Noel Frustration: Celtics trade coming?

[mahcussmaht]

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660466695536640

https://twitter.com/blanchardJRB/status/810206523540566016

Not sure why anyone should care about those.  This is The Process:

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660183361851393

and of course there is Simmons too plus their two top 10 picks this year.  Okafor and Noel could be complete busts, which they aren't, and it won't matter if Embiid stays healthy and Simmons comes close to his potential.

The Process was never about building a contender or even winning one championship.  It was sold as doing something no one else had to achieve something beyond normal expectations.  If two of your top four picks in the process turn out to essentially be busts, you're not doing anything extraordinary.  You're just OKC east.  And while that's a pretty nice thing to be, is it worth throwing away 4 or 5 years of your basketball life? 

Mike

I thought the process was about trying to maximize odds of getting a generational talent. 

And during the exact same period of time, Minnesota got a "generational talent" in Townes without having to destroy the team.  New Orleans got a "generational talent" in The Brow, didn't need to Hinkie it up.  There have been a lot of "generational talents" in the history of the NBA and teams acquired them in the past without ever needing to throw away 4 or 5 years of their basketball existence.  And if it was about getting that "generational talent," why did they continue to tank even harder after drafting Embiid?

OKC got two "generational talents" in Durant and Westbrook and probably a third in Hardin and they only outright tanked for ONE YEAR.

Mike

Neither of your examples make any sense.   What are you talking about?

Minnesota had a player who was considered a superstar, Kevin Love, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Towns.

The Pelicans had a player who was considered a superstar, Chris Paul, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Anthony Davis.

The 76ers never had a superstar to trade away.  They traded away a fringe star in Jrue Holiday and have Dario Saric and Nerlens Noel as a result.  Like the other two examples, this also put them in position to tank for Joel Embiid. 

All three of those teams still suck.  They are all still "tanking".   Don't act like one is morally superior.  They aren't.

OKC didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
NO didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
Philly has now tanked for FOUR YEARS, with a decent probability that they will well and truly suck for at least one and possibly two more years.

THIS IS WHAT THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT.  Tanking after the all-star break and even tanking an entire season has been, for good or ill, an accepted part of the NBA landscape.  What Hinkie did was not.  He made very deliberate moves so that three years into "The Process," his team was significantly worse than when he started.  If that is the price being paid, what should it ultimately buy?  Is one title enough?  Two?  Four or five trips to the Finals?

Mike

Aside from one 45 win season, this is technically the 5th out of 6 years the Pelicans have tanked since trading away Chris Paul.   That team sucks.

The Thunder lucked into Durant, but ended up tanking two more season after acquiring him.

This is the 13th season in a row the Timberwolves have a below .500 record.  This is the 3rd season in a row they have "tanked" since trading away Kevin Love. 

This is the 4th season in a row Philadelphia has "tanked", but Joel Embiid and Ben Simmons have a combined 18 career NBA games together.  Neither player has ever cracked the 30 minute mark.

[SHAQATTACK]

I might trade Mickey, Young and Gerald Green+future Pick for Noel.

I might.

We could wish they d take your offer
They ll want Smart or Brown swap in a swap for Noel

I would swap Kelly in a NY sec ......he is joke .   

[nickagneta]

When did Minnesota ever tank for Towns. That's just pure fiction right there.

Since the Wolves had Love they won in consecutive years the following number of games before trading him:
24
15
17
26
31
40

In other words they sucked and were completely incompetent. Kahn may have been the worst GM in NBA history. Love wanted out. Love wasn't going to resign with Minnesota so before he just left them the Wolves traded him to Cleveland. NONE of that has anything to do with tanking.

[vjcsmoke]

Noel - only for cheap because his contract is running out.

WCS - if he's available for cheap why not?
He could be the rim protector and rebounder we need.

at kentucky:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP1x5rmpMAY

draft scouting report:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk7PDMJyqhA

[Ilikesports17]

Noel - only for cheap because his contract is running out.

