Happy trails to Hinkie's Power.

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

Yes, it by definition completely invalidates the plan, because it was his plan to build through the draft. 

He resigned because his "process" failed - his bosses brought in other guys who know more about basketball than he does.  That's kind of a bad thing if you are a GM.

So you're saying you can't build through the draft? Because that was his plan. And to be honest, when he had four first round picks coming this offseason he never got to implement it so who knows.

And Jerry Colangelo is not a good bball mind, he's cut from the same cloth as Billy King and the good ole boy network.

[BDeCosta26]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

"The Process" doesn't always work. Creating a REALLY bad team for years upon years in a row in order to receive high draft picks is just a reality. Anyone can do it. "The Process" was about sucking for multiple years, and using those high draft picks to build a team of superstars.

Where Hinkie went wrong, is that he never actually built a team. Or even a semblance of one. If he had used those high picks on guys that could actually fit together and grow together. He got so caught up in his "I'm the smartest guy here" complex, that he refused to see the very real, human factors that go into building a team.

He insisted on always taking the "BPA", which to him meant most valuable trade chip. That's fine. Except when you draft 3 centers in a row, none of whom can play together, you decrease the value those guys have around the league. He got so caught up in losing at all costs, he refused to consider what kind of detrimental effect all that purposeful losing would have on those blue chip draft prospects he took. He ignored the importance of building a team towards something, with an idea in mind of what you wanna be.

That's exactly what Boston did, they also tanked a little and have accumulated assets in a similar way, but have made it clear the type of team and players they're looking for. Stevens has a system and were getting guys that fit in. Philly has done none of that. Are they in a better place now than when Hinkie took over? Sure. But four years of suckery later, and they're still a couple years away. This lack of acknowledgment for the human factors in building a team played as big a part as any, save his poor media relations, in the failure of "the process".

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

"The Process" doesn't always work. Creating a REALLY bad team for years upon years in a row in order to receive high draft picks is just a reality. Anyone can do it. "The Process" was about sucking for multiple years, and using those high draft picks to build a team of superstars.

Where Hinkie went wrong, is that he never actually built a team. Or even a semblance of one. If he had used those high picks on guys that could actually fit together and grow together. He got so caught up in his "I'm the smartest guy here" complex, that he refused to see the very real, human factors that go into building a team.

He insisted on always taking the "BPA", which to him meant most valuable trade chip. That's fine. Except when you draft 3 centers in a row, none of whom can play together, you decrease the value those guys have around the league. He got so caught up in losing at all costs, he refused to consider what kind of detrimental effect all that purposeful losing would have on those blue chip draft prospects he took. He ignored the importance of building a team towards something, with an idea in mind of what you wanna be.

That's exactly what Boston did, they also tanked a little and have accumulated assets in a similar way, but have made it clear the type of team and players they're looking for. Stevens has a system and were getting guys that fit in. Philly has done none of that. Are they in a better place now than when Hinkie took over? Sure. But four years of suckery later, and they're still a couple years away. This lack of acknowledgment for the human factors in building a team played as big a part as any, save his poor media relations, in the failure of "the process".

I agree with the Okafor pick being bad, though the reason Portland passed on Michael Jordan is that they were set outside and needed a center. So I tend to prefer BPA.

The human thing is way more just going 3 years without getting a point guard, which is a fault. If they had some spacing, a decent PG and left Noel at Center they'd be a run of the mill 20 win team with a top 3 pick. The margin is way more narrow than people realize.

[mctyson]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

Yes, it by definition completely invalidates the plan, because it was his plan to build through the draft. 

He resigned because his "process" failed - his bosses brought in other guys who know more about basketball than he does.  That's kind of a bad thing if you are a GM.

So you're saying you can't build through the draft? Because that was his plan. And to be honest, when he had four first round picks coming this offseason he never got to implement it so who knows.

And Jerry Colangelo is not a good bball mind, he's cut from the same cloth as Billy King and the good ole boy network.

Maybe I am not clear enough...

Hinkie drafted (or traded for) three 7' footers in a row in the front of the NBA lottery.  Off the top of my head I cannot think of any GM who has ever done that. 

Not only that - we are playing in an era of the NBA where teams are spreading the floor with shooters, going small, and sharing the ball around the perimeter.  The most sought after position right now IS NOT AT THE 5. 

To be more clear:

No one wants to trade their All-Star wing with 3-point range for Nerlens Noel, an athletic defensive center who can't shoot outside of 10 ft. 

