Ainge receives praise from Hinkie

[tankcity!]

Hinkie cited pace and 3-point shooting as traits of recently successful teams in the NBA, but did very little towards finding role players who could contribute to those team traits. He let Ish Smith go; when the Sixers reacquired him, their offense got much better.

I don't think he's the right guy for the next phase (roster building). Also seems to be a mixed bag on talent assessment.

The thing is that it's hard to find guys who can shoot and play with pace who are also young enough to fit with the timeline of that team (i.e. long long term).  Ish Smith is already 27.

I agree that Hinkie didn't properly value the benefit of keeping a guy like Ish Smith anyway, despite the fact that he's not a long term answer, because it helps the other guys on the floor develop.

I'd say Hollis Thompson, Robert Covington, and Jerami Grant all appear to be decent reserve pieces for a team that wants to play fast and take a lot of outside shots.  Stauskas could have some value in that regard, as well.


By no means was Hinkie perfect.  I just think he did enough to get the benefit of the doubt to see his vision through.  After all, the Sixers hired a guy who had never had a GM position before.  They had to expect that he would need some time to develop, just as players do.

I agree. Don't you think it's concerning that they hired the Colangelo's? I can understand why Sixers fans are worried they may trade their assets underpriced.

[celticsclay]

Hinkie cited pace and 3-point shooting as traits of recently successful teams in the NBA, but did very little towards finding role players who could contribute to those team traits. He let Ish Smith go; when the Sixers reacquired him, their offense got much better.

I don't think he's the right guy for the next phase (roster building). Also seems to be a mixed bag on talent assessment.

The thing is that it's hard to find guys who can shoot and play with pace who are also young enough to fit with the timeline of that team (i.e. long long term).  Ish Smith is already 27.

I agree that Hinkie didn't properly value the benefit of keeping a guy like Ish Smith anyway, despite the fact that he's not a long term answer, because it helps the other guys on the floor develop.

I'd say Hollis Thompson, Robert Covington, and Jerami Grant all appear to be decent reserve pieces for a team that wants to play fast and take a lot of outside shots.  Stauskas could have some value in that regard, as well.


By no means was Hinkie perfect.  I just think he did enough to get the benefit of the doubt to see his vision through.  After all, the Sixers hired a guy who had never had a GM position before.  They had to expect that he would need some time to develop, just as players do.

I agree. Don't you think it's concerning that they hired the Colangelo's? I can understand why Sixers fans are worried they may trade their assets underpriced.

Stauskas is pretty awful. He is one of the worst defenders in the league and has been called out multiple times for it by Brown (and he is the only player I really can remember Brown doing that to repeatedly so that says something). He is also a shooter that shoots 39% from the field and 33% from the field. If he was good in other areas (play-making, defense, rebounding) maybe that could be offset. As it stands right now he is one of the worst players in the league.

[PhoSita]

I would be very concerned about how the next phase was going to be handled if I were a Philly fan.

My biggest fear is that I'd have lived through three painful years of rebuilding and then a new group comes in, makes short sighted moves, and suddenly the franchise is more or less back to where it was in 2012 or so.

[PhoSita]

Stauskas is pretty awful. He is one of the worst defenders in the league and has been called out multiple times for it by Brown (and he is the only player I really can remember Brown doing that to repeatedly so that says something). He is also a shooter that shoots 39% from the field and 33% from the field. If he was good in other areas (play-making, defense, rebounding) maybe that could be offset. As it stands right now he is one of the worst players in the league.

I don't disagree with any of that, but as with a lot of their players I think he could still have some utility as a third stringer with the potential to maybe step into a larger reserve role if necessary.

But probably he wont' be in the league too much longer.

I guess my point is, a lot of those guys would look a lot better if they were playing 10-15 minutes a night behind players that allow them to focus entirely on doing what they actually do well.  They're not totally useless once the Sixers start putting together a core group of players.

[Moranis]

After three years, the only other legitimate NBA player on the Sixers roster besides Noel and Okafor is Covington and he's probably the 9th or 10th guy in a good team's rotation.  And don't say cap space because almost every team in the league is going to have cap space.

Every rebuild requires the "Get lucky" step you mentioned, and is prone to stalling out if that one fails.

