Happy trails to Hinkie's Power.

[Donoghus]

Wonder if the ownership is indeed losing faith due to the selections themselves and not plan. Like Embid, MCW, Saric, Okafor and Noel could have been Smart, LaVine, Giannis, Porzingis, and Noel. If 76ers hit on their picks they would be very good shape.

Embiid was a calculated risk.  Most talented prospect on the board at that time.  MCW you can question, but it was a weak draft.  Saric we don't know about.  Okafor and Noel were also the most talented prospect on the board where they were taken.  Hinkie was just staying true to his philosophy ... don't worry about actually building a team until you've got the young stars in place.

I didn't purposely pick positions but it did work that way lol. I was talking hitting where they were picking. If they had a do over based on players available when they picked it should be Smart over Embid (one could have passed on health), LaVine over Payton(LaVine had more upside IMO), Porzingis over Okafor(Porzingis looked like a better fit next to Noel), Greek freak over MCW (MCW was flawed to start with) and still take Noel.

Sure, but a GM's drafting can't be evaluated retroactively like that.  You have to assess their decision based on the information available at the time.

When you look at how the prospects they chose turned out, then you're evaluating the player's adjustment to the NBA and the team's development process, not the GM's drafting.

You really aren't following. Let me break it down another way. The owners wouldn't have an issue with all the tanking if Hinkie hit on all his picks. When you miss on a pick no matter the information at the time it is all on you. It is your job to make good picks. The owners are sacrificing millions of dollars on the idea that you will make the right choices. More millions when you are talking tanking and not just accounting for  player's salaries. After so many misses no GM last. It's not all because they are tanking 3 years in a row it's likely based on the misses.

I'd agree with this to an extent.  There has to be some culpability there on Hinkie for his drafting.  He chose to gamble on Embiid.  To this point, that pick looks awful given the immediate help that could've been drafted instead.  People knock Ainge for taking Fab Melo over the likes of Draymond Green. Middleton, Plumlee, etc.  but exonerate Hinkie for any of his drafting?  C'mon....

Look ownership signed off on this plan, they certainly hold some responsibility to the way things have gone.  However, you can't just point your finger at them for this mess and excuse Hinkie of any responsibility.  He has "built" a team right now that is currently 1-22.  He made the draft choices he made & the trades he did without a gun to his head.  He also chose not to bring in any sort of veteran presence to help this team....at all.  One player with more than 3 years NBA experience.   That's a joke.  All with the hopes of hitting it big in the lottery or simply trying to kick the can down the road if they don't.

[PhoSita]

The owners wouldn't have an issue with all the tanking if Hinkie hit on all his picks. When you miss on a pick no matter the information at the time it is all on you. It is your job to make good picks. The owners are sacrificing millions of dollars on the idea that you will make the right choices. More millions when you are talking tanking and not just accounting for  player's salaries. After so many misses no GM last. It's not all because they are tanking 3 years in a row it's likely based on the misses.

I understand what you're saying -- owners care about results.

At the same time, if the owners were really sincere in buying into Hinkie's plan, they would have to recognize that the draft is not a sure thing.  You cannot choose to build entirely through the draft and quit after three seasons because your handful of draft picks has not yet produced a clear cut superstar.  That was ALWAYS a possibility from the beginning.  It's not on Hinkie.

It makes no sense to hire somebody to execute a plan that has inherent randomness in it and then fire him after a relatively short period because the randomness hasn't worked out in your favor yet.

[PhoSita]

He made the draft choices he made & the trades he did without a gun to his head.  He also chose not to bring in any sort of veteran presence to help this team....at all.  One player with more than 3 years NBA experience.   That's a joke.  All with the hopes of hitting it big in the lottery or simply trying to kick the can down the road if they don't.

To me, it seems like the legitimate criticisms you can make of Hinkie stem from his apparent lack of appreciation for intangible things -- like having at least a few high character veterans on a young team, or making sure not to sour relationships with agents while pursuing your all-out tanking scheme. 

The NBA operates on business relationships between people, and the game it is built around involves teams of people competing against one another.  If you try too hard to abstract it all into numbers, you're bound to lose some essential elements to running a successful franchise.

[Who]

I think Embiid cost Philly a year ... in terms of a lost top 5 pick.

(1) As a result, I look at Philly as two years into rebuilding rather than three.

