WOJ mini-Bomb: Noel's stock drops

[tarheelsxxiii]

My goodness 😮

All this Hinkie discussion , Noel and Philly posts


Where is LarryBird33   🤔

Shhhh!  Maybe suspended?

Poor LB was suspended for comments detrimental to the blog. After which, he will be placed on probation where he is prohibited from mentioning any player, team, or GM (either current or former) other than those that are part of the Boston Celtics.

I read that he stopped posting here because he took a job with the 6ers -- conflict of interest.

[jpotter33]

Embiid has now called Noel his best friend and says he wants to try playing with him. Interesting stuff

I'm starting to think they're going to trade Okafor instead.

I'm starting to head this way, too. I think it's clear they've always wanted to trade Okafor over Noel, but I just don't think he has any trade value or team that really wants him right now. You have to think a young, athletic, defensive center is much more wanted across the league (Portland, Boston, Toronto, etc.) than an Al Jefferson clone.

Still don't think it'll be enough for Noel to want to stay there for his next contract, though.

[mahcussmaht]

Embiid has now called Noel his best friend and says he wants to try playing with him. Interesting stuff

I'm starting to think they're going to trade Okafor instead.

I'm starting to head this way, too. I think it's clear they've always wanted to trade Okafor over Noel, but I just don't think he has any trade value or team that really wants him right now. You have to think a young, athletic, defensive center is much more wanted across the league (Portland, Boston, Toronto, etc.) than an Al Jefferson clone.

Still don't think it'll be enough for Noel to want to stay there for his next contract, though.

They should trade Okafor.  He's the worst player ever.

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

Is Noel even good? We've only seen flashes. Time is ticking. Same for Okafor.

Philly's problem may not be crowded talent, but just an overall lack of it. Noel and Okafor may only be bench players from what we've seen so maybe we should value them like bench players and Philly shouldn't act like their giving up starting level talent for a discount. This is basically what some predicted back at the draft. Their value would only go down and it has.

Interesting point. And if accurate it bodes very poorly for hinkies approach to a rebuild.

Not really.  Hinkie's approach was to maximize the quality and quantity of picks because you can't count on a particular pick or draft for success.  They have Embiid and Simmons to build around regardless of how well Okafor and Noel turn out or what they trade them for.  They have the Laker 17/18 1st and the Kings 19 1st in addition to their 1sts over the next 3 years.  They also have maintained great cap space.  Maximizing opportunities while maintaining flexibility is the best approach to a rebuild.

But then all your eggs are in one draft basket, which is dangerous. Minnesota has how many top draft picks now?

Lest wait. Really, lets wait for 4 years and see. 

I see the fact that Noel and Okafor might not pan out as a reason why Hinkie had the strategy he did. In the past some teams may have tanked for a year or two and ended up with a couple high picks like Noel and Okafor, who might prove not to be worth tanking for. So Hinkie's strategy was to acquire as many high picks as possible so even though you may end up with a Noel, you also get an Embiid.

It's not that Hinkie's strategy doesn't work. I don't think there's a valid argument against it's concept. The question is whether the Hinkie process is worth the cost. And the cost turns out to be more than just wins and losses and dates on a calendar. It's the psychological wear and tear, the perception of and pressure on relationships within the team and around the league etc. It may be a larger cost than anticipated and requires more investment each year.

It still may be worth it. You tank for cornerstone guys and if you get one or two of them, it's worth it. They have Embiid who looks absolutely worth it if he can stay healthy. And maybe Simmons. They have another high pick coming this year. If they end up with even two legit stars, it doesn't matter who else comes and goes.

Ironically, this was all about "the process" and will ultimately be judged by "the result". Like you said, we'll wait and see.

There are two elements of Hinkie's strategy, however, that you don't need any more time to evaluate.

1.  His strategy is entirely dependent on luck.  In all these years of tanking, they only got the #1 pick once.  If the ping pong balls bounce a little different, they don't get Simmons.  If Embiid isn't hurt, they don't get him with the third pick.

Now, most winning teams get lucky but their strategy is to do the best they can and then hope for a little luck to put them over the top.  Hinkie's strategy was the equivalent of mortgaging your house to buy lottery tickets.

2.  The drive to be as bad as possible to all those extra ping pong balls meant that when the tank was over, meant the team would have no secondary or tertiary assets.  They have no real way of improving the team that doesn't involve trading one of their core pieces.

Mike

This might be the dumbest thing ever written. All strategies rely on luck, his openly acknowledged that fact and maximized the chances of getting lucky.

And point 2 is nonsense. You're seriously telling me they couldn't get major complementary pieces with a pick swap this year(which includes any Sacramento ping pong balls if they are in the lotto), their unprotected first next year, a top 3 protected Lakers pick and an unprotected 2019 Kings 1st rounder?

Riiiiiiiight.

How exactly is Danny Ainge getting a top 10 player under the new CBA? Do you think teams are going to trade them now that they have massive leverage in contract negotiations? Do you think NBA players are leaving 40-50 million extra dollars on the table? Maybe the LeBron, KD, Steph and Russ types of the world are because of their off court revenue. But Russ has signed an extension, the King isn't going anywhere, and KD/Steph have been fairly clear on where they are going.

Nope, he's hoping he gets lucky with on one of the Nets picks... Hoping you get "lucky" on a draft pick, does that sound familiar?

[Boris Badenov]

Embiid has now called Noel his best friend and says he wants to try playing with him. Interesting stuff

I'm starting to think they're going to trade Okafor instead.

