SB Nation Philly: All Posts by Derek Bodner

Sixers to work out Tim Hardaway Jr, Isaiah Canaan

2013-06-11T19:00:56Z

The 76ers will work out two more prospects in the coming weeks in Tim Hardaway Jr. (Michigan) and Isaiah Canaan (Murray State).

Hardaway Jr. is the higher ranked of the two, averaging 14.2 points, 4.5 rebounds and 2.4 assists as a junior for the NCAA tournament runner-up Michigan Wolverines, capping off a college career that saw him start every game he played over his three year career. His improvement as a jump shooter was his most significant development this past season, which turned him into a legitimate prospect. Hardaway upped his three point shooting percentage from 28.3% to 35.8% his junior year, improving his proficiency in catch and shoot situations substantially.

Canaan became the focal point of the Murray State offense over the past two seasons, averaging 22.4 points, 3.4 rebounds and 4.3 assists per game during his senior season. He's overall a very good shooter, but he's going to be fighting an uphill battle due to his size. You can read a scouting report I wrote for Draft Express about him here. He's currently projected to go in the second round.

Follow all the latest news about the 2013 NBA draft from at our NBA Draft headquarters.

Julius Erving And The Loss Of Innocence

2013-06-11T12:00:06Z

By the time I was old enough to start watching basketball, Julius Erving was in the twilight of his career. He still scored -- 18.1 and 16.8 points per game during the last two seasons of his career -- and his teams still had moderate success, winning 54 games in 1985-1986. But he was nothing close to the player he once was.

But his presence was still larger than life, and I was drawn to him. My father talked with reverence about him. My older friends tried to emulate him on the basketball court. For as much as Charles Barkley entertained me, Dr. J was who I wanted to be. I do not think there is any exaggeration when I say that I doubt I would be as in love with basketball today if Dr. J wasn't with the 76ers.

He was a legend.

When I was 10, Dr. J was scheduled to attend a basketball camp in my home town of Emmaus, Pennsylvania. Dr. J, in my home town?! No way. I had to attend. I eagerly signed up and waited, only to find out the week before the camp that Erving couldn't attend. We got Greg Anthony instead. Anthony at that time was entering the second season of a nondescript NBA career. I was devastated, or at least my 10 year old self was devastated. But he was a busy man, I reckoned, and I held no grudge. I still got to meet an NBA player, after all.

My loss of innocence in regards to athletes would come much later.

Fast forward to 1997 and things started to unravel. Erving had signed on to be Executive Vice President of the Orlando Magic in what was largely a public relations role. The man had spent practically the entirety of his adult life carrying leagues on his back, from trying to keep the ABA relevant to gaining back the goodwill of disillusioned NBA fans. This kind of role seemed perfect for Erving as he transitioned to the next phase of his career in basketball.

This is when his personal life started to unravel. It started with his son, Cory, who had been in and out of rehab and was charged with burglarizing a car in 1998. Questions about how much Erving was around, and whether or not that had any impact on the troubles Cory was having, lingered, but we had no idea about the particulars. For all we knew Dr. J had found some way to balance the seemingly impossible task of living an NBA life while being there for his kids. He had certainly earned the benefit of the doubt up to that point.

The story of Cory, of course, ended tragically. While some trace amounts of cocaine were found in his system, indicating that he had done the drug in the days leading up to the crash, the coroner determined that they were at insufficient levels to impact his driving ability. The crash appeared to legitimately be an accident, something everybody in America could empathize with Erving about.

But by that time the ruse of Julius Erving was already starting to wear off. Months before the Cory Erving tragedy, one of Dr. J's offspring was in the news over very different circumstances. The South Florida Sun-Sentinel had figured out that Erving was the father of Alexandra Stevenson, an 18 year old tennis phenom having a coming out party at Wimbledon.

Erving denied it, briefly, then finally admitted to it as he was left with little recourse: there was the minor, but pesky, detail that Stevenson's birth certificate had listed him as the father. As the details came out, the aura of Julius Erving started to fade. He had only met his daughter once, at a basketball camp when all he could say to her was to ask her whether she would like an autograph, even though he knew who she was at the time.

It didn't end there. During Julius and Turquoise Erving's 2003 divorce we learned about another child of Erving's born out of wedlock, Jules Madden, then aged 5. His mother, Dorys Madden, would eventually become Julius Erving's second wife, and the couple would have two more children together.

