Raise your hand if you still remember NBA 3.0.
For the unfamiliar: when Vivek Ranadive vied for ownership over the Sacramento Kings in 2013, he didn’t just center his pitch on a state-of-the-art arena in downtown Sacramento, he spoke of something bigger, something better, something global in significance and ahead of the curve in all things basketball. He pitched the Board of Governors, Commissioner Adam Silver, and most importantly, the City of Sacramento, on the concept of NBA 3.0 – a three pronged approach that used technology, globalization of the game and the idea that basketball can be an agent of positive change. Vivek spoke of using Big Data, deep machine-learning software and other tech-driven elements which he called his “secret sauce” in his hopes to make the NBA, by way of the Sacramento Kings, the most popular sport of the 21st Century. He’s undeniably a tech genius, a man hellbent on “making a dent in the universe” (as his friend Steve Jobs used to say) and above all else, the man with the vision, capital and goodwill of the fanbase to make it happen.
So where did that mentality go?
First, I don’t want to embrangle my message here. Yes, the arena that Vivek and Company built is nothing short of a blessing for the city of Sacramento and, in fact, most everything on the business and public outreach side of the Kings can be considered good, if not great. Vivek did what the Maloof brothers could not and got an arena done and did so with minimal harm to the taxpayers of Sacramento. Vivek took a stand on the right side of history when issues of racism and injustice came literally knocking at his doors. He, and the rest of the ownership group is to be commended on these things.
However, with the resignation of President of Basketball Operations and former fan-favorite Vlade Divac in mid-August, the Kings are now at a moment of reflection. It’s been seven seasons since Vivek Ranadive assumed control of the Sacramento Kings. He’s gone through five coaches during that time, with none posting close to a winning record. Only Mike Malone, Vivek’s very first hire as owner, has had success after leaving Sacramento. Malone has led the Denver Nuggets to no lower than tenth place during his tenure, with two ninth place finishes and two playoff appearances. He boasts a 54% win percentage during his time with the team and is already fourth in Denver Nuggets franchise history with 194 wins. Vivek has also gone through a string of advisors, general managers and executives, all who have been shoved into the closets and under the various rugs at Golden 1 Center when the time comes.
I couldn’t list every issue or mistake made in the last seven years if I had two lifetimes, but let’s give a quick rundown of some relevant turnover that has occurred in the last few years. Pete D’Alessandro and Chris Mullins were pushed away after a variety of failures and backstabbings – including a scheme to fire Mike Malone in an apparent attempt to get Mullin installed as coach. Vlade Divac was brought in to settle the dust mostly because he was trusted among the ownership, but he brought in the likes of Scott Perry, who left for the Knicks less than three months into the job, Brandon Williams, who not only ousted long-time employees without explanation but also feuded publicly with then head coach Dave Joerger, who was in the middle of coaching the Kings to their best record since the ’05-06 season. Both Williams and Joerger were fired at the end of that season, which led to hiring Luke Walton, who flamed out with the Lakers and was brought in without as much as a hiring process for other suitable candidates. Luke Walton saw sexual assault charges brought forward a week after he was formally hired, but was allowed to continue coaching after an independent investigation was closed due to lack of evidence. Divac and his sidekick Peja Stojakovic both stepped down just weeks ago after repeated misfires in the draft and general tumult in all things basketball, both victims of and perpetrators in the asylum that is the Sacramento Kings.
All the while, the franchise has failed in the very fundamental goals once sent out by Vivek across fields of rallying fans and national broadcasts that had finally regained a modicum of curiosity of the little team in the capital of California. Vivek was going to make the Kings into the model franchise of the 21st century – Moneyball for a basketball Metropolis. Yet, the Kings never truly boosted their analytics department. Sure, they hired Dean Oliver to be their Director of Player Personnel and Head of Analytics, the man who wrote the literal book on analytics in the NBA, but then they unceremoniously banned him from their summer league games and fired him with years left on the contract. They then replaced him with Roland Beech, another legend in the field, less than a month later. He spent two years in Sacramento and then exited stage left for reasons unknown. They then quickly hired Luke Bornn as their new Vice President of Strategy and Analytics, a man who had never worked specifically with basketball. At some point in the few years, Bornn quietly transitioned to an advisor role with the Kings. This is all to say that they couldn’t hold onto two legends and an up-and-comer in the field of analytics, much less a staff of men and women of this ilk. During Vivek’s tenure, the Kings have consistently fielded one of the smallest management teams in the NBA and the few home run hires that they’ve brought in have either been fired in embarrassing public fashion or left after less than a few years. This goes for scouting of college players, overseas players and those on opposing teams, as well. The Kings aren’t hiring bad people, they haven’t hired people at all. The Dallas Mavericks send their kindest regards.
In short, Vivek promised the NBA’s version of Wakanda and what he’s delivered is nothing short of Robocop’s Detroit.
The Sacramento Kings now stand at a fork-in-the-road that will lead to continued disappointment, apathy and rumors of mismanagement that go right to the very top or to a semblance of success, however fleeting, and the calming and then reinvigoration of the fanbase. But to get to that latter path, to get to a place above mockery and nearest to praise, they’ll need more than a President of Basketball Operations. They’ll need more than any single General Manager can do or the efforts of any singular Vice President of Strategy and Analytics, or single scout that can project Luka Doncic being a star before he’s a star, or Luka Doncic himself. Vivek, the ownership and the fanbase need something more if they have any chance of falling into the pit. They need a modern strategy for the way the game is played now, in 2020 and beyond, and a foundation firmly based in analytics. After coming up on fifteen years without a playoff appearance, the Kings need to rebound from this and not aim for an eighth seed or two. They need to publicly and privately commit to setting their eyes towards a championship in Sacramento. In short, they need NBA 3.0.
Enter Samuel Hinkie.
How much of an intro do Kings fan’s need on Sam Hinkie? He’s an oft-maligned, oft-misrepresented former General Manager of the Philadelphia Sixers. And if you’ve paid even slight attention to professional basketball since 2015, you’ve heard his name and probably have a vague understanding of “The Process”. Even now, four years after his thirty-four month stint with Philly, you will still hear his name on national broadcasts and talk shows alike. The part meme, part legend of Hinkie, this Dr. Frankenstein that briefly ran that team in Philadelphia has only grown with time, and for some reason, every failure of the Sixers. To this day we see many outside of Philly still argue about the merits of The Process, whether or not it was anything more than blatant tanking and whether the endgame of the strategy that would ultimately force his resignation was worth the losing that took place during his tenure.
He’s equally a savior to fans of misguided teams as he is a scapegoat for the problems the Sixers currently face and while he appears on the shortlist for many armchair owners, since his departure from the NBA in 2016, he’s made no such show on any franchise’s actual list of candidates. This includes the current list of leaked candidates for the Sacramento Kings. Whether that is his decisions or those with control of the franchise, I could only wager an uneducated guess. What I can say is that the Kings have seemingly had interest in him before, going back to 2017 when Marc Stein, Zach Lowe and Adrian Wojnarowski all tweeted about Vivek receiving permission to speak with Hinkie and their supposed interest in hiring an executive to place over the now resigned Divac. The Kings, of course, quickly denied those rumors.
But why would the Kings, who have been deprived of playoff basketball for coming up on a decade and a half want to swing a deal, entrust what might be the very last straw that many Kings fans have to a General Manager who brought his team 47 wins and 199 losses in three years? Why would an owner want to hire a man who drove attendance from 18th in the league before he arrived to the bottom two in attendance for the next three years in a row?