I'm starting to head this way, too. I think it's clear they've always wanted to trade Okafor over Noel, but I just don't think he has any trade value or team that really wants him right now. You have to think a young, athletic, defensive center is much more wanted across the league (Portland, Boston, Toronto, etc.) than an Al Jefferson clone.

Still don't think it'll be enough for Noel to want to stay there for his next contract, though.

They should trade Okafor.  He's the worst player ever.

I don't know whether those two statements are internally consistent.

[MBunge]

Is Noel even good? We've only seen flashes. Time is ticking. Same for Okafor.

Philly's problem may not be crowded talent, but just an overall lack of it. Noel and Okafor may only be bench players from what we've seen so maybe we should value them like bench players and Philly shouldn't act like their giving up starting level talent for a discount. This is basically what some predicted back at the draft. Their value would only go down and it has.

Interesting point. And if accurate it bodes very poorly for hinkies approach to a rebuild.

Not really.  Hinkie's approach was to maximize the quality and quantity of picks because you can't count on a particular pick or draft for success.  They have Embiid and Simmons to build around regardless of how well Okafor and Noel turn out or what they trade them for.  They have the Laker 17/18 1st and the Kings 19 1st in addition to their 1sts over the next 3 years.  They also have maintained great cap space.  Maximizing opportunities while maintaining flexibility is the best approach to a rebuild.

But then all your eggs are in one draft basket, which is dangerous. Minnesota has how many top draft picks now?

Lest wait. Really, lets wait for 4 years and see. 

I see the fact that Noel and Okafor might not pan out as a reason why Hinkie had the strategy he did. In the past some teams may have tanked for a year or two and ended up with a couple high picks like Noel and Okafor, who might prove not to be worth tanking for. So Hinkie's strategy was to acquire as many high picks as possible so even though you may end up with a Noel, you also get an Embiid.

It's not that Hinkie's strategy doesn't work. I don't think there's a valid argument against it's concept. The question is whether the Hinkie process is worth the cost. And the cost turns out to be more than just wins and losses and dates on a calendar. It's the psychological wear and tear, the perception of and pressure on relationships within the team and around the league etc. It may be a larger cost than anticipated and requires more investment each year.

It still may be worth it. You tank for cornerstone guys and if you get one or two of them, it's worth it. They have Embiid who looks absolutely worth it if he can stay healthy. And maybe Simmons. They have another high pick coming this year. If they end up with even two legit stars, it doesn't matter who else comes and goes.

Ironically, this was all about "the process" and will ultimately be judged by "the result". Like you said, we'll wait and see.

There are two elements of Hinkie's strategy, however, that you don't need any more time to evaluate.

1.  His strategy is entirely dependent on luck.  In all these years of tanking, they only got the #1 pick once.  If the ping pong balls bounce a little different, they don't get Simmons.  If Embiid isn't hurt, they don't get him with the third pick.

Now, most winning teams get lucky but their strategy is to do the best they can and then hope for a little luck to put them over the top.  Hinkie's strategy was the equivalent of mortgaging your house to buy lottery tickets.

2.  The drive to be as bad as possible to all those extra ping pong balls meant that when the tank was over, meant the team would have no secondary or tertiary assets.  They have no real way of improving the team that doesn't involve trading one of their core pieces.

Mike

This might be the dumbest thing ever written. All strategies rely on luck, his openly acknowledged that fact and maximized the chances of getting lucky.

And point 2 is nonsense. You're seriously telling me they couldn't get major complementary pieces with a pick swap this year(which includes any Sacramento ping pong balls if they are in the lotto), their unprotected first next year, a top 3 protected Lakers pick and an unprotected 2019 Kings 1st rounder?

Riiiiiiiight.

How exactly is Danny Ainge getting a top 10 player under the new CBA? Do you think teams are going to trade them now that they have massive leverage in contract negotiations? Do you think NBA players are leaving 40-50 million extra dollars on the table? Maybe the LeBron, KD, Steph and Russ types of the world are because of their off court revenue. But Russ has signed an extension, the King isn't going anywhere, and KD/Steph have been fairly clear on where they are going.

Nope, he's hoping he gets lucky with on one of the Nets picks... Hoping you get "lucky" on a draft pick, does that sound familiar?

The difference, and it is a pretty big one, is that Ainge didn't subject us to four years of unwatchable garbage while hoping to get lucky.  How many fans have just stopped watching Sixer games over the last 3+ seasons?  How many kids will never become fans because the Sixers were so horrible as they were growing up?  How much misery have Sixer diehards had to endure?

One of the reasons it's been impossible to have civil discussions about this is that Hinkie-lovers never acknowledge the cost of his strategy and never define what exactly would qualify as a success.

Let's review.  The Sixers still suck this year and will likely be fairly bad as well next season, though much better than the three putrid previous seasons.  Philly will have subjected their fans, deliberately, to possibly the worst half-decade of basketball any franchise has endured.  And what did it get them?

1.  A guy who looks like a stud but has yet to prove he can physically stand the full rigors of NBA basketball.
2.  Another guy who has yet to prove anything in the league.  He could be a stud.  He could be a bust.  He could be something in between.
3.  A Euro who isn't starting on one of the worst rosters in the league.
4.  A limited, all defense player who desperately wants to be traded.
5.  A limited, all offense player that virtually no one else in the league would trade a plug nickel for right now.
6.  A Lakers pick that could easily be in the back half of the lottery, where the Nik Stauskuses of the draft are often found.
7.  Their own draft picks, which we've just seen ourselves have dubious value.  To get maximum value, you need another team that both has a high quality player AND is looking to do a total rebuild.