Not to mention the leaking of a sex tape featuring Julius Erving and someone other than his wife.

It was at this point that I lost any and all faith in athletes being role models, at least off the court. I was in college then, at no point expecting to ever set foot in an NBA locker room, but the aura of athletes had worn off. 5 years earlier there was no athlete who I held in higher regard than Julius Erving. He was a legend in my mind, both on and off the court.

Definition of legend
noun
1a traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but not authenticated:
the legend of King Arthur

It's not that I developed a hatred for Julius Erving after all of this happened, or even a dislike. While I was initially stunned and disappointed, the fall from grace Erving experienced didn't make me re-think everything I thought I knew about the great Doctor, much in the same way that Magic Johnson's troubles a decade earlier hadn't.

The fall of the previously untouchable great Doctor served as a reality check for my college self. Legends, by definition, are not authenticated, and when you try to examine them as fact their weaknesses often show.

I have now interviewed Erving twice in my time covering the 76ers, exchanging a hand shake with the man who practically made me fall in love with the sport. In my years of interviewing college and professional basketball players, I rarely if ever get star struck when I meet an athlete anymore, but The Doctor still had that impact on me. The man, despite not being perfect, despite making decisions that I strongly disagreed with, was still larger than life.

Erving's tale, to me, became more about the constant evolution of the role that media had in sports. The more we cover these athletes, the more human they become. Legends are virtually impossible to maintain in the internet age, with 24/7 sports networks hovering around a multi-billion dollar industry.

Sometimes you want to go back. Go back to an age where legends can still exist, where we knew about their on-court feats, but not every intricate detail about the human being. But we can't. The age of innocence is gone.

In many ways, it helped me, both as a sports fan and as a member of the media. Why would we expect professional athletes to be models of virtue? They are young adults -- sometimes borderline children -- who just happen to be very good at at a game that we love. Physically mature long before being emotionally so, young adults who often times aren't ready to handle the fame and fortune. I shudder when I think about the mistakes I would have made with the world at my feet in my early twenties. I know that I would not have been ready for that responsibility, so it doesn't shock me when others stumble at times.

This doesn't necessarily describe Erving's situation, at least not the affair that resulted in his second child out of wedlock, as Erving was in his late 40's when that happened. But it served as a cold reminder that just because somebody can palm a basketball doesn't mean that they are infallible.

If you didn't get a chance to watch the NBA TV documentary, "The Doctor", last night, please do. They put together an excellent montage of video footage showing Erving's career take off like a rocket ship, while providing (mostly) excellent first-hand accounts from players, coaches, front office personnel and broadcasters to give you an excellent picture of the impact Dr. J truly made on both the sport and the people around him.

The video footage from Erving's time at Rucker Park is something every basketball fan should watch, and the documentary was overall incredibly informative.

But they left out a few key details that in my mind made the documentary less than it could have been. Namely, Alexandra Stevenson and Jules Madden.

It's not that I think his affairs overshadow the basketball player or the person. We tend to like to paint things as good or bad, black or white, and that is very rarely the case. I have no doubt that Julius Erving is, was, and will be a thoughtful, caring, and compassionate person to many people in his life. He's impacted the lives of millions of people, from those trying to emulate his feats on the basketball court to fans that he took the time to shake hands with and talk to, and everybody in-between.

But he also caused immense pain to Turquoise Brown and Alexandra Stevenson. He spent years lying, hiding, cheating, and manipulating the one he loved, causing her immense pain and anguish. He ignored his biological child for the first 27 years of her life, allowing her to grow up without a father figure in her life, meaning nothing more to her than a paycheck.

To ignore this aspect of his life was a mistake. The documentary went to considerable lengths to talk about Erving's personal life and the tragedy he has experienced, which, admittedly, he has had more than his fair share of.

The documentary got to the death of their son Cory (2000), mentioning it as the tipping point in his relationship with Turquoise, which led to their divorce (2003), while failing to mention a minor detail like Turquoise finding out about the existence of a second out of wedlock child (earlier in 2003)?

