FlyHigh wrote:So to be clear, we are essentially fine with 10 win teams for the next 10 years in the hope that in one of those years, the Sixers will draft a superstar?
Well, I don't actually care about the Sixers ... so, yeah. But, again, that is what I found appealing about it. It was a total commitment to rationality above all. If your goal is to win a championship, what is the best path to get the necessary players to make that viable? Stockpiling draft picks at the front of the draft. It certainly isn't the only way, but over the long haul it's going to have a higher degree of expected success than getting stuck in the wash-rinse-repeat cycle of the middling teams, and praying that when your team finally sucks you happen to suck in a year where there's a savior waiting for you in the draft. One method is based on dumb luck, the other is based on planning and playing the odds.
The problem with gambling, however, is that you don't always win. The good thing about gambling with the draft in a sport like basketball, is that you only really need to hit once or twice to get where you want to go.
And that's fine, but even when you hit that lottery, you need to have competent management around. Look at Cleveland with Lebron, Toronto w/ Bosh, Denver/NYK with Melo, New Orleans with Paul and now Davis, Cleveland to some extent with Harden, Minnesota with Love, etc.
You can go back through history and find nearly countless examples of teams winning that lottery and still blowing it. Outside of tanking, Hinkie has been an atrocious GM. Say we got a superstar. I had no faith in Hinkie to develop a winning culture or to surround him with other good players.
I think you also have a new dynamic where Philly is an incredibly unattractive destination for guys around the league. I personally think that matters to some degree, you don't want a guy to be drafted here and think, "oh shit", which is clearly the reaction that Okafor had.