WCS - if he's available for cheap why not?
He could be the rim protector and rebounder we need.

at kentucky:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP1x5rmpMAY

draft scouting report:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk7PDMJyqhA

Cauley Stein is a bad rebounder and his inability to show any improvement over the last 4+ years suggests he has a low ceiling.

[nickagneta]

Noel - only for cheap because his contract is running out.

WCS - if he's available for cheap why not?
He could be the rim protector and rebounder we need.

at kentucky:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP1x5rmpMAY

draft scouting report:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk7PDMJyqhA

Cauley Stein is a bad rebounder and his inability to show any improvement over the last 4+ years suggests he has a low ceiling.

I think people tend to forget that WCS and Noel were on the same Kentucky team as freshmen. Noel was the game changer, WCS the "potential" guy.

Years later Noel has proven he is one of the best defenders in the NBA, a poor offensive weapon and an okay rebounder. WCS has shown he isn't close to being as good a defender as Noel, is equally inept at offense and a poorer rebounder than Noel.

If it takes the same amount to get both guys, get the better player.

[Ilikesports17]

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660466695536640

https://twitter.com/blanchardJRB/status/810206523540566016

Not sure why anyone should care about those.  This is The Process:

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660183361851393

and of course there is Simmons too plus their two top 10 picks this year.  Okafor and Noel could be complete busts, which they aren't, and it won't matter if Embiid stays healthy and Simmons comes close to his potential.

The Process was never about building a contender or even winning one championship.  It was sold as doing something no one else had to achieve something beyond normal expectations.  If two of your top four picks in the process turn out to essentially be busts, you're not doing anything extraordinary.  You're just OKC east.  And while that's a pretty nice thing to be, is it worth throwing away 4 or 5 years of your basketball life? 

Mike

I thought the process was about trying to maximize odds of getting a generational talent. 

And during the exact same period of time, Minnesota got a "generational talent" in Townes without having to destroy the team.  New Orleans got a "generational talent" in The Brow, didn't need to Hinkie it up.  There have been a lot of "generational talents" in the history of the NBA and teams acquired them in the past without ever needing to throw away 4 or 5 years of their basketball existence.  And if it was about getting that "generational talent," why did they continue to tank even harder after drafting Embiid?

OKC got two "generational talents" in Durant and Westbrook and probably a third in Hardin and they only outright tanked for ONE YEAR.

Mike

Neither of your examples make any sense.   What are you talking about?

Minnesota had a player who was considered a superstar, Kevin Love, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Towns.

The Pelicans had a player who was considered a superstar, Chris Paul, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Anthony Davis.

The 76ers never had a superstar to trade away.  They traded away a fringe star in Jrue Holiday and have Dario Saric and Nerlens Noel as a result.  Like the other two examples, this also put them in position to tank for Joel Embiid. 

All three of those teams still suck.  They are all still "tanking".   Don't act like one is morally superior.  They aren't.

OKC didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
NO didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
Philly has now tanked for FOUR YEARS, with a decent probability that they will well and truly suck for at least one and possibly two more years.

THIS IS WHAT THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT.  Tanking after the all-star break and even tanking an entire season has been, for good or ill, an accepted part of the NBA landscape.  What Hinkie did was not.  He made very deliberate moves so that three years into "The Process," his team was significantly worse than when he started.  If that is the price being paid, what should it ultimately buy?  Is one title enough?  Two?  Four or five trips to the Finals?

Mike

Aside from one 45 win season, this is technically the 5th out of 6 years the Pelicans have tanked since trading away Chris Paul.   That team sucks.

The Thunder lucked into Durant, but ended up tanking two more season after acquiring him.

This is the 13th season in a row the Timberwolves have a below .500 record.  This is the 3rd season in a row they have "tanked" since trading away Kevin Love. 