His wife found out that her husband had a second child out of wedlock when a friend asked her about "their grandchild" that she had seen Erving playing with. She filed for divorce almost immediately after finding out that information. If you're going to bring up the divorce, it was disingenuous not to mention the *minor* contributing factor of 29 years of extramarital affairs, lying, and deception.

And that's where the documentary fell short. By going to great lengths to showcase his triumphs and what he was able to overcome, both on the basketball court and in his personal life, the documentary adequately showed off the legend of Dr. J. But by failing to acknowledge the mistakes he made, the documentary left Julius Erving as a legend. In truth, the story of Dr. J is much more complicated than that.

Sixers have met with draft prospects Plumlee, Olynyk

2013-06-06T16:15:34Z

As first reported by Michael Barkann of Comcast SportsNet, The 76es have met with two big men prospects in this upcoming draft in Mason Plumlee of Duke and Kelly Olynyk of Gonzaga.

Plumlee, the senior out of Duke, finally put it together this year, averaging 17.1 points, 9.9 rebounds and 1.4 blocks in 34.7 minutes per game for the Blue Devils. He measured in at 7'0.5" at the Chicago Draft Combine, with a 9' standing reach and a 36" max vertical. He will be 23 years old at the time of the draft.

Olynyk averaged 18.8 points and 7.3 rebounds in only 26.5 minutes per game, ranking as one of the prolific scorers in the country on a per-minute basis. He measured 7' in shoes at the combine, with a standing reach of 9' and a 29.5" max vertifical. While Olynyk is one of the most versatile offensive players in the draft, he will struggle to adequately defend and rebound his position. Despite only being a junior, Olynyk is 22 years old as he redshirted a year.

The 76ers have also reportedly worked out C.J. McCollum (Lehigh), Peyton Siva (Louisville), as well as Steven Adams (Pitt), Colton Iverson (Colorado State), Alex Oriakhi (Connecticut), Mouhammadou Jaiteh (France) and Jamelle Hagins (Delaware). Of those, Plumlee, Olynyk, McCollum, and Adams are projected to be first round picks, while the rest are projected as either second round picks or potential undrafted free agents.

Hinkie Looks To Bridge Analytic Divide

2013-05-17T15:15:22Z

Predictably, one of the main themes during Sam Hinkie's introductory press conference on Tuesday was his belief in advanced statistical analysis. It was mentioned during the introductory statement made by Joshua Harris as well as Hinkie's, and it was the first question asked by reporters.

Hinkie went to considerable effort to explain that the gap between how he values statistics and how more traditionally minded analysts value statistics isn't as wide as is popularly believed.

"I started my career out of college in the business world. Using data to help people make complicated decisions. It turns out it helps. It helps a lot," new 76ers president and general manager Sam Hinkie said about advanced statistics. "[But] It's not everything."

"I'm trying to use information to make decisions. The same way you do," Hinkie would go on to explain. "You use analytics when you open your iPhone and try to figure out if it's going to rain today. All you're using is lots and lots of data and it's helping you make an informed decision about whether you should bring an umbrella or not. That's the way I think about it."

"I want differential information. That might be from some snazzy, advanced something, and that might be from a conversation you had with that player's brother."-76ers president and general manager Sam Hinkie

As I argued the other day, the bridge really isn't all that wide, and the notion that he would be using statistics and only statistics to make a decision is one made up largely by those who have not made much of a sincere effort to understand the statistics they so readily deride.

Related: What Exactly Makes One An "Analytic"?

Harris and Hinkie made similar statements that statistics are not the only piece of the puzzle.

"When we talk about analytics we're not talking about going into a back room with a bunch of computers," Harris explained. "We're talking about adding to a very strong player [personnel] department and a more traditional front office."

"In every industry you're still relying on the judgement and experience and wisdom of smart, committed, loyal employees who have been at this a long time," said Hinkie. "I want differential information. That might be from some snazzy, advanced something, and that might be from a conversation you had with that player's brother. "

Hinkie didn't believe that finding a coach who embraced such a philosophy would be all that difficult.

"I think they all want to win. I think they all want to use the best information they can," Hinkie said. "I think more and more, as [teams] are really invested in this, [coaches] say 'This is helpful. This will help me.'"

Still, there is plenty of resistance among more traditionally minded people in the sport, both in front offices and in the media. It's curious, since the practice of using statistics to help make an informed decision isn't all that uncommon in every walk of life. Surely we would not argue that continuing to evolve the statistics we use to predict the weather and natural disasters would be a bad thing.