(2) Also as a result, I think it is premature for people to be up in arms about where they are in their rebuild.

(3) I also think they complicated their rebuild further by taking two centers (Noel, Okafor) who cannot play together and a foreigner (Saric) who hasn't joined the team yet. That will delay improvement further and lead to slower improvement in immediate future until they trade one of those centers and bring Saric over. So I am expecting a slow gradual climb rather than large jumps in performance year-to-year until situation is addressed properly.

[Csfan1984]

The owners wouldn't have an issue with all the tanking if Hinkie hit on all his picks. When you miss on a pick no matter the information at the time it is all on you. It is your job to make good picks. The owners are sacrificing millions of dollars on the idea that you will make the right choices. More millions when you are talking tanking and not just accounting for  player's salaries. After so many misses no GM last. It's not all because they are tanking 3 years in a row it's likely based on the misses.

I understand what you're saying -- owners care about results.

At the same time, if the owners were really sincere in buying into Hinkie's plan, they would have to recognize that the draft is not a sure thing.  You cannot choose to build entirely through the draft and quit after three seasons because your handful of draft picks has not yet produced a clear cut superstar.  That was ALWAYS a possibility from the beginning.  It's not on Hinkie.

It makes no sense to hire somebody to execute a plan that has inherent randomness in it and then fire him after a relatively short period because the randomness hasn't worked out in your favor yet.

I'm sure NBA league office, other teams, broadcast companies, along with fans are also pressuring 76ers. Even when not doing it on purpose as an example I was offered free tickets to watch a 76ers vs C's and said no. After all why do I want to pay parking, food, drinks and get home late to watch the 76ers. That mindset is growing for NBA fans in every city. They have to be losing a lot of money for everyone not just themselves right now.

[hpantazo]

I wonder what Doctor J thinks about all of this. He has looked like a tool standing next to Hinkie and praising their long term plan for dominance the past few years. We will never likely get an honest answer from him but my guess is he thought the whole plan was insane all along but wanted to keep his job.

[Moranis]

Wonder if the ownership is indeed losing faith due to the selections themselves and not plan. Like Embid, MCW, Saric, Okafor and Noel could have been Smart, LaVine, Giannis, Porzingis, and Noel. If 76ers hit on their picks they would be very good shape.

Embiid was a calculated risk.  Most talented prospect on the board at that time.  MCW you can question, but it was a weak draft.  Saric we don't know about.  Okafor and Noel were also the most talented prospect on the board where they were taken.  Hinkie was just staying true to his philosophy ... don't worry about actually building a team until you've got the young stars in place.

I didn't purposely pick positions but it did work that way lol. I was talking hitting where they were picking. If they had a do over based on players available when they picked it should be Smart over Embid (one could have passed on health), LaVine over Payton(LaVine had more upside IMO), Porzingis over Okafor(Porzingis looked like a better fit next to Noel), Greek freak over MCW (MCW was flawed to start with) and still take Noel.

Sure, but a GM's drafting can't be evaluated retroactively like that.  You have to assess their decision based on the information available at the time.

When you look at how the prospects they chose turned out, then you're evaluating the player's adjustment to the NBA and the team's development process, not the GM's drafting.

Well that and they didn't draft Payton, Orlando did.

76ers drafted Payton and traded him to Magic for Saric + extras.

No.  The trade was made before the pick it just couldn't be finalized until after the draft.  The Magic selected Payton, the Sixers selected Saric.  The Sixers got an extra 1st round pick and a 2nd round pick to move back 2 spots and draft the player they were going to draft anyway.

[Moranis]

Wonder if the ownership is indeed losing faith due to the selections themselves and not plan. Like Embid, MCW, Saric, Okafor and Noel could have been Smart, LaVine, Giannis, Porzingis, and Noel. If 76ers hit on their picks they would be very good shape.

Embiid was a calculated risk.  Most talented prospect on the board at that time.  MCW you can question, but it was a weak draft.  Saric we don't know about.  Okafor and Noel were also the most talented prospect on the board where they were taken.  Hinkie was just staying true to his philosophy ... don't worry about actually building a team until you've got the young stars in place.

I didn't purposely pick positions but it did work that way lol. I was talking hitting where they were picking. If they had a do over based on players available when they picked it should be Smart over Embid (one could have passed on health), LaVine over Payton(LaVine had more upside IMO), Porzingis over Okafor(Porzingis looked like a better fit next to Noel), Greek freak over MCW (MCW was flawed to start with) and still take Noel.