This is the 4th season in a row Philadelphia has "tanked", but Joel Embiid and Ben Simmons have a combined 18 career NBA games together.  Neither player has ever cracked the 30 minute mark.

it might seem like semantics, but tanking and sucking are different things.

Minny is not intentionally sucking. That is happening by accident. Id imagine they had hoped to be in the playoff picture today.

Hinkie was clearly a competent trader and I think a solid talent evaluator.

You look at franchises like New Orleans Minnesota and Sacramento and you are looking at historically incompetent franchises. You dont blame them for tanking because they arent planning to suck, they are just incompetent.

Philly on the other end from the seasons first tip to its last, for the last 3 seasons intentionally sucked.

This year Id say theyve moved from intentionally sucking to not caring about winning.

[tazzmaniac]

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660466695536640

https://twitter.com/blanchardJRB/status/810206523540566016

Not sure why anyone should care about those.  This is The Process:

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660183361851393

and of course there is Simmons too plus their two top 10 picks this year.  Okafor and Noel could be complete busts, which they aren't, and it won't matter if Embiid stays healthy and Simmons comes close to his potential.

The Process was never about building a contender or even winning one championship.  It was sold as doing something no one else had to achieve something beyond normal expectations.  If two of your top four picks in the process turn out to essentially be busts, you're not doing anything extraordinary.  You're just OKC east.  And while that's a pretty nice thing to be, is it worth throwing away 4 or 5 years of your basketball life? 

Mike

I thought the process was about trying to maximize odds of getting a generational talent. 

And during the exact same period of time, Minnesota got a "generational talent" in Townes without having to destroy the team.  New Orleans got a "generational talent" in The Brow, didn't need to Hinkie it up.  There have been a lot of "generational talents" in the history of the NBA and teams acquired them in the past without ever needing to throw away 4 or 5 years of their basketball existence.  And if it was about getting that "generational talent," why did they continue to tank even harder after drafting Embiid?

OKC got two "generational talents" in Durant and Westbrook and probably a third in Hardin and they only outright tanked for ONE YEAR.

Mike

Neither of your examples make any sense.   What are you talking about?

Minnesota had a player who was considered a superstar, Kevin Love, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Towns.

The Pelicans had a player who was considered a superstar, Chris Paul, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Anthony Davis.

The 76ers never had a superstar to trade away.  They traded away a fringe star in Jrue Holiday and have Dario Saric and Nerlens Noel as a result.  Like the other two examples, this also put them in position to tank for Joel Embiid. 

All three of those teams still suck.  They are all still "tanking".   Don't act like one is morally superior.  They aren't.

OKC didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
NO didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
Philly has now tanked for FOUR YEARS, with a decent probability that they will well and truly suck for at least one and possibly two more years.

THIS IS WHAT THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT.  Tanking after the all-star break and even tanking an entire season has been, for good or ill, an accepted part of the NBA landscape.  What Hinkie did was not.  He made very deliberate moves so that three years into "The Process," his team was significantly worse than when he started.  If that is the price being paid, what should it ultimately buy?  Is one title enough?  Two?  Four or five trips to the Finals?

Mike

The Sixers only tanked 3 seasons under Hinkie.  That's all.  They aren't really tanking this season.  They're just a bad team that has suffered some of the most significant injuries this year.  They are 3-5 over the last 8 games and have the same number of wins as the beloved TWolves who did their rebuild the right way.  How do the TWolves get a pass?  What about the Mavs and Nets who also have the same number of wins as the Sixers?  The Suns who have one more win and NOP has two more wins.  How do you justify saying the Sixers are tanking this year when there are a lot of other teams just as bad? 

How many championships do the Sixers have over the last 30 years?  How many finals have they made?  Assuming Embiid stays healthy and Simmons proves to be as good as he projects, the Sixers future is really bright and well worth tanking 3 seasons.  If Embiid hadn't suffered his re-injury, they wouldn't have had to tank last season but that could have cost them Simmons.  You're just bent out of shape because the process is working.  It is going to be really bad for you after the next draft when they add a top 5 pick and a top 10 pick. 