So why such resistance?

"I tell people that change is hard for all of us. Look at me 30 years from now and try to talk me out of my position and what's been successful for me for my whole career. I suspect I won't be nearly as pliable," Hinkie postulated.

"I think some people move along quickly [in adopting new techniques] and I think others don't," Hinkie said. "I think that's okay. If you've been doing something a very long time, you should guard it closely...I hope [a coach] doesn't change his mind every time somebody has a conversation with him and presents a case. There ought to be a very high threshold [to change]."

The other major reason Hinkie stated, besides a resistance to change, is how the practice of using advanced statistics is presented.

"I think part of it is the tone people deal with each other in, which I've tried really, really hard not to do," Hinkie said.

I spent some time speaking with Aaron Barzilai, the 76ers director of analytics, about that same problem after the press conference. He told me that he has found that you can be as sure as can be about something, but that it can be dismissed if you come off as dismissive of others opinions.

Related: 76ers hire Aaron Barzilai as director of analytics

On a side note, Aaron Barzilai recognized my name as the one who broke the story of his hiring last fall. He had no idea why anybody would care. We care because it was a monumental step in a direction that we had been hoping the franchise would go in for years. It was the first step in the process that would lead the 76ers to this point, and it was very important.

Reaffirming the belief in process

Another thing that was nice to hear was Sam Hinkie reaffirming that he believes in process, not outcome.

"One of the things that made this even more attractive to me was Josh [Harris] standing up publicly and saying 'that is a decision I would do again'," Hinkie explained when referring to the Bynum trade last year.

"That is very, very, very important to me. We talked a lot about process, not outcome. About trying to consistently take all the best information you can get and make consistently good decisions."

"Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. You should re-evaluate them all, but the fact that [Harris] can stand up after what was considered, and is fair to say, was such a failure, and say that's a decision he would do again, that means a lot to someone like me."

Team building and the draft

Besides discussing analytics, Andrew Bynum, and the coaching search, Sam Hinkie also spent some time on Tuesday talking about the team building process.

"I want to build a leading basketball operations that consistently makes high quality decisions," Hinkie said. "Just beating the average by a bit, in a pool of 30 competitors, will serve only to disappoint us in the long run."

Hinkie was asked specifically about taking a step backward in order to get the assets he needed to build a contender.

"I start with an end in mind. In everything. And I'll encourage our staff to do the same," Hinkie explained. "The mantra here has been very clear, which is to compete for championships. History, for the most part, especially recently, especially in the current environment, with the current rules and the current collective bargaining agreement, history has been reasonably clear that superstar players matter."

The focus on the draft wasn't just to draft a superstar, though, but also to accumulate assets which can be used in a trade to acquire a superstar.

"We talk about trading for some superstar, often that's a function of drafting well in the past and being able to use those pieces to trade for a superstar," Hinkie said.

The philosophy would be very similar to one Houston just went through, which culminated in landing James Harden.

"We all [in Houston] felt quite fortunate about [getting Harden], but it was a very long process. Literally over a dozen moves all summed up to [the Harden trade]," Hinkie said.

With all that said, should we expect for the 76ers to sit on their hands, save up their cap space for next offseason, get the best draft pick possible and try to pounce in free agency with their cap space?

"If you were to go down that path [of saving cap space for next year] you'd have to believe you could put yourself in a position to be competitive [in convincng players to come to Philly]," Hinkie said. "And if you could, I wouldn't disagree with it that it is a reasonable set of choices [to go that route], but that is by no means the favorite coming out of the barn, at all."

Regret over not doing this last year?

What was interesting was Joshua Harris admitting that, for some of the moves last offseason, they did not have a good process behind it.

"In some ways, in terms of some of the moves that had been made the prior season not working out exactly as we had planned, were not being made in hindsight with good process," Harris stated. "They weren't good decisions."

Harris has publicly stated that there were some moves made last offseason that he wouldn't do again - he reaffirmed Tuesday that Bynum was not one of them - but this was the hardest he had come down on the previous decision makers.

It also sounded like he viewed not hiring Hinkie last offseason as a mistake.

