A deeper, detailed look inside the 76ers Tank machine and Sam Hinkie's strategy

[Who]

Nerlens Noel's stat line last night = 12 points, 9 rebounds, 9 blocks, 4 steals

[LarBrd33]

Went to tankathon.com and saw that if the ping pong balls get the Lakers outside of the top 4 (pr 5?) that pick goes to Philly via the MCW trade Thursday from PHX.

So they could possibly get two top 5 picks?? 

I'd change my mind on their strategy if they were able to get Russell then Johnson.

PG
Russell
S. Johnson
Noel
Embiid

Not a champion in 2016 but after that, geez.

don't forget saric.  Prob not next year, but the year after.

[MBunge]

I guess the debate lies around whether or not you think it's okay to go through hell, to get to heaven.

And that's the logical and emotional flaw of the tanking argument.  It's all built on the assumption, no matter how much it is denied, that "tank now = great later."  But the evidence shows that the most likely result from Hinkie's mega-tank is still failure.  Failure being defined as not winning a title, since that the whole justification for tanking in the first place.

Mike

No one is saying that heaven is guaranteed. We are saying that the evidence proves that if you want to win a championship in the NBA, your best chance will come via a player pick in the top 5 of the NBA draft.

The evidence does prove, as you say, that more top 5 picks don't come near a championship than do.
But guess what else? More championships are won by teams with their own top 5 pick than those that are not.  <<<this is the key point you aren't processing.

What are common themes between and among NBA championship teams?
What specific characteristics do NBA title winning teams share if any? Or is it all just random ?

The common themes of title-winning teams is luck, brains, hard-work and taking risks.  It's just like success in life.

By the tanking-logic that Philly is pursuing and is being defended here, Ainge should have traded Pierce in 2007 to get as many ping pong balls as possible.  How would that have worked out?

Mike

[MBunge]

I guess the debate lies around whether or not you think it's okay to go through hell, to get to heaven.

And that's the logical and emotional flaw of the tanking argument.  It's all built on the assumption, no matter how much it is denied, that "tank now = great later."  But the evidence shows that the most likely result from Hinkie's mega-tank is still failure.  Failure being defined as not winning a title, since that the whole justification for tanking in the first place.

Mike

Wasn't a failure in 2007 when the Celtics all-out tanked...

What are you talking about?  Boston had the 2nd worst record in the league but wound up with the 5th pick in a draft that everybody said had only 2 franchise players.  That is the very definition of a tank utterly failing. 

Mike

And used that pick as ammunition to trade for the big 3... Which you conveniently leave off as an option for tanking teams.

Every plan but one is destined to fail for every team every year, not just tanking. That's math.

But according to tanking-logic, Ainge should have traded Pierce in 2007 so he could get more ping pong balls and/or draft picks.  That's what Hinkie just did with MCW.

Mike

[Smokeeye123]

I guess the debate lies around whether or not you think it's okay to go through hell, to get to heaven.

And that's the logical and emotional flaw of the tanking argument.  It's all built on the assumption, no matter how much it is denied, that "tank now = great later."  But the evidence shows that the most likely result from Hinkie's mega-tank is still failure.  Failure being defined as not winning a title, since that the whole justification for tanking in the first place.

Mike

Wasn't a failure in 2007 when the Celtics all-out tanked...

What are you talking about?  Boston had the 2nd worst record in the league but wound up with the 5th pick in a draft that everybody said had only 2 franchise players.  That is the very definition of a tank utterly failing. 

Mike

And used that pick as ammunition to trade for the big 3... Which you conveniently leave off as an option for tanking teams.

Every plan but one is destined to fail for every team every year, not just tanking. That's math.

But according to tanking-logic, Ainge should have traded Pierce in 2007 so he could get more ping pong balls and/or draft picks.  That's what Hinkie just did with MCW.

Mike

Ands that's where you are mistaken. Pierce is a cornstone franchise player. Mcw is a starter on an average team, he is not that good. Hinkie will stop tanking when he lands a player of the same caliber as a pierce. It's a legitimate strategy

[tazzmaniac]

Went to tankathon.com and saw that if the ping pong balls get the Lakers outside of the top 4 (pr 5?) that pick goes to Philly via the MCW trade Thursday from PHX.

So they could possibly get two top 5 picks?? 

I'd change my mind on their strategy if they were able to get Russell then Johnson.

PG
Russell
S. Johnson
Noel
Embiid

Not a champion in 2016 but after that, geez.

The pick is top 5 (not top 4) protected so it will probably stay with the Lakers this year. Next year it is just top 3 protected.   They'll probably get the Miami pick this year and possibly get the OKC pick too. 

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

I guess the debate lies around whether or not you think it's okay to go through hell, to get to heaven.

And that's the logical and emotional flaw of the tanking argument.  It's all built on the assumption, no matter how much it is denied, that "tank now = great later."  But the evidence shows that the most likely result from Hinkie's mega-tank is still failure.  Failure being defined as not winning a title, since that the whole justification for tanking in the first place.

Mike

Wasn't a failure in 2007 when the Celtics all-out tanked...

What are you talking about?  Boston had the 2nd worst record in the league but wound up with the 5th pick in a draft that everybody said had only 2 franchise players.  That is the very definition of a tank utterly failing. 

Mike

And used that pick as ammunition to trade for the big 3... Which you conveniently leave off as an option for tanking teams.

Every plan but one is destined to fail for every team every year, not just tanking. That's math.

But according to tanking-logic, Ainge should have traded Pierce in 2007 so he could get more ping pong balls and/or draft picks.  That's what Hinkie just did with MCW.

Mike

If you want to discount the fact that Paul Pierce was a superstar and MCW was one of the worst offensive players in the NBA this year then by all means. Make the comparison.