[nickagneta]

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660466695536640

https://twitter.com/blanchardJRB/status/810206523540566016

Not sure why anyone should care about those.  This is The Process:

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660183361851393

and of course there is Simmons too plus their two top 10 picks this year.  Okafor and Noel could be complete busts, which they aren't, and it won't matter if Embiid stays healthy and Simmons comes close to his potential.

The Process was never about building a contender or even winning one championship.  It was sold as doing something no one else had to achieve something beyond normal expectations.  If two of your top four picks in the process turn out to essentially be busts, you're not doing anything extraordinary.  You're just OKC east.  And while that's a pretty nice thing to be, is it worth throwing away 4 or 5 years of your basketball life? 

Mike

I thought the process was about trying to maximize odds of getting a generational talent. 

And during the exact same period of time, Minnesota got a "generational talent" in Townes without having to destroy the team.  New Orleans got a "generational talent" in The Brow, didn't need to Hinkie it up.  There have been a lot of "generational talents" in the history of the NBA and teams acquired them in the past without ever needing to throw away 4 or 5 years of their basketball existence.  And if it was about getting that "generational talent," why did they continue to tank even harder after drafting Embiid?

OKC got two "generational talents" in Durant and Westbrook and probably a third in Hardin and they only outright tanked for ONE YEAR.

Mike

Neither of your examples make any sense.   What are you talking about?

Minnesota had a player who was considered a superstar, Kevin Love, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Towns.

The Pelicans had a player who was considered a superstar, Chris Paul, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Anthony Davis.

The 76ers never had a superstar to trade away.  They traded away a fringe star in Jrue Holiday and have Dario Saric and Nerlens Noel as a result.  Like the other two examples, this also put them in position to tank for Joel Embiid. 

All three of those teams still suck.  They are all still "tanking".   Don't act like one is morally superior.  They aren't.

OKC didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
NO didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
Philly has now tanked for FOUR YEARS, with a decent probability that they will well and truly suck for at least one and possibly two more years.

THIS IS WHAT THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT.  Tanking after the all-star break and even tanking an entire season has been, for good or ill, an accepted part of the NBA landscape.  What Hinkie did was not.  He made very deliberate moves so that three years into "The Process," his team was significantly worse than when he started.  If that is the price being paid, what should it ultimately buy?  Is one title enough?  Two?  Four or five trips to the Finals?

Mike

The Sixers only tanked 3 seasons under Hinkie.  That's all.  They aren't really tanking this season.  They're just a bad team that has suffered some of the most significant injuries this year.  They are 3-5 over the last 8 games and have the same number of wins as the beloved TWolves who did their rebuild the right way.  How do the TWolves get a pass?  What about the Mavs and Nets who also have the same number of wins as the Sixers?  The Suns who have one more win and NOP has two more wins.  How do you justify saying the Sixers are tanking this year when there are a lot of other teams just as bad? 

How many championships do the Sixers have over the last 30 years?  How many finals have they made?  Assuming Embiid stays healthy and Simmons proves to be as good as he projects, the Sixers future is really bright and well worth tanking 3 seasons.  If Embiid hadn't suffered his re-injury, they wouldn't have had to tank last season but that could have cost them Simmons.  You're just bent out of shape because the process is working.  It is going to be really bad for you after the next draft when they add a top 5 pick and a top 10 pick.

Lets say the process is working once a core gotten together because of tanking actually wins more than they lose in a season. Sactown has a superstar and cant win jack. Same for NO. It takes more than drafting extremely talented youth to say tanking worked. You have to win something first before you say that

[GratefulCs]

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660466695536640

https://twitter.com/blanchardJRB/status/810206523540566016

Not sure why anyone should care about those.  This is The Process:

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660183361851393

and of course there is Simmons too plus their two top 10 picks this year.  Okafor and Noel could be complete busts, which they aren't, and it won't matter if Embiid stays healthy and Simmons comes close to his potential.