"In some ways, in terms of some of the moves that had been made the prior season not working out exactly as we had planned, were not being made in hindsight with good process. They weren't good decisions."-76ers managing owner Joshua Harris

"We were very, very impressed [with Sam last year]. But, for a lot of those reasons, the success of they team and otherwise, we decided to hold off making the decision [to bring Sam in]," Harris said. "When everything's going well, my general view is not to make a bunch of changes, particularly when I'm new to a league."

Hinkie's opinion on what to do with Bynum

Initially, Hinkie seemed like he didn't have much interest in Bynum, likely due to the risks Bynum's injured past presents.

"I think of Andrew [Bynum] like the thousands of other young men walking around the world that are unrestricted free agents that have potential to play NBA basketball," Hinkie explained. "I am duty bound to consider them, and to look at them. All of them."

However, as the press conference went on, Hinkie kept mentioning that he did not have enough data to make a judgement one way or the other about Bynum.

"I think the Sixers should have an enormous information advantage [about Bynum], based on all the information that exists in house. My first duty is to get up to speed on that information," Hinkie said.

Later, when asked whether re-signing Bynum this offseason would be an intelligent risk, Hinkie flat out said that he didn't know enough at this time.

What Exactly Makes One An "Analytic"? The Hiring Of Sam Hinkie

2013-05-14T19:00:08Z

In Sam Hinkie, the 76ers hired a guy who believes in advanced statistics, which ruffled some feathers from fans and analysts of the more traditional mindset.

But what exactly makes one an analytic?

If Doug Collins says before the season that he wants his team to take more shots from three point range and the free throw line, he's a traditional coach, correct? But if Sam Hinkie says he wants to improve our shot distribution and take more shots with higher expected values, he's an analytic?

If a coach says that his team gave up too many offensive rebounds, he watches the game. But if a GM says that the 32% offensive rebounding rate we gave up to our opponent was too high, he doesn't watch the game?

If a radio host says that, yeah, might only shoot 42% from the field, but he gets to the line a lot, so that helps offset his inefficiency, he watches the game. But if a blogger says that, with a true shooting percentage of 56% he's very efficient for a high usage rate player, that blogger doesn't watch the game?

If a baseball analyst says "yeah, he only got 47 RBI's last season, but he was batting in the 8-hole and didn't get many opportunities to knock runs in", he maintains his "uses his eyes" credibility. If TheGoodPhight says that Carlos Ruiz's RBI% is really high, then they should get out of their moms basement.

There's this divide that exists between people who use traditional statistics and those who use more advanced statistics. To be honest, that's partly due to the way we describe advanced statistics. At times, we do a poor job of explaining that these concepts, more or less, represent data and context that traditional analysts are already using.

Most people who follow basketball realize that a free throw doesn't go into the field goal percentage calculation and that, when comparing two players, if one player with a 42% field goal percentage gets to the line 8 times per game and another who shoots 42% only gets there 2 times per game that, field goal percentage can't be the only number used to measure efficiency. Analysts who use traditional statistics already have their own formula for how to figure out a players worth. They'll cite points per game, rebounds per game, assists per game, field goal percentage, free throw attempts, and will happily cite all of these figures when writing a column or talking on the radio.

Step one in bridging the divide is doing a better job of explaining exactly what these statistics represent.

We watch the games too

One of the first things skeptics will say is that "I prefer to watch the games". The insinuation, of course, is that people who use these fancy numbers do not.

As somebody who also works as a college basketball scout, this has always been a subject that has been near and dear to my heart. This simply could not be further from the truth.

When you see me with bloodshot eyes in the morning, it's because I was watching tape on Synergy Sports the night before scouting a prospect, not because I was organizing my spreadsheet.

This is perhaps further perpetuated by Hollywood, with the memorable scene in Moneyball where the Billy Beane character claims to not watch the games. It was, of course, a Hollywood invention. Also a Hollywood invention was the Peter Brand character, an overweight Jonah Hill portrayed as a baseball outsider. Of course, in real life, Paul DePodesta (the person who the Peter Brand character was based off of) started his career as an advanced scout for the Cleveand Indians, not a number cruncher. He was not the one who introduced sabremetrics to Billy Beane, and Billy Bean did watch games. But Hollywood was very desirous to perpetuate the computer-geek-who-knew-nothing-about-baseball myth, because that was the interesting story.

