamin until Blake Griffin. Sports are competitive and the fact that not trying to win is EVER desirable needs to be eliminated from the game. It really is a form of moral hazard that Hinkie espoused and engaged in, but instead of a government too big to fail bail out he exploited a flaw in the system.

 

[Waquoit]

EPL? Really? Clearly you don't follow Chelsea. Never seen a team quit on their coach quite like that.

Tanking exists in all major sports. Wake up fellas.

Isolated instances like Chelsea, sure. Even so, how many games has Chelsea lost in the EPL this year? One?

But massive institutional tanking like we see in the NBA? NHL maybe? But only in the NBA are they saying losing on purpose is worthwhile. That tanking is valid, losing is a good thing. Anyplace else tanking is met with scorn.

 

[Waquoit]

Curious....is it ok for the GSW to rest their starters? Ok for San Antonio to rest the big 3 on back-to-backs? I mean, by sitting the stars you are obviously not "trying to win".

I agree with what Jerry West said the other day. That's BS, too.

 

[Dogdeacon]

Really? This is a very bad comparison.

When a team rests its starters, it still wants to win. It sees the value of rest as being higher than the value of a win, but it still wants the win. It's not sitting starters to increase the chance of losing the game.

No, I think this is fair - I'd absolutely be pissed if paying for tickets to one of those games and would assiduously try to avoid seeing San Antonio on a back-to-back road game. And this is why Jordan is so legendary & this year's Warriors quest so compelling - bringing it every night just for competitions sake.

However it is VASTLY different to deprive customers (& usually on road, not home) of a few games a year versus throwing 3 seasons in the trash for both your home customers and your business partner's customers. That is my single biggest problem with the tanking, they did not try to compete in a competitive sport. IF you don't care about paying or spending time watching that crap I can actually see that for Sixers fans that strategy & 'real-to-fake-hope-sale' can be acceptable. But then for every fan of every other team or just NBA fans in general it seems fairly obvious that putting out an inferior product is a negative. You have to be thick to not get why this is so unacceptable.

 

[WhartonHusky]

I think what people are struggling with is the fact that plenty of SIXERS fans are ok with this - and actually support this. You all may not be, and that's your prerogative. But why do you presume to know what Sixers fans want or are willing to put up with?

What Sam Hinkie brought to the franchise (and ownership) was a PLAN. For once there was hope. Was it better when we made a blockbuster trade for Bynum that set us back numerous years? Was it better when we drafted Evan Turner? Sorry...but those 30 win teams didn't feel any better than this 10 win team, as a matter of fact it was worse, because we lacked HOPE and DIRECTION.

The idea of this being a decade long process is foolish and ignorant. This was a 2-3 year plan that was extended primarily because of Embiid's 2nd surgery and the fact that the Heat pick didn't convey last year. If Embiid is healthy and the Heat pick conveys do we win 10 games?

This off season the Sixers will have 3-4 firsts and a high probability of Embiid and Saric. That's 2-3 years worth of talent influx and that's only if the Coangelos don't roll it all into some tier 2 FA.

Yes this season has been tough, and last season too...but you think it was fun to watch Evan Turner, Thad Young, and Spencer Hawes every night?

And I wonder if it's so god awful for Sixer fans, how in the world to Nets, Knicks, Magic, Wolves, Bucks, etc fans endure?

p.s. The Sixer ownership has tripled the value of the franchise since they bought it. I don't think they give a rat's about sacrificing some attendance. And for the life of me, I cannot see how this is such an affront to the agents in the league. It's folly.

 

[WhartonHusky]

I wonder how Cleveland Cavs fans could have possibly endured 2011, 2012 and 2013 when they won 19, 21, and 24 games and used 1st round picks on Anthony Bennett, Sergey Karasev, and Dion Waiters.

I'm not positive, but I'd be willing to bet they don't really give a hoot.

 

[UconnFanNVa]

I think what people are struggling with is the fact that plenty of SIXERS fans are ok with this - and actually support this. You all may not be, and that's your prerogative. But why do you presume to know what Sixers fans want or are willing to put up with?

What Sam Hinkie brought to the franchise (and ownership) was a PLAN. For once there was hope. Was it better when we made a blockbuster trade for Bynum that set us back numerous years? Was it better when we drafted Evan Turner? Sorry...but those 30 win teams didn't feel any better than this 10 win team, as a matter of fact it was worse, because we lacked HOPE and DIRECTION.

The idea of this being a decade long process is foolish and ignorant. This was a 2-3 year plan that was extended primarily because of Embiid's 2nd surgery and the fact that the Heat pick didn't convey last year. If Embiid is healthy and the Heat pick conveys do we win 10 games?

This off season the Sixers will have 3-4 firsts and a high probability of Embiid and Saric. That's 2-3 years worth of talent influx and that's only if the Coangelos don't roll it all into some tier 2 FA.

Yes this season has been tough, and last season too...but you think it was fun to watch Evan Turner, Thad Young, and Spencer Hawes every night?