Sure, but a GM's drafting can't be evaluated retroactively like that.  You have to assess their decision based on the information available at the time.

When you look at how the prospects they chose turned out, then you're evaluating the player's adjustment to the NBA and the team's development process, not the GM's drafting.

You really aren't following. Let me break it down another way. The owners wouldn't have an issue with all the tanking if Hinkie hit on all his picks. When you miss on a pick no matter the information at the time it is all on you. It is your job to make good picks. The owners are sacrificing millions of dollars on the idea that you will make the right choices. More millions when you are talking tanking and not just accounting for  player's salaries. After so many misses no GM last. It's not all because they are tanking 3 years in a row it's likely based on the misses.

I'd agree with this to an extent.  There has to be some culpability there on Hinkie for his drafting.  He chose to gamble on Embiid.  To this point, that pick looks awful given the immediate help that could've been drafted instead.  People knock Ainge for taking Fab Melo over the likes of Draymond Green. Middleton, Plumlee, etc.  but exonerate Hinkie for any of his drafting?  C'mon....

Look ownership signed off on this plan, they certainly hold some responsibility to the way things have gone.  However, you can't just point your finger at them for this mess and excuse Hinkie of any responsibility.  He has "built" a team right now that is currently 1-22.  He made the draft choices he made & the trades he did without a gun to his head.  He also chose not to bring in any sort of veteran presence to help this team....at all.  One player with more than 3 years NBA experience.   That's a joke.  All with the hopes of hitting it big in the lottery or simply trying to kick the can down the road if they don't.

Yeah he chose to gamble on Embiid, but I firmly believe at least 90% of the GM's would have made that exact same selection.  You really can't fault him for taking Embiid.  He was the right pick for that franchise at that time. 

In fact, it is pretty hard to say they really missed on any draft pick.  MCW was the rookie of the year.  Embiid was the most talented player in his draft.  Saric is one of, if not the, best player in Europe.  Okafor was the best player available.  Some of the 2nd round picks have worked out well.  Now maybe you can say that while Okafor was the best player available he wasn't the best fit.  I get that, but what were they supposed to do, take a lesser player, manufacture a trade out of thin air, etc.  You should always draft the best player available, especially when your team just isn't very good. 

[Csfan1984]

Wonder if the ownership is indeed losing faith due to the selections themselves and not plan. Like Embid, MCW, Saric, Okafor and Noel could have been Smart, LaVine, Giannis, Porzingis, and Noel. If 76ers hit on their picks they would be very good shape.

Embiid was a calculated risk.  Most talented prospect on the board at that time.  MCW you can question, but it was a weak draft.  Saric we don't know about.  Okafor and Noel were also the most talented prospect on the board where they were taken.  Hinkie was just staying true to his philosophy ... don't worry about actually building a team until you've got the young stars in place.

I didn't purposely pick positions but it did work that way lol. I was talking hitting where they were picking. If they had a do over based on players available when they picked it should be Smart over Embid (one could have passed on health), LaVine over Payton(LaVine had more upside IMO), Porzingis over Okafor(Porzingis looked like a better fit next to Noel), Greek freak over MCW (MCW was flawed to start with) and still take Noel.

Sure, but a GM's drafting can't be evaluated retroactively like that.  You have to assess their decision based on the information available at the time.

When you look at how the prospects they chose turned out, then you're evaluating the player's adjustment to the NBA and the team's development process, not the GM's drafting.

Well that and they didn't draft Payton, Orlando did.

76ers drafted Payton and traded him to Magic for Saric + extras.

No.  The trade was made before the pick it just couldn't be finalized until after the draft.  The Magic selected Payton, the Sixers selected Saric.  The Sixers got an extra 1st round pick and a 2nd round pick to move back 2 spots and draft the player they were going to draft anyway.

Still their pick was used for Payton. Not Saric. I have to go by what the pick was to say who they could have drafted. If I go off trade down then that changes players available. And since they indeed had the higher pick and had full control of it till draft selection then we can't say they could have only gotten players at the magic slot can we?

[PhoSita]

The owners wouldn't have an issue with all the tanking if Hinkie hit on all his picks. When you miss on a pick no matter the information at the time it is all on you. It is your job to make good picks. The owners are sacrificing millions of dollars on the idea that you will make the right choices. More millions when you are talking tanking and not just accounting for  player's salaries. After so many misses no GM last. It's not all because they are tanking 3 years in a row it's likely based on the misses.

