Ben Simmons wants out of Philadelphia

Status
Not open for further replies.

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,008
I definitely think some teams would be hesitant to give Simmons the max, there are so many question marks with that dude both on the court and off the court.

If there were a lot of GMs who were as high on Simmons as some of the posters in this thread, Simmons would already be gone. I think the reason this situation is so stingy is that Philly is holding out for someone who believes in Simmons as a top player and frankly, there are not a lot of GMs willing to make that gamble.
There are many current max players with question marks. His current deal is also less than what a new max would look like. GM’s aren’t not gambling on the player it is that in this theoretical free agency you wouldn’t be giving up assets, match contracts, or deal with tax implications. That is real world stuff……I’m referring to a team saying, “Nah, we don’t want to add a 25-year old All-Star who may be the best multi-way defender in the game. We’ve got Nic Batum, we good.”
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,241
There are many current max players with question marks. His current deal is also less than what a new max would look like. GM’s aren’t not gambling on the player it is that in this theoretical free agency you wouldn’t be giving up assets, match contracts, or deal with tax implications. That is real world stuff……I’m referring to a team saying, “Nah, we don’t want to add a 25-year old All-Star who may be the best multi-way defender in the game. We’ve got Nic Batum, we good.”
There are definitely teams out there who are not looking at giving up a lot of assets for Simmons because of the many valid concerns that surround him at the moment. If everyone was as gung-ho on him as you appear to be, a deal would have already been made.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,471
Yeah, asset value (and salary match, and timeline fit on those assets, etc.) is an issue with Simmons. Making deals for stars is hard. On the other hand, Simmons is easily worth his deal, if he were a FA this coming offseason he'd get a full max offer in the first minute the window opens (more than what he makes now).

Simmons is a really really good player with some flaws. People are probably blowing his flaws a bit out of proportion, he's a bad FT shooter and a reluctant crunch time shooter. Those are real flaws. His lack of 3 is less of a flaw honestly, plenty of 6'10" guys don't/can't shoot 3s (honestly some guys like Giannis should take less), but PHI has Embiid so Simmons' natural spot in the offense is clogged making his lack of 3s more of a problem.

Teams are trying to put together a fit for him that PHI will take, and they are playing hardball because they know PHI can't just keep him, it isn't going to work. Also part of the problem is likely that Morey wants to compete for a title, which makes a package for Ben harder... he can't go the usual route and take a bunch of 1sts, he needs impact players, and one of them has to be a PG because his roster is wildly unbalanced and has no capable assist creators. He's handled this really poorly overall, even WITH Simmons losing George Hill and not replacing him is a bad move, without Simmons it means you probably need 2 real PGs back in a Simmons deal, if you get 1 you're still a lot worse at ball distribution than last year.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
40,656
Is there any realistic package that Philly would accept from Boston for Simmons? Guessing no given the division rivalry but I remain intrigued about his fit with the Jay’s.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,861
where I was last at
I'm of a mind of why bail-out the 76ers unless you can get Simmons at a big discount that reflects the risk he remains gun-shy outside of the paint and is a liability in certain important game scenarios. If you're a deep good team, I can see a trade of players and 2-3 1s as if you're good those picks have a discounted marginal near-term value, and you may be in a better position to take on the risk and cap hit. But if you're a bad/mediocre teams 2-3 1s are your future to rebuild and might be a very risky path to take unless you're pretty certain Simmons will turn into a more confident shooter beyond the paint.

The NBA is a big world and most of you guys have GMing skills far beyond my modest abilities and knowledge of NBA trade possibilities. So lets pretend/assume the Celtics have an interest in Ben Simmons teaming with the Js. And lets also assume the Js are inseparable. What would Philly want from the Celts in player ballast to keep the trade machine happy, and who would the Celts be ok with parting with to get Ben? Would Philly consider a possible mega-trade with a division rival post Fultz?

