Around the League: Week 24 4/4-4/10

[Mori Chu]

This is interesting. If I read it correctly, Kobe has had at least one 40+ point game against every team in the NBA. That's pretty incredible.



http://i.imgur.com/GKO9gXG.jpg

[pickle]

So, the moral of the story is that drafting the consensus BPA (which Okafor was at the time), if he doesn't fit your roster, will get you fired. Hmm.

Trade the pick if you have to. Get the player you can use (or trade a player(s) you have). But don't stuff them all onto one roster.

I think I differ in my read of that situation for a few reasons.

First, I'm not sure I entirely agree that Okafor was the BPA. He was the most sure thing of that class, yes. But given the style of the new NBA and his well documented playing style, many wondered how he would fit into the game as it was popularized by the Warriors. There are guys who would take a couple of years to develop but who were, in theory, at least as able to contribute to any team as Okafor could in a couple of years.

Second, I think Hinkie's MO up to that point had always been to go for the biggest upside and incur the maximum amount of risk. That more or less should have been Porzingis, who is 7'3 and mobile and compared to Dirk, rather than 7' plodding center bad ft% who couldn't guard a chair or really dominate the boards, who was being compared to Al Jefferson.

And third, I think at some point BPA no longer works. It's like us with all these glut of guards, and the mention of Kris Dunn sickens me. Honestly even Hield bothers me. I would take on Hield if I had confidence that the front office had the determination to move Knight and/or Bledsoe no matter the cost, but I don't have that faith. So ... with 2 centers on the roster, both of whom are about 20 yrs old and works in progress needing minutes, a 3rd one seemed rather foolish.

I wouldn't mind getting Hinkie here, if McDonough was ever let go.

[Mori Chu]

First, I'm not sure I entirely agree that Okafor was the BPA. He was the most sure thing of that class, yes. But given the style of the new NBA and his well documented playing style, many wondered how he would fit into the game as it was popularized by the Warriors. There are guys who would take a couple of years to develop but who were, in theory, at least as able to contribute to any team as Okafor could in a couple of years.

Second, I think Hinkie's MO up to that point had always been to go for the biggest upside and incur the maximum amount of risk. That more or less should have been Porzingis, who is 7'3 and mobile and compared to Dirk, rather than 7' plodding center bad ft% who couldn't guard a chair or really dominate the boards, who was being compared to Al Jefferson.

And third, I think at some point BPA no longer works. It's like us with all these glut of guards, and the mention of Kris Dunn sickens me. Honestly even Hield bothers me. I would take on Hield if I had confidence that the front office had the determination to move Knight and/or Bledsoe no matter the cost, but I don't have that faith. So ... with 2 centers on the roster, both of whom are about 20 yrs old and works in progress needing minutes, a 3rd one seemed rather foolish.

I wouldn't mind getting Hinkie here, if McDonough was ever let go.

Good post. I like what you said about BPA being a limited concept. Drafting "BPA" over all else is how you end up as the Sixers with three centers who need playing time and can't be on the floor together. I don't know if I would want Hinkie. I don't think he really did enough to make that team watchable during his big process.

[JCSunsfan]

So, the moral of the story is that drafting the consensus BPA (which Okafor was at the time), if he doesn't fit your roster, will get you fired. Hmm.

Trade the pick if you have to. Get the player you can use (or trade a player(s) you have). But don't stuff them all onto one roster.

I think I differ in my read of that situation for a few reasons.

First, I'm not sure I entirely agree that Okafor was the BPA. He was the most sure thing of that class, yes. But given the style of the new NBA and his well documented playing style, many wondered how he would fit into the game as it was popularized by the Warriors. There are guys who would take a couple of years to develop but who were, in theory, at least as able to contribute to any team as Okafor could in a couple of years.

Second, I think Hinkie's MO up to that point had always been to go for the biggest upside and incur the maximum amount of risk. That more or less should have been Porzingis, who is 7'3 and mobile and compared to Dirk, rather than 7' plodding center bad ft% who couldn't guard a chair or really dominate the boards, who was being compared to Al Jefferson.

And third, I think at some point BPA no longer works. It's like us with all these glut of guards, and the mention of Kris Dunn sickens me. Honestly even Hield bothers me. I would take on Hield if I had confidence that the front office had the determination to move Knight and/or Bledsoe no matter the cost, but I don't have that faith. So ... with 2 centers on the roster, both of whom are about 20 yrs old and works in progress needing minutes, a 3rd one seemed rather foolish.

I wouldn't mind getting Hinkie here, if McDonough was ever let go.

I thin our conclusion is similar. BPA has limitations. Btw. I would never ever would want Hinkie here. He runs a team like a message board nerd. There are better ways to build a team than being the worst you can be year after year. It's ok to go into rebuilding mode but the goal should to be competitive fairly soon. His plan depends way to much on the when and how many players you draft and not nearly enough on good scouting and drafting well.

[Mori Chu]

The thing Hinkie never figured out is, there's good bad and then there's bad bad. You can be "competitive," have a talented young team with potential to grow and improve, but still win ~25-30 games and get another good draft pick the next year. Look at recent examples of, say, the Jazz or Magic or Bucks or Wolves. They've all been bad, but in a way that seemed to imply that they were working on it and playing hard and showing flashes and signs of potential. Hinkie saw no value in that because it took away his precious ping pong balls. He actively got rid of players who were helping them, not because he got back any useful asset in return, but literally so that he could lose more and tank further. That's bad GMing. When you finally do get your blue chipper, you can't have them growing up in an org that has such a toxic culture of losing and not even competing.