No one wants to trade their All-Star stretch 4 or shifty PG for Jahlil Okafor, a slow plodding offensive specialist in the post who can guard anyone his size and speed, let alone switch on a pick and roll.

No one is going to trade their top 15-20 player for Joel Embiid straight up.  Would Danny trade Isaiah Thomas for Embiid, right now?  Ask yourself that.  This is a 5 with chronic foot injuries who has never played a game in the NBA (oooh but he is really wowing them in workouts reportedly...)

Those are his prize jewels.  That's it.  A team with those three right now, playing at full health, is not winning jack in the NBA.  That is Hinkie's legacy.

[Emmette Bryant]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

I agree with you that the GM has to be able to evaluate talent no matter what philosophy he follows in building a team. I just think that the 76ers should have built a team instead of collecting assets.

[Dino Pitino]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

Yes, it by definition completely invalidates the plan, because it was his plan to build through the draft. 

He resigned because his "process" failed - his bosses brought in other guys who know more about basketball than he does.  That's kind of a bad thing if you are a GM.

So you're saying you can't build through the draft? Because that was his plan. And to be honest, when he had four first round picks coming this offseason he never got to implement it so who knows.

And Jerry Colangelo is not a good bball mind, he's cut from the same cloth as Billy King and the good ole boy network.

Maybe I am not clear enough...

Hinkie drafted (or traded for) three 7' footers in a row in the front of the NBA lottery.  Off the top of my head I cannot think of any GM who has ever done that. 

Not only that - we are playing in an era of the NBA where teams are spreading the floor with shooters, going small, and sharing the ball around the perimeter.  The most sought after position right now IS NOT AT THE 5. 

To be more clear:

No one wants to trade their All-Star wing with 3-point range for Nerlens Noel, an athletic defensive center who can't shoot outside of 10 ft. 

No one wants to trade their All-Star stretch 4 or shifty PG for Jahlil Okafor, a slow plodding offensive specialist in the post who can guard anyone his size and speed, let alone switch on a pick and roll.

No one is going to trade their top 15-20 player for Joel Embiid straight up.  Would Danny trade Isaiah Thomas for Embiid, right now?  Ask yourself that.  This is a 5 with chronic foot injuries who has never played a game in the NBA (oooh but he is really wowing them in workouts reportedly...)

Those are his prize jewels.  That's it.  A team with those three right now, playing at full health, is not winning jack in the NBA.  That is Hinkie's legacy.

Name which All Star wings, stretch 4's, and shifty point guards you mean. This year's All Star game? Or do Jeff Teague and (ahem) Jrue Holiday count? A straight up one-for-one trade? Or can either Noel or Okafor being packaged with a pick or two? The state of the league's All Star points and wings is such that they comprise most of the league's best 20 or so players, these aren't your average All Stars. But let's say the Bulls make Butler available. You don't think the Sixers could get him by packaging either Noel or Okafor with a pick or two?

Anyway, it's year three of what was supposed to be a five year plan. The team was not supposed to be winning jack by now, even if Embiid were at full health.

[BDeCosta26]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

"The Process" doesn't always work. Creating a REALLY bad team for years upon years in a row in order to receive high draft picks is just a reality. Anyone can do it. "The Process" was about sucking for multiple years, and using those high draft picks to build a team of superstars.

Where Hinkie went wrong, is that he never actually built a team. Or even a semblance of one. If he had used those high picks on guys that could actually fit together and grow together. He got so caught up in his "I'm the smartest guy here" complex, that he refused to see the very real, human factors that go into building a team.

He insisted on always taking the "BPA", which to him meant most valuable trade chip. That's fine. Except when you draft 3 centers in a row, none of whom can play together, you decrease the value those guys have around the league. He got so caught up in losing at all costs, he refused to consider what kind of detrimental effect all that purposeful losing would have on those blue chip draft prospects he took. He ignored the importance of building a team towards something, with an idea in mind of what you wanna be.

That's exactly what Boston did, they also tanked a little and have accumulated assets in a similar way, but have made it clear the type of team and players they're looking for. Stevens has a system and were getting guys that fit in. Philly has done none of that. Are they in a better place now than when Hinkie took over? Sure. But four years of suckery later, and they're still a couple years away. This lack of acknowledgment for the human factors in building a team played as big a part as any, save his poor media relations, in the failure of "the process".

I agree with the Okafor pick being bad, though the reason Portland passed on Michael Jordan is that they were set outside and needed a center. So I tend to prefer BPA.