The Process was never about building a contender or even winning one championship.  It was sold as doing something no one else had to achieve something beyond normal expectations.  If two of your top four picks in the process turn out to essentially be busts, you're not doing anything extraordinary.  You're just OKC east.  And while that's a pretty nice thing to be, is it worth throwing away 4 or 5 years of your basketball life? 

Mike

I thought the process was about trying to maximize odds of getting a generational talent. 

And during the exact same period of time, Minnesota got a "generational talent" in Townes without having to destroy the team.  New Orleans got a "generational talent" in The Brow, didn't need to Hinkie it up.  There have been a lot of "generational talents" in the history of the NBA and teams acquired them in the past without ever needing to throw away 4 or 5 years of their basketball existence.  And if it was about getting that "generational talent," why did they continue to tank even harder after drafting Embiid?

OKC got two "generational talents" in Durant and Westbrook and probably a third in Hardin and they only outright tanked for ONE YEAR.

Mike

Neither of your examples make any sense.   What are you talking about?

Minnesota had a player who was considered a superstar, Kevin Love, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Towns.

The Pelicans had a player who was considered a superstar, Chris Paul, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Anthony Davis.

The 76ers never had a superstar to trade away.  They traded away a fringe star in Jrue Holiday and have Dario Saric and Nerlens Noel as a result.  Like the other two examples, this also put them in position to tank for Joel Embiid. 

All three of those teams still suck.  They are all still "tanking".   Don't act like one is morally superior.  They aren't.

OKC didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
NO didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
Philly has now tanked for FOUR YEARS, with a decent probability that they will well and truly suck for at least one and possibly two more years.

THIS IS WHAT THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT.  Tanking after the all-star break and even tanking an entire season has been, for good or ill, an accepted part of the NBA landscape.  What Hinkie did was not.  He made very deliberate moves so that three years into "The Process," his team was significantly worse than when he started.  If that is the price being paid, what should it ultimately buy?  Is one title enough?  Two?  Four or five trips to the Finals?

Mike

The Sixers only tanked 3 seasons under Hinkie.  That's all.  They aren't really tanking this season. They're just a bad team that has suffered some of the most significant injuries this year.  They are 3-5 over the last 8 games and have the same number of wins as the beloved TWolves who did their rebuild the right way.  How do the TWolves get a pass?  What about the Mavs and Nets who also have the same number of wins as the Sixers?  The Suns who have one more win and NOP has two more wins.  How do you justify saying the Sixers are tanking this year when there are a lot of other teams just as bad? 

How many championships do the Sixers have over the last 30 years?  How many finals have they made?  Assuming Embiid stays healthy and Simmons proves to be as good as he projects, the Sixers future is really bright and well worth tanking 3 seasons.  If Embiid hadn't suffered his re-injury, they wouldn't have had to tank last season but that could have cost them Simmons.  You're just bent out of shape because the process is working.  It is going to be really bad for you after the next draft when they add a top 5 pick and a top 10 pick.

they're tanking in an "ethical" way this year

 

[tazzmaniac]

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660466695536640

https://twitter.com/blanchardJRB/status/810206523540566016

Not sure why anyone should care about those.  This is The Process:

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660183361851393

and of course there is Simmons too plus their two top 10 picks this year.  Okafor and Noel could be complete busts, which they aren't, and it won't matter if Embiid stays healthy and Simmons comes close to his potential.

The Process was never about building a contender or even winning one championship.  It was sold as doing something no one else had to achieve something beyond normal expectations.  If two of your top four picks in the process turn out to essentially be busts, you're not doing anything extraordinary.  You're just OKC east.  And while that's a pretty nice thing to be, is it worth throwing away 4 or 5 years of your basketball life? 

Mike

I thought the process was about trying to maximize odds of getting a generational talent. 

