Another Day, Another Baseless Conclusion On Hinkie & The 76ers
Time and time again, the Hinkie Era in Philadelphia has been the source of media attention – attention that typically would never be paid to a basketball team that’s won 37 games in two years. If you follow the NBA, then I don’t need to tell you why this organization is receiving so much attention.
As the 76ers’ GM and President of Basketball Operations, Sam Hinkie may be the most polarizing figure in all of sports. That’s right: It’s not a player, a person we actually pay to watch, that has so many people talking. It’s a general manager.
Just 44 days after being hired by owner Josh Harris, Hinkie blew up the mediocre (arguably, already terrible) Sixers team, trading Jrue Holiday for the rights to the now-budding Nerlens Noel and a future first-round draft pick. Since then, Hinkie has made a score of moves that have taken the Sixers further out of present contention, yet more equipped to add pieces for future glory.
Some of those “future” pieces are here now in 2015: Jahlil Okafor and Nerlens Noel for certain. Other players such as Robert Covington, Hollis Thompson, Jerami Grant and Nik Stauskas can also become smaller pieces to move this franchise forward. The one player I’ve intentionally omitted is the 7-foot African who only recently became a legal consumer of alcohol.
For most Sixers fans, casual or die-hard, Joel Embiid has simply been a thought, tucked in the deep crevices of our brains. Undergoing a second surgery on his precious navicular bone, Embiid won’t don the fly new Sixers unis this year, having already sat our all of his would-be rookie season. The man child who is largely considered the most talented Sixer was Fridays’ topic of serious discussion – discussion that, again, put Hinkie and the Sixers in a very negative light.
Brian Geltzeiler’s story on SI.com – Covert dealings, Embiid’s attitude are undermining Philadelphia’s ‘process’ – is yet another example of a member of the media writing a negative piece that simply misses the mark on a number of levels. For a team that is so frequently written about, it’s quite amazing how little the media truly pays attention to what’s actually happening in Philly.
Let’s start with the article’s conclusion:
“The Sixers’ mantra under Hinkie has been “trust the process,” but with the process having led to a still ill-fitting roster, a ton of losses, and a growing sense of distrust within the organization, it’s fair to wonder just how much longer this can all stay together before some very real changes are made.”
Actually, thanks to an error earlier in the piece, the final line reads: “Ed. note: The original version of this story stated that Saric did not have a buyout clause for after the 2015-16 season.” But I digress.
“Trust the process,” the famous “mantra,” is not the Sixers’. It is the concoction of the rabid bloggers at Liberty Ballers, who I suggest you read.
It’s also surprising that Geltzeiler references the “ton of losses” as a sign of a broken process, especially considering his article’s opening paragraph:
“The Philadelphia 76ers are entering the third year of their long-term rebuilding project, one which has largely been characterized by a transparent attempt to be as bad as possible for as long as possible in order to maximize the team’s chances of drafting a generational star.”
If the Sixers are in a “transparent attempt to be as bad as possible,” the losses would not be a sign of a broken process. A broken process would be characterized by having nothing to show for those losses, which couldn’t be further from the truth. Let’s also not forget Geltzeiler claim that the Sixers aren’t only attempting to be as bad as possible, but also “for as long as possible.” I’m really not sure there’s anything I need to say about it; It really makes zero sense.
Moving on, Geltzeiler also claims that Hinkie has “chosen [a] path toward future contention, without apparent regard — at least publicly — for the growing extent of the damage the approach is causing internally.” Perhaps Geltzeiler only means damage in the front office, but as hard as this team plays (not that Geltzeiler watches), it’s impossible to argue that this “path” is damaging the team’s culture.
He mentions Sixers CEO Scott O’Neil, specifically O’Neil’s displeasure for trading Michael Carter-Williams – though Geltzeiler reports that the CEO was miffed because he was planning to market the team around Carter-Williams and Noel.
Frankly, I don’t give a shit about marketing; I care only about contending. And I have great optimism that Hinkie can draft a player with more potential to that end with the Lakers’ pick than what he had in MCW. And I’m not alone in that sentiment.
One of the many sources Geltzeiler leans on believes that Hinkie moved on from the former Rookie of the Year because “Carter-Williams was a poor shooter, and thought that at 23 years old, Carter-Williams was too old to meaningfully improve in that area.” According to Geltzeiler, the Sixers track every shot players take in practice to help in their efforts to improve their players’ shooting ability. It’s befuddling then, that the SI reporter would then opine that, “To give up on Carter-Williams so quickly and determine that he was beyond repair calls into question the initial decision to select him.”
Wouldn’t the fact that the Sixers invest so much into tracking and developing MCW’s shooting arm them with more knowledge than anyone as to whether he could become a sufficient shooter? Would you have any reason to question Hinkie’s selection of Carter-Williams, having since exchanged him for an incredibly valuable pick that will aid the Sixers’ ability to land a true star (which MCW is not)?
Then there is Embiid.
Geltzeiler writes that the greatest point of internal friction came over Hinkie’s selection of the Kansas center with the third pick in the 2014 draft. Already known as a calculated risk-taker, Hinkie had an obvious choice to make in drafting Embiid. The players who followed the Sixers’ pick don’t even scratch the potential of the Cameroonian big man: Aaron Gordon, Dante Exum, Marcus Smart and Julius Randle.
While Geltzeiler unsurprisingly discusses Embiid’s health concerns, he also uses sources to question whether Hinkie understood “the depth of Embiid’s attitude concerns.” The article includes a number of “facts” from various sources, including that Embiid was “frequently seen feasting on chicken fingers and hot dogs at and after games.”
Whether all of these “facts” are true, half of them are true or none of them have any merit, the idea that Embiid has now become the “face of a broken process” is blasphemous.
How media members continue to parse “facts” that lead to illogical conclusions has become normalcy, but is nonetheless head-shakingly erroneous. The reality that many of these writers have little real experience watching the Sixers is abundantly clear. These largely baseless articles continue to fuel the dumpster fire that is the national discussion about Hinkie and the 76ers.
While Hinkie couldn’t give any fucks whether people like Geltzeiler write pieces such as his, what I can hope is that reporters try recognizing the obvious facts – those that contradict the conclusions made from speculative and/or shallow “facts.”
If you’d like to conclude based on your sources that Embiid hasn’t been the model 21 year-old (who will have had to sit out over 24 months of real basketball), then fine. But to conclude that it’s a sign of the “process” falling apart is careless.
Dear guy: Next time, do a better job.