But yeah, no, they're not remotely similar.

[Boris Badenov]

I guess the debate lies around whether or not you think it's okay to go through hell, to get to heaven.

And that's the logical and emotional flaw of the tanking argument.  It's all built on the assumption, no matter how much it is denied, that "tank now = great later."  But the evidence shows that the most likely result from Hinkie's mega-tank is still failure.  Failure being defined as not winning a title, since that the whole justification for tanking in the first place.

Mike

Wasn't a failure in 2007 when the Celtics all-out tanked...

What are you talking about?  Boston had the 2nd worst record in the league but wound up with the 5th pick in a draft that everybody said had only 2 franchise players.  That is the very definition of a tank utterly failing. 

Mike

And used that pick as ammunition to trade for the big 3... Which you conveniently leave off as an option for tanking teams.

Every plan but one is destined to fail for every team every year, not just tanking. That's math.

But according to tanking-logic, Ainge should have traded Pierce in 2007 so he could get more ping pong balls and/or draft picks.  That's what Hinkie just did with MCW.

Mike

Ands that's where you are mistaken. Pierce is a cornstone franchise player. Mcw is a starter on an average team, he is not that good. Hinkie will stop tanking when he lands a player of the same caliber as a pierce. It's a legitimate strategy

Right. Also, Ainge did try to trade Pierce, for Chris Paul who is another franchise cornerstone player. It's conceivable that we could have done as well or better over the last eight years if we'd made that move.

[colincb]

Went to tankathon.com and saw that if the ping pong balls get the Lakers outside of the top 4 (pr 5?) that pick goes to Philly via the MCW trade Thursday from PHX.

So they could possibly get two top 5 picks?? 

I'd change my mind on their strategy if they were able to get Russell then Johnson.

PG
Russell
S. Johnson
Noel
Embiid

Not a champion in 2016 but after that, geez.

That's a list of guys that hasn't done squat in the NBA. 

[colincb]

Went to tankathon.com and saw that if the ping pong balls get the Lakers outside of the top 4 (pr 5?) that pick goes to Philly via the MCW trade Thursday from PHX.

So they could possibly get two top 5 picks?? 

I'd change my mind on their strategy if they were able to get Russell then Johnson.

PG
Russell
S. Johnson
Noel
Embiid

Not a champion in 2016 but after that, geez.

don't forget saric.  Prob not next year, but the year after.

Not a great shooter (53% FG, 29% 3FG, 71% FT) and as a tweener and Euro, his defense likely sucks too. 5.5 RPG and his Assist/TO ratio is 1.1. Maybe daddy let's him come over for 2016-17, but if Sixers still stink next year (bet the farm) don't count on it.

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

Went to tankathon.com and saw that if the ping pong balls get the Lakers outside of the top 4 (pr 5?) that pick goes to Philly via the MCW trade Thursday from PHX.

So they could possibly get two top 5 picks?? 

I'd change my mind on their strategy if they were able to get Russell then Johnson.

PG
Russell
S. Johnson
Noel
Embiid

Not a champion in 2016 but after that, geez.

That's a list of guys that hasn't done squat in the NBA.

Noel has been a phenomenal defender for a rookie this year. One of the best rook defenders ever.

And every draft pick has never done anything until they do something. That's how the draft works.

[colincb]

Went to tankathon.com and saw that if the ping pong balls get the Lakers outside of the top 4 (pr 5?) that pick goes to Philly via the MCW trade Thursday from PHX.

So they could possibly get two top 5 picks?? 

I'd change my mind on their strategy if they were able to get Russell then Johnson.

PG
Russell
S. Johnson
Noel
Embiid

Not a champion in 2016 but after that, geez.

That's a list of guys that hasn't done squat in the NBA.

Noel has been a phenomenal defender for a rookie this year. One of the best rook defenders ever.

And every draft pick has never done anything until they do something. That's how the draft works.

Thanks for the tip? Noel is an elite defender with a 47% TS% and bad hands. Good chance that he'll get better, but he's no threat to turn into franchise player. The others are just names on a piece of paper with a PG to be named later (although it's supposedly PG Mudiay that they have their eyes on according to ex-coach Larry Brown) and don't constitute anything close to a contender.

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

Went to tankathon.com and saw that if the ping pong balls get the Lakers outside of the top 4 (pr 5?) that pick goes to Philly via the MCW trade Thursday from PHX.

So they could possibly get two top 5 picks?? 

I'd change my mind on their strategy if they were able to get Russell then Johnson.

PG
Russell
S. Johnson
Noel
Embiid

Not a champion in 2016 but after that, geez.

That's a list of guys that hasn't done squat in the NBA.

Noel has been a phenomenal defender for a rookie this year. One of the best rook defenders ever.

And every draft pick has never done anything until they do something. That's how the draft works.

Thanks for the tip? Noel is an elite defender with a 47% TS% and bad hands. Good chance that he'll get better, but he's no threat to turn into franchise player. The others are just names on a piece of paper with a PG to be named later (although it's supposedly PG Mudiay that they have their eyes on according to ex-coach Larry Brown) and don't constitute anything close to a contender.

Yes, he's terrible offensively. He's also 20 years old. He's not a franchise player, flat out. The guy will never be more than prime Marcus Camby(which when you look at his best 3 year stretch is a good thing), but he'll probably do it longer.

The Sixers will probably have 3/5 starters for when they intend to compete on the roster by June in Noel, Embiid and their pick. If they draft Towns you could see a big guy go, though to be honest it would be Saric in my opinion.

And 2-3 of their rotational pieces in Canaan, Grant and Covington.

That's not bad for a foundation considering that their attempt to trade for Andrew Bynum gutted the roster.