And during the exact same period of time, Minnesota got a "generational talent" in Townes without having to destroy the team.  New Orleans got a "generational talent" in The Brow, didn't need to Hinkie it up.  There have been a lot of "generational talents" in the history of the NBA and teams acquired them in the past without ever needing to throw away 4 or 5 years of their basketball existence.  And if it was about getting that "generational talent," why did they continue to tank even harder after drafting Embiid?

OKC got two "generational talents" in Durant and Westbrook and probably a third in Hardin and they only outright tanked for ONE YEAR.

Mike

Neither of your examples make any sense.   What are you talking about?

Minnesota had a player who was considered a superstar, Kevin Love, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Towns.

The Pelicans had a player who was considered a superstar, Chris Paul, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Anthony Davis.

The 76ers never had a superstar to trade away.  They traded away a fringe star in Jrue Holiday and have Dario Saric and Nerlens Noel as a result.  Like the other two examples, this also put them in position to tank for Joel Embiid. 

All three of those teams still suck.  They are all still "tanking".   Don't act like one is morally superior.  They aren't.

OKC didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
NO didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
Philly has now tanked for FOUR YEARS, with a decent probability that they will well and truly suck for at least one and possibly two more years.

THIS IS WHAT THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT.  Tanking after the all-star break and even tanking an entire season has been, for good or ill, an accepted part of the NBA landscape.  What Hinkie did was not.  He made very deliberate moves so that three years into "The Process," his team was significantly worse than when he started.  If that is the price being paid, what should it ultimately buy?  Is one title enough?  Two?  Four or five trips to the Finals?

Mike

The Sixers only tanked 3 seasons under Hinkie.  That's all.  They aren't really tanking this season.  They're just a bad team that has suffered some of the most significant injuries this year.  They are 3-5 over the last 8 games and have the same number of wins as the beloved TWolves who did their rebuild the right way.  How do the TWolves get a pass?  What about the Mavs and Nets who also have the same number of wins as the Sixers?  The Suns who have one more win and NOP has two more wins.  How do you justify saying the Sixers are tanking this year when there are a lot of other teams just as bad? 

How many championships do the Sixers have over the last 30 years?  How many finals have they made?  Assuming Embiid stays healthy and Simmons proves to be as good as he projects, the Sixers future is really bright and well worth tanking 3 seasons.  If Embiid hadn't suffered his re-injury, they wouldn't have had to tank last season but that could have cost them Simmons.  You're just bent out of shape because the process is working.  It is going to be really bad for you after the next draft when they add a top 5 pick and a top 10 pick.

Lets say the process is working once a core gotten together because of tanking actually wins more than they lose in a season. Sactown has a superstar and cant win jack. Same for NO. It takes more than drafting extremely talented youth to say tanking worked. You have to win something first before you say that

Need to see Simmons play some NBA games but the 1st phase of the process, acquire star talent, certainly appears successful.  Its up to Colangelo to build a winning team around Embiid and Simmons.  It should not be too difficult with their skillsets and all the assets Colangelo has to work with.  Having two top 10 picks in this draft in this draft gives him lots of options. 

[nickagneta]

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660466695536640

https://twitter.com/blanchardJRB/status/810206523540566016

Not sure why anyone should care about those.  This is The Process:

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660183361851393

and of course there is Simmons too plus their two top 10 picks this year.  Okafor and Noel could be complete busts, which they aren't, and it won't matter if Embiid stays healthy and Simmons comes close to his potential.

The Process was never about building a contender or even winning one championship.  It was sold as doing something no one else had to achieve something beyond normal expectations.  If two of your top four picks in the process turn out to essentially be busts, you're not doing anything extraordinary.  You're just OKC east.  And while that's a pretty nice thing to be, is it worth throwing away 4 or 5 years of your basketball life? 

Mike

I thought the process was about trying to maximize odds of getting a generational talent. 