[Mori Chu]

BTW, anybody else watching Spurs/Warriors? This is such a huge game. Currently 22-16, Spurs on top, at the start of the 2nd quarter.

[Indy]

BTW, anybody else watching Spurs/Warriors? This is such a huge game. Currently 22-16, Spurs on top, at the start of the 2nd quarter.

both teams are missing layups and put backs like they are fade away contested 3s.

[carey]

Welp, uno mas and it's vs. the banged up Grizzlies at home. Grizzlies just barely lost by a point to the W's the other night so we'll see what happens but that crowd is going to be rockin'.

[pickle]

The thing Hinkie never figured out is, there's good bad and then there's bad bad. You can be "competitive," have a talented young team with potential to grow and improve, but still win ~25-30 games and get another good draft pick the next year. Look at recent examples of, say, the Jazz or Magic or Bucks or Wolves. They've all been bad, but in a way that seemed to imply that they were working on it and playing hard and showing flashes and signs of potential. Hinkie saw no value in that because it took away his precious ping pong balls. He actively got rid of players who were helping them, not because he got back any useful asset in return, but literally so that he could lose more and tank further. That's bad GMing. When you finally do get your blue chipper, you can't have them growing up in an org that has such a toxic culture of losing and not even competing.

I get that a lot of people dislike Hinkie, and totally understand that he is flawed. However, I guess for me it's a pretty classic case of compensation. As a Suns fan we've suffered too much from a few particular issues, and in finding fixes I want so much to fix those issues above all else. On the court that issue is defense and toughness; in the front office that issue is the lack of a coherent strategy (that works... so please no more dual "pg" process that runs 2 guys who lack pg skills).

What Hinkie did, from where I stand, was institutional tanking, so that you could never question whether the team actively punted games a la Spurs before Duncan or (yeah this is a bit before my time but I read a lot about it) the Rockets before Olajuwon. The on-court product is indeed awful, and I think that's where they, Hinkie and the portion of the 76ers ownership group who supported his vision, failed to anticipate the backlash from the NBA and the other owners. But if the 76ers ran in a vacuum I suspect they would've let Hinkie continue for at least another year, and maybe this is the year everything came together for him.

I think Bryan Colangelo will be able to quickly put this team in the playoffs. At least a large chunk of that credit should go to Hinkie.

Another point, from a podcast I heard, is that super-tanking should not be Hinkie's identity, and I agree with it. Yes this is what he did at Philly, but it doesn't mean that it's the only thing he knows how to do, it just means this was the proposal that he made to ownership 3 years ago that got him hired. What I learned from his tenure in Philly is that he is able to really stick to a specific strategy and not waver, even going as far as resigning his job. I can respect that type of dedication. The other parts of his GM'ing acumen are unproven.

[pickle]

I thin our conclusion is similar. BPA has limitations. Btw. I would never ever would want Hinkie here. He runs a team like a message board nerd. There are better ways to build a team than being the worst you can be year after year. It's ok to go into rebuilding mode but the goal should to be competitive fairly soon. His plan depends way to much on the when and how many players you draft and not nearly enough on good scouting and drafting well.

Yeah sorry for the long-winded post I made. I thought maybe we were on the same page there but went ahead anyway. One thing I absolutely agree with though is that Hinkie did not manage the media properly. I think if his plans were communicated to the media more, he would be less hated. I mean the results would have been just as ugly but he personally would be less targeted, perhaps.

[Superbone]

Yep, huge win for the Warriors and spoiled the Spurs perfect home record. Warrior's pretty much have the all-time record wrapped up now with the hobbled Grizzlies at home. Good time for the Warriors to finally be back at full strength with Bogut and Igoudala. Speaking of which, what happened to Duncan and Diaw for the Spurs?

[Cap]

The Spurs are 39-0 at home, and decide to rest Duncan against GS?

[JCSunsfan]

The Spurs are 39-0 at home, and decide to rest Duncan against GS?

That's Pops for you. The season is just one long game to him. He intends on winning the season not individual games. So one game means nothing and the records mean nothing unless they play a significant part in winning the championship.

[Cap]

This wasn't just any record. They'd have become the first team in the NBA's 70-year history to go undefeated at home, and set a record that could never be broken. I know Pop is Pop, but this still leaves me SMH.

[Indy]

This wasn't just any record. They'd have become the first team in the NBA's 70-year history to go undefeated at home, and set a record that could never be broken. I know Pop is Pop, but this still leaves me SMH.

You never talk about who has the best home record. Or best away record. You sometimes ask who has to best record ever (but you don't care if they didn't win a ring). I would much rather be the team that beat the "best team ever" in the playoffs on my way to another championship. And I think that is exactly what he thought when he sat those two.

[pickle]

This wasn't just any record. They'd have become the first team in the NBA's 70-year history to go undefeated at home, and set a record that could never be broken. I know Pop is Pop, but this still leaves me SMH.

You never talk about who has the best home record. Or best away record. You sometimes ask who has to best record ever (but you don't care if they didn't win a ring). I would much rather be the team that beat the "best team ever" in the playoffs on my way to another championship. And I think that is exactly what he thought when he sat those two.

That's a great take Indy.

[Ring_Wanted]

https://twitter.com/JeffSkversky/status/719232535033720833

[Indy]

https://twitter.com/JeffSkversky/status/719232535033720833

Hmmm

[Indy]

A true fixer. Get in, do the job quickly, get out.

[JCSunsfan]

https://twitter.com/JeffSkversky/status/719232535033720833

Hmmm

Doesn't want to be BC's boss.