Is Philly better off than Boston?  Minnesota?  Milwaukee?  The Lakers?  How much better do they have to be to make up for years of willful basketball atrocity?

Mike

[tazzmaniac]

Is Noel even good? We've only seen flashes. Time is ticking. Same for Okafor.

Philly's problem may not be crowded talent, but just an overall lack of it. Noel and Okafor may only be bench players from what we've seen so maybe we should value them like bench players and Philly shouldn't act like their giving up starting level talent for a discount. This is basically what some predicted back at the draft. Their value would only go down and it has.

Interesting point. And if accurate it bodes very poorly for hinkies approach to a rebuild.

Not really.  Hinkie's approach was to maximize the quality and quantity of picks because you can't count on a particular pick or draft for success.  They have Embiid and Simmons to build around regardless of how well Okafor and Noel turn out or what they trade them for.  They have the Laker 17/18 1st and the Kings 19 1st in addition to their 1sts over the next 3 years.  They also have maintained great cap space.  Maximizing opportunities while maintaining flexibility is the best approach to a rebuild.

But then all your eggs are in one draft basket, which is dangerous. Minnesota has how many top draft picks now?

Lest wait. Really, lets wait for 4 years and see. 

I see the fact that Noel and Okafor might not pan out as a reason why Hinkie had the strategy he did. In the past some teams may have tanked for a year or two and ended up with a couple high picks like Noel and Okafor, who might prove not to be worth tanking for. So Hinkie's strategy was to acquire as many high picks as possible so even though you may end up with a Noel, you also get an Embiid.

It's not that Hinkie's strategy doesn't work. I don't think there's a valid argument against it's concept. The question is whether the Hinkie process is worth the cost. And the cost turns out to be more than just wins and losses and dates on a calendar. It's the psychological wear and tear, the perception of and pressure on relationships within the team and around the league etc. It may be a larger cost than anticipated and requires more investment each year.

It still may be worth it. You tank for cornerstone guys and if you get one or two of them, it's worth it. They have Embiid who looks absolutely worth it if he can stay healthy. And maybe Simmons. They have another high pick coming this year. If they end up with even two legit stars, it doesn't matter who else comes and goes.

Ironically, this was all about "the process" and will ultimately be judged by "the result". Like you said, we'll wait and see.

There are two elements of Hinkie's strategy, however, that you don't need any more time to evaluate.

1.  His strategy is entirely dependent on luck.  In all these years of tanking, they only got the #1 pick once.  If the ping pong balls bounce a little different, they don't get Simmons.  If Embiid isn't hurt, they don't get him with the third pick.

Now, most winning teams get lucky but their strategy is to do the best they can and then hope for a little luck to put them over the top.  Hinkie's strategy was the equivalent of mortgaging your house to buy lottery tickets.

2.  The drive to be as bad as possible to all those extra ping pong balls meant that when the tank was over, meant the team would have no secondary or tertiary assets.  They have no real way of improving the team that doesn't involve trading one of their core pieces.

Mike

This might be the dumbest thing ever written. All strategies rely on luck, his openly acknowledged that fact and maximized the chances of getting lucky.

And point 2 is nonsense. You're seriously telling me they couldn't get major complementary pieces with a pick swap this year(which includes any Sacramento ping pong balls if they are in the lotto), their unprotected first next year, a top 3 protected Lakers pick and an unprotected 2019 Kings 1st rounder?

Riiiiiiiight.

How exactly is Danny Ainge getting a top 10 player under the new CBA? Do you think teams are going to trade them now that they have massive leverage in contract negotiations? Do you think NBA players are leaving 40-50 million extra dollars on the table? Maybe the LeBron, KD, Steph and Russ types of the world are because of their off court revenue. But Russ has signed an extension, the King isn't going anywhere, and KD/Steph have been fairly clear on where they are going.

Nope, he's hoping he gets lucky with on one of the Nets picks... Hoping you get "lucky" on a draft pick, does that sound familiar?

The difference, and it is a pretty big one, is that Ainge didn't subject us to four years of unwatchable garbage while hoping to get lucky.  How many fans have just stopped watching Sixer games over the last 3+ seasons?  How many kids will never become fans because the Sixers were so horrible as they were growing up?  How much misery have Sixer diehards had to endure?

One of the reasons it's been impossible to have civil discussions about this is that Hinkie-lovers never acknowledge the cost of his strategy and never define what exactly would qualify as a success.

Let's review.  The Sixers still suck this year and will likely be fairly bad as well next season, though much better than the three putrid previous seasons.  Philly will have subjected their fans, deliberately, to possibly the worst half-decade of basketball any franchise has endured.  And what did it get them?

1.  A guy who looks like a stud but has yet to prove he can physically stand the full rigors of NBA basketball.
2.  Another guy who has yet to prove anything in the league.  He could be a stud.  He could be a bust.  He could be something in between.
3.  A Euro who isn't starting on one of the worst rosters in the league.
4.  A limited, all defense player who desperately wants to be traded.
5.  A limited, all offense player that virtually no one else in the league would trade a plug nickel for right now.
6.  A Lakers pick that could easily be in the back half of the lottery, where the Nik Stauskuses of the draft are often found.
7.  Their own draft picks, which we've just seen ourselves have dubious value.  To get maximum value, you need another team that both has a high quality player AND is looking to do a total rebuild.

Is Philly better off than Boston?  Minnesota?  Milwaukee?  The Lakers?  How much better do they have to be to make up for years of willful basketball atrocity?

Mike

It is impossible to have a discussion with you because you repeat the same drivel all the time.  The Sixers are doing a full rebuild which takes time.  Why would you expect them to be further along especially with all the injuries they've had this year?  The TWolves and Lakers rebuilds have been going on just as long and they're not winning much more than the Sixers. 