I assume Smart + whoever feeds the Trade monster and 2 1s is a starting/reasonable area. But I think I'm bailing out Philly and making them a powerhouse.

Can somebody unconfuse me?

I'll hang-up and listen.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,008
There are definitely teams out there who are not looking at giving up a lot of assets for Simmons because of the many valid concerns that surround him at the moment. If everyone was as gung-ho on him as you appear to be, a deal would have already been made.
I agree that there are many teams (most actually) who wouldn’t be giving up salary-matching assets for Simmons. That isn’t what you had initially said however. You said there would be teams hesitant to give Simmons the max in response to a hypothetical free agency today. These are two completely different scenarios.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,241
Yeah, asset value (and salary match, and timeline fit on those assets, etc.) is an issue with Simmons. Making deals for stars is hard. On the other hand, Simmons is easily worth his deal, if he were a FA this coming offseason he'd get a full max offer in the first minute the window opens (more than what he makes now).

Simmons is a really really good player with some flaws. People are probably blowing his flaws a bit out of proportion, he's a bad FT shooter and a reluctant crunch time shooter. Those are real flaws. His lack of 3 is less of a flaw honestly, plenty of 6'10" guys don't/can't shoot 3s (honestly some guys like Giannis should take less), but PHI has Embiid so Simmons' natural spot in the offense is clogged making his lack of 3s more of a problem.

Teams are trying to put together a fit for him that PHI will take, and they are playing hardball because they know PHI can't just keep him, it isn't going to work. Also part of the problem is likely that Morey wants to compete for a title, which makes a package for Ben harder... he can't go the usual route and take a bunch of 1sts, he needs impact players, and one of them has to be a PG because his roster is wildly unbalanced and has no capable assist creators. He's handled this really poorly overall, even WITH Simmons losing George Hill and not replacing him is a bad move, without Simmons it means you probably need 2 real PGs back in a Simmons deal, if you get 1 you're still a lot worse at ball distribution than last year.
This is an incredibly generous summarization of the situation. Simmons issue isn't that he doesn't shoot threes; it's that he doesn't shoot the ball, period. 90% of his shots come from inside the restricted area--if it isn't a dunk or layup you can pretty much forget about him shooting the ball. Even then, because of his free throw shooting issues, he is afraid to put the ball up sometimes in the paint. That is a significantly different than a guy who might not be a great three point shooter, but has some form of mid-range game or way to add some spacing to the floor without being a threat to shoot from the perimeter.

Someone else mentioned it earlier, but the real issue with Simmons is that you need to really build a team around his strengths and weaknesses but he also really isn't good enough for a team to do that the way that like, Giannis or Jokic or Embiid are.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Apr 9, 2007
14,269
Washington
I assume Smart + whoever feeds the Trade monster and 2 1s is a starting/reasonable area. But I think I'm bailing out Philly and making them a powerhouse.
I think such a trade might be creating a powerhouse, but it wouldn't be the 76ers. Simmons doesn't fit with Philly but still makes them better even with his flaws. On the Celtics with both Jays is potentially a great fit.

I don't see any way Philly would do that.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,861
where I was last at
I think such a trade might be creating a powerhouse, but it wouldn't be the 76ers. Simmons doesn't fit with Philly but still makes them better even with his flaws. On the Celtics with both Jays is potentially a great fit.

I don't see any way Philly would do that.
I think Philly with Smart has scary championship potential. IMO Simmons with the Celts has to get over his phobia for them to realize the same championship potential. If he doesn't get over his beyond the paint fears, I'm not sure where he would be a great fit.