The human thing is way more just going 3 years without getting a point guard, which is a fault. If they had some spacing, a decent PG and left Noel at Center they'd be a run of the mill 20 win team with a top 3 pick. The margin is way more narrow than people realize.

The thing is, in a vacuum it all makes sense. People were talking about Okafor at #1 for a long time. You think, if you can get him at 3 and #4 is Zinger, who at the time wouldn't even work out for you. So you take Okafor thinking "He's the most valuable player I can get here". But that ignores that because your trotting out a team of d-leaguers for the third year in a row that lacks a PG, spacing and already had a solid young C in Noel, Okafor is going to look worse than he should, lowering his value.

I understand the BPA aspect, but a guy like Okafor who was so obviously unsuited to today's game both offensively and defensively and was such a bad match for the rest of Philly's roster, I really feel like he blew it there. I mean, on top of never making anything useful out of his plethora of later picks, your left with a couple blue chip bigs that can't play together at all, with a team of D-Leaguers and Bob Covington running post-ups to Okafor as he forces his way through a double team. You have to be building towards something. There has to be a team identity and a recognizable core being built. Even if you continue to be poor like Minny, you have a really good young core that's establishing an identity in this league.

 Hinkie ignored that major factor and it lead to his downfall.

[MBunge]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

Yes, it by definition completely invalidates the plan, because it was his plan to build through the draft. 

He resigned because his "process" failed - his bosses brought in other guys who know more about basketball than he does.  That's kind of a bad thing if you are a GM.

So you're saying you can't build through the draft? Because that was his plan. And to be honest, when he had four first round picks coming this offseason he never got to implement it so who knows.

And Jerry Colangelo is not a good bball mind, he's cut from the same cloth as Billy King and the good ole boy network.

Maybe I am not clear enough...

Hinkie drafted (or traded for) three 7' footers in a row in the front of the NBA lottery.  Off the top of my head I cannot think of any GM who has ever done that. 

Not only that - we are playing in an era of the NBA where teams are spreading the floor with shooters, going small, and sharing the ball around the perimeter.  The most sought after position right now IS NOT AT THE 5. 

To be more clear:

No one wants to trade their All-Star wing with 3-point range for Nerlens Noel, an athletic defensive center who can't shoot outside of 10 ft. 

No one wants to trade their All-Star stretch 4 or shifty PG for Jahlil Okafor, a slow plodding offensive specialist in the post who can guard anyone his size and speed, let alone switch on a pick and roll.

No one is going to trade their top 15-20 player for Joel Embiid straight up.  Would Danny trade Isaiah Thomas for Embiid, right now?  Ask yourself that.  This is a 5 with chronic foot injuries who has never played a game in the NBA (oooh but he is really wowing them in workouts reportedly...)

Those are his prize jewels.  That's it.  A team with those three right now, playing at full health, is not winning jack in the NBA.  That is Hinkie's legacy.

Name which All Star wings, stretch 4's, and shifty point guards you mean. This year's All Star game? Or do Jeff Teague and (ahem) Jrue Holiday count? A straight up one-for-one trade? Or can either Noel or Okafor being packaged with a pick or two? The state of the league's All Star points and wings is such that they comprise most of the league's best 20 or so players, these aren't your average All Stars. But let's say the Bulls make Butler available. You don't think the Sixers could get him by packaging either Noel or Okafor with a pick or two?

Anyway, it's year three of what was supposed to be a five year plan. The team was not supposed to be winning jack by now, even if Embiid were at full health.

People keep saying "but they're not trying to be good" like it's some sort of talisman against rational thought.  Let's look at this plainly.  In year three of a five year plan, Philly...

Did not have a quality starting point guard.
Did not have a quality backup point guard.
Did not have a quality starting shooting guard.
Did not have a quality backup shooting guard.
Did not have a quality starting small forward.
Did not have a quality starting power forward.
Their only quality backup power forward is 32 years old.

They're supposed to fix all that in two years?

The fact that Hinkie was trying something radically different doesn't mean that it's impossible to evaluate his performance.

Mike

[Moranis]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

Yes, it by definition completely invalidates the plan, because it was his plan to build through the draft. 

He resigned because his "process" failed - his bosses brought in other guys who know more about basketball than he does.  That's kind of a bad thing if you are a GM.

So you're saying you can't build through the draft? Because that was his plan. And to be honest, when he had four first round picks coming this offseason he never got to implement it so who knows.

And Jerry Colangelo is not a good bball mind, he's cut from the same cloth as Billy King and the good ole boy network.

Maybe I am not clear enough...

Hinkie drafted (or traded for) three 7' footers in a row in the front of the NBA lottery.  Off the top of my head I cannot think of any GM who has ever done that. 

Not only that - we are playing in an era of the NBA where teams are spreading the floor with shooters, going small, and sharing the ball around the perimeter.  The most sought after position right now IS NOT AT THE 5. 

To be more clear:

No one wants to trade their All-Star wing with 3-point range for Nerlens Noel, an athletic defensive center who can't shoot outside of 10 ft. 

No one wants to trade their All-Star stretch 4 or shifty PG for Jahlil Okafor, a slow plodding offensive specialist in the post who can guard anyone his size and speed, let alone switch on a pick and roll.

No one is going to trade their top 15-20 player for Joel Embiid straight up.  Would Danny trade Isaiah Thomas for Embiid, right now?  Ask yourself that.  This is a 5 with chronic foot injuries who has never played a game in the NBA (oooh but he is really wowing them in workouts reportedly...)

Those are his prize jewels.  That's it.  A team with those three right now, playing at full health, is not winning jack in the NBA.  That is Hinkie's legacy.

Name which All Star wings, stretch 4's, and shifty point guards you mean. This year's All Star game? Or do Jeff Teague and (ahem) Jrue Holiday count? A straight up one-for-one trade? Or can either Noel or Okafor being packaged with a pick or two? The state of the league's All Star points and wings is such that they comprise most of the league's best 20 or so players, these aren't your average All Stars. But let's say the Bulls make Butler available. You don't think the Sixers could get him by packaging either Noel or Okafor with a pick or two?

Anyway, it's year three of what was supposed to be a five year plan. The team was not supposed to be winning jack by now, even if Embiid were at full health.

People keep saying "but they're not trying to be good" like it's some sort of talisman against rational thought.  Let's look at this plainly.  In year three of a five year plan, Philly...

Did not have a quality starting point guard.
Did not have a quality backup point guard.
Did not have a quality starting shooting guard.
Did not have a quality backup shooting guard.
Did not have a quality starting small forward.
Did not have a quality starting power forward.
Their only quality backup power forward is 32 years old.

They're supposed to fix all that in two years?

The fact that Hinkie was trying something radically different doesn't mean that it's impossible to evaluate his performance.

Mike

One of the guys below is 24 year old Jae Crowder, the other is 25 year old Robert Covington.  Those are the per 36 minute stats from their 3rd year in the league. 
1753 5.0 13.2 .380 3.0 8.8 .340 2.0 4.4 .460 2.5 3.2 .790 1.2 6.8 8.0 1.8 2.1 0.8 2.8 4.5 15.6
1647 5.0 11.9 .420 1.3 4.5 .293 3.7 7.4 .499 2.4 3.1 .773 1.6 4.8 6.4 2.1 1.6 0.5 1.1 3.0 13.7

I assume you would consider 4th year Jae Crowder to be a quality starting SF, yet Robert Covington exceeds Mr. Crowder's 3rd year almost across the board, yet he isn't considered a quality starting SF prospect.

You see that is the problem with your analysis.  You act like these 1st, 2nd, and 3rd year players are complete pictures of what they will become.  You make no account for players like Saric or Embiid and certainly make no distinctions for how bad Philly was when Hinkie took over.  Philly had the worst outlook in the league and it wasn't close when Hinkie got there. 

[PhoSita]

http://www.sporcle.com/games/naqwerty3/trust-the-process

This is a fun game to play.

How many of the players who spent time on the Sixers during Hinkie's tenure can you name?

I got 30.

[trickybilly]

http://www.sporcle.com/games/naqwerty3/trust-the-process

This is a fun game to play.

How many of the players who spent time on the Sixers during Hinkie's tenure can you name?

I got 30.

Awesome. I got 13. Poor Hollis Thompson. I completely forgot he existed. TP.

[kozlodoev]

http://www.sporcle.com/games/naqwerty3/trust-the-process

This is a fun game to play.

How many of the players who spent time on the Sixers during Hinkie's tenure can you name?

I got 30.

Awesome. I got 13. Poor Hollis Thompson. I completely forgot he existed. TP.

I thought Hinkie was hired in 2015. Why are there players with 13-14 tenure on the list?

[PhoSita]

http://www.sporcle.com/games/naqwerty3/trust-the-process

This is a fun game to play.

