Ainge is trying to rebuild on the fly while Hinkie is trying to rebuild from scratch. If we had a star to build upon, I'd agree with Ainge's approach. Unfortunately we don't so I prefer Hinkie's approach. I don't think Hinkie would have done the IT trade even if he thought IT was a bit more valuable than the Cavs 1st. I'm certain he wouldn't have used cap space on a couple mediocre free agents. Brett Brown said the Sixers "didn't want to get pregnant with average players". That's exactly what we did by making the playoffs because of the weak East.
Hinkie's plan isn't just tanking to improve the Sixer's own picks. He's acquired a lot of picks by trading off players that aren't in the Sixers future plans and by using their plentiful cap space in salary dump trades. He's used roster spots to churn through d-leaguers to find keepers like Covington. The Sixer's young players get ample opportunity to play, develop and prove themselves. Early in the season, Noel looked like he should be in the d-league at times but he still got playing time and developed quite nicely. On the other hand, Young was relegated to the d-league because he wasn't good enough to help us get wins so his development was stunted.
Hinkie's approach has gotten the Sixers better assets and maintained more cap space at the expense of wins. However the losing culture argument is bogus. The Sixers were an above average defense even with their lesser talent and high turnover. They just had a really lousy offense.