And during the exact same period of time, Minnesota got a "generational talent" in Townes without having to destroy the team.  New Orleans got a "generational talent" in The Brow, didn't need to Hinkie it up.  There have been a lot of "generational talents" in the history of the NBA and teams acquired them in the past without ever needing to throw away 4 or 5 years of their basketball existence.  And if it was about getting that "generational talent," why did they continue to tank even harder after drafting Embiid?

OKC got two "generational talents" in Durant and Westbrook and probably a third in Hardin and they only outright tanked for ONE YEAR.

Mike

Neither of your examples make any sense.   What are you talking about?

Minnesota had a player who was considered a superstar, Kevin Love, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Towns.

The Pelicans had a player who was considered a superstar, Chris Paul, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Anthony Davis.

The 76ers never had a superstar to trade away.  They traded away a fringe star in Jrue Holiday and have Dario Saric and Nerlens Noel as a result.  Like the other two examples, this also put them in position to tank for Joel Embiid. 

All three of those teams still suck.  They are all still "tanking".   Don't act like one is morally superior.  They aren't.

OKC didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
NO didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
Philly has now tanked for FOUR YEARS, with a decent probability that they will well and truly suck for at least one and possibly two more years.

THIS IS WHAT THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT.  Tanking after the all-star break and even tanking an entire season has been, for good or ill, an accepted part of the NBA landscape.  What Hinkie did was not.  He made very deliberate moves so that three years into "The Process," his team was significantly worse than when he started.  If that is the price being paid, what should it ultimately buy?  Is one title enough?  Two?  Four or five trips to the Finals?

Mike

The Sixers only tanked 3 seasons under Hinkie.  That's all.  They aren't really tanking this season.  They're just a bad team that has suffered some of the most significant injuries this year.  They are 3-5 over the last 8 games and have the same number of wins as the beloved TWolves who did their rebuild the right way.  How do the TWolves get a pass?  What about the Mavs and Nets who also have the same number of wins as the Sixers?  The Suns who have one more win and NOP has two more wins.  How do you justify saying the Sixers are tanking this year when there are a lot of other teams just as bad? 

How many championships do the Sixers have over the last 30 years?  How many finals have they made?  Assuming Embiid stays healthy and Simmons proves to be as good as he projects, the Sixers future is really bright and well worth tanking 3 seasons.  If Embiid hadn't suffered his re-injury, they wouldn't have had to tank last season but that could have cost them Simmons.  You're just bent out of shape because the process is working.  It is going to be really bad for you after the next draft when they add a top 5 pick and a top 10 pick.

Lets say the process is working once a core gotten together because of tanking actually wins more than they lose in a season. Sactown has a superstar and cant win jack. Same for NO. It takes more than drafting extremely talented youth to say tanking worked. You have to win something first before you say that

Need to see Simmons play some NBA games but the 1st phase of the process, acquire star talent, certainly appears successful.  Its up to Colangelo to build a winning team around Embiid and Simmons.  It should not be too difficult with their skillsets and all the assets Colangelo has to work with.  Having two top 10 picks in this draft in this draft gives him lots of options.

All may be true but you still cant realistically say its working until the team starts winning more than its losing.

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660466695536640

https://twitter.com/blanchardJRB/status/810206523540566016

Not sure why anyone should care about those.  This is The Process:

https://twitter.com/Dcorrigan50/status/810660183361851393

and of course there is Simmons too plus their two top 10 picks this year.  Okafor and Noel could be complete busts, which they aren't, and it won't matter if Embiid stays healthy and Simmons comes close to his potential.

The Process was never about building a contender or even winning one championship.  It was sold as doing something no one else had to achieve something beyond normal expectations.  If two of your top four picks in the process turn out to essentially be busts, you're not doing anything extraordinary.  You're just OKC east.  And while that's a pretty nice thing to be, is it worth throwing away 4 or 5 years of your basketball life? 

Mike

I thought the process was about trying to maximize odds of getting a generational talent. 