How many of the players who spent time on the Sixers during Hinkie's tenure can you name?

I got 30.

Awesome. I got 13. Poor Hollis Thompson. I completely forgot he existed. TP.

I thought Hinkie was hired in 2015. Why are there players with 13-14 tenure on the list?

Hinkie's tenure started with the 2013 draft, I thought.  Holiday for Noel + 2014 1st.

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

Yes, it by definition completely invalidates the plan, because it was his plan to build through the draft. 

He resigned because his "process" failed - his bosses brought in other guys who know more about basketball than he does.  That's kind of a bad thing if you are a GM.

So you're saying you can't build through the draft? Because that was his plan. And to be honest, when he had four first round picks coming this offseason he never got to implement it so who knows.

And Jerry Colangelo is not a good bball mind, he's cut from the same cloth as Billy King and the good ole boy network.

Maybe I am not clear enough...

Hinkie drafted (or traded for) three 7' footers in a row in the front of the NBA lottery.  Off the top of my head I cannot think of any GM who has ever done that. 

Not only that - we are playing in an era of the NBA where teams are spreading the floor with shooters, going small, and sharing the ball around the perimeter.  The most sought after position right now IS NOT AT THE 5. 

To be more clear:

No one wants to trade their All-Star wing with 3-point range for Nerlens Noel, an athletic defensive center who can't shoot outside of 10 ft. 

No one wants to trade their All-Star stretch 4 or shifty PG for Jahlil Okafor, a slow plodding offensive specialist in the post who can guard anyone his size and speed, let alone switch on a pick and roll.

No one is going to trade their top 15-20 player for Joel Embiid straight up.  Would Danny trade Isaiah Thomas for Embiid, right now?  Ask yourself that.  This is a 5 with chronic foot injuries who has never played a game in the NBA (oooh but he is really wowing them in workouts reportedly...)

Those are his prize jewels.  That's it.  A team with those three right now, playing at full health, is not winning jack in the NBA.  That is Hinkie's legacy.

Name which All Star wings, stretch 4's, and shifty point guards you mean. This year's All Star game? Or do Jeff Teague and (ahem) Jrue Holiday count? A straight up one-for-one trade? Or can either Noel or Okafor being packaged with a pick or two? The state of the league's All Star points and wings is such that they comprise most of the league's best 20 or so players, these aren't your average All Stars. But let's say the Bulls make Butler available. You don't think the Sixers could get him by packaging either Noel or Okafor with a pick or two?

Anyway, it's year three of what was supposed to be a five year plan. The team was not supposed to be winning jack by now, even if Embiid were at full health.

People keep saying "but they're not trying to be good" like it's some sort of talisman against rational thought.  Let's look at this plainly.  In year three of a five year plan, Philly...

Did not have a quality starting point guard.
Did not have a quality backup point guard.
Did not have a quality starting shooting guard.
Did not have a quality backup shooting guard.
Did not have a quality starting small forward.
Did not have a quality starting power forward.
Their only quality backup power forward is 32 years old.

They're supposed to fix all that in two years?

The fact that Hinkie was trying something radically different doesn't mean that it's impossible to evaluate his performance.

Mike

Covington is a quality 3 or 4, and Grant is a good back up 4. McConnell is fine as a backup PG too.

Their real issue is that they don't have anyone who can initiate and either get to the rim or force the defense to rotate.

[MBunge]

http://deadspin.com/the-idea-behind-the-process-is-wrong-and-always-has-be-1769688492

"The simple fact of the matter is that in three years Sam Hinkie showed that he was a poor talent evaluator. Nerlens Noel isn’t Steven Adams or Rudy Gobert, Michael Carter-Williams isn’t Giannis Antetokounmpo, Joel Embiid isn’t Aaron Gordon, Jahlil Okafor isn’t Kristaps Porzingis. Hinkie drafted over 10 players in the second round and tore through D-Leaguers and end-of-the-benchers via trade and ended up with just one (or maybe two) back-of-the-rotation players. One of the few times he did find something resembling real talent in the second round—K.J. McDaniels—Hinkie offered the player an insulting contract and soon traded him."

What does poor talent evaluation have to do with the process? No team building strategy works with a bad talent evaluator. The person executing the plan might not be the right guy, but it doesn't invalidate a pretty proven strategy.

Are you trying to be funny funny or ironic funny?  I have to admit sometimes I can't tell the difference.