Kids root for bad teams all the time because that's who their family and friends root for.  Three years of bad play is not going to create a lost generation of Sixers fans.  The Sixers home attendance has been very poor the past three seasons but they're already up to 19th in home attendance this season.  A somewhat more competitive team and a young star puts butts back in the seats.  It'll get even better when Simmons gets back. 

Embiid is a 2 way franchise player whose only significant concern is staying healthy.  The chance of Simmons being a bust is low.  At worst, he'll be a very large Rondo which isn't bad at all.  They should be a good fit together and it shouldn't be hard to build a solid team around them with all the Sixers assets.  In case you have been paying attention, the 2017 draft is projected to be a very good and very deep draft.  A player like Stauskas won't sniff the lottery in this draft.  Their own picks are hardly of dubious value as shown by Embiid and Simmons.  Their own picks have roughly the same value as our Nets picks.  You forgot to include the Kings unprotected 2019 1st in the list of Sixers assets. 

Here's a rough breakdown of where the teams rebuilding with youth stand plus us. 

Team         Core Young Players           1sts next 3 drafts      2017 Cap space               
Sixers        Embiid, Simmons, Okafor           5                         50M+ (Noel gone)     
Lakers       Russell, Ingram, Randle         1 or 2                       20M  (Young gone)
TWolves    Towns, Wiggins, LaVine          2 or 3                       20-25M
Bucks        Giannis, Parker, Middleton          3                         None  (Monroe opts in)
Celtics       Brown, Smart, Rozier                 5                          30M (Olynyk gone)

The Bucks are a borderline playoff team but the other 3 are still losing a lot.  Sixers have big advantages in picks and cap space.  Best young core is a judgment call but I'd put Bucks and Sixers slightly ahead of TWolves with the Lakers trailing.  Overall I'd take the Sixers rebuild position over the others. 

As for our rebuild, it is hard to compare to the others.  We're really dependent on getting a star via trade or free agency.  If we go into a youth rebuild, we're clearly behind.

Success for the Sixers rebuild is the same for any other youth rebuild.  Get a couple young stars, build a good team around them and become a true contender 5 or more years.           

[Moranis]

Is Noel even good? We've only seen flashes. Time is ticking. Same for Okafor.

Philly's problem may not be crowded talent, but just an overall lack of it. Noel and Okafor may only be bench players from what we've seen so maybe we should value them like bench players and Philly shouldn't act like their giving up starting level talent for a discount. This is basically what some predicted back at the draft. Their value would only go down and it has.

Interesting point. And if accurate it bodes very poorly for hinkies approach to a rebuild.

Not really.  Hinkie's approach was to maximize the quality and quantity of picks because you can't count on a particular pick or draft for success.  They have Embiid and Simmons to build around regardless of how well Okafor and Noel turn out or what they trade them for.  They have the Laker 17/18 1st and the Kings 19 1st in addition to their 1sts over the next 3 years.  They also have maintained great cap space.  Maximizing opportunities while maintaining flexibility is the best approach to a rebuild.

But then all your eggs are in one draft basket, which is dangerous. Minnesota has how many top draft picks now?

Lest wait. Really, lets wait for 4 years and see. 

I see the fact that Noel and Okafor might not pan out as a reason why Hinkie had the strategy he did. In the past some teams may have tanked for a year or two and ended up with a couple high picks like Noel and Okafor, who might prove not to be worth tanking for. So Hinkie's strategy was to acquire as many high picks as possible so even though you may end up with a Noel, you also get an Embiid.

It's not that Hinkie's strategy doesn't work. I don't think there's a valid argument against it's concept. The question is whether the Hinkie process is worth the cost. And the cost turns out to be more than just wins and losses and dates on a calendar. It's the psychological wear and tear, the perception of and pressure on relationships within the team and around the league etc. It may be a larger cost than anticipated and requires more investment each year.

It still may be worth it. You tank for cornerstone guys and if you get one or two of them, it's worth it. They have Embiid who looks absolutely worth it if he can stay healthy. And maybe Simmons. They have another high pick coming this year. If they end up with even two legit stars, it doesn't matter who else comes and goes.

Ironically, this was all about "the process" and will ultimately be judged by "the result". Like you said, we'll wait and see.

There are two elements of Hinkie's strategy, however, that you don't need any more time to evaluate.

1.  His strategy is entirely dependent on luck.  In all these years of tanking, they only got the #1 pick once.  If the ping pong balls bounce a little different, they don't get Simmons.  If Embiid isn't hurt, they don't get him with the third pick.

Now, most winning teams get lucky but their strategy is to do the best they can and then hope for a little luck to put them over the top.  Hinkie's strategy was the equivalent of mortgaging your house to buy lottery tickets.

2.  The drive to be as bad as possible to all those extra ping pong balls meant that when the tank was over, meant the team would have no secondary or tertiary assets.  They have no real way of improving the team that doesn't involve trading one of their core pieces.

Mike

This might be the dumbest thing ever written. All strategies rely on luck, his openly acknowledged that fact and maximized the chances of getting lucky.

And point 2 is nonsense. You're seriously telling me they couldn't get major complementary pieces with a pick swap this year(which includes any Sacramento ping pong balls if they are in the lotto), their unprotected first next year, a top 3 protected Lakers pick and an unprotected 2019 Kings 1st rounder?

Riiiiiiiight.

