Hinkie, the story went, was impersonal and aloof -- high school valedictorian, Stanford Arjay Miller Scholar, Bain consultant, a nerd glued to a laptop, an MBA who treated players as commodities. Definitely not a "basketball guy."
The perception of Hinkie had arguably reached a point where it was damaging the Sixers brand. During his time in Philly, he'd developed, for example, a reputation as a dogged negotiator. Knowing that he had unusual leverage -- Philly's unused cap space -- he would aim to extract as much blood as possible in deals. But an industry with only 29 other businesses necessitates dealing with the same people over and over again.
"There has to be a level of understanding, a level of trust between teams," one former GM says. "I think Sam had a hard time opening up in that process. If you are trying to win the deal each time, that's fine, as long as the other side gets a win too. But if you are trying to kill them, then it makes it harder to work with them in the future."
Adds one Western Conference executive: "Sam's a hard-nosed negotiator, which is intimidating to some people. There's a bit of 'what's behind the curtain?' with Sam. People don't know what his factors are. It's not as straightforward as 'I like that guy.'"
Agents had their own concerns. Hinkie became known for drafting players in the second round and signing them to four-year partially guaranteed contracts. Without any leverage, agents were forced to accept those team-friendly terms, but they didn't have to like it.
Those decisions had consequences: Agents and rival GMs were happy to turn Hinkie into the embodiment of every negative stereotype of the analytics movement.
"I think Sam is a pure analytics guy," says David Falk, who gained fame in the late 1980s as Michael Jordan's agent and still represents a small list of clients. "I don't think they had enough pure basketball people. While there's a lot more utilization of analytics, it's like painting by the numbers. And you can't paint a masterpiece by the numbers."