Neither. He didn't draft well enough. That doesn't invalidate the plan, it just means he was the wrong guy to implement. Deadspin is pretty clueless, and that article is par for the course. If he had Gmthe Greek Freek and Porzingis he'd look like a genius. His "process" worked, he just hasn't done a great job of capitalizing on the picks.

Please list the team building methods that work without good talent evaluation.

Yes, it by definition completely invalidates the plan, because it was his plan to build through the draft. 

He resigned because his "process" failed - his bosses brought in other guys who know more about basketball than he does.  That's kind of a bad thing if you are a GM.

So you're saying you can't build through the draft? Because that was his plan. And to be honest, when he had four first round picks coming this offseason he never got to implement it so who knows.

And Jerry Colangelo is not a good bball mind, he's cut from the same cloth as Billy King and the good ole boy network.

Maybe I am not clear enough...

Hinkie drafted (or traded for) three 7' footers in a row in the front of the NBA lottery.  Off the top of my head I cannot think of any GM who has ever done that. 

Not only that - we are playing in an era of the NBA where teams are spreading the floor with shooters, going small, and sharing the ball around the perimeter.  The most sought after position right now IS NOT AT THE 5. 

To be more clear:

No one wants to trade their All-Star wing with 3-point range for Nerlens Noel, an athletic defensive center who can't shoot outside of 10 ft. 

No one wants to trade their All-Star stretch 4 or shifty PG for Jahlil Okafor, a slow plodding offensive specialist in the post who can guard anyone his size and speed, let alone switch on a pick and roll.

No one is going to trade their top 15-20 player for Joel Embiid straight up.  Would Danny trade Isaiah Thomas for Embiid, right now?  Ask yourself that.  This is a 5 with chronic foot injuries who has never played a game in the NBA (oooh but he is really wowing them in workouts reportedly...)

Those are his prize jewels.  That's it.  A team with those three right now, playing at full health, is not winning jack in the NBA.  That is Hinkie's legacy.

Name which All Star wings, stretch 4's, and shifty point guards you mean. This year's All Star game? Or do Jeff Teague and (ahem) Jrue Holiday count? A straight up one-for-one trade? Or can either Noel or Okafor being packaged with a pick or two? The state of the league's All Star points and wings is such that they comprise most of the league's best 20 or so players, these aren't your average All Stars. But let's say the Bulls make Butler available. You don't think the Sixers could get him by packaging either Noel or Okafor with a pick or two?

Anyway, it's year three of what was supposed to be a five year plan. The team was not supposed to be winning jack by now, even if Embiid were at full health.

People keep saying "but they're not trying to be good" like it's some sort of talisman against rational thought.  Let's look at this plainly.  In year three of a five year plan, Philly...

Did not have a quality starting point guard.
Did not have a quality backup point guard.
Did not have a quality starting shooting guard.
Did not have a quality backup shooting guard.
Did not have a quality starting small forward.
Did not have a quality starting power forward.
Their only quality backup power forward is 32 years old.

They're supposed to fix all that in two years?

The fact that Hinkie was trying something radically different doesn't mean that it's impossible to evaluate his performance.

Mike

One of the guys below is 24 year old Jae Crowder, the other is 25 year old Robert Covington.  Those are the per 36 minute stats from their 3rd year in the league. 
1753 5.0 13.2 .380 3.0 8.8 .340 2.0 4.4 .460 2.5 3.2 .790 1.2 6.8 8.0 1.8 2.1 0.8 2.8 4.5 15.6
1647 5.0 11.9 .420 1.3 4.5 .293 3.7 7.4 .499 2.4 3.1 .773 1.6 4.8 6.4 2.1 1.6 0.5 1.1 3.0 13.7

I assume you would consider 4th year Jae Crowder to be a quality starting SF, yet Robert Covington exceeds Mr. Crowder's 3rd year almost across the board, yet he isn't considered a quality starting SF prospect.

You see that is the problem with your analysis.  You act like these 1st, 2nd, and 3rd year players are complete pictures of what they will become.  You make no account for players like Saric or Embiid and certainly make no distinctions for how bad Philly was when Hinkie took over.  Philly had the worst outlook in the league and it wasn't close when Hinkie got there.

I don't know why you're comparing Crowder last year and Covington this year.  They're both 25 year old.

I would also point out that Ish Smith is putting up 14 points and 7 assists a game for Philly this season.  Tony Parker is putting up 11.3 points and 5.3 assists for San Antonio.  Should the Spurs have picked him up after the Wizards released him in October and made him their starting point guard?

Mike