Sources: 76ers center Joel Embiid suffers setback with right foot

[D.o.s.]

I think "the mess that is Philly" is largely incorrect, by the way. They have a good coach. They are creating a system on the court. They are losing a lot of games, sure, but it isn't like they're the Kings. The 76ers aren't flailing around rudderlessly.

if you consider a plan of creating a roster to be as bad as possible in order to increase the odds of winning the lottery to not be 'rudderless' then, sure, they have a plan. 

Thing is, they're already 2 years into Noel's rookie deal--the top player on the team that's actually seen court time so far.  Philly doesn't figure to be close to competing for a playoff spot during the rest of his contract.  What's his incentive to stay for another contract as opposed to going to another team that has a culture (or likelihood) of winning during his next deal?

If people are talking about maxing out a player like Middleton, Noel could get a max deal now if he were eligible.  Money won't be an issue for this kid.  I just don't see a reason why he wouldn't choose to move to a franchise that has more to offer than just money (which he will get from anyone)

They are not rudderless on the court, either. They are bad. These are two different things.

Okay....The only year I remember the Celtics tanking was the year Pierce and Tony Allen got hurt. It's not like they sold everyone and blatantly tanked like the Sixers so I don't get your point.

The 76ers only tanked after their swing-for-the-fences move (trading for Bynum) didn't work out. At that point, what were their other options?

Right...Houston tanked for Hakeem the dream you mean. Otherwise, no idea why you threw Houston in there. And the other teams tanked like the Celtics, it's just unfortunate the Celtics have a great coach. I never said you shouldn't tank. Look at my name. I was only saying blatantly tanking kills the culture. Do you even remember the culture of the Warriors and the Thunder? I actually watched those teams played when they sucked. They were trying to win. They were just young and didn't have great coaching. I don't understand how people can't tell the difference on this board. What Philly is doing is egregious.

Please do not lecture me on how bad the Warriors and the Sonics/Thunder were, especially if you insist that the way those teams (including Houston) tanked was not "blatant" or "egregious."

Fun Fact: When the NBA institutes a draft lottery because of your tanking, you are being both "blatant" and "egregious" in your efforts. 

DOS San Antontio is really a horrible example and you significantly weaken the point you are making by including them. They "tanked" something like 17 seasons ago and everyone that was on their roster for that season has been retired from the NBA a minimum of 5 years (looking at that roster I would even say 10 is possible). Even the most anti-tank people don't view at is as some voodoo curse that haunts your roster 20 years down the line.

If you have one season where your star player gets injured and you don't get him back as quickly as possible this is not the same as having three consecutive  20 win seasons. It is entirely possibly that the whole culture of losing thing is sports talk myth. However, saying there can be an impact on young players going through long term losing for multiple seasons is at least a plausible point. Saying a team will have a long term negative impact where they didn't do everything they could to win games in a single season seems like a completely different, and fairly ridiculous point.

I disagree on San Antonio, but fair enough: did the massively entrenched losing culture of the Boston Celtics carry over in the single season it took for us to swap for KG? Clearly Pierce would have been negatively affected in his development if this was the case, right? "A classic case of a good player on a bad team," remember?

[MBunge]

Hinkie understands what a lot of people here don't:  Superstars win titles. 

The vast majority of superstars DON'T win titles.

And what Hinkie understood is that he could follow a strategy that screwed over his own fan base and sponged off the rest of the least for several years and, as long as there were plenty of folks like you around to defend him, he could get away with it.

Mike

Embiid or no Embiid, I still take their two top assets over any two of ours combined... possibly even 3.

A defensive phenom like Nerlens Noel and whatever they get at #3... That's foundation-building cornerstones. 

After Marcus Smart, what's our best asset here?  Brooklyn's unprotected 2016?  That pick might end up 12-17.   I'd surely trade both of those "assets" for either Noel or the #3 pick.

As always, there are several levels to this debate.

1.  Literally anyone could do what Hinkie has done.  I could do it.  A ten year old could do it.  It doesn't take brains or wisdom or basketball knowledge.  It's the front office equivalent of flopping, trying to twist the rules to your advantage in a way that would damage the sport if everyone did it.

2.  Philly has now tanked for two straight years, both in-season and off-season, and it sure looks like a third is in the offing.  If all you've got for that is Noel and the #3 this year, a pick which some mock drafts have as Porzingis, that's horrible.

3.  I don't know what you mean by "foundational" when you use it to describe Noel.  Right now, the reasonable best case scenario for Noel is a more athletic Marcus Camby with better defense and less offense.  That would actually be a heck of a good player, but someone upon whom you build the "foundation" of a team?