I understand what you're saying -- owners care about results.

At the same time, if the owners were really sincere in buying into Hinkie's plan, they would have to recognize that the draft is not a sure thing.  You cannot choose to build entirely through the draft and quit after three seasons because your handful of draft picks has not yet produced a clear cut superstar.  That was ALWAYS a possibility from the beginning.  It's not on Hinkie.

It makes no sense to hire somebody to execute a plan that has inherent randomness in it and then fire him after a relatively short period because the randomness hasn't worked out in your favor yet.

I'm sure NBA league office, other teams, broadcast companies, along with fans are also pressuring 76ers. Even when not doing it on purpose as an example I was offered free tickets to watch a 76ers vs C's and said no. After all why do I want to pay parking, food, drinks and get home late to watch the 76ers. That mindset is growing for NBA fans in every city. They have to be losing a lot of money for everyone not just themselves right now.

None of this was particularly difficult to foresee when they started down this road, though.  I think it was generally agreed the Sixers were choosing to basically relegate themselves for 3-5 years without actually getting relegated.

This is kind of like Fargo.  The owners hired Steve Buscemi and now they're queasy about the consequences of what they've set in motion.

[Csfan1984]

Wonder if the ownership is indeed losing faith due to the selections themselves and not plan. Like Embid, MCW, Saric, Okafor and Noel could have been Smart, LaVine, Giannis, Porzingis, and Noel. If 76ers hit on their picks they would be very good shape.

Embiid was a calculated risk.  Most talented prospect on the board at that time.  MCW you can question, but it was a weak draft.  Saric we don't know about.  Okafor and Noel were also the most talented prospect on the board where they were taken.  Hinkie was just staying true to his philosophy ... don't worry about actually building a team until you've got the young stars in place.

I didn't purposely pick positions but it did work that way lol. I was talking hitting where they were picking. If they had a do over based on players available when they picked it should be Smart over Embid (one could have passed on health), LaVine over Payton(LaVine had more upside IMO), Porzingis over Okafor(Porzingis looked like a better fit next to Noel), Greek freak over MCW (MCW was flawed to start with) and still take Noel.

Sure, but a GM's drafting can't be evaluated retroactively like that.  You have to assess their decision based on the information available at the time.

When you look at how the prospects they chose turned out, then you're evaluating the player's adjustment to the NBA and the team's development process, not the GM's drafting.

You really aren't following. Let me break it down another way. The owners wouldn't have an issue with all the tanking if Hinkie hit on all his picks. When you miss on a pick no matter the information at the time it is all on you. It is your job to make good picks. The owners are sacrificing millions of dollars on the idea that you will make the right choices. More millions when you are talking tanking and not just accounting for  player's salaries. After so many misses no GM last. It's not all because they are tanking 3 years in a row it's likely based on the misses.

I'd agree with this to an extent.  There has to be some culpability there on Hinkie for his drafting.  He chose to gamble on Embiid.  To this point, that pick looks awful given the immediate help that could've been drafted instead.  People knock Ainge for taking Fab Melo over the likes of Draymond Green. Middleton, Plumlee, etc.  but exonerate Hinkie for any of his drafting?  C'mon....

Look ownership signed off on this plan, they certainly hold some responsibility to the way things have gone.  However, you can't just point your finger at them for this mess and excuse Hinkie of any responsibility.  He has "built" a team right now that is currently 1-22.  He made the draft choices he made & the trades he did without a gun to his head.  He also chose not to bring in any sort of veteran presence to help this team....at all.  One player with more than 3 years NBA experience.   That's a joke.  All with the hopes of hitting it big in the lottery or simply trying to kick the can down the road if they don't.

Yeah he chose to gamble on Embiid, but I firmly believe at least 90% of the GM's would have made that exact same selection.  You really can't fault him for taking Embiid.  He was the right pick for that franchise at that time. 

In fact, it is pretty hard to say they really missed on any draft pick.  MCW was the rookie of the year.  Embiid was the most talented player in his draft.  Saric is one of, if not the, best player in Europe.  Okafor was the best player available.  Some of the 2nd round picks have worked out well.  Now maybe you can say that while Okafor was the best player available he wasn't the best fit.  I get that, but what were they supposed to do, take a lesser player, manufacture a trade out of thin air, etc.  You should always draft the best player available, especially when your team just isn't very good.