How exactly is Danny Ainge getting a top 10 player under the new CBA? Do you think teams are going to trade them now that they have massive leverage in contract negotiations? Do you think NBA players are leaving 40-50 million extra dollars on the table? Maybe the LeBron, KD, Steph and Russ types of the world are because of their off court revenue. But Russ has signed an extension, the King isn't going anywhere, and KD/Steph have been fairly clear on where they are going.

Nope, he's hoping he gets lucky with on one of the Nets picks... Hoping you get "lucky" on a draft pick, does that sound familiar?

The difference, and it is a pretty big one, is that Ainge didn't subject us to four years of unwatchable garbage while hoping to get lucky.  How many fans have just stopped watching Sixer games over the last 3+ seasons?  How many kids will never become fans because the Sixers were so horrible as they were growing up?  How much misery have Sixer diehards had to endure?

One of the reasons it's been impossible to have civil discussions about this is that Hinkie-lovers never acknowledge the cost of his strategy and never define what exactly would qualify as a success.

Let's review.  The Sixers still suck this year and will likely be fairly bad as well next season, though much better than the three putrid previous seasons.  Philly will have subjected their fans, deliberately, to possibly the worst half-decade of basketball any franchise has endured.  And what did it get them?

1.  A guy who looks like a stud but has yet to prove he can physically stand the full rigors of NBA basketball.
2.  Another guy who has yet to prove anything in the league.  He could be a stud.  He could be a bust.  He could be something in between.
3.  A Euro who isn't starting on one of the worst rosters in the league.
4.  A limited, all defense player who desperately wants to be traded.
5.  A limited, all offense player that virtually no one else in the league would trade a plug nickel for right now.
6.  A Lakers pick that could easily be in the back half of the lottery, where the Nik Stauskuses of the draft are often found.
7.  Their own draft picks, which we've just seen ourselves have dubious value.  To get maximum value, you need another team that both has a high quality player AND is looking to do a total rebuild.

Is Philly better off than Boston?  Minnesota?  Milwaukee?  The Lakers?  How much better do they have to be to make up for years of willful basketball atrocity?

Mike

It is impossible to have a discussion with you because you repeat the same drivel all the time.  The Sixers are doing a full rebuild which takes time.  Why would you expect them to be further along especially with all the injuries they've had this year?  The TWolves and Lakers rebuilds have been going on just as long and they're not winning much more than the Sixers. 

Kids root for bad teams all the time because that's who their family and friends root for.  Three years of bad play is not going to create a lost generation of Sixers fans.  The Sixers home attendance has been very poor the past three seasons but they're already up to 19th in home attendance this season.  A somewhat more competitive team and a young star puts butts back in the seats.  It'll get even better when Simmons gets back. 

Embiid is a 2 way franchise player whose only significant concern is staying healthy.  The chance of Simmons being a bust is low.  At worst, he'll be a very large Rondo which isn't bad at all.  They should be a good fit together and it shouldn't be hard to build a solid team around them with all the Sixers assets.  In case you have been paying attention, the 2017 draft is projected to be a very good and very deep draft.  A player like Stauskas won't sniff the lottery in this draft.  Their own picks are hardly of dubious value as shown by Embiid and Simmons.  Their own picks have roughly the same value as our Nets picks.  You forgot to include the Kings unprotected 2019 1st in the list of Sixers assets. 

Here's a rough breakdown of where the teams rebuilding with youth stand plus us. 

Team         Core Young Players           1sts next 3 drafts      2017 Cap space               
Sixers        Embiid, Simmons, Okafor           5                         50M+ (Noel gone)     
Lakers       Russell, Ingram, Randle         1 or 2                       20M  (Young gone)
TWolves    Towns, Wiggins, LaVine          2 or 3                       20-25M
Bucks        Giannis, Parker, Middleton          3                         None  (Monroe opts in)
Celtics       Brown, Smart, Rozier                 5                          30M (Olynyk gone)

The Bucks are a borderline playoff team but the other 3 are still losing a lot.  Sixers have big advantages in picks and cap space.  Best young core is a judgment call but I'd put Bucks and Sixers slightly ahead of TWolves with the Lakers trailing.  Overall I'd take the Sixers rebuild position over the others. 

As for our rebuild, it is hard to compare to the others.  We're really dependent on getting a star via trade or free agency.  If we go into a youth rebuild, we're clearly behind.

Success for the Sixers rebuild is the same for any other youth rebuild.  Get a couple young stars, build a good team around them and become a true contender 5 or more years.         

This is a great post.  And you know what fans really like, winning.  The Sixers were a mess when Hinkie got there.  They had no direction, were missing 1st round picks, and just weren't a good team.  Sure they weren't historically bad, but that team was going nowhere.  It needed to be gutted and needed a reset.  Hinkie didn't understand the human element as well as he should have, but he set Philly up to be a real legit contender for a very long time.  If the Sixers start winning, every single fan will praise the rebuild.  I don't even think they need to win a title, just being a real contender is something that team has had 1 season in something like 30 years. 

[Rosco917]

I've watch Okafor several times this season, I just don't like his motor or body english, especially on transition defense, or half court D. His conditioning is suspect, along with his attitude. His one skill, scoring in the post is a skill no longer desirable in the league. I'm not sure he would fit on this team and what they like to do. He's not a Stevens type basketball player.

As desperate as I feel the C's should be for interior 4/5 help, I would pass on Okafor unless he came really reasonable, as in cheap. Maybe he can be shaped by a better organization, maybe not.

As for Noel, it's nice to have a defensive minded young center still developing on the team. He runs the floor very well, he defends the rim, he can cover multiple positions. Health is a concern. His scoring is still a work in progress, but he's 22, with dedication, and coaching he'll improve. If CBS uses Horford as a stretch 4, he would be an interesting ally-oop target for IT.