Upon his departure, Sam Hinkie left what he called his investor’s letter – equal parts resignation letter, resume, and explanation to the whole of just what the hell he was attempting to do, in an attempt to save face to those that were now edging him out the door. It was meant to be private, but in typical embarrassing Philly fashion, those same people leaked it. Most media had a good laugh at him quoting Max Planck and Elon Musk, and citing examples that range from extinct birds to the Ten Thousand Year Clock and then it faded into just another anecdote in the legend of Sam Hinkie and The Process. The Process never left NBA fan discussion for Palo Alto like its creator, instead bouncing around in Twitter threads and blog conversations, usually in arguments and devoid of the necessary context on both sides, solidifying itself as one of the most controversial topics in sports, residing in a sort of space between worship and infamy. So let’s talk about it for a second.
Before we get started, I want to provide you a link to the resignation letter in case you want to read the entire thing. It isn’t nearly as dense as its reputation and while it is thirteen-pages long, it’s accessible and intelligent all the way through. This is an undressing of the strategy and goals of a franchise in a way fans rarely get access to. It’s a fascinating read and I’m going to give some of the highlights.
To first give some context to the Philadelphia Sixers team that would hire a man like Hinkie to run their front office: the 2012-2013 Sixers had won 34 games that season, saw the likes of Damien Wilkins, Dorell Wright, Nick Young and Royal Ivey headed away in free agency and maybe the best player left on that team, Jason Richardson, sidelined for the coming season. The Sixers cupboards were bare with only Arnett Moultrie and Evan Turner as guys on rookie contracts. Just a season before, the Sixers traded Andre Iguodala, young Nikola Vucevic, Mo Harkless, and a protected future first for Andrew Bynum, a guy who was less of a star and more of a constant knife in the heart of then coach, Doug Collins. Bynum was nursing an injury and stayed injured for pretty much his entire tenure. In short, the Sixers cupboards were bare. Hinkie cites in his letter ESPN’s future Power Rankings, a mixture of current roster, player potential, assets, cap space, coaching etc. that projects how they should fair in the next three years: the Sixers were 26th. Sidenote, the Kings were 27th and shoutout to cowboyron96 (Rise the Hot Hand, buddy) on STR who relayed succinctly why: 
In his letter, Hinkie states matter-of-factly Your crops had been eaten. The Kings are a small patch of potatoes in the back field away from not being allowed into their stall at the farmer’s market.
The Sixers fortunes would change in a variety of ways with the firing of then GM Tony DiLeo and the ascension of Hinkie. Hinkie sprinkled a variety of goals and observations throughout but his general methodology and recommendation for the long lasting success of the Sixers can be summarized as seeing their position in the hierarchy of the league necessitated a zig while our competitors comfortably zagged and to do so would require a culture of finding new, better ways to solve repeating problems. In short, the Sixers needed to innovate, do so quickly and continue to do so until they reached the NBA summit. The Sixers needed to find a way to fight a three front war with four clips of ammo and an abandoned tank. In his own words:
The strategy we settled on was straightforward, even if arduous. Replenish the talent pipeline, improve the quality and quantity of players on the roster, shift the style of play towards tomorrow’s champions, and become a culture focused on innovation.
More specifically he listed the need to play a faster style that recognizes the importance of speed in tomorrow’s NBA and one that quickly integrates young players. Four and a half years after his resignation and 2700 miles across the country, this is where the Kings should be headed right now, if not for the last few years.
He continues, We set out to improve our shot selection toward high efficiency basketball. I’m imagining what they asked Buddy Hield to do in the bubble and I’m shaking my head vigorously with this.
We also wanted to build a defensive identity thatin timecould thwart tomorrow’s high-efficiency offenses. Lastly, we needed to build a world-class training center, develop an ever-evolving player development program, and change the organization’s culture to one of innovation and a constant search for competitive edge.
Now this is obviously an eight year old assessment of a different franchise at a different moment in the league, but it’s also (other than the world class training center) every single thing that the Kings need and that their fans have called for. Recognizing the strengths of this current franchise, a fast paced offense fits them like a glove, but beyond that, fans cries for a defensive presence have gone ignored since, what, Samuel Dalembert? Metta World Peace? We’ve all spent time in the comments pining for a true farm system in Stockton that developed our guys down there into ready made players. Much of the appeal for Webster and Tolzman from Toronto are for that exact reason: the Raptors built a pipeline that ran from their G-League team straight to the Larry O’Brien trophy. And that end bit about a culture of innovation and a constant search for a competitive edge? Now where exactly have we heard that before?
Hinkie spends a good portion of his letter talking about the need to see down the road further than any other team in the league. That the team shouldn’t be committed to a preferred style of play but rather aim for where future champions would be crowned. Hinkie is in no way rigid about how to reach the ultimate goal only that they should be aiming solely for that. I mention this because, well, there’s a lot of people that say something to the tune of “I don’t want The Process in Sacramento!” as if that was the only thing Sam Hinkie ever focused on. Admittedly, its the only thing we’ve been able to see out of Hinkie, but that’s more to do with Hinkie’s employers being pressured to end their plans prematurely. “The Process” itself wasn’t about losing a bunch of games – it was about ensuring the best chance of winning it all by maximizing every single advantage the Sixers had. The Kings have different assets and ownership than the Sixers (for better AND worse) and if there is one thing I am certain of in reading this thirteen pages a million and a half times, it’s that Sam Hinkie is NOT a one trick pony. Three pages in, Hinkie mentions that he writes in a decision journal, putting down on paper what and why he thinks he’s the way he does about every single move he makes, when he makes it.
“Reading your own past reasoning in your own words in your own handwriting time after time causes the tides of humility to gather at your feet. I’m often in waist-deep water here.”
This man knows the mistakes he’s made, The Process and otherwise. There would be no Process in Sacramento, and for a variety of reasons. First, the lottery odds have changed enough in recent years that the advantage Hinkie sought is now split between the bottom three teams. That change in itself negates the most displeasing part of The Process. Secondly, if the the NBA ever does allow Sam Hinkie back into the fold, their blacklist already has a line and his initials chiseled in stone. Most importantly thought, his strategy for a team in 2021 would be different solely because the league has caught up to where he expected and predicted they would be at this point. In 2012, prior to being hired Hinkie wrote Sixers owner Josh Harris another document laying out where he saw the league headed. In it, he noted “History’s lessons are clear, but tomorrow’s championship caliber teams may break from historical trends” and gave two examples: “A 3PA-happy champion like Orlando under Stan Van Gundy” and “A fast-paced champion like Phoenix under Mike D’Antoni”. In 2015, the Golden State Warriors were far and away the fastest paced team in the league, hit the third most threes in league history and beat the Cleveland Cavaliers in the NBA Finals in six games.
But what were the actual tangible results of these goals? We’ve seen where they were and we’ve seen where they aimed to go, but what actually happened? Well, in short, all hell broke loose. Over the next two years, the Sixers added a draft pick or a pick swap to the team EVERY month over the draft picks that they had already. Twenty six months after taking charge of the Sixers, Sam Hinkie had himself a total of 28 draft picks or pick swaps. TWENTY-EIGHT more chances at grabbing the players necessary to build a championship team. Resigning just a month before the 2016 NBA Draft lottery, the Sixers had positioned themselves for an absolutely wild haul. They had the best chances in the league for the #1 pick, owned the rights to the Lakers pick if it fell out of the Top 3, owned the rights to swap their pick with the Kings if Sacramento jumped. They also already owned the 24th and 26th pick in the draft that year. This was, of course, the year the Sixers and GM Jerry Coangelo picked Ben Simmons at #1, the Lakers pick was not conveyed (they drafting Brandon Ingram) and the 24th and 26th were used on Timothy Luwawu-Cabarot and Furkan Kormaz.