They flat out missed if they don't develop past what they are now. You have to make good picks that pan out to be a good gm. If everyone was allowed the excuse that the pick looked good at the time no gm would ever lose a job.

[Moranis]

Wonder if the ownership is indeed losing faith due to the selections themselves and not plan. Like Embid, MCW, Saric, Okafor and Noel could have been Smart, LaVine, Giannis, Porzingis, and Noel. If 76ers hit on their picks they would be very good shape.

Embiid was a calculated risk.  Most talented prospect on the board at that time.  MCW you can question, but it was a weak draft.  Saric we don't know about.  Okafor and Noel were also the most talented prospect on the board where they were taken.  Hinkie was just staying true to his philosophy ... don't worry about actually building a team until you've got the young stars in place.

I didn't purposely pick positions but it did work that way lol. I was talking hitting where they were picking. If they had a do over based on players available when they picked it should be Smart over Embid (one could have passed on health), LaVine over Payton(LaVine had more upside IMO), Porzingis over Okafor(Porzingis looked like a better fit next to Noel), Greek freak over MCW (MCW was flawed to start with) and still take Noel.

Sure, but a GM's drafting can't be evaluated retroactively like that.  You have to assess their decision based on the information available at the time.

When you look at how the prospects they chose turned out, then you're evaluating the player's adjustment to the NBA and the team's development process, not the GM's drafting.

Well that and they didn't draft Payton, Orlando did.

76ers drafted Payton and traded him to Magic for Saric + extras.

No.  The trade was made before the pick it just couldn't be finalized until after the draft.  The Magic selected Payton, the Sixers selected Saric.  The Sixers got an extra 1st round pick and a 2nd round pick to move back 2 spots and draft the player they were going to draft anyway.

Still their pick was used for Payton. Not Saric. I have to go by what the pick was to say who they could have drafted. If I go off trade down then that changes players available. And since they indeed had the higher pick and had full control of it till draft selection then we can't say they could have only gotten players at the magic slot can we?

They originally had the 10th pick, but they didn't draft Payton.  That is what I was objecting to i.e. your statement that they drafted Payton.

And to be clear the Sixers traded the 2014 10th pick for the 2014 12th pick, Philly's 2017 1st round pick, and a 2015 2nd round pick (which they then traded for a 2020 2nd round pick, a 2021 2nd round pick, and cash).  It looks like that 2017 Philadelphia 1st they re-acquired is going to be a pretty good pick.  Thus, I'd say they clearly won that trade.  Now if you want to say that after the trade instead of Saric they should have drafted someone else (like say LaVine), I'd be happy to listen to that, though until Saric comes over it will be hard to really gauge if he was the wrong pick.  Remember, Philly was always going to be bad for a couple of years so a slight improvement that a guy like LaVine would yield over that time isn't going to matter.  5 or 10 years from now if LaVine is better than Saric, that is when it matters, but right now it makes no difference and that is why it is hard to say Saric was the wrong pick. 

[Csfan1984]

Wonder if the ownership is indeed losing faith due to the selections themselves and not plan. Like Embid, MCW, Saric, Okafor and Noel could have been Smart, LaVine, Giannis, Porzingis, and Noel. If 76ers hit on their picks they would be very good shape.

Embiid was a calculated risk.  Most talented prospect on the board at that time.  MCW you can question, but it was a weak draft.  Saric we don't know about.  Okafor and Noel were also the most talented prospect on the board where they were taken.  Hinkie was just staying true to his philosophy ... don't worry about actually building a team until you've got the young stars in place.

I didn't purposely pick positions but it did work that way lol. I was talking hitting where they were picking. If they had a do over based on players available when they picked it should be Smart over Embid (one could have passed on health), LaVine over Payton(LaVine had more upside IMO), Porzingis over Okafor(Porzingis looked like a better fit next to Noel), Greek freak over MCW (MCW was flawed to start with) and still take Noel.

Sure, but a GM's drafting can't be evaluated retroactively like that.  You have to assess their decision based on the information available at the time.

When you look at how the prospects they chose turned out, then you're evaluating the player's adjustment to the NBA and the team's development process, not the GM's drafting.

Well that and they didn't draft Payton, Orlando did.