Its an interesting trade, but I'm not sure either side has the balls to do it.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Apr 9, 2007
14,269
Washington
It is an interesting idea, but even assuming Simmons remains the same player he's been for the last several years:

I think Smart plus the two Jays would be better than Smart plus Embiid.
I think Simmons plus the two Jays would be better than Simmons plus Embiid.
I think Simmons plus the two Jays would be better than Smart plus Embiid.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
21,861
where I was last at
It is an interesting idea, but even assuming Simmons remains the same player he's been for the last several years:

I think Smart plus the two Jays would be better than Smart plus Embiid.
I think Simmons plus the two Jays would be better than Simmons plus Embiid.
I think Simmons plus the two Jays would be better than Smart plus Embiid.
We could discuss your 3 conclusions but it sort of comes down to this. Simmons and Embiid playing together in '21-'22 may only be theoretical as Morey and Rivers have to consider it a very combustible and destructive combo going forward. It may be an addition by subtraction type of situation. But its hard to assess and the risks of being wrong or trading with a rival are very high.

Smart has a lower ceiling but less volatility, his performance as seen by a bell shape curve would be tightly centered around the mean. You know what you're getting.

Simmons ceiling is higher but his volatility is far greater. Hence the risk and my perspective that Philly might have to entertain a discount for others to assume the Simmons risk.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,471
This is an incredibly generous summarization of the situation. Simmons issue isn't that he doesn't shoot threes; it's that he doesn't shoot the ball, period. 90% of his shots come from inside the restricted area--if it isn't a dunk or layup you can pretty much forget about him shooting the ball. Even then, because of his free throw shooting issues, he is afraid to put the ball up sometimes in the paint. That is a significantly different than a guy who might not be a great three point shooter, but has some form of mid-range game or way to add some spacing to the floor without being a threat to shoot from the perimeter.

Someone else mentioned it earlier, but the real issue with Simmons is that you need to really build a team around his strengths and weaknesses but he also really isn't good enough for a team to do that the way that like, Giannis or Jokic or Embiid are.
I think his FTs are a concern, and the associated reluctance to shoot late in games. As to the rest, 90% of his shots take place inside 10 feet, not in the restricted area, and that is to me a plus not a minus. If you don't shoot 3s you shouldn't take many if any shots outside the paint, there is no point. He's basically what would happen if instead of Giannis shooting 20% of his shots from 3 (and being really bad at it) he just went into the paint for all of those possessions. Are we worried about Zion's shot selection (he takes more of his shots inside 10 feet than even Simmons).

I think it's a product of people thinking... "PGs have to shoot", if you didn't know what position Ben played and I said... "Hey, here is a player who is 6'11" 240, passes like Jokic, Rebounds like Lebron, scores with the effiency of Gordon Hayward or Jaylen Brown, and is arguably the single best, most versatile 1-5 defender in the league, but he can't shoot outside of the paint and he hits only 60% of his FTs" you'd say... oh okay, so he's a top 5 PF in the league? Yes you have to build around him, you have to build around any player that isn't KD. If you have Lillard you know you need a lot of guys who can help his bad D, if you have Embiid you know you need shooters and someone to get him entry passes. If you have Ben Simmons you need stretch bigs and guards who can shoot.... but that's not different from what you need with Giannis, or LeBron (current), or any other guy who wants to use his size to get in the paint and score or kick but isn't a real 3 pt threat on his own.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Apr 9, 2007
14,269
Washington
Simmons ceiling is higher but his volatility is far greater. Hence the risk and my perspective that Philly might have to entertain a discount for others to assume the Simmons risk.
I agree that Philly is going to take a discount and not get full value for Simmons, but when and if they are ready to sell, I think they'll be able to find a discounted deal outside of their conference.

I agree that Simmons' potential for volatility is greater, but only in a good way. The defense and playmaking isn't going anywhere and will remain elite. The unwillingness and inability to shoot is volatile in that it can only go up from where it is now.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,241
I think his FTs are a concern, and the associated reluctance to shoot late in games. As to the rest, 90% of his shots take place inside 10 feet, not in the restricted area, and that is to me a plus not a minus. If you don't shoot 3s you shouldn't take many if any shots outside the paint, there is no point. He's basically what would happen if instead of Giannis shooting 20% of his shots from 3 (and being really bad at it) he just went into the paint for all of those possessions. Are we worried about Zion's shot selection (he takes more of his shots inside 10 feet than even Simmons).