I’m not here to defend Hinkie’s draft record necessarily. Drafting Jahlil Okafor over Kristaps Porzingis was a miss. I’ve seen people whine that he drafted then Rookie of the Year Michael Carter-Williams at 11 when Giannis Antetokounmpo fell to 15. It’s also easy to attribute too much success to him either. He did not draft Ben Simmons and there are still rumors that float around that Hinkie said he would have taken Ingram over Simmons. Hinkie hit and he missed, like all general managers. But when he hit, he hit. Joel Embiid is the best center in the NBA. Jeremi Grant drafted in the second round is a key cog off the bench for the Nuggets. Kings starting big man and fan favorite Richaun Holmes, second round pick. He signed another Kings legend, Dewayne Dedmon to a two ten day contracts at the end of one season prior to him getting any recognition in the league. The picks that he acquired still haven’t all come to pass. Just this last season, Mikal Bridges was selected by the Sixers (and traded away quickly). That pick was send away for Zhaire Smith. I can’t go over 28 moves and swaps, but the point is: Hinkie put 28 rounds in the chamber, knowing they weren’t all gonna hit, knowing good and well they only needed two or three from each round to have themselves something special. Beyond that he emphasized a fundamental goal of searching out every advantage he could find, every avenue of data, to get those picks and signings right.
As a Kings fan, nothing was more patronizing than hearing the likes of “trust me, I’m a developer” or Pete D’Allesando jumping on a radio show to answer fan questions only to say “you need to trust me” or even Vlade proudly proclaiming at the lowest spot of his tenure “I believe we have a super team, they’re just young”. Anyone in their right mind knew this was bullshit, whether the speakers truly meant it or not. The Kings have been flying by the seat of their pants, patching teams and coaching staffs and front offices together for 14 seasons now, heading vaguely in a direction that might or might not be towards a playoff berth. I don’t want to be excited that our new GM got Zach Randolph and a sad-faced George Hill to join our team as a favor. I don’t want to hear how we’re supposed to believe that Giorgios Papagiannis is a hidden gem but Luka Doncic isn’t even the second choice for a team in need of everything he had. Trusting one of the least knowledgeable management staffs in basketball history with top picks is soul sucking, especially when it came to the draft. Over and over seeing trade downs that resulted predictably someone from a Final Four team who made a splash in March. Decision-making that wasn’t just not focused on the future, but not even based in the present. I want to share one last anecdote that he mentions in his letter. For a team as short-sited as the Kings have always been, Hinkie mentions that “in this league, the long view picks at the lock of mediocrity”, the very thing the Kings have been trapped behind since 2005. This is wrapping up now, so bear with me. He states:
Warren Buffett in the late 80s on this topic: In any sort of a contestfinancial, mental, or physicalit’s an enormous advantage to have opponents who have been taught that it’s useless to even try. Ask who wants to trade for an in-his-prime Kevin Garnett and 30 hands will go up. Ask who planned for it three or four years in advance and Danny Ainge is nearly alone. Same for Daryl Morey in Houston trading for James Harden. San Antonio’s Peter Holt said after signing LaMarcus Aldridge this summer, R.C. [Buford] came to us with this plan three years ago, four years agoseriously. And we’ve worked at it ever since.
Kings fans have been told through the actions of this franchise time and time again that it’s useless to try. They’ve finally started to believe it. I don’t want the guy that want’s to get us an eighth seed and a little extra TV revenue. I want the guy that sees the decade and half plus of losing, the mish-mash in the Kings cupboard of small assets and bloated contracts and stills says: “fuck it, let’s go win a couple championships”. This fanbase and franchise are both desperate to have Vivek finally own up and make good on NBA 3.0’s basketball potential in Sacramento and Sam Hinkie just happens to be the guy who wanted those exact same things and attempted to execute a plan to achieve them over eight years ago.
Am I claiming that Sam Hinkie is the only man up to the task? No. There are plenty other talented people in this league. Other people can check boxes off of the wish list, other people could get the Kings to their end goal. Is Hinkie the scary, high risk, high reward candidate? Sure. But, part of the reason to reject fear and plow on is exactly because fear had been the dominant motivator of the actions of too many for too long. Afraid to properly rebuild, afraid to hire capable people who could usurp your job, afraid to fire the coach or hire the coach or stick with the coach. Time and time again. Honestly, this whole piece might be less about Hinkie and more about that wish list we, the hive mind, have for a great GM. There just happens to be paper proof that Sam Hinkie at one point or another was and/or is that kind of GM for Sacramento. If he’ll take it, Hinkie needs to be interviewed.
It’s been seven years since Vivek Ranadive took control of the Kings and four since Sam Hinkie stepped away from the Sixers. There’s been superteams and various NBA records broken left and right and even a bit of a dynasty. And yet there is still a larger basketball universe out there ripe for some real, permanent denting. It’s time for Vivek, Hinkie and the Kings to come together, take a look way down the road and see that they can still be the ones to do it, if they do it together.
Great stuff!
My main question after reading this in-depth article: I wonder how cowboyron is doing?
I like to think he’s rising the hot hand wherever he is
True story: told my college friends back in the day that if the Kings stayed in Sacramento, I’d get a Kings related tattoo and incorporate ‘Rise the Hot Hand’ in it somehow.
Still haven’t done it, but it’s still planned in my head as if I will.
Haha, awesome!
The last three paragraphs of this piece are just perfect.
no thank you. Hinkie and the 76ers are getting their just desserts right now.
Did Hinkie trade for and then not re-sign Butler?
Did Hinkie trade for and overpay to re-sign Harris?
Did Hinkie sign an aging center in Horford?
We could discuss the draft misses he did (Okafor in particular), and whether a core of Embiid and Simmons is a decent enough starting point or not, but mismanagement post Hinkie’s expulsion can’t be blamed on him.
I don’t blame him for mismanagement after his firing, but for the same reason he also receives only partial credit for the good things that happened after he was gone. If we’re strictly judging on his actual tenure, his record is: 3 sub-20 win seasons, 3 of 4 lottery picks busted (plus 1 incomplete), and a culture that was so controversial that the league forced him out, which started the domino effect of mismanagement. Hell, Embiid is his crowning achievement and he never played a single game while Hinkie was employed. Does he get credit Embiid’s development under a different front office? If so, he must have some culpability for the risks he took that matured into problems, as well.
To me, the only conclusion you can make without a huge amount of butterfly effect assumptions is that The Process (ie. stacking up as many draft assets as possible without caring about wins for a couple seasons) was a good idea in a vacuum, but whether he’d be able to transition from great asset collector to great GM is unknowable. Right now he’s 0 for 1.
As to your observation that Embiid never played a single game while Hinkie was GM:
Yeah, I agree with the sentiment and recognize Embiid would’ve been very likely to become a star under any GM. Who knows, he might’ve been better under Hinkie.
But I think it goes both directions. If Hinkie never poisons the well instead of planting the tree by drafting a third consecutive center (Okafor) ahead of Porzingis, then the 76ers never have to mortgage their future for a third playmaker in Butler or Harris.
They didn’t have to mortgage their future for a third playmaker. Nothing Hinkie did forced them to do that. But things Hinkie did enabled them to do it.
Literally, the best team the Sixers have had was the one Hinkie left (yes, I’m including Simmons as a Hinkie move since he was the concesus #1). They’ve done nothing but spend assets and get worse since.
A better word choice on my part would’ve been “never choose to mortgage” rather than “never have to mortgage.” Either way, the negative consequences of picking Okafor over Porzingis remained after he was gone.
Anyway, my point here isn’t that Hinkie’s a bad GM candidate. I’d be excited if we got him. I just think we have far more proof that his strategy was smart than proof that he is the best person to deploy that strategy. For instance, the article references a few times his looking toward 3pt shooting and fast pace as important aspects of future success in the NBA. Obviously that came true, but the practical outcome of his assessment was choosing Michael Carter Williams (a guard who’s a career 25% 3pt shooter) and two traditional bigs (Noel and Okafor). Vision is crucial, but so is the finesse to deliver outcomes matching your ideals.