76ers drafted Payton and traded him to Magic for Saric + extras.

No.  The trade was made before the pick it just couldn't be finalized until after the draft.  The Magic selected Payton, the Sixers selected Saric.  The Sixers got an extra 1st round pick and a 2nd round pick to move back 2 spots and draft the player they were going to draft anyway.

Still their pick was used for Payton. Not Saric. I have to go by what the pick was to say who they could have drafted. If I go off trade down then that changes players available. And since they indeed had the higher pick and had full control of it till draft selection then we can't say they could have only gotten players at the magic slot can we?

They originally had the 10th pick, but they didn't draft Payton.  That is what I was objecting to i.e. your statement that they drafted Payton.

And to be clear the Sixers traded the 2014 10th pick for the 2014 12th pick, Philly's 2017 1st round pick, and a 2015 2nd round pick (which they then traded for a 2020 2nd round pick, a 2021 2nd round pick, and cash).  It looks like that 2017 Philadelphia 1st they re-acquired is going to be a pretty good pick.  Thus, I'd say they clearly won that trade.  Now if you want to say that after the trade instead of Saric they should have drafted someone else (like say LaVine), I'd be happy to listen to that, though until Saric comes over it will be hard to really gauge if he was the wrong pick.  Remember, Philly was always going to be bad for a couple of years so a slight improvement that a guy like LaVine would yield over that time isn't going to matter.  5 or 10 years from now if LaVine is better than Saric, that is when it matters, but right now it makes no difference and that is why it is hard to say Saric was the wrong pick.

But the point of my statement was hits and misses and the do overs.  In a do over at 10 where Payton was taken with their pick, they could have taken LaVine. LaVine who looks much better than Saric right now. And again I can't say Saric over LaVine because LaVine was gone by the Saric pick.

[Moranis]

Wonder if the ownership is indeed losing faith due to the selections themselves and not plan. Like Embid, MCW, Saric, Okafor and Noel could have been Smart, LaVine, Giannis, Porzingis, and Noel. If 76ers hit on their picks they would be very good shape.

Embiid was a calculated risk.  Most talented prospect on the board at that time.  MCW you can question, but it was a weak draft.  Saric we don't know about.  Okafor and Noel were also the most talented prospect on the board where they were taken.  Hinkie was just staying true to his philosophy ... don't worry about actually building a team until you've got the young stars in place.

I didn't purposely pick positions but it did work that way lol. I was talking hitting where they were picking. If they had a do over based on players available when they picked it should be Smart over Embid (one could have passed on health), LaVine over Payton(LaVine had more upside IMO), Porzingis over Okafor(Porzingis looked like a better fit next to Noel), Greek freak over MCW (MCW was flawed to start with) and still take Noel.

Sure, but a GM's drafting can't be evaluated retroactively like that.  You have to assess their decision based on the information available at the time.

When you look at how the prospects they chose turned out, then you're evaluating the player's adjustment to the NBA and the team's development process, not the GM's drafting.

Well that and they didn't draft Payton, Orlando did.

76ers drafted Payton and traded him to Magic for Saric + extras.

No.  The trade was made before the pick it just couldn't be finalized until after the draft.  The Magic selected Payton, the Sixers selected Saric.  The Sixers got an extra 1st round pick and a 2nd round pick to move back 2 spots and draft the player they were going to draft anyway.

Still their pick was used for Payton. Not Saric. I have to go by what the pick was to say who they could have drafted. If I go off trade down then that changes players available. And since they indeed had the higher pick and had full control of it till draft selection then we can't say they could have only gotten players at the magic slot can we?

They originally had the 10th pick, but they didn't draft Payton.  That is what I was objecting to i.e. your statement that they drafted Payton.

And to be clear the Sixers traded the 2014 10th pick for the 2014 12th pick, Philly's 2017 1st round pick, and a 2015 2nd round pick (which they then traded for a 2020 2nd round pick, a 2021 2nd round pick, and cash).  It looks like that 2017 Philadelphia 1st they re-acquired is going to be a pretty good pick.  Thus, I'd say they clearly won that trade.  Now if you want to say that after the trade instead of Saric they should have drafted someone else (like say LaVine), I'd be happy to listen to that, though until Saric comes over it will be hard to really gauge if he was the wrong pick.  Remember, Philly was always going to be bad for a couple of years so a slight improvement that a guy like LaVine would yield over that time isn't going to matter.  5 or 10 years from now if LaVine is better than Saric, that is when it matters, but right now it makes no difference and that is why it is hard to say Saric was the wrong pick.