The reality is that there is nothing even remotely representing an either-or in this debate. There is not one (successful) advanced statistic proponent who does not spend copious amounts of time watching the sport that they love. Sam Hinkie watches more basketball than any person who is out there criticizing him.

As Spike Eskin noted, this is largely a straw-man argument. "I watch the game!" Great. So do we.

The difference is what metrics the two sides value. And make no mistake about it, traditional "watch the game" guys reference stats quite a bit as well.

Statistics lie

I hear this mentioned a lot. "Statistics lie!"

EXACTLY. Now we finally agree on something.

Ironically, it's the people who look at advanced statistics who turn the most critical eye towards statistics. We absolutely believe that statistics lie. It's that belief that statistics are not very representative of what is happening on the basketball court that leads us to try to find better statistics to use.

And that's the ultimate goal of advanced statistics. Find something that is more representative of what is happening on the basketball court.

While people have been using rebounds per game as a way to measure how productive a player is on the glass for decades, there are deficiencies in that metric. How many minutes per game did a player play? How many rebounds were available to be collected? How did his team do on the glass while he was on the court?

Rather than throwing our hands up when we run into one of these situations where a statistic has gaping holes in its usefulness we try to find a better way to measure it. Context matters.

Statistics are better at telling you the what than the why

Statistics, both traditional and advanced, do a better job of telling you "what" than "why".

Some of the statistics I find the most useful, besides ones that look to correct glaring problems in traditional stats (fg%, rebounds per game, assists per game, etc) are the ones that tell you what. They're perhaps more appropriately named "situational" statistics rather than advanced statistics.

What I'm talking about here is the ability to find out that X player shot X% on corner three's, or shot x% and scored X points per possession used when shooting a dribble jumper off a pick and roll, or shot X% when making a jump shot over his right shoulder but 10% less when shooting over his left shoulder.

These aren't particularly advanced calculations, but they're invaluable in the data they provide. In fact, they're the exact type of things scouts will note when watching a player.

Where the statistics struggle at times is figuring out the why. Can Jrue Holiday's efficiency off the pick and roll be improved with a big man who will dive to the hoop and take the defensive attention away from Holiday? Why do two players have a negative adjusted +/- when on the court together? What of their skill sets don't mesh well?

It gets even harder when predicting future player development. Many advanced metrics will tell you the effectiveness of a 19 year old player, but what happens when that player develops a jump shot? How much will that open up the rest of his game? There weren't advanced statistics that would have showed Jrue Holiday would go from 30.7% at the shortened collegiate 3 point line to 39% from the NBA three point in one year. In order to predict that, you had to watch his form -- his balance, mechanics, follow through -- not look at the numbers.

The goal of advanced statistics is not to replace watching the game. The goal of advanced statistics is simply to find statistics that are more representative of what we're trying to measure. To recognize the flaws in current statistics and figure out ways to make them more telling.

Anybody you talk to who has worked with Sam Hinkie in the past will tell you how smart he is, not just about numbers but also about the game of basketball. People whom I respect very much, such as Zach Lowe, will tell you that he is among the smartest basketball people he has talked to. If you're putting down this hire just because he believes in advanced statistics, I urge you to take a long hard look at what advanced statistics are and what they're trying to accomplish, and stop making straw-man arguments such as using different statistics than you do means he doesn't watch the game.

Sam Hinkie Hire Brings 76ers Ownershp Group Into Focus

2013-05-13T14:14:15Z

When it was announced that the 76ers would be purchased by a group of investors there were some questions as to exactly who would be the one guiding the team.

Sure, Joshua Harris was always known to be the majority owner, but it was uncertain exactly what his involvement would be. Would be a silent owner? Would he delegate most of the responsibility? Would he take an active interest in, and role with, the team?

That speculation was fueled somewhat by the announcement that Adam Aron would be the CEO, making him the de facto face of the ownership group. It was also somewhat complicated by the presence of Jason Levien, a former player agent and Sacramento Kings executive. Levien was the only person within the ownership group to have any previous basketball experience.

The first domino to fall was when Levien left the 76ers, speculated by some to have lost a power struggle for influence on basketball operations with then 76ers head coach Doug Collins. Levien sold his stake in the 76ers shortly thereafter and joined the Memphis Grizzlies as CEO and managing partner. He's now at the top of basketball operations for Memphis.

