Sixers 2017-2018 Season

allentown 2017-11-01 18:43:11 UTC #41

Yes it is. A reason why the switch from the process to the Colangelo less than ideal. I think the more direct analogy than the Phillies is Howie to skip and back to Howie with a lot of trashing of the other guy's assets. With the Eagles in first place, Howie has clearly one this battle, but in both changes there was unnecessary carnage inflicted upon the roster.

Sixers should just play Okafor when Embiid is rested. If Okafor wants a trade or a big deal elsewhere after the season, then he would be well advised to play his heart out. Colangelo should insist he be played at center.

bigegypt0417 2017-11-01 20:37:52 UTC #42

How does that make the team better?

VoteForKalas 2017-11-01 22:17:21 UTC #43

Okafor has been buried here after posting 17/7 as a 20 yr old rookie. They have handled him terribly since and ruined his trade value completely.

Noel they gave away due to similar issues.

Both were very valuable high picks. You either keep and develop them or you maximize the return you get for them. Trading or releasing them for nothing is horrible management.

VoteForKalas 2017-11-01 22:18:23 UTC #44

Yes and they were equally as guilty in certain cases

It boils down to poor management

VoteForKalas 2017-11-01 22:25:35 UTC #45

That is a big part of their mismanagement of these talents - if they were so disillusioned by Okafor after a good rookie year (?!), then they should have traded him then. To not play him, question him publicly and announce you want to trade him were all mistakes. Why would any team give you anything for Noel or Okafor if they know you're desperate to get rid of them?

zambonir 2017-11-01 23:08:48 UTC #46

I think this is partially true but the league also had no illusions about Okafor's value. Or Noel's relative to his contract status. And they could see what was happening in the court (as far as who was playing where and with whom, and what Brown liked) too.

Where it most resembles the Phillies (and the Flyers for that matter) is Okafor was seen as a problem player and that was that. Given his age, he could definitely embarass the Sixers somewhere down the line. But there's definitely nothing they can do now.

allentown 2017-11-02 01:59:14 UTC #47

There are a lot of minutes Embiid won't play and Okafor is our 3nd most talented center. He doesn't play Brown's style game. Brown will have to make adjustments to maximize Okafor's effectiveness. Helps us now and might build some trade value. When Embiid doesn't play we just aren't that good. Playing without Fultz and much of time without Embiid requires deviation from the preferred approach in any case. I don't think it is strictly a case of Okafor has flopped but that he is a different style center than Brown prefers and he's never been used properly.

xogfog 2017-11-02 10:53:42 UTC #48

Embid played a career high 30 minutes last night

allentown 2017-11-02 15:29:51 UTC #49

It still leaves quite a few minutes at center and that is his high. Will he play that many minutes almost every night at any point this season? I doubt it.

zambonir 2017-11-02 18:28:59 UTC #50

Regardless of position Brown has said he prefers both Johnson and Holmes. There is nothing they can do to improve his trade value and the GM shouldn't tell the coach who to play, right? They are in a game of chicken that they'll probably lose but while it is unfair to Okafor I don't blame them for not wanting to deliver a free player to Boston either. Maybe if it was another team.

nycphils 2017-11-02 19:02:59 UTC #51

At this point they should find any deal and take a low or distant future 2nd round pick to move on but avoid him getting to Boston, etc. can't imagine you can't get a 2019 2nd round pick from the Bulls, Hawks, etc. for him.

And if you can't, then just release him - who cares if a player absolutely no one wants goes to Boston?

bkeich 2017-11-02 19:47:27 UTC #52

All this talk about releasing Okafor avoids the obvious reason not to do it. If (When?) Embiid gets hurt Okafor immediately becomes our best offensive option at Center and would most likely move back into the rotation.

There is nothing to be gained by releasing him except a roster spot that we don’t really have a crunch to fill. Okafor has been a very good “soldier” for a year now while getting limited minutes, I don’t see him blowing up. Obviously he is upset, and really he should be, I would have picked up the option, but that is water under the bridge.

As the season continues Okafor will have some trade value just because he has an expiring contract (although not really large enough to make that great value). He can score in the post, that has value. I just wish Hinkie was still around to get something for him (last year) but that is also water under the bridge.

VoteForKalas 2017-11-03 17:23:19 UTC #53

If Okafor sucks so badly, why would the 76ers care? He would not succeed in Boston anyway, right?

Sorry, but they cannot have it both ways. Okafor posted 17/7 as a 20 yr old rookie on a horribly pathetic team. Since then, outside of injury issues which the team manipulated as well, they buried him and then sat on their hands while the quality of offers decreased (since they bashed him publicly and were not playing him).

Same with Noel. It was terrible and irresponsible management.

zambonir 2017-11-03 17:39:41 UTC #54

Oh, I agree they blew it many times over. This team will probably succeed, if it does, in spite of Colangelo, not because of him (though it might also still fail simply because of injuries).

But now that it is where it is, not sure it really matters whether they play him, release him or wait for a trade. But only option 3 still salvages something, however minor, from the mess. That they might be doing it merely to save face doesn't change that.

(And yes, obviously they are terrified that he'll thrive on another team.)

DougLindsay 2017-11-03 17:44:42 UTC #55

Okafor stinks. He was a poor fit for how the NBA plays these days when he was drafted and he still is. He was the big mistake of the Hinkie era. Team needs to do what is best for them in regards to salary flexibility.

Philsmania 2017-11-03 19:14:54 UTC #56

Generally, I don't think Hinkie drafted all that well in the first round and it cannot be blamed on bad draft position. He probably lucked out on being able to draft Embiid at #3 in 2014 and Embiid may as yet turn out to be a medical casualty. Saric appears to be a good pick too. However, his selections of Carter-Williams, Noel and Okafor all weren't too hot.

DougLindsay 2017-11-03 19:19:51 UTC #57

Noel was fine. They flipped MCW for a great pick. Hinkie never claimed to be a draft guru, just understood that picking at the top increases your chances at hitting more.

zambonir 2017-11-03 20:44:57 UTC #58

My recollection, though I could be wrong, is that Embiid and Okafar were both near-consensus #1s if healthy. In both cases they basically dropped to the Sixers and were known risks, but still the clear BPAs. I don't think Hinkie's plan accounted for the fact that having a glut of centers would turn out to be a less valuable thing, and Embiid's health made them gun-shy about trading Noel when he would have been at his peak.

allentown 2017-11-03 23:11:47 UTC #59

You're not wrong, that was the draft day consensus.

LegoDoom 2017-11-03 23:19:16 UTC #60

I'm not sure I agree with this. Towns was generally considered the #1 prospect and the only reason the Sixers took Okafor is because Porzingis wouldn't workout or take a physical for them. And that's not a knock on Hinkie as I'm not sure who else would have been the pick even though it was obvious that Okafor wasn't made for the modern NBA.