But the point of my statement was hits and misses and the do overs.  In a do over at 10 where Payton was taken with their pick, they could have taken LaVine. LaVine who looks much better than Saric right now. And again I can't say Saric over LaVine because LaVine was gone by the Saric pick.

No.  LaVine went 13th.  Saric went 12th.  Under your analysis at 10 you are clearly wrong.  Philadelphia acquired the Philadelphia 2017 1st round pick in that trade.  That is far more valuable than any player that could have been taken at 10.  It isn't close.

And you can't really say LaVine looks much better than Saric right now because you don't know what Saric will be.  I mean LaVine isn't even starting.  Who knows what he or Saric will be. 

[Donoghus]

Wonder if the ownership is indeed losing faith due to the selections themselves and not plan. Like Embid, MCW, Saric, Okafor and Noel could have been Smart, LaVine, Giannis, Porzingis, and Noel. If 76ers hit on their picks they would be very good shape.

Embiid was a calculated risk.  Most talented prospect on the board at that time.  MCW you can question, but it was a weak draft.  Saric we don't know about.  Okafor and Noel were also the most talented prospect on the board where they were taken.  Hinkie was just staying true to his philosophy ... don't worry about actually building a team until you've got the young stars in place.

I didn't purposely pick positions but it did work that way lol. I was talking hitting where they were picking. If they had a do over based on players available when they picked it should be Smart over Embid (one could have passed on health), LaVine over Payton(LaVine had more upside IMO), Porzingis over Okafor(Porzingis looked like a better fit next to Noel), Greek freak over MCW (MCW was flawed to start with) and still take Noel.

Sure, but a GM's drafting can't be evaluated retroactively like that.  You have to assess their decision based on the information available at the time.

When you look at how the prospects they chose turned out, then you're evaluating the player's adjustment to the NBA and the team's development process, not the GM's drafting.

Well that and they didn't draft Payton, Orlando did.

76ers drafted Payton and traded him to Magic for Saric + extras.

No.  The trade was made before the pick it just couldn't be finalized until after the draft.  The Magic selected Payton, the Sixers selected Saric.  The Sixers got an extra 1st round pick and a 2nd round pick to move back 2 spots and draft the player they were going to draft anyway.

Still their pick was used for Payton. Not Saric. I have to go by what the pick was to say who they could have drafted. If I go off trade down then that changes players available. And since they indeed had the higher pick and had full control of it till draft selection then we can't say they could have only gotten players at the magic slot can we?

They originally had the 10th pick, but they didn't draft Payton.  That is what I was objecting to i.e. your statement that they drafted Payton.

And to be clear the Sixers traded the 2014 10th pick for the 2014 12th pick, Philly's 2017 1st round pick, and a 2015 2nd round pick (which they then traded for a 2020 2nd round pick, a 2021 2nd round pick, and cash).  It looks like that 2017 Philadelphia 1st they re-acquired is going to be a pretty good pick.  Thus, I'd say they clearly won that trade.  Now if you want to say that after the trade instead of Saric they should have drafted someone else (like say LaVine), I'd be happy to listen to that, though until Saric comes over it will be hard to really gauge if he was the wrong pick.  Remember, Philly was always going to be bad for a couple of years so a slight improvement that a guy like LaVine would yield over that time isn't going to matter.  5 or 10 years from now if LaVine is better than Saric, that is when it matters, but right now it makes no difference and that is why it is hard to say Saric was the wrong pick.

But the point of my statement was hits and misses and the do overs.  In a do over at 10 where Payton was taken with their pick, they could have taken LaVine. LaVine who looks much better than Saric right now. And again I can't say Saric over LaVine because LaVine was gone by the Saric pick.

No.  LaVine went 13th.  Saric went 12th.  Under your analysis at 10 you are clearly wrong.  Philadelphia acquired the Philadelphia 2017 1st round pick in that trade.  That is far more valuable than any player that could have been taken at 10.  It isn't close.

And you can't really say LaVine looks much better than Saric right now because you don't know what Saric will be.  I mean LaVine isn't even starting.  Who knows what he or Saric will be.

Conversely, you can say that LaVine is contributing now while Saric has not and could help this team to a record that is better than 1-22.