I think it's a product of people thinking... "PGs have to shoot", if you didn't know what position Ben played and I said... "Hey, here is a player who is 6'11" 240, passes like Jokic, Rebounds like Lebron, scores with the effiency of Gordon Hayward or Jaylen Brown, and is arguably the single best, most versatile 1-5 defender in the league, but he can't shoot outside of the paint and he hits only 60% of his FTs" you'd say... oh okay, so he's a top 5 PF in the league? Yes you have to build around him, you have to build around any player that isn't KD. If you have Lillard you know you need a lot of guys who can help his bad D, if you have Embiid you know you need shooters and someone to get him entry passes. If you have Ben Simmons you need stretch bigs and guards who can shoot.... but that's not different from what you need with Giannis, or LeBron (current), or any other guy who wants to use his size to get in the paint and score or kick but isn't a real 3 pt threat on his own.
It's far more valuable for your primary ball handler to be able to shoot than a big man, because your primary ball-handler starts the possession with the ball, far from the basket. If the defense knows that they don't have to guard to guy outside of ten feet, the entire offense is being compromised.

You can say that Simmons on paper sounds like a really good PF, but he isn't a PF! He's a PG. He doesn't post-up, he doesn't set screens, he doesn't crash the offense glass, he is a primary ball handler who sets up the offense. He isn't this magical combination of different great players, that is just ridiculous. Saying he scores with the efficiency of Hayward/Brown is just disingenuous and pointless. Maybe he should be a PF but that would involve him currently having to do a bunch of things that he doesn't do currently.

Every player obviously needs complementary players to reach their potential, but I think there is a significant gap between Simmons and a player like Giannis or Dame or Jokic. Those guys can do so much for you offensively that you can afford to cheat on talent in other areas to find role players that can cover for their weaknesses. Giannis can be surrounded by less talented players because he can do so much and is so great that he can make up for everyone else's deficiencies as long as they fill some role where they do 1 thing really well. I don't think Simmons is even close to that level, so it becomes harder to envision a scenario where he is the best player on a team and everyone else around him is significantly worse and that team being very good.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,471
It's far more valuable for your primary ball handler to be able to shoot than a big man, because your primary ball-handler starts the possession with the ball, far from the basket. If the defense knows that they don't have to guard to guy outside of ten feet, the entire offense is being compromised.

You can say that Simmons on paper sounds like a really good PF, but he isn't a PF! He's a PG. He doesn't post-up, he doesn't set screens, he doesn't crash the offense glass, he is a primary ball handler who sets up the offense. He isn't this magical combination of different great players, that is just ridiculous. Saying he scores with the efficiency of Hayward/Brown is just disingenuous and pointless. Maybe he should be a PF but that would involve him currently having to do a bunch of things that he doesn't do currently.

Every player obviously needs complementary players to reach their potential, but I think there is a significant gap between Simmons and a player like Giannis or Dame or Jokic. Those guys can do so much for you offensively that you can afford to cheat on talent in other areas to find role players that can cover for their weaknesses. Giannis can be surrounded by less talented players because he can do so much and is so great that he can make up for everyone else's deficiencies as long as they fill some role where they do 1 thing really well. I don't think Simmons is even close to that level, so it becomes harder to envision a scenario where he is the best player on a team and everyone else around him is significantly worse and that team being very good.
He's a PG because PHI plays him at PG. Everything you just described is what many teams do with their PFs, LeBron is a PF, Giannis is a PF, most PFs aren't running around setting screens and demanding post-ups like it's 1986, they are attacking mismatches at the elbow, initiating offense on the drive, etc. Tatum is a PF, KD is a PF, half the offense initiators in the league are PFs.