And during the exact same period of time, Minnesota got a "generational talent" in Townes without having to destroy the team.  New Orleans got a "generational talent" in The Brow, didn't need to Hinkie it up.  There have been a lot of "generational talents" in the history of the NBA and teams acquired them in the past without ever needing to throw away 4 or 5 years of their basketball existence.  And if it was about getting that "generational talent," why did they continue to tank even harder after drafting Embiid?

OKC got two "generational talents" in Durant and Westbrook and probably a third in Hardin and they only outright tanked for ONE YEAR.

Mike

Neither of your examples make any sense.   What are you talking about?

Minnesota had a player who was considered a superstar, Kevin Love, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Towns.

The Pelicans had a player who was considered a superstar, Chris Paul, and traded him away putting themselves in position to tank for Anthony Davis.

The 76ers never had a superstar to trade away.  They traded away a fringe star in Jrue Holiday and have Dario Saric and Nerlens Noel as a result.  Like the other two examples, this also put them in position to tank for Joel Embiid. 

All three of those teams still suck.  They are all still "tanking".   Don't act like one is morally superior.  They aren't.

OKC didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
NO didn't tank for FOUR YEARS.
Philly has now tanked for FOUR YEARS, with a decent probability that they will well and truly suck for at least one and possibly two more years.

THIS IS WHAT THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT.  Tanking after the all-star break and even tanking an entire season has been, for good or ill, an accepted part of the NBA landscape.  What Hinkie did was not.  He made very deliberate moves so that three years into "The Process," his team was significantly worse than when he started.  If that is the price being paid, what should it ultimately buy?  Is one title enough?  Two?  Four or five trips to the Finals?

Mike

The Sixers only tanked 3 seasons under Hinkie.  That's all.  They aren't really tanking this season.  They're just a bad team that has suffered some of the most significant injuries this year.  They are 3-5 over the last 8 games and have the same number of wins as the beloved TWolves who did their rebuild the right way.  How do the TWolves get a pass?  What about the Mavs and Nets who also have the same number of wins as the Sixers?  The Suns who have one more win and NOP has two more wins.  How do you justify saying the Sixers are tanking this year when there are a lot of other teams just as bad? 

How many championships do the Sixers have over the last 30 years?  How many finals have they made?  Assuming Embiid stays healthy and Simmons proves to be as good as he projects, the Sixers future is really bright and well worth tanking 3 seasons.  If Embiid hadn't suffered his re-injury, they wouldn't have had to tank last season but that could have cost them Simmons.  You're just bent out of shape because the process is working.  It is going to be really bad for you after the next draft when they add a top 5 pick and a top 10 pick.

Lets say the process is working once a core gotten together because of tanking actually wins more than they lose in a season. Sactown has a superstar and cant win jack. Same for NO. It takes more than drafting extremely talented youth to say tanking worked. You have to win something first before you say that

Need to see Simmons play some NBA games but the 1st phase of the process, acquire star talent, certainly appears successful.  Its up to Colangelo to build a winning team around Embiid and Simmons.  It should not be too difficult with their skillsets and all the assets Colangelo has to work with.  Having two top 10 picks in this draft in this draft gives him lots of options.

I'm a take the tank philosophy and flip it.
How many NBA franchises haven't scored at least one top 5 pick in the past 20 years? Has it really stopped any team that didn't get to draft (if indeed there are any) in the top 5 from getting a potentially once in a generation talent?

[trickybilly]

Noel having yet another good game.

My only complaint from Danny (since Rondo trade, where I proved to be horribly wrong) in the last 10 years was missing on this guy. Surely we could have offered more than Justin Anderson and a probably protected first rounder.

[celticsclay]

Noel having yet another good game.

My only complaint from Danny (since Rondo trade, where I proved to be horribly wrong) in the last 10 years was missing on this guy. Surely we could have offered more than Justin Anderson and a probably protected first rounder.

It is only two second rounders. It is eliminated from being a first rounder