And I wonder if it's so god awful for Sixer fans, how in the world to Nets, Knicks, Magic, Wolves, Bucks, etc fans endure?

p.s. The Sixer ownership has tripled the value of the franchise since they bought it. I don't think they give a rat's about sacrificing some attendance. And for the life of me, I cannot see how this is such an affront to the agents in the league. It's folly.

As a Knicks fan i can appreciate getting high draft picks and getting some young fresh blood on the team. However, i personally feel like its hard for a whole team primarily of young players to develop when playing with other young developing players. I think its helps tremendously to play with older players that can mentor and show you how professionals do it (which I guess is why Philly signed Brand). But i think until that team signs some Vets thats can really run with them and train with them and show them by example night in and night out a professional does it, the 76ers are going to continue to be a place that is mocked and that players cycle through. I wouldnt want to be the fan of a team that plans to continue to stay at the top of the draft and cycles through potential franchise players that leave when their rookie contracts are up because they dont want to play for the team that I am a fan of. I guess thats the direction i see the 76ers going in.

The Knicks have been managed horribly too!! But i like having some vets on the team to show the young guys how things should work. I personally feel if the Knicks could they should trade Melo for Picks and or young players and go full on in rebuild mode, BUT with some vets that can keep the kids grounded and working hard. What the Knicks will probably do is try to sign someone to a max contract and pair with Melo to get us back into the playoffs. We'll float in the playoffs for a year or 2 and then fall back into too good for a really high pick and too bad to make the playoffs. Not a great position for any team.

So I can understand the plan in Philly, but at some point you need a plan to get out of losing mode and start trying to right the ship and change the culture. When would plan take place and how? Is the plan to get enough good young players and they'll all mature together over the years and become a title contender? Or do you see trading pieces away to get more established players to go with your younger talent? How does Philly go from bottom of the league to being a contender and how long is that supposed to take?

 

[Dogdeacon]

Yes, we get it and understand some Sixers fans are willing to accept it - I think justifying that by stories of downtrodden times is exaggerated. They were in the playoffs 4 years ago with an entertaining team that even took a game off the juggernaut Heat squad. Historically the Sixers are far from the worst franchise, they have a storied history, championships & title runs, cache and are in a big enough market to attract free agents. They are teams that have never won & there was no massive drought prior to this tanking exercise.

I think just like opposing fans believe Hinkie is getting his just desserts for mucking up the league, Sixers fans are justifiably pissed for firing him now and seemingly abandoning the plan. But they are actually just transitioning, the tanking and stockpiling of draft picks is done, so what they now need are experienced NBA types, better drafting decisions and a new reputation. Although I think Hinkie deserved to get demoted, I don't think he deserved the way it happened. Colangelo hiring his son is not getting the deserved negative nepotism attention because they leaked the manifesto. This was a diabolically brilliant move by Colangelo Sr, but he's still engaging in nepotism and burning down Hinkie's career with malice.

P.S. Evan Turner wasn't a good draft pick, but he's a good NBA player and easily among top-5 of playoff contending Celtics team. Turner is the Celts 2nd best offensive creator after Thomas and also seems to be interesting self-effacing guy via his internet presence.

 

[WhartonHusky]

This is the inflection point for the Sixers! They have multiple picks, Embiid & Saric, and tons of cap space. The bottom is in.

I don't disagree they need vets and more quality players, but this doesn't happen overnight. The team will look much different next year, even if they don't trade anyone. They will likely add a vet beyond Landry/Brand and the rebuild will enter phase 2. All this was planned.

But to say the team was "entertaining" 4 years ago is a terrible exaggeration. We had limited talent and were going nowhere. This is why so many Sixer fans rally behind Hinkie and the Process.

Nothing is worse in the NBA than being mediocre.

 

[partyATkemba]

Wharton is right. I would be fully on board with this if i was a Sixers' fan. Sell all your assets, for future gains. They're obviously implementing pace of the game (the new culture) into the team but don't have the personnel to execute. This is all part of the process (and part of the tanking plan). NBA front offices get caught up on names and past successes, which is why Hinke was forced out.

They can have 4 first round picks this year, 2 in the top 5 - with the best cap situation in the league. I'm a Knicks fan, which blows because they always have to have some sort of draw to MSG. First round picks are the most important things in the NBA, you have to build through the draft. Period.

 

[WhartonHusky]

Bird rights give you a big advantage in managing the cap.

 

[Dogdeacon]

Nothing is worse in the NBA than being mediocre.

Celts were mediocre last year (and very analogous to that Sixers squad I referenced, Celts were worse/swept) and I was pissed they made the playoffs & likely lost out on Winslow. Flash forward to unexpectedly very good year and a team on a mission to avenge last year's one and out playoff performance. Turns out I was wrong (for wanting them to miss playoffs last year) and actually being competitive helps you become more competitive. Who knew?!

 

[Dogdeacon]

Bob Ley with a very funny takedown of the Hinkie letter on OTL - unless a sports contest is on like last night Ley is only reason to watch.