Yes Giannis is better than Simmons on offense, but Simmons' offense is partially limited by the offense and roster hes' on. You could put Simmons as a swing with a sniper PG and run the offense that way. Just because PHI with their awkward roster fit did something doesn't mean his new team should. His new team should use him like he's LeBron. Let him get in the lane, let him facilitate, surround him with shooting, see what happens when you let him be the #1 option. He's probably a 20/8/8 guy in that situation with great defense, and a contract that doesn't necessitate him being your #1 scorer even. Simmons is not that hard to build around... 1 other ballhandler who can shoot 3s, 1 other "big" who can stretch and rebound, then the other two spots can basically be anyone as long as they can shoot.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,786
Smart can't be traded for some time anyway.

Philly's one advantage is that they don't need to replace Simmons with a scorer. That's also their biggest disadvantage because the ones who match up with him tend to be scorers.

The problem with Simmons is you can't really trade someone like Fox for him unless you have another alpha scorer already. Simmons is definitely not "the guy" on offense. He's not even the 2nd guy. In a world the Kings did trade Fox for Simmons, they'd probably be worse. Who is the go to scorer on that team? Haliburton? Buddy?

I don't think anyone is going to give up an alpha scorer for Ben Simmons. A team may give up a CJ McCollum. That would be a very hard pill to swallow for a guy who was the centerpiece in a Harden deal just a year ago. He's also not a PG. I'm not sure I see an ideal matchup for Philly trade wise. They are kind of in the same spot the Cavs are in when KI demanded a trade. They ended up taking a draft pick with a good chance of being top 4 (ended up 8) and IT4 (many thought he was just salary filler, others thought he was included so the Cavs could compete and have something in case James bolted).

Philly should be looking for a decent playmaker who can shoot first and foremost. After that, they should be looking for picks and/or possibly another player who can help contribute now. I don't think the deal is available, but the Kings deal centered around Haliburton (with salary filler and another asset or 2) is the one Philly should be pushing for. I still think Simmons and filler to Minnesota for DLo, Beasley makes sense too.

Any move they make will see them get worse on defense. Offense is another matter. I think Simmons would improve Minnesota on both sides of the court because he's a much better fit with KAT than Embiid and they'd have the emerging Edwards as well. But, I also think Philly would be better offensively with DLo and Beasley. The Kings deal would depend largely on Haliburton's development. I'm also not sure Simmons is that great a fit next to Fox or Haliburton. I don't see the Kings being a real option but they are always mentioned. I don't know if Dame and Simmons would work either. Have we seen how Simmons works with a ball dominant guard?

I don't see many other offers out there that satisfy Philly's need. The ones that too are not all that good. So I think it's very true Simmons doesn't have negative value and would get a max today. I also think it's possible a lot of the trades for Ben Simmons include players many on this board would consider negative value at their contracts (DLo, CJ McCollum). I'd be one of them but Philly would be better with any of those offers than getting 0 value out of Simmons. 30 minutes of DLo is a lot better than 30 minutes of play from your 12-15.

I'd love to see KAT/Simmons/Edwards. The rest of the league wouldn't. It's crazy that KAT is still 25 too. Feels like he's been around forever. He'll be going into his 7th NBA season. Only thing that gives me pause about it is KAT and Embiid's average shot distance is similar, and their shot distribution from 0-3 and 3-10 is similar. That's where it ends. The big difference between them is Embiid takes considerably more long 2s (10ft-3p) while Towns takes more 3s. The last 2 years, 33.6% and 38.3% of Embiid's shots have been long 2s. Towns is at 7.9% and 11.7%. Over that same period, 21.5% and 17.1% of Embiid's shots have been 3s. For Towns, 44.5% and 36.0%. KAT has some crazy good shot distribution.

The other thing about KAT is he might request a trade too. Acquiring Simmons would probably put an end to that. I'm not sure Minnesota would consider Edwards for Simmons or if that's even something Philly would go for.