Mike

Judging by Danny's actions over the past two seasons, tanking for phenom prospects is a lot harder than it seems.  Hinkie deserves credit for pulling it off.  Now we have to see how these kids perform long-term. Should be a fun team to watch heading forward.

And Ainge got his team back into the playoffs in the second year of a rebuild where he got rid of the four best veterans on his roster.  But somehow that's LESS impressive than what Hinkie has done?

Mike

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

Hinkie understands what a lot of people here don't:  Superstars win titles. 

The vast majority of superstars DON'T win titles.

And what Hinkie understood is that he could follow a strategy that screwed over his own fan base and sponged off the rest of the least for several years and, as long as there were plenty of folks like you around to defend him, he could get away with it.

Mike

Embiid or no Embiid, I still take their two top assets over any two of ours combined... possibly even 3.

A defensive phenom like Nerlens Noel and whatever they get at #3... That's foundation-building cornerstones. 

After Marcus Smart, what's our best asset here?  Brooklyn's unprotected 2016?  That pick might end up 12-17.   I'd surely trade both of those "assets" for either Noel or the #3 pick.

How much better do you think Noel is compared to WCS. They are both athletic bigs from Kentucky who are tremendous defenders, bad offensive players, and surprisingly ineffective rebounders.

I'd guess Noel is significantly better.  I could be wrong.  Not at all sold on WCS.  They played together as freshman.  WCS didn't show much improvement over his 3 years of College ball.   Noel has incredible potential.

It is unbelievable how much you overrate Noel. Makes no sense. Defies Logic even. What is his upside, is he better than Anthony Davis at Defense? Nope...So I don't get your point. WCS and Noel both are the same in my eyes. Noel will not be good at Offense. He has no touch around the rim. So yes, WCS and Noel are the same bro. Sorry, but sometimes you can be a little ridiculous. I understand you don't want to sound bias, but please at least be fair. And again, why do you think players are going to go to Philly? Has Philly even attempted to trade for players? You do know players have control of where they go right?

I'm really looking forward to this off-season so the Celtics can shut up all the Philly fans around this board.

No offense but i get the sense you don't know what you are talking about.  We can chat again next season when the performances give you some clarity. In the meantime, feel free to google "Nerlens Noel defense" if you want to see the points I've made dozens of times of this forum already.

I am not sold on WCS. We will see what happens.

Look, I typically agree with most of your points, but not when it comes to the Sixers. I don't think you can blatantly tank and be successful.

I cannot fathom how you could have paid any attention to basketball from 2006-2008 and come away with this conclusion...

And spare me on the culture piece, that's one of the Sixers strengths not one of it's weaknesses. The entire organization revolves around player development.

Okay....The only year I remember the Celtics tanking was the year Pierce and Tony Allen got hurt. It's not like they sold everyone and blatantly tanked like the Sixers so I don't get your point.

Ahhhh, so when the Celtics tank, but don't sell off the farm it doesn't matter. Got it.

So how are you guys ever going to recover from Danny Ainge trading your 4 best players in the span of 18 months? Because that's what happened from the '13 offseason to the '15 trade deadline.

[hpantazo]

We tanked hard for Duncan back in the day too, it just didn't work out and on top of it Pitino panicked and traded away the guys we drafted too early.

[tankcity!]

Hinkie understands what a lot of people here don't:  Superstars win titles. 

The vast majority of superstars DON'T win titles.

And what Hinkie understood is that he could follow a strategy that screwed over his own fan base and sponged off the rest of the least for several years and, as long as there were plenty of folks like you around to defend him, he could get away with it.

Mike

Embiid or no Embiid, I still take their two top assets over any two of ours combined... possibly even 3.

A defensive phenom like Nerlens Noel and whatever they get at #3... That's foundation-building cornerstones. 

After Marcus Smart, what's our best asset here?  Brooklyn's unprotected 2016?  That pick might end up 12-17.   I'd surely trade both of those "assets" for either Noel or the #3 pick.

How much better do you think Noel is compared to WCS. They are both athletic bigs from Kentucky who are tremendous defenders, bad offensive players, and surprisingly ineffective rebounders.

I'd guess Noel is significantly better.  I could be wrong.  Not at all sold on WCS.  They played together as freshman.  WCS didn't show much improvement over his 3 years of College ball.   Noel has incredible potential.