It's true the Sixers don't have many "legitimate NBA players" on the roster right now, but that's not a rubric for judging their rebuild, three years into it, that I find particularly persuasive or useful.

Hinkie approached his rebuild of the Sixers with a strategy that needed at least 5 years to play out before it could be properly judged.  What we can say after 3 years is he did a very good job assembling a pile of assets, despite the fact that he didn't enjoy any major strokes of good fortune along the way.

The next step to the rebuild is actually putting those assets to use to build a team.  This summer would have been the opportune time to do that.  But now Hinkie will never get the chance to make something out of the raw resources he accumulated.

Hinkie cited pace and 3-point shooting as traits of recently successful teams in the NBA, but did very little towards finding role players who could contribute to those team traits. He let Ish Smith go; when the Sixers reacquired him, their offense got much better.

I don't think he's the right guy for the next phase (roster building). Also seems to be a mixed bag on talent assessment.

He thought Marshall, who is 3 years younger than Smith, was going to be the guy (he did an interview where he talked about that).  Then Marshall's injury kept lingering longer and longer and they started off the year so badly.  Remember in the prior two seasons Marshall had shot between 39 and 40% from three and in the most recent year in Milwaukee had a TS% of over 56%.  Marshall as a replacement for Smith made a lot of sense for what Philly wanted to do, Hinkie just really didn't anticipate how badly Marshall was injured and how badly the team would play without Marshall or even Wroten at the point. 

[MBunge]

After three years, the only other legitimate NBA player on the Sixers roster besides Noel and Okafor is Covington and he's probably the 9th or 10th guy in a good team's rotation.  And don't say cap space because almost every team in the league is going to have cap space.

Every rebuild requires the "Get lucky" step you mentioned, and is prone to stalling out if that one fails.

It's true the Sixers don't have many "legitimate NBA players" on the roster right now, but that's not a rubric for judging their rebuild, three years into it, that I find particularly persuasive or useful.

Hinkie approached his rebuild of the Sixers with a strategy that needed at least 5 years to play out before it could be properly judged.  What we can say after 3 years is he did a very good job assembling a pile of assets, despite the fact that he didn't enjoy any major strokes of good fortune along the way.

The next step to the rebuild is actually putting those assets to use to build a team.  This summer would have been the opportune time to do that.  But now Hinkie will never get the chance to make something out of the raw resources he accumulated.

1.  Again, suck and luck.  Three years is more than enough time to trade for a promising young player or sign a decent free agent.  Hinkie refused to even consider either of those things.  As Hinkie was twiddling his thumbs, Ainge traded for IT, Crowder, Zeller and Jerebko and signed Turner and Amir.  Hinkie might not have been able to do that well but the point is HE DIDN'T EVEN TRY TO DO ANYTHING BECAUSE HIS PLAN WAS TO SPEND YEARS NEVER EVEN TRYING TO DO IT.  Suck and luck.

2.  Hinkie has NOT done a very good job assembling assets.  He has in fact left the team with surprisingly few assets after three years of rebuilding.  There's a very good chance they won't get the Lakers pick this year and that it will be a lot lower in the lottery when they do get it next year.  Their other two first round picks this year will be in the mid to late 20s, otherwise known as the zone where GMs strike out as much or more than they hit.  They've also got an extra 2nd round pick this year and a bunch of 2nd rounders between 2018 and 2020.  Noel and Okafor have probably less value now than when they were drafted, they probably couldn't get a plug nickel for Embiid until he proves he can stay healthy and Saric is currently 23 and averaging a whopping 11.6 points in Europe.

Compared to the Nets, Philly is in pretty good shape.  But three years of tanking and THAT'S all they've got?

Mike

[mctyson]

I'm in the minority school of larry bird, when I say that history will treat Hinkie very well. I think he had a very rationale game plan. If Embiid gets healthy, the Sixers will soon take off and be competitive.

No one ever said Hinkie's strategy was irrational.  Quite the opposite, I think the notion that he was some kind of intellectual for serially tanking is silly.  It is a very obvious move if your team stinks.

[mctyson]

The difference between Ainge and Hinkie or Buford and Hinkie is that those guys had plans that were always going to work, just maybe not work well enough to win a title.  Ainge was accumulating assets he was always going to cash in for a star player.  Buford was creating cap space while still keeping the Spurs a title contender and he was always going to get someone to sign there.  Maybe Ainge doesn't get Ray and KG and maybe Buford doesn't get Aldridge, but they would still have had an option B, C and D to fall back on.