If Ben will play anywhere, a deal centered around Sexton and picks might make sense too. Sexton would help now and the picks could potentially be pretty good. Cleveland does it because apparently his teammates think he shoots the ball "TOO MUCH." It would be pure comedy to go from Simmons to Sexton.


TL;DR The 76ers are a contender as long as Joel Embiid is on the team. He's also 27 and not exactly an iron man. If Simmons is really willing to sit out, I don't see how Philly can sit idly by and waste a year of Embiid's prime. Their window is now. Not replacing Simmons with anyone is worse than replacing Gordan Hayward with no one. That worked out well for the C's. Evan Fournier is not Gordan Hayward. The C's were so much better with Evan Fournier than no body.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,786
I think there is a significant gap between Simmons and a player like Giannis or Dame or Jokic.
You and everyone else. No one here is saying Ben Simmons is a top 10 player in the league. He's more comparable to Jaylen Brown than he is Jayson Tatum. He's Robin, not Batman.

His game has flaws. His game would have flaws even if he didn't play with Embiid. Embiid just exasperates the problem. Someone like KAT would help hide them.

The big issue is fit. He needs 4 players on the court who can shoot but he also needs someone else to be the 2nd scorer. Usually the 2 max guys are the scorers. Finding someone else to score 20+ a game usually costs money. Money teams don't have because Simmons is on a max and the 1st scoring option is probably on a max too.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,241
You and everyone else. No one here is saying Ben Simmons is a top 10 player in the league. He's more comparable to Jaylen Brown than he is Jayson Tatum. He's Robin, not Batman.

His game has flaws. His game would have flaws even if he didn't play with Embiid. Embiid just exasperates the problem. Someone like KAT would help hide them.

The big issue is fit. He needs 4 players on the court who can shoot but he also needs someone else to be the 2nd scorer. Usually the 2 max guys are the scorers. Finding someone else to score 20+ a game usually costs money. Money teams don't have because Simmons is on a max and the 1st scoring option is probably on a max too.
Which is precisely my point, you don't build the team around Robin, you build it around Batman. Simmons needs to be a pretty specific situation to maximize his talent and I don't know how many teams would or should be willing to do that.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
40,656
Which is precisely my point, you don't build the team around Robin, you build it around Batman. Simmons needs to be a pretty specific situation to maximize his talent and I don't know how many teams would or should be willing to do that.
I keep coming back to the Spurs when thinking about this one. They obviously have a great coaching staff that knows how to maximize talent, especially Australian talent. They have a legit PG who they could send back to Philly along with some other useful guard/wing talent in Derrick White, Devin Vassell, Lonnie Walker, Joshua Primo, etc. along with salary filler vets like Thaddeus Young who Philly obviously knows well.

Something like Dejounte Murray, Thaddeus Young, Devin Vassell, and a protected pick for Simmons.

Simmons clearly isn't a Batman but the Spurs don't even have a Robin at this point. They don't really have a good path to getting a top 20-25 player like Simmons so he would be worth the gamble at that price. Murray would slot right in for Simmons, Young would provide quality bench depth, and Vassell has a decent chance of being a solid complementary player around Embiid. The Spurs are in the worst spot possible - mediocrity land - so I think they should be motivated to doing something major, especially in the twilight of Pop's career.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,241
I keep coming back to the Spurs when thinking about this one. They obviously have a great coaching staff that knows how to maximize talent, especially Australian talent. They have a legit PG who they could send back to Philly along with some other useful guard/wing talent in Derrick White, Devin Vassell, Lonnie Walker, Joshua Primo, etc. along with salary filler vets like Thaddeus Young who Philly obviously knows well.

Something like Dejounte Murray, Thaddeus Young, Devin Vassell, and a protected pick for Simmons.