It is unbelievable how much you overrate Noel. Makes no sense. Defies Logic even. What is his upside, is he better than Anthony Davis at Defense? Nope...So I don't get your point. WCS and Noel both are the same in my eyes. Noel will not be good at Offense. He has no touch around the rim. So yes, WCS and Noel are the same bro. Sorry, but sometimes you can be a little ridiculous. I understand you don't want to sound bias, but please at least be fair. And again, why do you think players are going to go to Philly? Has Philly even attempted to trade for players? You do know players have control of where they go right?

I'm really looking forward to this off-season so the Celtics can shut up all the Philly fans around this board.

No offense but i get the sense you don't know what you are talking about.  We can chat again next season when the performances give you some clarity. In the meantime, feel free to google "Nerlens Noel defense" if you want to see the points I've made dozens of times of this forum already.

I am not sold on WCS. We will see what happens.

Look, I typically agree with most of your points, but not when it comes to the Sixers. I don't think you can blatantly tank and be successful.

I cannot fathom how you could have paid any attention to basketball from 2006-2008 and come away with this conclusion...

And spare me on the culture piece, that's one of the Sixers strengths not one of it's weaknesses. The entire organization revolves around player development.

Okay....The only year I remember the Celtics tanking was the year Pierce and Tony Allen got hurt. It's not like they sold everyone and blatantly tanked like the Sixers so I don't get your point.

Ahhhh, so when the Celtics tank, but don't sell off the farm it doesn't matter. Got it.

So how are you guys ever going to recover from Danny Ainge trading your 4 best players in the span of 18 months? Because that's what happened from the '13 offseason to the '15 trade deadline.

Yeah, they traded veterans for future assets like every other team in the NBA. They didn't trade Michael Carter Williams, or draft Saric so he can sit-out and they can tank. No, the Celtics don't have a bunch of d-leaguers on their team.

This is the last time I respond to you because you already know what I am telling you. Philly is a mountain on their own.

[D.o.s.]

Yeah, they traded veterans for future assets like every other team in the NBA. They didn't trade Michael Carter Williams, or draft Saric so he can sit-out and they can tank. No, the Celtics don't have a bunch of d-leaguers on their team.

This is the last time I respond to you because you already know what I am telling you. Philly is a mountain on their own.

[tankcity!]

I think "the mess that is Philly" is largely incorrect, by the way. They have a good coach. They are creating a system on the court. They are losing a lot of games, sure, but it isn't like they're the Kings. The 76ers aren't flailing around rudderlessly.

if you consider a plan of creating a roster to be as bad as possible in order to increase the odds of winning the lottery to not be 'rudderless' then, sure, they have a plan. 

Thing is, they're already 2 years into Noel's rookie deal--the top player on the team that's actually seen court time so far.  Philly doesn't figure to be close to competing for a playoff spot during the rest of his contract.  What's his incentive to stay for another contract as opposed to going to another team that has a culture (or likelihood) of winning during his next deal?

If people are talking about maxing out a player like Middleton, Noel could get a max deal now if he were eligible.  Money won't be an issue for this kid.  I just don't see a reason why he wouldn't choose to move to a franchise that has more to offer than just money (which he will get from anyone)

They are not rudderless on the court, either. They are bad. These are two different things.

Okay....The only year I remember the Celtics tanking was the year Pierce and Tony Allen got hurt. It's not like they sold everyone and blatantly tanked like the Sixers so I don't get your point.

The 76ers only tanked after their swing-for-the-fences move (trading for Bynum) didn't work out. At that point, what were their other options?

Right...Houston tanked for Hakeem the dream you mean. Otherwise, no idea why you threw Houston in there. And the other teams tanked like the Celtics, it's just unfortunate the Celtics have a great coach. I never said you shouldn't tank. Look at my name. I was only saying blatantly tanking kills the culture. Do you even remember the culture of the Warriors and the Thunder? I actually watched those teams played when they sucked. They were trying to win. They were just young and didn't have great coaching. I don't understand how people can't tell the difference on this board. What Philly is doing is egregious.

Please do not lecture me on how bad the Warriors and the Sonics/Thunder were, especially if you insist that the way those teams (including Houston) tanked was not "blatant" or "egregious."

Fun Fact: When the NBA institutes a draft lottery because of your tanking, you are being both "blatant" and "egregious" in your efforts. 

DOS San Antontio is really a horrible example and you significantly weaken the point you are making by including them. They "tanked" something like 17 seasons ago and everyone that was on their roster for that season has been retired from the NBA a minimum of 5 years (looking at that roster I would even say 10 is possible). Even the most anti-tank people don't view at is as some voodoo curse that haunts your roster 20 years down the line.