“A third consecutive center ahead of Porzingis.”
Kris is one of your better 7’3″ shooting guards.
height = position
Yes, he gets credit for Embiid. He hired Brett Brown who developed Embiid.
So does he get blame for limiting Embiid with Brett Brown’s coaching if Embiid’s next coach ends up using him more successfully? Or can the impact of his decision making only ever get extrapolated if it’s positive?
Embiid has been limited by Brown’s coaching?
I don’t know. My point isn’t to assess Brown’s coaching,
Goal posts moved.
You basically said he shouldn’t get credit for Embiid’s development but are now saying Embiid hasn’t been developed enough? Or can the impact of his decision making only ever get extrapolated if it’s negative?
I didn’t move any goalposts. My argument isn’t whether or not Embiid is developed enough. It’s that the impact of his bad decisions didn’t stop the day he was fired, just as the impact of his good decisions eventually made them a 50-win team. Whether he could’ve taken them from 50 wins to championship is not knowable, but we should at least consider the possibility that the guy who picked Noel over McCollum, Carter-Williams over Giannis, and Okafor over Porzingis might’ve bumped into some problems that were as bad or worse than what the succeeding FO did.
I think the difference with those examples is that those were pretty much consensus picks. Noel was projected higher, but injuries were a concern. Right before Noel, you had Cody Zeller and Alex Len. Immediately after, McLemore and Caldwell-Pope. It was a risky pick that didn’t work out. Especially since Embiid came along a year later. But to Hinkie’s credit he took BPA Embiid instead of worrying about fit with Noel. McCollum was picked 10th, right ahead of MCW, and Giannis wasn’t until 4 picks later (after Steven Adams, Kelly Olynyk, and Shabazz Muhammad). Even Okafor was a consensus pick at #3 that year. These aren’t like Vlade bucking the trend to get his guy, which turns out to be completely wrong. These are selections likely a majority of knowledgeable people would have made.
Hinkie also traded MCW while he was reigning ROY for the pick that ended up being Mikal Bridges. Probably got max value there. And Okafor was reportedly on the block in the middle of an all-rookie season for the Nets 2016 1st (which ended up being Jaylen Brown).
My point is there is a whole lot of context for the examples you are citing. Hinkie had some fuck-ups for sure, but bottom line is he put that team on the track to relevance by accumulating assets and attempting to maximize their value.
Brought this up a few weeks ago regarding Phoenix. A team can miss on some draft picks, but if they get enough bites at the apple, they should eventually land a high end talent or two in the draft.
Which was really Hinkie’s point, IMO.
Someone should alert the Sacramento Kings. 11 top-10 and 5 top-5 draft picks in the last 12 years.
That’s the biggest conundrum IMO. Despite changes in management and coaches and even ownership, the Kings continually whiff on draft picks. Year after year after year.
I agree with all of this and would never suggest Vlade is a better GM than Hinkie.
To your point about MCW, that trade ended up being a 2013 11th pick (MCW) for a 2018 10th pick. That’s essentially a lateral move that took 5 years just to get back to even value, and it’s a much worse outcome than picking the right guy (Giannis).
With Noel, that pick was acquired by trading Jrue. The deal ended up being Jrue for 2013 6th (Noel), 2014 12th (Saric), 2015 35th (Willy Hernangomez), and 2018 26th (post-Hinkie selection). In theory those four picks for Jrue is amazing, but in practice Noel, Saric, Hernangomez, and a 2018 26th pick is bad value for Jrue. Again, his vision was better than his ability to produce a positive outcome.
Same for Okafor – great job tanking to put yourself in position to get an all star, bad job missing that all star.
It seems to me that finding a GM humble enough to lose games and take the consensus BPA is the easy part. You or I could follow the trail Hinkie blazed there. The hard part is having the personnel, infrastructure, contacts, etc to know when to ignore consensus BPA and trade up for Luka, trade down for Tatum instead of Fultz, reach for Giannis, etc. Hinkie’s record in that respect is pretty pedestrian. Being better at it than Vlade is too low of a bar.
On the MCW trade, the pick would have conveyed sooner if the Lakers kept dodging bullets and remaining in the top 3 for a couple years. But we’re talking about MCW, a player who probably wouldn’t get you a top 59-protected 2nd nowadays. And Hinkie got a lottery pick.
Seems he had the same in mind for Okafor. His value at an all-time high during his rookie year, and Boston was offering a top 3 pick in 2016. Ownership likely nixed it.
Point is not to compare to Vlade. Hinkie ate Vlade for lunch and got a pick out of it. I think Hinkie is right up there with Ainge, Ujiri, Morey, and Presti. All of those executives had their screw-ups as well. But they built sustainable contenders, just like Hinkie did. All while accumulating assets to help ensure continued success. Had Hinkie been able to see his plan through, I don’t think we’d even be able to entertain the possibility of someone like him coming here. It’s a golden opportunity (if he even wants it). A real chance to move the needle in my opinion.
All Hinkie did was tank, lose games, and get lucky with the lottery ping pong balls. His was not even really good at drafting players, taking the obvious choices in Simons and Embiid but whiffing on Okafor and Fultz.
He actually didn’t get lucky in the draft. Moved down one year, was on the number the other two. And Embiid wasn’t the obvious choice at the time.
I’m not sure it takes brilliance to tank the way he did, but it does take some courage. And putting his team in position to get those “obvious choices” was his strategy, no? There’s always a better chance in the top-3 than picking in the 7/8/9 spots year after year.
And he didn’t draft Fultz, think that was Colangelo.
Well, I don’t want to tank and lose games, so I still think it’s a bad idea.
I think that’s what Will’s article is getting at – that might not be Hinkie’s general philosophy, just the one he felt Philly needed at the time.
Having said that, it’s hard to know if Hinkie is a one-trick pony in that regard.
We do that already without even trying.
Putting aside the tanking. He did a pretty nice job with drawing value in trades and finding talent in the 2nd round (Holmes, Jerami Grant) and the G-League (signed Covington and Christian Wood, then Colangelo let him walk).
Yep. Colangelo traded the #3 pick and the 2019 Kings pick (which Hinkie heisted from Vlade two years earlier) to move up to #1 and draft Fultz. Celtics got Tatum.
And that… is where the ceiling of the process may have been severely limited.
I don’t think Hinkie gets owned by Ainge like that. If Philly gets Tatum they might have had their big 3 for a decade.
Yup, if Philly took Tatum they might be chasing a title this year.
Just the thought of that reminded me of the Game of Zones episode that featured Hinkie. It’s something like him locked in a dungeon and he asks someone “How many titles have the 76ers after they drafted Tatum?”
but none of this happens if Hinkie doesn’t fleece Vlade. How does this Kings team look with Tatum over Fox?
I think the Kings still would have taken Fox at #3. Didn’t Vlade say he would have taken Fox at #1 if he had the pick?
But Vlade would have taken Fox at #1, remember?
Ainge said before Tatum had ever played a game that they would’ve picked him #1 overall. I think grabbing the Romeo Langford pick was just icing on the cake.
Here’s some video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oq5N5RPPJj8&t=67
That is true, there are a lot of variables we’ll never know for sure. I mean Ainge could just be blowing smoke, but I believe him. Maybe Hinkie then grabs Fox (knowing the Kings affinity) and fleeces Vlade again for #5 & #10 and gets Isaac and Mitchell. Who knows… Just would’ve loved to see the guy finish what he started. He literally did all the groundwork, took all the criticism, and was canned right before his labor came to fruition.
