ADVERTISEMENT

Ben Simmons March Sadness

This was pretty much a wasted year from Simmons playing for Johnny Jones, nothing he could learn from him !!
 
Making a non-shooter shoot a lot of threes is not a smart thing to do if you are trying to win a game. I'm sure they are practicing them, just like I am sure Briscoe is, but I'm also confident that they intentionally limit the amount of shots he takes outside of the paint.


Ok, I wasnt sure if you were talking opponent force him outside or coach allowing it.
 
I don't understand if you are a top 15 or so guy why you would go to a non elite school that has a terrible coach. Look at the guy at Miss. St and guys at Cal. They would have been OAD at most big schools and got to play in the tournament. Now they are coming back and their NBA careers are in question. Simmons is such a big talent that he will still go #1 but will never play in NCAA.

Well pretty certain Ivan Rabb is projected top 10 lottery and I know Brown is projected lottery at Cal. Rabb is averaging almost a double double and Brown around 15 a game. But ur point is valid for development wouldnt trade Brown for Murray however Ivan Rabb would have made us title favorites
 
The problem is that you can't just put the players in a trade machine and get what you want.

My feeling is that Ingram may be 90% as valuable as Simmons.

I also know that Randle becomes less valuable in trades if your trading partner knows you have to move him because of fit.

So let's say you only get 70% value back in trade for Randle. Would you rather have Randle + .9Simmons, or .7Randle + Simmons?

I understand that BPA is the prevailing wisdom. I've also watched the Sixers get crushed with that strategy for a while now.

A lot of this is predicated on my belief that Ingram is reasonably close to Simmons as a talent. If I thought that Simmons was a Lebron level asset, I might feel differently.
Well, I'd say I dont know if it would be a bad fit. That's why you draft him and see how it works. If it comes to getting rid of one of them, and it is Randle, I'm not bothered by not getting full value for him, as long as I get something that compliments Simmons in a much more effective way. We don't even know if Randle will end up being worth very much anyway, at least not yet.
 
Also the Sixers aren't a great example because they are intentionally trying to suck, and have had some bad luck. I agree it's getting to the point where they need to think about whether or not they want to keep doing this, but if they win the lottery this year things suddenly don't look so bad for them.
 
Well, I'd say I dont know if it would be a bad fit. That's why you draft him and see how it works. If it comes to getting rid of one of them, and it is Randle, I'm not bothered by not getting full value for him, as long as I get something that compliments Simmons in a much more effective way. We don't even know if Randle will end up being worth very much anyway, at least not yet.

Randle is a top ten rebounder in the league now. I've watched the Lakers a ton, and I like him.

Our opinions differ. That's fine. Either Simmons or Randle could develop a knockdown jump shot. If so, they could play beside each other.

I happen to like Ingram a lot, and when everything is measured I would rather have him.

If I were the Lakers and got the first pick, I would try to trade down to pick up Ingram and another piece.

I do think Simmons is deserving of the first pick.
 
Also the Sixers aren't a great example because they are intentionally trying to suck, and have had some bad luck. I agree it's getting to the point where they need to think about whether or not they want to keep doing this, but if they win the lottery this year things suddenly don't look so bad for them.

They are a good example because they are the poster child for the "take the BPA and it will all work out" philosophy.
 
Simmons is a stud but Dale Brown couldnt do anything with Shaquille, Chris Jackson, and the other good guy on that team
 
I think there is wide gap between the talent and potential of Ben Simmons vs Ingram. Personally, if I was in charge of a team I wouldn't trade Simmons for two Ingrams.

I don't see Ingram as a star in the NBA. Maybe his body will fill out and my judgment is just wrong. Simmons isn't the 2nd Coming, either, but he's very good.
 
The Lebron comparisons are what is killing Simmons. Forget Lebron and go with Magic. A bigger stronger version of Magic that is going to make everyone on your team better and run like a top. Simmons dishing the ball to NBA talent is going to be devastating to behold. He may average a triple double. Assists, points, and rebounds.
 
I don't see Ingram as a star in the NBA. Maybe his body will fill out and my judgment is just wrong. Simmons isn't the 2nd Coming, either, but he's very good.

I could certainly be wrong too. I've only watched each of them a few times, but Simmons superiority seemed pretty clear to me.

But my main reason for responding is to give you props. From what I've seen, having a poster on this board say "maybe . . . my judgment is . . . wrong," is almost as rare as a white elephant. Any poster confident enough to acknowledge they could be wrong about anything evidences a maturity and intelligence level that makes their opinions deserve a lot of respect in my book.
 
The guy chose to play at LSU for one of the worst coaches in college basketball. He's getting exactly what he signed up for.
 
Family ties is why Simmons signed with LSU. Not an evaluation of the program. He always knew he was going to LSU.
 
Randle is a top ten rebounder in the league now. I've watched the Lakers a ton, and I like him.

Our opinions differ. That's fine. Either Simmons or Randle could develop a knockdown jump shot. If so, they could play beside each other.

I happen to like Ingram a lot, and when everything is measured I would rather have him.

If I were the Lakers and got the first pick, I would try to trade down to pick up Ingram and another piece.

I do think Simmons is deserving of the first pick.
If you think he's better that's more acceptable. Taking a guy who you think is a lesser player because he fits better with the team is the origin of so many famous draft mistakes.
 
They are a good example because they are the poster child for the "take the BPA and it will all work out" philosophy.
They are intentionally sucking. They would be much better if they actually wanted to be. They are intentionally trying to be the worst team because it gives them the best chance to draft a superstar. They don't suck because they have been taking the best player available. Bad example.
 
If you think he's better that's more acceptable. Taking a guy who you think is a lesser player because he fits better with the team is the origin of so many famous draft mistakes.

I think he's close. And I never said I would draft him over Simmons straight up. I said if I had the top pick I would like to trade it for Ingram and another pick.

It all boils down to getting the most value for your team. Taking BPA is an excellent starting point, but it shouldn't be the only consideration when constructing a team.
 
They are intentionally sucking. They would be much better if they actually wanted to be. They are intentionally trying to be the worst team because it gives them the best chance to draft a superstar. They don't suck because they have been taking the best player available. Bad example.

You're splitting hairs.

They are employing a BPA and asset accumulation strategy.

If I were a fan of the Sixers, I would say it isn't working.

I would rather have a core of Nerlens Noel, Julius Randle, Zach Lavine, and Emmanual Mudiay, for instance. (Not much shooting, I know).

They realistically could have done this in the last three drafts. They would have a talented core, and would still be drafting in the lottery.

The reason I say this applies, is that they would have drafted Randle even though they thought Embiid was a little better. They would have drafted Lavine even though they preferred Saric. Ditto for Mudiay over Okafor.

Imo, they would be in better shape today. Obviously, you and many others disagree. Especially the illustrious Philadelphia GM.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT