Stein: Bucks and Bulls nearing MCW for Snell trade

[tankcity!]

It's a great trade by Hinkie. Hard to deny that. Still not sure it's worth jumping to conclusions that the plan worked. Looking at it hindsight, I think it was good plan. Simmons itself is worth it imo. I think he could be a top ten player. The problem is the Sixers historically have been unfortunate with injuries. Let's see if their roster can stay healthy. Also, they would have to be able to beat Boston in order for the plan to be worth it. We're also assuming Boston will not be improving which I and Lbrrd can agree are on the upswing.

[tazzmaniac]

Does anyone have any theories on how what Chicago is thinking here? Does it mean they think Dimwiddie and Jerian Grant can't handle their jobs? I really don't get it.

They apparently didn't see Snell in their rotation so why not kick the tires on MCW.  If it doesn't work out, they'll just let him go in free agency. 

http://www.todaysfastbreak.com/nba-east/chicago-bulls/bulls-make-easy-choice-michael-carter-williams-tony-snell-swap/

[tazzmaniac]

It's a great trade by Hinkie. Hard to deny that. Still not sure it's worth jumping to conclusions that the plan worked. Looking at it hindsight, I think it was good plan. Simmons itself is worth it imo. I think he could be a top ten player. The problem is the Sixers historically have been unfortunate with injuries. Let's see if their roster can stay healthy. Also, they would have to be able to beat Boston in order for the plan to be worth it. We're also assuming Boston will not be improving which I and Lbrrd can agree are on the upswing.

Stars shine in the playoffs and we still don't have our star.  With Simmons and Embiid, the Sixers may already have two future stars.  While the talk is all about Embiid, Okafor and Noel not fitting together, Embiid and Simmons should work well together.  Building around those two shouldn't be hard. 

[MBunge]

Hard to believe that MCW went from being ROY to being traded for Tony Snell

and yet hinkie got flack for trading him.  They still have the top 3 protected laker pick. Could end up much better than MCW.

Sorry, but I'm not sure where you're getting the Hinkie flack from... I don't recall him getting that, other than a poster here and there. In fact, most people where in agreement that MCW sucked. I think you're recalling things a bit skewed since I do recall you were fairly high, or at least higher than most around here, on MCW and thought he might be getting more than a protected 1st rounder out of him.

So... not really.

Every time I mentioned that Hinkie made a great trade getting the Lakers pick for MCW, I got flak.

Because it's still not a great trade.  The Lakers pick is top 3 protected again for 2017 and most people seem to agree the Lakers could be bad enough again to keep it.  So, Hinkie traded MCW for what might end up being, depending on events, a 2018 pick that might not even be in the lottery.

It wasn't a terrible trade but, as always, it was another Hinkie move where the downside was never considered.

Mike

what downside?

1.  If the Lakers get another top 3 pick next year, then sign a couple of quality veterans, it would not at all be hard for them to take a big leap the following season.  The Lakers, afterall, could have the fifth, sixth, even eighth best record this year and still get a top pick.  Of course, people didn't understand the concept of "draft lottery" when it applied to the Sixers.  It's not surprising that extends to the Lakers.

2.  Opportunity cost.  Trading MCW in 2015 for a return they have yet to receive prevented them from using him as a asset in any other deals.  Heck, maybe Ainge trades the third pick and Young+Hunter for MCW and Noel.

Again, MCW is no great shakes so you can't slam that individual move too much.  It's typical of Hinkie-lovers, though, to be thrilled with a deal where you could wait three years and wind up with the equivalent of Nik Stauskus.

Mike

People understand the lottery odds.

No, they don't.  Otherwise they wouldn't get so excited about a strategy to be the worst team in the league, when the worst team in the league MOST LIKELY won't get the first pick in the draft.

It might be great for Philly that they finally got lucky and got Simmons, but that's all it was.  Luck.  Hinkie's plan was to throw away multiple seasons and rely on random chance.

Mike

[alldaboston]

Hard to believe that MCW went from being ROY to being traded for Tony Snell

and yet hinkie got flack for trading him.  They still have the top 3 protected laker pick. Could end up much better than MCW.

Sorry, but I'm not sure where you're getting the Hinkie flack from... I don't recall him getting that, other than a poster here and there. In fact, most people where in agreement that MCW sucked. I think you're recalling things a bit skewed since I do recall you were fairly high, or at least higher than most around here, on MCW and thought he might be getting more than a protected 1st rounder out of him.

So... not really.

Every time I mentioned that Hinkie made a great trade getting the Lakers pick for MCW, I got flak.

Because it's still not a great trade.  The Lakers pick is top 3 protected again for 2017 and most people seem to agree the Lakers could be bad enough again to keep it.  So, Hinkie traded MCW for what might end up being, depending on events, a 2018 pick that might not even be in the lottery.

It wasn't a terrible trade but, as always, it was another Hinkie move where the downside was never considered.

Mike

what downside?

1.  If the Lakers get another top 3 pick next year, then sign a couple of quality veterans, it would not at all be hard for them to take a big leap the following season.  The Lakers, afterall, could have the fifth, sixth, even eighth best record this year and still get a top pick.  Of course, people didn't understand the concept of "draft lottery" when it applied to the Sixers.  It's not surprising that extends to the Lakers.

2.  Opportunity cost.  Trading MCW in 2015 for a return they have yet to receive prevented them from using him as a asset in any other deals.  Heck, maybe Ainge trades the third pick and Young+Hunter for MCW and Noel.

Again, MCW is no great shakes so you can't slam that individual move too much.  It's typical of Hinkie-lovers, though, to be thrilled with a deal where you could wait three years and wind up with the equivalent of Nik Stauskus.

Mike

People understand the lottery odds.

No, they don't.  Otherwise they wouldn't get so excited about a strategy to be the worst team in the league, when the worst team in the league MOST LIKELY won't get the first pick in the draft.

It might be great for Philly that they finally got lucky and got Simmons, but that's all it was.  Luck.  Hinkie's plan was to throw away multiple seasons and rely on random chance.

Mike

But they are the most likely of the trash teams to get the first pick in the draft.

[celticsclay]

At the end of the day I just agree with larbrd. Hinkies legacy is approaching theo Epstein levels at this point

[Snakehead]

At the end of the day I just agree with larbrd. Hinkies legacy is approaching theo Epstein levels at this point

LOL why?  Epstein won championships.  Too rich.

Larbrd alternate account?

[saltlover]

At the end of the day I just agree with larbrd. Hinkies legacy is approaching theo Epstein levels at this point

LOL why?  Epstein won championships.  Too rich.

Larbrd alternate account?

Seriously.

It's not just about getting talented young players.  You have to build a team at some point.  The Sixers are four years into their rebuild, and still don't have a cohesive team.  They're going to try to trade Noel, but what if they can't?  His rookie contract is up.  Do they resign him to a max deal so as to not lose an asset, even if he doesn't fit? If they do, what do they do with Embiid, who can hit free agency in 2018?

Yes, Hinkie may have done a decent job of acquiring "assets."  But he couldn't figure out what to do with them, and he burnt a ton of bridges along the way. 

The Celtics and Sixers started their rebuilds the same day.  The Celtics won more games last year than Philly has won in three seasons combined.  Theo Epstein he is not.

[Snakehead]

At the end of the day I just agree with larbrd. Hinkies legacy is approaching theo Epstein levels at this point

LOL why?  Epstein won championships.  Too rich.

Larbrd alternate account?

Seriously.

It's not just about getting talented young players.  You have to build a team at some point.  The Sixers are four years into their rebuild, and still don't have a cohesive team.  They're going to try to trade Noel, but what if they can't?  His rookie contract is up.  Do they resign him to a max deal so as to not lose an asset, even if he doesn't fit? If they do, what do they do with Embiid, who can hit free agency in 2018?

Yes, Hinkie may have done a decent job of acquiring "assets."  But he couldn't figure out what to do with them, and he burnt a ton of bridges along the way. 

The Celtics and Sixers started their rebuilds the same day.  The Celtics won more games last year than Philly has won in three seasons combined.  Theo Epstein he is not.

Nevermind that Noel and Oakafor are both very flawed players and Embiid shows a ton of promise but also has zero track record for staying healthy.  And the fit between them is really poor.

This thread is hilarious.  Goes to show what a couple of posters can convince themselves of within in a few pages.

76ers headed for the chip!  Embiid MVP!

[tazzmaniac]

Hard to believe that MCW went from being ROY to being traded for Tony Snell

and yet hinkie got flack for trading him.  They still have the top 3 protected laker pick. Could end up much better than MCW.

Sorry, but I'm not sure where you're getting the Hinkie flack from... I don't recall him getting that, other than a poster here and there. In fact, most people where in agreement that MCW sucked. I think you're recalling things a bit skewed since I do recall you were fairly high, or at least higher than most around here, on MCW and thought he might be getting more than a protected 1st rounder out of him.

So... not really.

Every time I mentioned that Hinkie made a great trade getting the Lakers pick for MCW, I got flak.

Because it's still not a great trade.  The Lakers pick is top 3 protected again for 2017 and most people seem to agree the Lakers could be bad enough again to keep it.  So, Hinkie traded MCW for what might end up being, depending on events, a 2018 pick that might not even be in the lottery.

It wasn't a terrible trade but, as always, it was another Hinkie move where the downside was never considered.

Mike

what downside?

1.  If the Lakers get another top 3 pick next year, then sign a couple of quality veterans, it would not at all be hard for them to take a big leap the following season.  The Lakers, afterall, could have the fifth, sixth, even eighth best record this year and still get a top pick.  Of course, people didn't understand the concept of "draft lottery" when it applied to the Sixers.  It's not surprising that extends to the Lakers.

2.  Opportunity cost.  Trading MCW in 2015 for a return they have yet to receive prevented them from using him as a asset in any other deals.  Heck, maybe Ainge trades the third pick and Young+Hunter for MCW and Noel.

Again, MCW is no great shakes so you can't slam that individual move too much.  It's typical of Hinkie-lovers, though, to be thrilled with a deal where you could wait three years and wind up with the equivalent of Nik Stauskus.

Mike

People understand the lottery odds.

No, they don't.  Otherwise they wouldn't get so excited about a strategy to be the worst team in the league, when the worst team in the league MOST LIKELY won't get the first pick in the draft.

It might be great for Philly that they finally got lucky and got Simmons, but that's all it was.  Luck.  Hinkie's plan was to throw away multiple seasons and rely on random chance.

Mike

Hinkie understood the odds very well which is exactly why he took the approach that he did.  The chances of a one year tank netting a star aren't good.  By picking top 3 in multiple drafts you significantly increase the probability of getting a player with star potential. 

The multi-year tank was part of Hinkie's strategy but he also acquired a lot of additional picks.  In the last 4 drafts, the Sixers have had 8 1st round picks and 11 2nd round picks.  Because of Hinkie trades, the Sixers will also get the Lakers 1st in 2017 or 2018, their own 1st in 2017 (back from Orlando) and the Kings 1st in 2019 and a bunch of future 2nd round picks.  He even got possible picks swaps with the Kings in 2016 and 2017 in order to increase the probabilities however modestly.  Why did he acquire so many 2nd rounders?  Because the odds of getting even a useful rotation player in the 2nd rounder is small.  Acquire a lot of 2nd rounders and the odds look a lot better. 

The notion that the draft is a crapshoot is silly because acquiring star talent through trades or free agency is much more unlikely and is more risky.  Making a bad draft pick hurts but making a bad trade or free agency pickup can set a team back for years. 

[jayk009]

Michael Carter Williams is probably a better player than Snell but he is a horrible fit next to Rondo, Wade and Butler.

I guess the Bulls are trying to set a new trend by having no 3 point shooters on their perimeter.

Although losing Snell is not a big deal so it doesn't hurt them too much.

Gives the Bucks a useful rotational wing who plays solid D and can hit an occasional 3, they're hoping he becomes the next useful 3 and D guys.