If you have one season where your star player gets injured and you don't get him back as quickly as possible this is not the same as having three consecutive  20 win seasons. It is entirely possibly that the whole culture of losing thing is sports talk myth. However, saying there can be an impact on young players going through long term losing for multiple seasons is at least a plausible point. Saying a team will have a long term negative impact where they didn't do everything they could to win games in a single season seems like a completely different, and fairly ridiculous point.

I disagree on San Antonio, but fair enough: did the massively entrenched losing culture of the Boston Celtics carry over in the single season it took for us to swap for KG? Clearly Pierce would have been negatively affected in his development if this was the case, right? "A classic case of a good player on a bad team," remember?

I'm not lecturing you. I just thought you would understand that the Celtics tanked the same way as those teams but made playoffs because they're in the east and have a great coach. Ainge wanted to lose. I just think it's fairly obvious Philly took it to another level and now is forcing the league to reconsider the lottery. If you think it's awesome, good for you, but I personally thinks it sucks for all the other NBA teams who can't tank the way Philly does. It's a huge advantage.

[tankcity!]

Yeah, they traded veterans for future assets like every other team in the NBA. They didn't trade Michael Carter Williams, or draft Saric so he can sit-out and they can tank. No, the Celtics don't have a bunch of d-leaguers on their team.

This is the last time I respond to you because you already know what I am telling you. Philly is a mountain on their own.

I would've respected your post if it was actually funny

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

The lack of improvement over WCS's three seasons of college ball should be fairly concerning for anyone drafting him. 

According to the stats, WCS did improve a lot defensively.

Mike

I'm not really sure where that argument is coming from. He blocked the ball less as a junior than as a soph, stole it slightly less and rebounded it exactly the same. I think the dip in blocks is probably somewhat attributable to Towns, but he hasn't seen jumps in his numbers.

He definitely was not as good as Noel in college. And personally I like WCS as a prospect.

[celticsclay]

I think "the mess that is Philly" is largely incorrect, by the way. They have a good coach. They are creating a system on the court. They are losing a lot of games, sure, but it isn't like they're the Kings. The 76ers aren't flailing around rudderlessly.

if you consider a plan of creating a roster to be as bad as possible in order to increase the odds of winning the lottery to not be 'rudderless' then, sure, they have a plan. 

Thing is, they're already 2 years into Noel's rookie deal--the top player on the team that's actually seen court time so far.  Philly doesn't figure to be close to competing for a playoff spot during the rest of his contract.  What's his incentive to stay for another contract as opposed to going to another team that has a culture (or likelihood) of winning during his next deal?

If people are talking about maxing out a player like Middleton, Noel could get a max deal now if he were eligible.  Money won't be an issue for this kid.  I just don't see a reason why he wouldn't choose to move to a franchise that has more to offer than just money (which he will get from anyone)

They are not rudderless on the court, either. They are bad. These are two different things.

Okay....The only year I remember the Celtics tanking was the year Pierce and Tony Allen got hurt. It's not like they sold everyone and blatantly tanked like the Sixers so I don't get your point.

The 76ers only tanked after their swing-for-the-fences move (trading for Bynum) didn't work out. At that point, what were their other options?

Right...Houston tanked for Hakeem the dream you mean. Otherwise, no idea why you threw Houston in there. And the other teams tanked like the Celtics, it's just unfortunate the Celtics have a great coach. I never said you shouldn't tank. Look at my name. I was only saying blatantly tanking kills the culture. Do you even remember the culture of the Warriors and the Thunder? I actually watched those teams played when they sucked. They were trying to win. They were just young and didn't have great coaching. I don't understand how people can't tell the difference on this board. What Philly is doing is egregious.

Please do not lecture me on how bad the Warriors and the Sonics/Thunder were, especially if you insist that the way those teams (including Houston) tanked was not "blatant" or "egregious."

Fun Fact: When the NBA institutes a draft lottery because of your tanking, you are being both "blatant" and "egregious" in your efforts. 

DOS San Antontio is really a horrible example and you significantly weaken the point you are making by including them. They "tanked" something like 17 seasons ago and everyone that was on their roster for that season has been retired from the NBA a minimum of 5 years (looking at that roster I would even say 10 is possible). Even the most anti-tank people don't view at is as some voodoo curse that haunts your roster 20 years down the line.