And they wouldn't have turned their franchises into steaming piles of garbage to do so.

Hinkie, on the other hand, had a plan that consisted of two parts.

1.  Suck.
2.  Get lucky.

And he had no fallback position when #2 didn't work.

Mike

Of course he did, they just aren't at the point in the process yet.

And how do you know when that "point" is?  Prior to Ish Smith joining the team they were on track to be historically bad, possibly the worst team ever.  Was next season going to be the "point" then?  The year after that?  2 years?

Philly is not going to be good next year even if they added both Simmons and Ingram to the roster. 

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

After three years, the only other legitimate NBA player on the Sixers roster besides Noel and Okafor is Covington and he's probably the 9th or 10th guy in a good team's rotation.  And don't say cap space because almost every team in the league is going to have cap space.

Every rebuild requires the "Get lucky" step you mentioned, and is prone to stalling out if that one fails.

It's true the Sixers don't have many "legitimate NBA players" on the roster right now, but that's not a rubric for judging their rebuild, three years into it, that I find particularly persuasive or useful.

Hinkie approached his rebuild of the Sixers with a strategy that needed at least 5 years to play out before it could be properly judged.  What we can say after 3 years is he did a very good job assembling a pile of assets, despite the fact that he didn't enjoy any major strokes of good fortune along the way.

The next step to the rebuild is actually putting those assets to use to build a team.  This summer would have been the opportune time to do that.  But now Hinkie will never get the chance to make something out of the raw resources he accumulated.

1.  Again, suck and luck.  Three years is more than enough time to trade for a promising young player or sign a decent free agent.  Hinkie refused to even consider either of those things.  As Hinkie was twiddling his thumbs, Ainge traded for IT, Crowder, Zeller and Jerebko and signed Turner and Amir.  Hinkie might not have been able to do that well but the point is HE DIDN'T EVEN TRY TO DO ANYTHING BECAUSE HIS PLAN WAS TO SPEND YEARS NEVER EVEN TRYING TO DO IT.  Suck and luck.

2.  Hinkie has NOT done a very good job assembling assets.  He has in fact left the team with surprisingly few assets after three years of rebuilding.  There's a very good chance they won't get the Lakers pick this year and that it will be a lot lower in the lottery when they do get it next year.  Their other two first round picks this year will be in the mid to late 20s, otherwise known as the zone where GMs strike out as much or more than they hit.  They've also got an extra 2nd round pick this year and a bunch of 2nd rounders between 2018 and 2020.  Noel and Okafor have probably less value now than when they were drafted, they probably couldn't get a plug nickel for Embiid until he proves he can stay healthy and Saric is currently 23 and averaging a whopping 11.6 points in Europe.

Compared to the Nets, Philly is in pretty good shape.  But three years of tanking and THAT'S all they've got?

Mike

If the Lakers pick conveys they've got 2 top 5 picks, a hedge on next years draft position with Sacramento, 2 more 1sts this year, a Sacramento 1st that goes unprotected the year after Boogie becomes a FA, Saric, Noel, Okafor and a plus 3 pt shooter who is 6'9 and makes 1 million dollars a year locked up for two more seasons.

What planet do you live on where those aren't a lot of assets? There are a handful of teams in the league with more to offer. Boston might be one, and aside from that???

[celticsclay]

After three years, the only other legitimate NBA player on the Sixers roster besides Noel and Okafor is Covington and he's probably the 9th or 10th guy in a good team's rotation.  And don't say cap space because almost every team in the league is going to have cap space.

Every rebuild requires the "Get lucky" step you mentioned, and is prone to stalling out if that one fails.

It's true the Sixers don't have many "legitimate NBA players" on the roster right now, but that's not a rubric for judging their rebuild, three years into it, that I find particularly persuasive or useful.

Hinkie approached his rebuild of the Sixers with a strategy that needed at least 5 years to play out before it could be properly judged.  What we can say after 3 years is he did a very good job assembling a pile of assets, despite the fact that he didn't enjoy any major strokes of good fortune along the way.