[celticsclay]

I've watch Okafor several times this season, I just don't like his motor or body english, especially on transition defense, or half court D. His conditioning is suspect, along with his attitude. His one skill, scoring in the post is a skill no longer desirable in the league. I'm not sure he would fit on this team and what they like to do. He's not a Stevens type basketball player.

As desperate as I feel the C's should be for interior 4/5 help, I would pass on Okafor unless he came really reasonable, as in cheap. Maybe he can be shaped by a better organization, maybe not.

As for Noel, it's nice to have a defensive minded young center still developing on the team. He runs the floor very well, he defends the rim, he can cover multiple positions. Health is a concern. His scoring is still a work in progress, but he's 22, with dedication, and coaching he'll improve. If CBS uses Horford as a stretch 4, he would be an interesting ally-oop target for IT.

okafor is not a very good player. I said this last year but I think the 17 points he averaged last year may end up being a career high

[RAAAAAAAANDY]

Is Noel even good? We've only seen flashes. Time is ticking. Same for Okafor.

Philly's problem may not be crowded talent, but just an overall lack of it. Noel and Okafor may only be bench players from what we've seen so maybe we should value them like bench players and Philly shouldn't act like their giving up starting level talent for a discount. This is basically what some predicted back at the draft. Their value would only go down and it has.

Interesting point. And if accurate it bodes very poorly for hinkies approach to a rebuild.

Not really.  Hinkie's approach was to maximize the quality and quantity of picks because you can't count on a particular pick or draft for success.  They have Embiid and Simmons to build around regardless of how well Okafor and Noel turn out or what they trade them for.  They have the Laker 17/18 1st and the Kings 19 1st in addition to their 1sts over the next 3 years.  They also have maintained great cap space.  Maximizing opportunities while maintaining flexibility is the best approach to a rebuild.

But then all your eggs are in one draft basket, which is dangerous. Minnesota has how many top draft picks now?

Lest wait. Really, lets wait for 4 years and see. 

I see the fact that Noel and Okafor might not pan out as a reason why Hinkie had the strategy he did. In the past some teams may have tanked for a year or two and ended up with a couple high picks like Noel and Okafor, who might prove not to be worth tanking for. So Hinkie's strategy was to acquire as many high picks as possible so even though you may end up with a Noel, you also get an Embiid.

It's not that Hinkie's strategy doesn't work. I don't think there's a valid argument against it's concept. The question is whether the Hinkie process is worth the cost. And the cost turns out to be more than just wins and losses and dates on a calendar. It's the psychological wear and tear, the perception of and pressure on relationships within the team and around the league etc. It may be a larger cost than anticipated and requires more investment each year.

It still may be worth it. You tank for cornerstone guys and if you get one or two of them, it's worth it. They have Embiid who looks absolutely worth it if he can stay healthy. And maybe Simmons. They have another high pick coming this year. If they end up with even two legit stars, it doesn't matter who else comes and goes.

Ironically, this was all about "the process" and will ultimately be judged by "the result". Like you said, we'll wait and see.

There are two elements of Hinkie's strategy, however, that you don't need any more time to evaluate.

1.  His strategy is entirely dependent on luck.  In all these years of tanking, they only got the #1 pick once.  If the ping pong balls bounce a little different, they don't get Simmons.  If Embiid isn't hurt, they don't get him with the third pick.

Now, most winning teams get lucky but their strategy is to do the best they can and then hope for a little luck to put them over the top.  Hinkie's strategy was the equivalent of mortgaging your house to buy lottery tickets.

2.  The drive to be as bad as possible to all those extra ping pong balls meant that when the tank was over, meant the team would have no secondary or tertiary assets.  They have no real way of improving the team that doesn't involve trading one of their core pieces.

Mike

This might be the dumbest thing ever written. All strategies rely on luck, his openly acknowledged that fact and maximized the chances of getting lucky.

And point 2 is nonsense. You're seriously telling me they couldn't get major complementary pieces with a pick swap this year(which includes any Sacramento ping pong balls if they are in the lotto), their unprotected first next year, a top 3 protected Lakers pick and an unprotected 2019 Kings 1st rounder?

Riiiiiiiight.

How exactly is Danny Ainge getting a top 10 player under the new CBA? Do you think teams are going to trade them now that they have massive leverage in contract negotiations? Do you think NBA players are leaving 40-50 million extra dollars on the table? Maybe the LeBron, KD, Steph and Russ types of the world are because of their off court revenue. But Russ has signed an extension, the King isn't going anywhere, and KD/Steph have been fairly clear on where they are going.

Nope, he's hoping he gets lucky with on one of the Nets picks... Hoping you get "lucky" on a draft pick, does that sound familiar?

The difference, and it is a pretty big one, is that Ainge didn't subject us to four years of unwatchable garbage while hoping to get lucky.  How many fans have just stopped watching Sixer games over the last 3+ seasons?  How many kids will never become fans because the Sixers were so horrible as they were growing up?  How much misery have Sixer diehards had to endure?

One of the reasons it's been impossible to have civil discussions about this is that Hinkie-lovers never acknowledge the cost of his strategy and never define what exactly would qualify as a success.

Let's review.  The Sixers still suck this year and will likely be fairly bad as well next season, though much better than the three putrid previous seasons.  Philly will have subjected their fans, deliberately, to possibly the worst half-decade of basketball any franchise has endured.  And what did it get them?