[tazzmaniac]

At the end of the day I just agree with larbrd. Hinkies legacy is approaching theo Epstein levels at this point

LOL why?  Epstein won championships.  Too rich.

Larbrd alternate account?

Seriously.

It's not just about getting talented young players.  You have to build a team at some point.  The Sixers are four years into their rebuild, and still don't have a cohesive team.  They're going to try to trade Noel, but what if they can't?  His rookie contract is up.  Do they resign him to a max deal so as to not lose an asset, even if he doesn't fit? If they do, what do they do with Embiid, who can hit free agency in 2018?

Yes, Hinkie may have done a decent job of acquiring "assets."  But he couldn't figure out what to do with them, and he burnt a ton of bridges along the way. 

The Celtics and Sixers started their rebuilds the same day.  The Celtics won more games last year than Philly has won in three seasons combined.  Theo Epstein he is not.

How many playoff series have we won in this rebuild?  What are our chances of making the finals while Lebron is still performing like a superstar?  How much is it going to cost to retain Olynk this offseason?  Where will our rebuild be in two years when Horford is 32 making MAX and Bradley, Thomas and Smart all want to get paid?  If Ainge can't acquire a star soon to make us a true contender, we'll be starting another rebuild around Brown and the two Nets picks in a couple years. 

Hinkie hadn't begun to build a team around the assets he acquired.  If Embiid stays healthy this season, the Sixers decisions are easy.  Build around Simmons and Embiid.  Trade Noel if you get a reasonable offer.  Otherwise make the qualifying offer and see what offer he gets (won't be MAX).  If Embiid is healthy, losing Noel for nothing isn't that big of a deal.  Trade Okafor if you get a very good offer.  Otherwise keep him since he's just starting his 2nd season and will serve as a fallback in case Embiid suffers another injury.  Draft a young stud at PG and possibly SF in the 2017 draft. 

[tazzmaniac]

Michael Carter Williams is probably a better player than Snell but he is a horrible fit next to Rondo, Wade and Butler.

I guess the Bulls are trying to set a new trend by having no 3 point shooters on their perimeter.

Although losing Snell is not a big deal so it doesn't hurt them too much.

Gives the Bucks a useful rotational wing who plays solid D and can hit an occasional 3, they're hoping he becomes the next useful 3 and D guys.

Rondo shot 35.3 3P% with Dallas and 36.5 3P% with the Kings last year. 

[alldaboston]

Michael Carter Williams is probably a better player than Snell but he is a horrible fit next to Rondo, Wade and Butler.

I guess the Bulls are trying to set a new trend by having no 3 point shooters on their perimeter.

Although losing Snell is not a big deal so it doesn't hurt them too much.

Gives the Bucks a useful rotational wing who plays solid D and can hit an occasional 3, they're hoping he becomes the next useful 3 and D guys.

Rondo shot 35.3 3P% with Dallas and 36.5 3P% with the Kings last year.

the Dallas number is based on just 54 attempts though.

i will agree, however, on the Kings stat. thats a good percentage, on 170 shots from deep. over 2 attempts a game.

[Smartacus]

Michael Carter Williams is probably a better player than Snell but he is a horrible fit next to Rondo, Wade and Butler.

I guess the Bulls are trying to set a new trend by having no 3 point shooters on their perimeter.

Although losing Snell is not a big deal so it doesn't hurt them too much.

Gives the Bucks a useful rotational wing who plays solid D and can hit an occasional 3, they're hoping he becomes the next useful 3 and D guys.

Rondo shot 35.3 3P% with Dallas and 36.5 3P% with the Kings last year.

the Dallas number is based on just 54 attempts though.

i will agree, however, on the Kings stat. thats a good percentage, on 170 shots from deep. over 2 attempts a game.

But then again he's not going to be playing primarily next to Wade, Rondo, and Butler. He's going to be playing next to Isiah Canaan most likely.

Canaan is a very capable 3 point shooter. He made 176 for the 6ers last year and just dropped this performance the other day against Milwaukee.

https://youtu.be/zSXLsdkatZc