The next step to the rebuild is actually putting those assets to use to build a team.  This summer would have been the opportune time to do that.  But now Hinkie will never get the chance to make something out of the raw resources he accumulated.

1.  Again, suck and luck.  Three years is more than enough time to trade for a promising young player or sign a decent free agent.  Hinkie refused to even consider either of those things.  As Hinkie was twiddling his thumbs, Ainge traded for IT, Crowder, Zeller and Jerebko and signed Turner and Amir.  Hinkie might not have been able to do that well but the point is HE DIDN'T EVEN TRY TO DO ANYTHING BECAUSE HIS PLAN WAS TO SPEND YEARS NEVER EVEN TRYING TO DO IT.  Suck and luck.

2.  Hinkie has NOT done a very good job assembling assets.  He has in fact left the team with surprisingly few assets after three years of rebuilding.  There's a very good chance they won't get the Lakers pick this year and that it will be a lot lower in the lottery when they do get it next year.  Their other two first round picks this year will be in the mid to late 20s, otherwise known as the zone where GMs strike out as much or more than they hit.  They've also got an extra 2nd round pick this year and a bunch of 2nd rounders between 2018 and 2020.  Noel and Okafor have probably less value now than when they were drafted, they probably couldn't get a plug nickel for Embiid until he proves he can stay healthy and Saric is currently 23 and averaging a whopping 11.6 points in Europe.

Compared to the Nets, Philly is in pretty good shape.  But three years of tanking and THAT'S all they've got?

Mike

If the Lakers pick conveys they've got 2 top 5 picks, a hedge on next years draft position with Sacramento, 2 more 1sts this year, a Sacramento 1st that goes unprotected the year after Boogie becomes a FA, Saric, Noel, Okafor and a plus 3 pt shooter who is 6'9 and makes 1 million dollars a year locked up for two more seasons.

What planet do you live on where those aren't a lot of assets? There are a handful of teams in the league with more to offer. Boston might be one, and aside from that???

I think this argument gets extreme on both sides of the fence. Sari, Noel and Okafor seem like nice pieces. However, people's opinion on Okafor varies wildly. Obviously their draft pick this year is an awesome asset. The Lakers is a lot more muddled depending on when they get it.

I don't think Covington, the 26th pick in the draft and the 22nd pick in the draft are really assets. I don't consider the Celtics draft pick this year to be an asset. Most teams have a first round pick and most teams are picking higher than that range.

So the value of all these things could fluctuate wildly in the 6 months. Also does anyone think this resignation could be somehow tied to more negative internal news on Embiid? That would kind of be a significant blow to his regime if they found Embiid will never play.
I

[LarBrd33]

After three years, the only other legitimate NBA player on the Sixers roster besides Noel and Okafor is Covington and he's probably the 9th or 10th guy in a good team's rotation.  And don't say cap space because almost every team in the league is going to have cap space.

Every rebuild requires the "Get lucky" step you mentioned, and is prone to stalling out if that one fails.

It's true the Sixers don't have many "legitimate NBA players" on the roster right now, but that's not a rubric for judging their rebuild, three years into it, that I find particularly persuasive or useful.

Hinkie approached his rebuild of the Sixers with a strategy that needed at least 5 years to play out before it could be properly judged.  What we can say after 3 years is he did a very good job assembling a pile of assets, despite the fact that he didn't enjoy any major strokes of good fortune along the way.

The next step to the rebuild is actually putting those assets to use to build a team.  This summer would have been the opportune time to do that.  But now Hinkie will never get the chance to make something out of the raw resources he accumulated.

1.  Again, suck and luck.  Three years is more than enough time to trade for a promising young player or sign a decent free agent.  Hinkie refused to even consider either of those things.  As Hinkie was twiddling his thumbs, Ainge traded for IT, Crowder, Zeller and Jerebko and signed Turner and Amir.  Hinkie might not have been able to do that well but the point is HE DIDN'T EVEN TRY TO DO ANYTHING BECAUSE HIS PLAN WAS TO SPEND YEARS NEVER EVEN TRYING TO DO IT.  Suck and luck.