I wonder if the Okafor pick would be viewed the way it is now if ownership had let Hinkie trade him to the Celtics. Sure, Hinkie screwed the trade value of Okafor and Noel once the team had a legitimate logjam at Center. But it was pretty clear that he took Okafor for two reasons: 1) the Porzingis camp didn’t want him to go to Philadelphia; 2) he picked BPA with the intent of flipping the player later on. It’s pretty clear that the Colangelos stopped him.
https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelphia/philadelphia-sixers/report-jahlil-okafor-was-celtics-target-proposed-blockbuster
I forgot about that. Okafor’s value was at its highest point, since he was averaging 17 points on his way to all-rookie. But it seems Hinkie wanted to flip him for Brooklyn’s unprotected 2016 pick (which yielded Jaylen Brown).
If that goes through, it definitely changes the narrative. I wonder if ownership was losing patience, and trading a rookie in the middle of a promising campaign they just saw as taking it too far.
But once again, Hinkie would have been right.
Ha! The article picture is hilarious!
Just wanted to proudly say that this is the type of in-depth coverage of the Kings that you can’t find anywhere else. This website and the community is absolutely the best part of being a Kings fan.
We may all be rooting for the most hopeless and shit franchise that ever existed but at least we’re all in it together.
Hear hear!
First things first – brilliantly composed and constructed article. What a phenomenal read!
I too have no idea whether or not Hinkie would be the right guy. But you would have to figure that he would only agree to the job if he had close to absolute control over the basketball decisions, and that in itself would be highly encouraging for this dysfunctional excuse for a professional basketball organization.
Again, kudos. Really, really, reeeeeeeally good article. Thanks for what had to have been a lot of time putting it together.
Yeah, this is the good stuff. We are a lucky group.
this is… amazing.
Thanks, Will!
Your 2000-word article, and your picture that is worth a thousand words (that’s 3000 words total!) are both amazing.
You guys are the inverse of the Sacramento Kings. Champions of the sports blog world. 🙂
Holy shit!
Jesus H. Divac!
Extra credit for biegs getting his own card.
This is the best thing I’ve seen in my life.
This is fantastic. This type of stuff is what made that old place and this new place so special.
“The Process” is one of the most talked about and yet least understood sportsball events I can recall in recent sportsball memory.
So much conflation of facts and timelines and so much emotional reaction to some of the concepts of the Process, as opposed to what actually happened and the overall context in which decisions were made and the plan was formulated.
The writing’s prime,
The prose sublime!
It took some time
But it doesn’t rhyme!
This is so good – you’re lucky we’re socially distancing Will!
Nicely done.
This really is a spectacular and thoughtful examination of Hinkie, and of the Philadelphia and Sacramento franchises. Your hard work in managing to put into context nearly a decade of decisions and actions spanning two different organizations has truly resulted in a masterful analysis. You ought to be very proud of this, long-form journalism that’s actually worth the effort to read remains rare, despite the surplus of writers and sites making the attempt.
My inclination toward Hinkie is lessened by the change in draft odds for the worst teams, as you pointed out. I honestly don’t know who ought to be considered, although my gut tells me that it ought to be someone who has shown the kind of forward-looking ideas that Hinkie, in retrospect, had in Philadelphia. As you wrote, Hinkie doesn’t seem to be a one-trick pony, so if the conceptualist who will run the show in Sacramento turns out to be him, I’d say we could do a hell of a lot worse.
Again, just top-level work, Will.
I am the third of four generations of Philadelphia sports fans. A car load of great uncles settled in the Wilmington area after escaping the coal mines of West Virginia, and became dedicated Philadelphia sports fanatics prior to World War II. The most excitement I can personally remember were the Phillies fans of the late 70s and early 80s, and then again in the 2000s when they won so many NL East pennants. Yes, it’s true, Eagles fans are the craziest fans you can imagine, but the winning is fleeting and isn’t sustainable year after year, so that’s a little different.
The Hinkie process years were the most exciting years I’ve ever experienced as a Philadelphia sports fan. I don’t claim to be able to explain it, but it captured the interest of a city like nothing I have ever seen before. Memories of fans following Saric through the airport exclaiming The Homie is here!, live-casting his trip through baggage claim.
It wasn’t without friction though, media and friends alike were angry and divided, and some of those rifts seem to be permanent. People are still dying on those hills in Philadelphia.
IMHO you are very right in wanting to see that happen here in Sacramento. Years from now the history of that episode in Philadelphia will be written with just a few sentences, and I don’t think they’ll ever really be able to explain what it was like for fans.
Question:
Does anyone know how legit that list is? It was from before that external agency was appointed, right?
Basically a bunch of media members leaked a ton of names the 2 days after Vlade resigned. Most likely these were names said media member has a positive relationship with. We’ve heard basically nothing of note since.
I’m not sure they were leaked. More just a bunch of spitballin’. I think anybody would have put together a pretty similar list without any inside info at all.
First of all, what a great read. Thank you so much for putting so much time and energy into this piece, the effort really shows.
However, and I know that I’m in the minority here, I don’t believe Hinkie is right for this team. You’re right to point out that “The Process” is frequently oversimplified as a synonym for tanking. A better description might be not allowing the norms and customs of the NBA and the lure of adequacy to distract from the pursuit of championship level success. And while for 28 out of 30 NBA teams this is sound advice, I just can’t get myself to feel this is the remedy for the Kings.
The problem with the Kings under Ranadive has never been a lack of innovation. We’ve innovated our way to the bottom of the standings year after year. It’s never been falling for the norms and customs of the NBA, we drafted Bagley over the consensus pick contrary to those norms and customs.
The problem with the Kings under Ranadive has been a fundamental inability to consistently make competent, well thought out moves, either in isolation or as a part of a grander scheme. At this point in the Kings life, I think the ownership group shouldn’t aim to build a championship contender against all odds, or to prove the NBA wrong. I think the aim should be to string together a season’s worth of competent moves, each bringing us closer to respectability. And I don’t believe that Hinkie is the man for that job.
As you noted in your piece, Hinkie doesn’t have the most solid draft record. Moreover, aside from tanking, the thing his tenure is most widely known for is its perpetual roster turnover. While he could get away with this in Philadelphia, in a franchise with some level of success and in a market that NBA players are drawn to regardless of prior season outcomes, the same can not be said for Sacramento. We lack the sort of credibility to be seen as an innovator or up-and-comer. It’s easy to see Vivek smiling when he hires Hinkie, but what happens when the articles start coming out questioning his first major roster shift? His second? His third? What happens when ticket sales plummet after he trades De’Aaron for a high draft pick, whether or not it’s the right move? I just don’t think we have the ownership, market, or reputation to be at the cutting edge of basketball.
While I would certainly be interested in a Sam Hinkie hire and would likely prefer it to Dumars, what I really want more than anything is for the Kings to hire a GM who makes the right moves in an effort to make this a competent franchise. It’s like we’re watching footage of Lillard nailing half court threes and saying “why not us?” Sure, that’d be swell, but maybe we should start with getting a few players who can hit catch and shoots from the corner, then work our way out from there.
I don’t believe a championship banner is anywhere in the Kings near future. But I’d love to see a playoff run or two, then, after that happens, we can talk about next steps and shooting for the moon.
So you mean to tell me all this BS that’s happening to the Kings is an excuse by Vivek to hire Hinkie as the GM?
Vivek owns the team, he doesn’t need to make excuses to hire or fire anyone.
This is just about perfect. I hope it can creep upward toward the higher echelons of Kingsdom. I was always very jealous of what Philadelphia was doing. Think Hinkie would be a bold hire.
This just has to be posted in this thread…
When I think about Hinkie’s “process,” the actual timeline offers some nice perspective when compared to other team building processes, such as the Vivek Era.
Sixers’ Timeline.
The Sixers made the playoffs in 2011-12. They made the playoffs again in 2017-18 after a 52 win season. Their entire playoff drought was five (5) years. But that isn’t even the Hinkie timeline.
Hinkie Timeline.
Hinkie was hired in June of 2013. The Sixers had just missed the playoffs (so that year of the 5 is not even on his watch) after winning only 34 games.
Hinkie was gone by April of 2016. His entire tenure as GM was less than three (3) years. So, yes: the team was crap during those three years (19, 18, and 10 wins), but folks seem to remember The Process as being some long and drawn out ineptitude when it was not. It was quick and decisive.
The 2016-17 Sixers enjoyed an 18 win improvement, winning 28 games without rookie Ben Simmons and having Embiid for only 31 games. For perspective, 28 wins matches or exceeds seven (7) of the Kings last 12 seasons.
The following year, with a full season of Simmons and over 60 games from Embiid, the Sixers won 52 games. They followed that up with another 50+ win season and a .589 winning percentage this year.
So, to recap: 5 year playoff drought in all, only 3 under Hinkie. It took Hinkie’s process 4 seasons to build a 50 win team. Now, compare that to Sacramento’s timeline, or Minny from 2004-2016, or the Suns, or the Knicks.
Would any Kings fan really say no if we could go back in time and tear it all down for three years when Vivek took over in order to build a team that wins 50 games each year four seasons later? Of course not. And given that, why would we say no to that right now?
Yeah, for the folks who say, “But Hinkie will tank a bunch of seasons away!” I say, “the Kings haven’t exactly been winning the last 14 seasons.”
At least the losing would be in service of some sort of plan. Instead of this random, haphazard, direction-less losing we’ve been seeing.
Yup, if he were to blow things up it would at least be losing with a purpose, rather than losing while trying to win.
I will say, that’s what intrigues me about Hinkie. It’s the ability to draw up a long-term plan based on rational strategies, expectations, and efficiencies, and stick to it. Patience can be a real market advantage.
That is also why I don’t think Vivek will hire him. My guess is he wants results now and doesn’t want the honor of being the owner with the longest playoff drought in league history.
I fully believe the Kings will eclipse 15 seasons without the playoffs, but I don’t think Vivek will take it willingly.
Agreed! We win when we should lose, walk when we should run, pay when we should save, draft stiffs over studs. we Don’t need a fresh innovative GM. We have Vivinovation!
Fucking sad really.
Hinkie relied on luck as well. He did get a 1st and 3rd pick in his tenure. He was also lucky Embiid fell to 3rd that year because of his foot problems.
Is that entirely luck though? That was sort of the point of bottoming out.
And Embiid was a risk at three even, for the exact reason you noted.
well yes. But bottoming out and staying in the top 3 is still considerable luck. Also look at that draft. Embiid is the only all star in that entire first round. Lots of decent/good role players, but nothing close to his talent.
From what I recall, the other teams passed on him because of his injury history. He was a high risk/high reward player. Now is that luck for Hinkie or other teams not willing to risk as much as he would?
Probably both. He drafted Embiid after drafting Noel the year before (who also sat our his rookie year due to injury).
I always wonder if he fully intended to flip at least one of Okafor, Embiid, and Noel. At the time Cs, were still highly prized. The league hadn’t quite moved to the perimeter yet. Since Hinkie saw that as the future, I wonder if he wasn’t trying to profit on other teams still valuing those guys. It clearly wasn’t a strategy that worked out either way, but it always felt to me that he was drafting them to be trade chips.
I think he just took the BPA at the time, which is what you should do with top 10 picks, regardless of positional need.
It ain’t rocket surgery. Pick the BPA then adjust the roster accordingly. I mean, if the Kings get the #1 pick in 2021, they had better take Cunningham and it shouldn’t matter if they already have Fox on an extended deal.
It does appear that Okafor was on the table at the 2016 deadline for the Nets 2016 unprotected 1st (article referenced by jdwhit above). But possibly ownership stepped in? Jahlil was having a nice rookie year, so I could see that happening.
If that happens and they draft Jaylen Brown at #3 that year, that changes a lot of the narrative, imo.
And it wasn’t like Okafor wasn’t consensus at that pick. It’s not like a Bagley situation.
Actually, they would have had to been unlucky to stay out of the top three:
2014: 2nd best lottery odds, ended up with the third pick
2015: 3rd best lottery odds, ended up with the third pick
2016: Best lottery odds, ended up with the first pick
I’d agree that he’s a decent risk pick there, but I don’t think (for this particular debate) you can look at it in hindsight. IIRC most mocks had Embiid in the 4 to 6 range.
Somewhat unrelated, but I remember in those Grantland videos that Pete tried to trade up to #3 to draft Embiid, and Hinkie wouldn’t do it.
A 10 win season would really have me questioning my season tickets. 3 straight sub-20 win seasons and I would nope right out.
That’s not quick and explosive, that’s 3 years of torture
What have the last 14 years been?
They’ve been bad but not awful? I can deal with bad – wins still make for a fun evening – but paying for my (awesome but also pricey) seats to watch 3 straight years of teams as devoid of talent as the process Sixers requires a level of masochism that I simply cannot muster.
Dunno, I’d love to watch a couple of fifty win seasons and consistent playoff appearances/wins.
Sure, me too. But why do you think tanking is necessary to get there? Or even a viable path?
3 years of an empty arena and we likely don’t *have* a team.
I’m not sure it’s either necessary or viable. But we’re answering this question, right?
Whether that’s actually necessary here is another question entirely, and per Will’s article, there’s no reason to believe Hinkie would need to tear this down to the studs.
And let’s not get crazy – that arena wouldn’t be empty, and this team isn’t going anywhere regardless.
The answer to that question is “Yes, of course” because it wouldn’t cost me tens of thousands of dollars for seats to watch a team get blown by 30+ points on a routine basis, often with the opposing team resting their stars who might otherwise make the show worthwhile.
The process-Sixers were *horrendous*. Those teams had no redeeming qualities – their young players weren’t the least bit exciting and the future was deeply questionable with Embiid hurt seemingly forever followed by Simmons missing his rookie year as well. I totally would have bailed and just watched from home – a team that only wins 10 games in the Eastern conference sucks on level I can scarcely imagine.
I think you hit on something. Embiid sat out for TWO whole seasons, Saric remained overseas for two years, and Simmons sat out for one. Had those three played, would those years have been as bad?
It begs the question, were the 76ers really as bad as because of “The Process” or because of those three players not playing?
Simmons wasn’t drafted until after that 10-win wet fart of a season and Embiid finally played the year that Simmons sat out but the “here we go again” had to have been deafening in Sixers land.
Assuming you’re not transparently tanking, an Embiid-led team otherwise filled with mediocre talent is probably about as good as the Boogie-led Kings teams were – you could pencil in 20-30 wins and a mid-to-late lottery pick.
I’m not sure Saric really moves the needle though – the Sixers had Richaun Holmes and Robert Covington and a few other guys that have turned out to be decent enough players but they lacked anyone you’d want to be even your 3rd best player on a good team.
I think what some, myself included, are alluding to, is that things have been really really bad in Sac for longer than my children have been alive. I really don’t think Hinkie could stink it up anymore than it already is.
Hinkie dismantled a fringe playoff team that had just missed the playoffs for one year, and they had an All-Star in Holiday. Hinkie wouldn’t need to do much dismantling here. That’s even if he follows the same “process” that he did in Philly.
Honestly the biggest thing he could probably do is trade Fox for some future picks and other assets, and I’m not sure that moves the needle that much for the Kings in terms of wins and losses.