If you have one season where your star player gets injured and you don't get him back as quickly as possible this is not the same as having three consecutive  20 win seasons. It is entirely possibly that the whole culture of losing thing is sports talk myth. However, saying there can be an impact on young players going through long term losing for multiple seasons is at least a plausible point. Saying a team will have a long term negative impact where they didn't do everything they could to win games in a single season seems like a completely different, and fairly ridiculous point.

I disagree on San Antonio, but fair enough: did the massively entrenched losing culture of the Boston Celtics carry over in the single season it took for us to swap for KG? Clearly Pierce would have been negatively affected in his development if this was the case, right? "A classic case of a good player on a bad team," remember?

To give you a serious response I think it does impact some players differently and it is possible for long term losing to impact players. For example, it is my opinion that being on really bad teams for multiple years that did some tanking and being given minutes no matter what he did had a negative impact on Antoine Walker's career. I think him personally if he came onto a team that was trying to win games from the get go he wouldn't have developed some of the bad habits he had and also may have gotten more serious about his training and diet to try and get some minutes alongside good players.

Some of the guys on the Wizards teams from about 6 years ago have also said they felt the tanking and chaotic culture had a negative impact on their careers. I think it was Nick Young, Blatche and Mcgee as the leaders. I forget which one of them commented on it.

The point is, is at definitely possibly that having a team set out to lose 55-60 games for multiple years in a row can at least negatively impact some guys career. In the case of Pierce, it appears that it did not. Its entirely possible a guy like Noel will also have no impact from it either, but I wouldn't say there is a non-zero chance.

[D.o.s.]

^fair enough.

I'm not lecturing you. I just thought you would understand that the Celtics tanked the same way as those teams but made playoffs because they're in the east and have a great coach. Ainge wanted to lose. I just think it's fairly obvious Philly took it to another level and now is forcing the league to reconsider the lottery. If you think it's awesome, good for you, but I personally thinks it sucks for all the other NBA teams who can't tank the way Philly does. It's a huge advantage.

No, I maintain that the people who think the 76ers are doing things differently just weren't paying attention.

Steve Smith said on open court  earlier this week that "he never heard of tanking" before a few years ago. There's no way that's actually possible, but it speaks to the way the conversation around teams that don't try to win games has evolved. Tanking is a big deal because the fans have caught up with it, not because the Sixers are doing anything that hasn't been done before.

To make an analogy -- just because most people weren't aware of who Nate Silver was prior to the 2008 election doesn't mean his methodology came out of nowhere. If you aren't/weren't hip to that fact, you lose a lot of your credibility when it comes to talking about it.

Bad teams actively staying bad in order to maintain the most advantageous draft position did not start when Andrew Bynum went bowling. I realize this is a hard thing to grasp, for some.

[tankcity!]

^fair enough.

I'm not lecturing you. I just thought you would understand that the Celtics tanked the same way as those teams but made playoffs because they're in the east and have a great coach. Ainge wanted to lose. I just think it's fairly obvious Philly took it to another level and now is forcing the league to reconsider the lottery. If you think it's awesome, good for you, but I personally thinks it sucks for all the other NBA teams who can't tank the way Philly does. It's a huge advantage.

No, I maintain that the people who think the 76ers are doing things differently just weren't paying attention.

Steve Smith said on open court  earlier this week that "he never heard of tanking" before a few years ago. There's no way that's actually possible, but it speaks to the way the conversation around teams that don't try to win games has evolved. Tanking is a big deal because the fans have caught up with it, not because the Sixers are doing anything that hasn't been done before.

To make an analogy -- just because most people weren't aware of who Nate Silver was prior to the 2008 election doesn't mean his methodology came out of nowhere. If you aren't/weren't hip to that fact, you lose a lot of your credibility when it comes to talking about it.

Bad teams actively staying bad in order to maintain the most advantageous draft position did not start when Andrew Bynum went bowling. I realize this is a hard thing to grasp, for some.

Yeah, I get your overall point. It's a good one.

[Endless Paradise]

I see I missed out on yet another rousing discussion of "my team's tanking went like this, but your team's tanking went like that." 

[D.o.s.]

I see I missed out on yet another rousing discussion of "my team's tanking went like this, but your team's tanking went like that." 

It's 'cause you waste your time correcting trade threads, bro.

[moiso]

Gotta agree with tankcity! that both Noel and WCS aspire to be in the same group as DeAndre Jordan, Tyson Chandler, and maybe Camby.  They are all similar.  I don't see any reason to put Noel ahead of anyone in this group yet, and no reason why WCS won't prove he belongs in the group.  Tp to tankcity.