2.  Hinkie has NOT done a very good job assembling assets.  He has in fact left the team with surprisingly few assets after three years of rebuilding.  There's a very good chance they won't get the Lakers pick this year and that it will be a lot lower in the lottery when they do get it next year.  Their other two first round picks this year will be in the mid to late 20s, otherwise known as the zone where GMs strike out as much or more than they hit.  They've also got an extra 2nd round pick this year and a bunch of 2nd rounders between 2018 and 2020.  Noel and Okafor have probably less value now than when they were drafted, they probably couldn't get a plug nickel for Embiid until he proves he can stay healthy and Saric is currently 23 and averaging a whopping 11.6 points in Europe.

Compared to the Nets, Philly is in pretty good shape.  But three years of tanking and THAT'S all they've got?

Mike

If the Lakers pick conveys they've got 2 top 5 picks, a hedge on next years draft position with Sacramento, 2 more 1sts this year, a Sacramento 1st that goes unprotected the year after Boogie becomes a FA, Saric, Noel, Okafor and a plus 3 pt shooter who is 6'9 and makes 1 million dollars a year locked up for two more seasons.

What planet do you live on where those aren't a lot of assets? There are a handful of teams in the league with more to offer. Boston might be one, and aside from that???

Tp.  Some people just aren't going to "get it" with Philly until they see them improve.  They will cite "magic" as the reason for the sudden influx of talent.

The team is basically in perfect position for a quick turnaround.

[greece66]

Personally, I made the thread bcs Hinkie's comments shows how much respect DA gets around the League.

But since we got in the Hinkie controversy, some quick remarks:

• The vast majority of the comments at http://www.libertyballers.com/ are in favour of Hinkie.
• He did a good job in several trades: Holiday and MCW come to mind.
• Lucky17 has an interesting list of players, but each is a different case. Many of these were only signed on ten day contracts. KJMcDaniels was traded for a second rounder and Canaan to Houston; he has played a total of 215 mins this season. IMO it's far fetched to say Hinkie just let numerous  potentially useful players walk.

Hinkie did make some poor PR moves which resulted in bad publicity; also his ability to assess talent and craft a competitive team are questionable.

Still, he made no obvious blunder that justifies his sidelining by the ownership; sure, the rebuild was taking too long, but this was something Hinkie had made clear from day 1.

The conflict that led to his resignation took place behind closed doors and it's almost impossible to make a fair assessment of Hinkie's two and a half years at Philly now. Hopefully with time more information will become available on what exactly happened. 

[PhoSita]

Some people just aren't going to "get it" with Philly until they see them improve. 

Yeah, I think what it comes down to is people look at the W/L record and say, "Nope, this is a disaster."

And especially around here, that feels vindicating because the optics of it are that the Sixers tanked (and made no bones about what they were doing) and have been punished by karma, while the Celtics only mostly-tanked a single season and then made moves to get better.  Now here we are, headed to the playoffs with a shot at 50 wins and a top 5 pick.

[LarBrd33]

Some people just aren't going to "get it" with Philly until they see them improve. 

Yeah, I think what it comes down to is people look at the W/L record and say, "Nope, this is a disaster."

And especially around here, that feels vindicating because the optics of it are that the Sixers tanked (and made no bones about what they were doing) and have been punished by karma, while the Celtics only mostly-tanked a single season and then made moves to get better.  Now here we are, headed to the playoffs with a shot at 50 wins and a top 5 pick.

There's a lot of reasons people don't get it with Philly, but key part is that people underrate how easy it is for a team with 80 million in cap space to fill out a roster with role players.  That's basically the easiest part of this.  First, they wanted to set a foundation of upper tier prospects.  They only need one guy to end up a franchise talent for it to be considered a success.   I don't think some casual fans understand how much Philly avoided adding role player level talent.  They literally snubbed an entire class of free agents in favor of bring in dleague gambles.  It served the tank agenda... But that's over now.

[celticsclay]

Some people just aren't going to "get it" with Philly until they see them improve. 

Yeah, I think what it comes down to is people look at the W/L record and say, "Nope, this is a disaster."

And especially around here, that feels vindicating because the optics of it are that the Sixers tanked (and made no bones about what they were doing) and have been punished by karma, while the Celtics only mostly-tanked a single season and then made moves to get better.  Now here we are, headed to the playoffs with a shot at 50 wins and a top 5 pick.

You can simplify it like that if you want, but I think more of the argument comes from people having low opinions of Okafor and think spending a top 3 pick on a player that may never play is a huge miss.