This left Doug Collins making the basketball decisions, and Adam Aron as the face of the franchise. Aron's marketing antics have ruffled some feathers, causing some to claim that the ownership group is more worried about how to market the team than how to build it. As the 76ers started losing, Aron's antics went from endearing to annoying, and frustration with the ownership group mounted.

And, through most of it, Joshua Harris remained silent. Sure, he, along with David Blitzer, were the largest investors in the group, and Harris is the managing owner and the one placed on the NBA's Board of Governor's, but he was out of the public's eye. That would lead many to question exactly how much Harris would be involved in the decision making process.

Those questions have been answered this season, as Joshua Harris has affirmed his presence at the top of the 76ers organization. It started during the exit interviews, where not only did Harris drop subtle clues about his role as the decision maker in the management group ("I would make the Bynum trade again", "there were decisions that I wouldn't make again"), as well as more direct statements, including where he said that "the GM" and himself would be the ultimate decision makers in the search for a new coach.

(The fact that he initially said "the GM" and not Tony DiLeo, and then that he said everything was on the table when he was asked whether DiLeo would be the GM, was something I pointed out in the comments in my article following the exit interviews. It wasn't a ringing endorsement, and a change was something that was hardly a shock considering how last offseason played out and Harris's comments after the season).

I was told by an NBA source that the decision to replace DiLeo with Hinkie was a decision made by Joshua Harris, and Joshua Harris alone.

It was the most Harris has taken charge since taking over the 76ers, and it gave me confidence in the direction of the franchise. And that confidence was validated last Friday.

It was also nice to see Harris stick to his plan. Last offseason, the 76ers interviewed Hinkie, as well as other candidates who embraced advanced statistics, for the 76ers general manager position. Talks with those candidates ended up not materializing -- I'll leave you to speculate about what changed between last offseason and this offseason -- but Harris continued pushing the organization towards the future by hiring Aaron Barzilai as the teams director of analytics, purchasing a D-League team, and embracing the SportVu tracking technology. It was nice to see Harris maintain his vision and ultimately get the guy he wanted all along.

Sound Familiar?

Last month during the exit interviews, one of things Harris said that really stuck out to me was the following:

"Things don't always work out. You just make good decisions and over time they work out." -- Joshua Harris

It was something Harris stressed over and over. The Bynum trade didn't work out, but it's a decision he felt was the right one to make.

It's then no surprise that Harris went out and hired a like-minded thinker.

"I'm all about expected values. I don't even care if [a shot] goes in or not, I'm all about "Should it go in?" I can live with randomness" -- Sam Hinkie

That quote was from new 76ers general manager Sam Hinkie in 2008.

That differentiation between outcome and whether the decision was correct is a key distinction that I think gets missed far too frequently, applicable in both coaching and in team building. It's good to know that the two people who will be the most responsible for the 76ers success over the next few years embrace that philosophy.

Aaron Barzilai's future?

Last November we broke the news that the 76ers had hired Aaron Barzilai as their new director of analytics. When the news came out that Hinkie would be the new general manager, I reached out to an NBA source to inquire about whether Barzilai was still in the 76ers future plans.

The source did confirm that the team did not intend to severe ties with Barzilai. Not only that, with a like-minded thinker now running the organization, Barzilai's influence within the organization was likely to grow. Barzilai has not yet had much of an opportunity to make his impact on the team, as the team made very little personnel changes after he arrived, but he should have more potential to make an impact now with free agency and the draft coming up.

String of good decisions

If you add it all up, my confidence in the 76ers ownership group, and Joshua Harris in particular, is continuing to grow. He continues to make good decisions, from his willingness to use the amnesty on Brand (even if the basketball decisions that followed, which were made by others, didn't work out), to his willingness green-light a risk on Bynum, to buying a D-League team, embracing the SportVU tracking technology, and now his selection of a general manager.

While Aron might ruffle some feathers with his marketing strategy, the man behind the scenes seems to be pulling all the right strings.

Toot It Or Boot It: Charles Jenkins

2013-05-12T12:00:06Z

In this segment of the "toot it or boot it" series, we'll take a look at the 76ers trade deadline acquisition: Charles Jenkins.