1.  A guy who looks like a stud but has yet to prove he can physically stand the full rigors of NBA basketball.
2.  Another guy who has yet to prove anything in the league.  He could be a stud.  He could be a bust.  He could be something in between.
3.  A Euro who isn't starting on one of the worst rosters in the league.
4.  A limited, all defense player who desperately wants to be traded.
5.  A limited, all offense player that virtually no one else in the league would trade a plug nickel for right now.
6.  A Lakers pick that could easily be in the back half of the lottery, where the Nik Stauskuses of the draft are often found.
7.  Their own draft picks, which we've just seen ourselves have dubious value.  To get maximum value, you need another team that both has a high quality player AND is looking to do a total rebuild.

Is Philly better off than Boston?  Minnesota?  Milwaukee?  The Lakers?  How much better do they have to be to make up for years of willful basketball atrocity?

Mike

Success I would say is a team that is a championship contender. At least one, but preferably multiple top 10 players that wins 50-60 games for several years in a row if they have good health. Basically I'd say a small step above the Raptors unless they can actually push Cleveland this year.

And really? Acknowledge the costs? I LIVED the "costs" of both this era and the Billy King/Tony DiLeo/Doug Collins train wreck that came before it. It's not close, this has been much less painful. It's one thing to watch bad basketball, it;s another to watch bad basketball and know there is no chance it will ever get better.

It's hilarious you think people who were Sam Hinkie supporters just appeared out of thin air in the spring of 2013. They didn't, they lived the real costs of constant win now moves that wasted Allen Iverson's prime, lead to a team that maxed out as a slightly above .500 team and ultimately culminated in the Bynum trade which left us owing 2 first round picks and with exactly one good player on the roster in Jrue Holiday.

As far as your assets rankings...

The #1 overall pick and the runaway ROY who has the chance to be the best Center in the NBA in a few years... Yeah, what a shame. Oh and a top 5 and possibly another top 10 pick this year in what should be a decent, if over hyped draft.

I'd much rather be stuck with a midget PG who can't guard anybody in the post season and is due for his salary to triple, a 3 and D wing who is a season and a half away from his salary tripling, 5 back up guards I'm not sure can play, and a very good center who can't draw another star in FA right as my window for signing one closes...

Your chance at contention is draft picks and Jaylen Brown. We have more high picks, and better prospects so...

Now you have a GM who isn't an idiot, so I'd still tip the scales in your favor over the 76ers but the Celtics also started from a much, much better place in their rebuild than Sam Hinkie did.

And finally, the question nobody has ever answered because they can't. Lay out a better plan from where Philly was in June of 2013...

[celticsclay]

Is Noel even good? We've only seen flashes. Time is ticking. Same for Okafor.

Philly's problem may not be crowded talent, but just an overall lack of it. Noel and Okafor may only be bench players from what we've seen so maybe we should value them like bench players and Philly shouldn't act like their giving up starting level talent for a discount. This is basically what some predicted back at the draft. Their value would only go down and it has.

Interesting point. And if accurate it bodes very poorly for hinkies approach to a rebuild.

Not really.  Hinkie's approach was to maximize the quality and quantity of picks because you can't count on a particular pick or draft for success.  They have Embiid and Simmons to build around regardless of how well Okafor and Noel turn out or what they trade them for.  They have the Laker 17/18 1st and the Kings 19 1st in addition to their 1sts over the next 3 years.  They also have maintained great cap space.  Maximizing opportunities while maintaining flexibility is the best approach to a rebuild.

But then all your eggs are in one draft basket, which is dangerous. Minnesota has how many top draft picks now?

Lest wait. Really, lets wait for 4 years and see. 

I see the fact that Noel and Okafor might not pan out as a reason why Hinkie had the strategy he did. In the past some teams may have tanked for a year or two and ended up with a couple high picks like Noel and Okafor, who might prove not to be worth tanking for. So Hinkie's strategy was to acquire as many high picks as possible so even though you may end up with a Noel, you also get an Embiid.

It's not that Hinkie's strategy doesn't work. I don't think there's a valid argument against it's concept. The question is whether the Hinkie process is worth the cost. And the cost turns out to be more than just wins and losses and dates on a calendar. It's the psychological wear and tear, the perception of and pressure on relationships within the team and around the league etc. It may be a larger cost than anticipated and requires more investment each year.

It still may be worth it. You tank for cornerstone guys and if you get one or two of them, it's worth it. They have Embiid who looks absolutely worth it if he can stay healthy. And maybe Simmons. They have another high pick coming this year. If they end up with even two legit stars, it doesn't matter who else comes and goes.

Ironically, this was all about "the process" and will ultimately be judged by "the result". Like you said, we'll wait and see.

There are two elements of Hinkie's strategy, however, that you don't need any more time to evaluate.

1.  His strategy is entirely dependent on luck.  In all these years of tanking, they only got the #1 pick once.  If the ping pong balls bounce a little different, they don't get Simmons.  If Embiid isn't hurt, they don't get him with the third pick.

Now, most winning teams get lucky but their strategy is to do the best they can and then hope for a little luck to put them over the top.  Hinkie's strategy was the equivalent of mortgaging your house to buy lottery tickets.

2.  The drive to be as bad as possible to all those extra ping pong balls meant that when the tank was over, meant the team would have no secondary or tertiary assets.  They have no real way of improving the team that doesn't involve trading one of their core pieces.

Mike

This might be the dumbest thing ever written. All strategies rely on luck, his openly acknowledged that fact and maximized the chances of getting lucky.