Yeah, I’m gonna have to disagree with this.
They’ve been awful.
Ah, you prefer your pain to be long-lasting.
I’m a Bills fan too. It’s kind of my jam.
Fair enough.
I’m just gonna sort of disagree with you there.
I just want an offseason where I don’t have to question the level of forethought my team’s GM is capable of.
Kings fans are certainly used to this part:
necessitated a zig while our competitors comfortably zagged
and Vivek said….
I see your zig and raise you a BAGS!
Really nice write-up. Covered most everything.
And still after reading it, I want Hinkie nowhere near this team. I offer a control group for Hinkie: Former Magic GM Otis Smith.
Otis Smith established a rapport with a respected coach, drafted well enough, and saw his team reach the NBA Finals. He then clashed with a egomaniacal franchise player we now know had a knack for this in other future stops, and Smith was summarily dismissed after a disappointing playoff run and rumors of damaged relationships. He has not worked as an NBA GM since, despite us being linked to him at one point. Smith was replaced by Rob Hennigan, who came from a wildly respected franchise and acquired and even developed young talent but was replaced after abysmal results compounded and progress stalled.
Now let’s turn to Hinkie. I remember his letter. It struck me as the self-important ramblings of a nutcase. It was the kind of letter that had smug all over it and likely resulted in an audible groan from anyone who read it. More bluntly: it read, to me, like Hinkie was trying to make himself out to be a martyr.
And guess what- it worked! People continually refer to him, albeit in muted tones at times, as some data-driven genius who was misunderstood by a meddlesome market. There could be an element of truth in that, of course. But it doesn’t mean the other isn’t also true. The 76ers are poorly run, and Brand looks in way over his head. Hiring Colangelo was a mess. Also, Hinkie was a self-important tinkerer who alienated his front office and owners while slyly suggesting he had the answers, but people just didn’t realize it yet.
Unlike Smith, Hinkie’s team never reached the playoffs, let alone the Finals. The respected coach he brought in was also fired. The resources helped the team reach the next level, but not complete the transformation. Like Smith, Hinkie hasn’t been a GM again, yet we have been among the only teams linked to him since his departure. We hear a lot of pining about Hinkie. Why? Does 20 draft picks mean he knew some secret? Does the data and analytics blind people?
All told, I wouldn’t hire either. You want to change things? You want to look like you’re swinging for fences? Hire someone who is currently employed and rumored among other competitive jobs, or seen as a savvy executive with the potential for more.
We don’t need to go here again. Pete D had reams of notebook paper full of strange algorithms and used them to wow Vivek during his interview. It was nice. The person with the knowledge didn’t harness it properly, and it was clear it was compensating for other shortcomings or biases. Hinkie isn’t Pete D., but the impression I fear he’d carve on Vivek is similar. And all told, I expect it would end in the same result.
Solid points, all around. Do you have some names of GM candidates you’d like to see interviewed?
There are a lot of great names, currently employed, that if I were VIvek/Joe I would inquire on. Among them:
Webster (unlikely)
Zarren (ditto)
Mark Hughes
Trent Redden
Shane Battier
Sean Marks
Bill Branch
Jason Wexler
Tayshaun Prince
Anthony McClish
David Mowbray
That would be my initial shortlist.
Part of me doesn’t want a former player as GM. Maybe I think they have some kind of positional or game styles biases. See: Vlade. Aside from Ainge, how many of today’s ace GMs are also ex-NBA players?
Maybe Pat Riley? But not many, for sure.
I was going to add Sean Marks to that list as well. That dude has done some brass balls moves in Brooklyn and may have a title for them next season.
On a side, I’m interested to see how James Jones does in Phoenix. That guy is only a few years removed from playing and is now running the Suns. Didn’t he go directly from playing to front office staff?
I just did a quick look. Past 30 years,here were the former NBA players who became executives and won a title:
Jerry West
Pat Riley
Jack McCloskey
Mitch Kupchak
Danny Ainge
And….Joe Dumars
I feel like this new generation of players working their way up the ranks will be better equipped to handle the duties of a modern GM.
I respect your take on this and absolutely think there is some Pete D. that inherently comes with not just Hinkie, but anyone that comes in with an analytics base. We as a fanbase were burned hard once.
I’m not sure how long it’s been since you’ve seen that letter, but with some years worth of space between the resignation and now, you might go back and give it a look over again on a boring night with nothing else to do. He states right up front that he loves reading investors letters and basically says that’s the format he was choosing to write in.
This was always meant to be a comprehensive review of his time as a manager and not simply a resignation. One man’s trash is another’s treasure as I found that it never rambled, only brought up points from a variety of other subjects to help make his point. He does this on pretty much in every podcast and interview he does, so while you may see smug, self-important or nutcase, I think he’s just an intelligent guy trying to put certain concepts into layman’s terms or terms that the ownership group would find easier to understand.
Also, I’d keep in mind that he also wrote this for a particular audience who turned around and leaked it immediately.
All in all, I don’t think the “data-driven genius who was misunderstood by a meddlesome market” is realistically akin to what people think anymore. Cult figure? Absolutely. But, I’d say even his biggest fan boys understand and discuss his weaknesses, and none would call him misunderstood. He was understood perfectly by the NBA, understood so clearly the applied pressure on the Sixers ownership group to hire someone above him to reign his philosophies to a more palatable, acceptable level. There was some meddling by the NBA, sure, precisely because, the Philly fans and organization all understood him perfectly and signed off on it.
Again, the Kings have a crop of candidates that are less risky with similar upside as Sam Hinkie. As someone outside of the front office, I found we (fans) have a leg up in knowing Hinkie’s inner working via the leaked resignation letter and think that they fit Vivek’s former plans for the Kings to a tee.
Also, glad you included McClish in your list. I think he could end up being a finalist for the job.
All the algorithms in the world are worthless without adequate inputs. That is scouting and information not easily manipulated by street savvy GM’s and owners. Vivek is probably a 170 IQ guy, but he lacks the savvy that only comes from being intimate with your craft. He will continue to out think the league, while the league outfox’s him.
I have a related question, is the reason the Kings didn’t spend money on scouting was because of incompetence or was it because they were cheap and weren’t allowed to?
well there is that option too
When the Kings first hired Vlade they attempted to bring in David Morway, but he did not accept the position because he could not get a commitment from the team to fully staff the training and scouting departments.
To be fair, they have done a better job of that in recent years.
Bratz with the knowledge.
The big mistakes are so big that we sometimes forget all the little minor fuck ups that happened.
I struggled writing this at times because every time I went back and researched a screw-up we’ve seen in the last 7 years, I’d find 3 more in the comments that I’d forgotten about and wanted to mention those as well.
For whatever reason, reading old Ailene Voisin articles is a hobby of mine. They have a flow to them over the years: optimism > here we go again > have they finally learned? > rinse and repeat. She was pretty plugged in though, so there were always little scoops in there that often went unnoticed or forgotten over time.
Oh man, there’s a name from the past.
I love that it is still his avatar 😉
In short, Vivek promised the NBA’s version of Wakanda and what he’s delivered is nothing short of Robocop’s Detroit.
Uh, would that mean that this is relevant here?
Absolutely terrifying.
No, this is terrifying.
Managing partner for 1000 years!
Your Move Creep!
Bravo. This article was everything I expected and more. I think Hinkie is the best option for the Kings next GM. I know there are several good options out there. The most touted being the likes of Webster and Zarren. With someone like Redden being a real possibility. Those seem fine.
The thing about those candidates is that I don’t know how much any of them has to do with their current organizations success. Webster works under Ujiri. Zarren under Ainge. And Redden is with the Clippers under Winger, with Jerry West as a consultant. I mean, they could be great. But they could be like the Alvin Gentry’s of GM-ing for all we know. Great in an assistant capacity, but found to be lacking when they are the top guy.