The good news is, the 76ers gave up virtually nothing to obtain Jenkins. The second round pick that they gave up to Golden State has protections on it (top 55 protected) that make it unlikely that the 76ers will ever give anything to Golden State. The trade was a salary dump for Golden State, pure and simple.

The bad news is that Jenkins has yet to show any real ability to be an efficient scorer in the NBA, which is troubling for someone whose only real role in this league would be to provide energy for a few minutes per game off the bench.

It's hard to really evaluate what Jenkins did after coming to the 76ers, as he played so infrequently (12 games, 12.5 minutes per game). Typically with these young, borderline, NBA players that's less of a concern, as what they do in practice is probably going to have as much if not more weight to the coaches confidence in their ability to fill a role down the line. The problem with that line of thought is that who had been watching him in practice is now gone.

I wrote before that Jenkins, who was an excellent three point shooter in college and also got to the line a ton, needed to find a way to translate those skill sets to the NBA if he wanted to be able to fill a role. He went on to attempt 0 three pointers and only 4 free throws in his 150 minutes with the 76ers.

While it would have been nice to have seen a little more of Jenkins in a 76ers uniform, the reality is he's a borderline NBA player. If he can extend his range out to the three point line (he's 4-22 for his career), he might be able to find time as a fringe rotational player.

I suppose if the 76ers bring him back on a minimum salary contract it won't be anything to be upset over. He has some latent scoring ability if he could just find a way to improve his shot distribution.

But the 76ers could really use a legitimate backup point guard, somebody who could hit a shot coming off of a pick, hit a catch and shoot three, move the ball and play solid defense. Jenkins excels at none of these. For that reason, I think the 76ers should part ways with Jenkins next season.

Verdict: Boot It.

Poll

Should the 76ers bring back Charles Jenkins?

Yes

21 votes

No

40 votes

Who?

42 votes

The guy who used to sit next to Aaron McKie?

26 votes

129 votes | Poll has closed

Tony DiLeo searches for coach while Sixers search for GM?

2013-05-06T21:58:32Z

Ken Berger has some interesting updates on the 76ers coaching search. Those updates include:

The Sixers seem to be the most interested (currently) in Warriors assistant Mike Malone. The 76ers have contacted players who have played for Malone as well as Golden State consultant Jerry West.
Spurs assistant Mike Budenholzer is high on their list, and they have talked to former players about him as well.
The Sixers still plan to bring Malone and Jeff Hornacek in for interviews.

Perhaps the most surprising, and certainly the most interesting, tidbit of information was that CBSSports has heard that Tony DiLeo is heading up the search for the new coach. That wouldn't normally be incredibly surprising -- a General Manager would typically be at the forefront of a coaching search -- if it were not for the nugget that Tony DiLeo's contract runs out with the 76ers later this summer, and the 76ers may be in the process of searching for DiLeo's replacement.

To the surprise of some rival executives, the Sixers' coaching search is being spearheaded by GM Tony DiLeo, whose contract expires this summer. With team president Rod Thorn moving into a consulting role and DiLeo's contract expiring, rival execs expect the Sixers to engage in a search for a new head of basketball operations, as well. In fact, that process has already begun through back-channel conversations, one person contacted on the Sixers' behalf told CBSSports.com.

As I mentioned after the 76ers exit interviews, Joshua Harris didn't give Tony DiLeo all that ringing of an endorsement, so the fact that the 76ers ownership group is looking at possible replaecments isn't all that shocking of a development. The kicker is that, according to Ken Berger, rival executives believe that DiLeo is leading the other search, the one for a coach..

Why would you let somebody who you are actively looking to replace be the primary decision making in a coaching search? If that is true -- and every indication I had received before today was that Harris would be the one making the decision -- that seems like a serious mishap.

It's not even that the names being thrown about as the primary candidates are bad ones. Malone and Budenholzer are two names I have a lot of interest in. It's just the concern of somebody who isn't in the teams long term plans making such an important decision.

I do think there's some chance that there is more going on here than has been reported. It could be possible that DiLeo is simply doing the majority of the early legwork and that the decision will ultimately be made by Harris. It is certainly a situation that is something to watch, though. The closer DiLeo gets to his contract running out, the more speculation there will be. For everybody's sake, hopefully this gets resolved in a timely manner. As I have said in the past, the GM position is the more important of the two up in the air.