And point 2 is nonsense. You're seriously telling me they couldn't get major complementary pieces with a pick swap this year(which includes any Sacramento ping pong balls if they are in the lotto), their unprotected first next year, a top 3 protected Lakers pick and an unprotected 2019 Kings 1st rounder?

Riiiiiiiight.

How exactly is Danny Ainge getting a top 10 player under the new CBA? Do you think teams are going to trade them now that they have massive leverage in contract negotiations? Do you think NBA players are leaving 40-50 million extra dollars on the table? Maybe the LeBron, KD, Steph and Russ types of the world are because of their off court revenue. But Russ has signed an extension, the King isn't going anywhere, and KD/Steph have been fairly clear on where they are going.

Nope, he's hoping he gets lucky with on one of the Nets picks... Hoping you get "lucky" on a draft pick, does that sound familiar?

The difference, and it is a pretty big one, is that Ainge didn't subject us to four years of unwatchable garbage while hoping to get lucky.  How many fans have just stopped watching Sixer games over the last 3+ seasons?  How many kids will never become fans because the Sixers were so horrible as they were growing up?  How much misery have Sixer diehards had to endure?

One of the reasons it's been impossible to have civil discussions about this is that Hinkie-lovers never acknowledge the cost of his strategy and never define what exactly would qualify as a success.

Let's review.  The Sixers still suck this year and will likely be fairly bad as well next season, though much better than the three putrid previous seasons.  Philly will have subjected their fans, deliberately, to possibly the worst half-decade of basketball any franchise has endured.  And what did it get them?

1.  A guy who looks like a stud but has yet to prove he can physically stand the full rigors of NBA basketball.
2.  Another guy who has yet to prove anything in the league.  He could be a stud.  He could be a bust.  He could be something in between.
3.  A Euro who isn't starting on one of the worst rosters in the league.
4.  A limited, all defense player who desperately wants to be traded.
5.  A limited, all offense player that virtually no one else in the league would trade a plug nickel for right now.
6.  A Lakers pick that could easily be in the back half of the lottery, where the Nik Stauskuses of the draft are often found.
7.  Their own draft picks, which we've just seen ourselves have dubious value.  To get maximum value, you need another team that both has a high quality player AND is looking to do a total rebuild.

Is Philly better off than Boston?  Minnesota?  Milwaukee?  The Lakers?  How much better do they have to be to make up for years of willful basketball atrocity?

Mike

Success I would say is a team that is a championship contender. At least one, but preferably multiple top 10 players that wins 50-60 games for several years in a row if they have good health. Basically I'd say a small step above the Raptors unless they can actually push Cleveland this year.

And really? Acknowledge the costs? I LIVED the "costs" of both this era and the Billy King/Tony DiLeo/Doug Collins train wreck that came before it. It's not close, this has been much less painful. It's one thing to watch bad basketball, it;s another to watch bad basketball and know there is no chance it will ever get better.

It's hilarious you think people who were Sam Hinkie supporters just appeared out of thin air in the spring of 2013. They didn't, they lived the real costs of constant win now moves that wasted Allen Iverson's prime, lead to a team that maxed out as a slightly above .500 team and ultimately culminated in the Bynum trade which left us owing 2 first round picks and with exactly one good player on the roster in Jrue Holiday.

As far as your assets rankings...

The #1 overall pick and the runaway ROY who has the chance to be the best Center in the NBA in a few years... Yeah, what a shame. Oh and a top 5 and possibly another top 10 pick this year in what should be a decent, if over hyped draft.

I'd much rather be stuck with a midget PG who can't guard anybody in the post season and is due for his salary to triple, a 3 and D wing who is a season and a half away from his salary tripling, 5 back up guards I'm not sure can play, and a very good center who can't draw another star in FA right as my window for signing one closes...

Your chance at contention is draft picks and Jaylen Brown. We have more high picks, and better prospects so...

Now you have a GM who isn't an idiot, so I'd still tip the scales in your favor over the 76ers but the Celtics also started from a much, much better place in their rebuild than Sam Hinkie did.

And finally, the question nobody has ever answered because they can't. Lay out a better plan from where Philly was in June of 2013...

rant, as I have told you a number of times I generally enjoy your contributions to this board and your knowledge of the 76ers. That being said attacking the Celtics and calling our player a midget does not add anything to this board and isn't really warranted on a Celtics fan board because one poster insults philly. You got an issue with that poster take it up with them but this isn't useful.

[mahcussmaht]

Does Joel Embiid have more trade value than DeMarcus Cousins?

[KG Living Legend]

Does Joel Embiid have more trade value than DeMarcus Cousins?

 I would say yes. Embiid is untouchable.

[mahcussmaht]

Does Joel Embiid have more trade value than DeMarcus Cousins?

 I would say yes. Embiid is untouchable.

The starting point for purchasing Cousins seems to be Amir Johnson, Marcus Smart, the 2017 Brooklyn 1st, and two protected 1st rounders.  Guys say we would need to also include one of Jaylen Brown, Avery Bradley Jae Crowder or the 2018 Brooklyn 1st.  That's if the Kings even decide to give up and move on from Cousins. 

You say Embiid would cost more than that?  I agree with you.   And that's also why I think you can call the process a success.  The purpose was to add a franchise player.  They succeeded in adding one.  We are still dreaming of trading for our own.  I'd trade most of the team for Embiid.

The Philadelphia 76ers are like an internet company that isn't turning a profit yet, but have a 40 billion dollar valuation.  Maybe it doesn't live up to the promise (Twitter's valuation dropped from 40 billion in 2013 to 10 billion this year as they failed to monetize), but you have to acknowledge that right now they are sitting on a fortune and that fortune is the direct result of the process.