But Hinkie’s done it. His oft-maligned methods have been proven successful. Sure he had some misses along the way. But bottom line he took a team from NBA purgatory (the worst place to be), and laid all the groundwork to return them to relevance and contention.
If given the chance to see his plan to completion, who knows? But it could be reason enough for him to come back. The only question is whether Vivek will give him full control… but if that’s not happening it doesn’t matter who we hire.
#HereWeHinkie
I also recall Vivek saying that fans would get food/drink delivered to their seat via drones….the top level doesn’t even have cup holders Vivek!!! For someone who’s that smart, he sure is a moron.
I remember him saying he was going to bring the Monarch’s back.
He did say that he’d bring a championship to Sacramento.
Hinkie would not be a good choice and was a disaster ! Why else did the league step in to stop the tanking ! Sixers improved by operating like a normal NBA team after his firing ! He also traded Jrue Holiday for the right to draft Nerlens Noel which did nothing for Philly! When you win 20% of games for years that is not a plan but just a cop out called the Process ! Kings need to hire a proven Winner – period !
As I read this, I read it in Grant’s voice.
I naturally did as well… It’s absolutely perfect to catch the wording and cadence of Peaches.
“OK, so Philly is now a consistent playoff team, but have they won any championships recently!! Not so great, huh?!”
The fun part of writing this comment is that I am starting to forget Grant’s annoying catchphrases…such a relief!
I like Jrue well enough, but it’s not like he’s leading teams to the playoffs year in and year out.
Whether you like it or not, that was an actual plan. I doubt Philly would be in the position they are now without it.
The Sixers best season came by simply playing the guys Hinkie assembled.
Also, he turned Jrue into Noel (#6), Saric (#12), 2017 #3 (That the Sixers had traded away pre-Hinkie), and two 2nd round picks that I don’t have the energy to chase down right now.
They stepped in to stop it because it was working and he was making a mockery of the league with trade heist after trade heist.
Dude, the league changed the lottery odds because of the way Hinkie manipulated the system.
Good piece Will. Enjoyed it.
The one thing that scares me is Hinkie kinda feels like the George Karl of GMs. The “evil genius blackballed by the league for not playing nice” vibes are a little worrisome. I don’t think it’s a dealbreaker, but his previous tactics may not have sit well with rival execs and player agents. Agents, specifically, probably have legitimate financial gripes. One under discussed part of Hinkie’s tenure was his use of CBA loopholes to get above the salary floor. That kinda stuff can rub agents and players the wrong way.
The other Karl-esque aspect is that bringing in a guy like Hinkie requires complete buy-in from ownership. Vivek can’t just like the idea of Hinkie, then not go all in.
I’ll admit I felt that a bit too in the beginning but I think the difference is… Karl was hyping himself up there for a lot of it and the media played along with it. Hinkie has stayed entirely out of the limelight (unless you count going on a few investing podcasts as limelight) and his hype comes from fans with zero love from media members.
(also, Karl actually won during much of his career so… there is that to complicate it)
Yeah it’s not a perfect analogy even though there are some parallels. The other being that Sacramento was the only team willing to give Karl a job, and the same may be true with Hinkie.
Just in general, I could see Hinkie looking at the situation, and seeing how turning this franchise around would be a nice redemption arc. His time in Silicon Valley would also give him a certain level of respect from Vivek that typical GMs might not get. He could probably speak in that weird tech speak and jedi mind trick Vivek into giving him everything he asks for.
Wait a second here…are you saying the Kings might actually hire a GM who has heard of this thing called a CBA, much less knows it well enough to carve out loopholes?
This feels like a little easter egg added for me specifically:
I don’t think people realize how often Vivek likes to name drop his “good friend” Steve Jobs in interviews. It just seems like clout theft like he’s on same level or whatever.
When discussing Steve Jobs:
Same level? According to Vivek, Steve Jobs put him on a pedestal:
I totally believe this happened, Vivek being too starstruck and too highly intelligent, got played by Steve Jobs, and still isn’t aware what he lost.
And that’s why Vivek is great at running tech companies, not basketball teams.
Ive come up with the perfect plan. If the Rockets lose, then the Kings give the Rockets one of their second round picks in exchange for Daryl Morey’s contract. He becomes President of bball ops., then he hires his former protege Sam Hinkie as GM.
Man, if the Rockets lose, it’s gonna be a shit storm in Houston. It’s going to be glorious.
you really think they clean house after one year of their “no center” experiment?
They’ve got zero draft capital and two max contracts that play the same position.
I think Morey and D’Antoni may be out. In all honesty, they could use Hinkie. That team will needs to be torn down and rebuilt because, like you say, they have zero draft capital. They also have zero cap space to sign anyone this offseason and they are getting old.
I don’t think Hinkie would take the job. Pretty sure Morey turned down the job in Philly out of respect for Hinkie. I get your point though that the Rockets need someone like Hinkie to clean house.
I’m going to find it hilarious if OKC somehow gets through Houston AND the Clippers. They already own something like 8 first rounders from those two teams, it would be so sweet for them to also beat them. It’s even better because they are led by the guy they each had.
I’m no CP3 fan, but if he beats Houston and the Clippers, that will be something.
It would be beautiful.
I could be on board with that.
Man, the NBA would just love us. Morey (the guy who caused a shitstorm with China), and Hinkie (the guy who made them change the lottery rules). Sign me up.
If the King’s were to hire Hinkie, I’d love to see him bring on a high level guy with a great scouting/player dev background. The same way I like the Webster/Tolzman (sp?) pairing, I’d like to see Hinkie’s with a scouting guru to run the identification of draft & FA targets.
Tangential question, if the Rockets flame out and fire Morey, could the Kings over pay him to take the GM job?
I would be more than okay with that outcome.
The better question is: Would Vivek hand him the keys to the castle?
I’m late to this party and I honestly didn’t read the whole thing. But.
I have a hard time understanding how a fan base that’s suffered through 14 straight losing seasons can be so on board with the idea of hiring a GM whose “process” included 7 straight years of intentional tanking to ” replete the talent pool” en route to multiple first round exits once said talent was amassed and still hasn’t really even sniffed the finals.
And nevermind the league office had to step in to officially remove him.
I just don’t get the appeal.
I don’t understand how a team that’s suffered through 14 straight seasons can continue down the same path of irrelevance year after year. Hinkie tore down a team that was in NBA purgatory (which is the hardest place to recover from), and after 4 losing seasons (the last of which was an 18-win improvement), became a 50-win team and missed the eastern conference finals by one miraculous shot.
He had a plan, executed it and the Sixers are relevant. He laid all the groundwork for that team. Although, who knows how much better they could have been if he hadn’t been replaced right as they were ascending.
As others mentioned he didn’t trade two lottery picks to pick Fultz. He accumulated a war chest of assets which have since been squandered. Cap space tied up in an aging Al Horford and one of the NBA’s worst contracts in Tobias Harris.
I’d just like to see him able to finish what he began in Philly. And I’d love to see him given that opportunity here.
I’ll take another 4 years of losing with a plan over whatever in the eff we’ve been doing for over a decade.
Hiring Hinkie doesn’t change the path we’re going down…
I think it might.
Logically, you’re right. With Hinkie at the helm we’d at least know ahead of time that we’re tanking for the next 4 years, ticket sales will plummet and games will be affordable to attend again…lol
Might be less than 4 years. I think they can do it in 3. And those could be exciting years watching our two top 5 draft picks in 2021 become legit all-stars. Doesn’t have to be like the process, with Embiid missing 2 years and Simmons sitting out one.
Badge Legend