Simmons clearly isn't a Batman but the Spurs don't even have a Robin at this point. They don't really have a good path to getting a top 20-25 player like Simmons so he would be worth the gamble at that price. Murray would slot right in for Simmons, Young would provide quality bench depth, and Vassell has a decent chance of being a solid complementary player around Embiid. The Spurs are in the worst spot possible - mediocrity land - so I think they should be motivated to doing something major, especially in the twilight of Pop's career.
Right, the only teams really willing to go all-in on building a roster around Simmons would be teams that have pretty much nothing to build on. San Antonio makes sense on paper but Pop and Simmons seems like a recipe for disaster.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,241
Not accounting for trade realities, what is the absolute best on-the-court situation for Simmons? Brooklyn?
Brooklyn would be less-than-ideal because Simmons would pretty much never have the ball and would basically just be a defender/rebounder. I think Denver would be good; he can be the PG while also being surrounded by shooters and other creators, and his defense would be a big upgrade for them.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,471
Not accounting for trade realities, what is the absolute best on-the-court situation for Simmons? Brooklyn?
GS replacing Draymond would be good. Curry is the alpha and changes the court spacing, Klay is a 2nd scorer who doesn't want the ball except to shoot.
WAS with an extended Beal is a good fit, Beal can be your scorer, Simmons the 2/3 guy, that's a good pair to build around
SA is an interesting fit, replacing non-3 shooter DeRozan, but you need to add a scorer still.
MIN could be a good fit, Towns is a #1 who can stretch the floor, and you'd have one of the guards still as a 2nd scorer (D-Lo is the better fit as he's a better shooter, but Edwards could be fine).
A lot of the worse teams in the league are good fits if they don't have a non-shooter as one of their core pieces,,, CLE?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,786
Not accounting for trade realities, what is the absolute best on-the-court situation for Simmons? Brooklyn?
Minnesota I think. Denver might be good but the passing skills may be a bit redundant with Jokic.

Chicago

edit: Scratch Chicago. I forgot about DeMar being in Chicago.
 
Last edited:

shoelace

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 24, 2019
185
GS replacing Draymond would be good. Curry is the alpha and changes the court spacing, Klay is a 2nd scorer who doesn't want the ball except to shoot.
WAS with an extended Beal is a good fit, Beal can be your scorer, Simmons the 2/3 guy, that's a good pair to build around
SA is an interesting fit, replacing non-3 shooter DeRozan, but you need to add a scorer still.
MIN could be a good fit, Towns is a #1 who can stretch the floor, and you'd have one of the guards still as a 2nd scorer (D-Lo is the better fit as he's a better shooter, but Edwards could be fine).
A lot of the worse teams in the league are good fits if they don't have a non-shooter as one of their core pieces,,, CLE?
Toronto would be an interesting fit (if Siakam goes out), but I can't see that happening.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,505
around the way
It really seems like the most logical trade for both sides.

Russell plus some smaller assets for Simmons is quick and easy
I agree, and I don't know why we're expanding the deal to include Beasley.

DLo plus a top-10 protected first for Simmons. Trade fits in the machine. Make it happen Theo. Morey won't get a better deal and fit than that.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,407
Santa Monica
I keep coming back to the Spurs when thinking about this one. They obviously have a great coaching staff that knows how to maximize talent, especially Australian talent. They have a legit PG who they could send back to Philly along with some other useful guard/wing talent in Derrick White, Devin Vassell, Lonnie Walker, Joshua Primo, etc. along with salary filler vets like Thaddeus Young who Philly obviously knows well.

Something like Dejounte Murray, Thaddeus Young, Devin Vassell, and a protected pick for Simmons.

Simmons clearly isn't a Batman but the Spurs don't even have a Robin at this point. They don't really have a good path to getting a top 20-25 player like Simmons so he would be worth the gamble at that price. Murray would slot right in for Simmons, Young would provide quality bench depth, and Vassell has a decent chance of being a solid complementary player around Embiid. The Spurs are in the worst spot possible - mediocrity land - so I think they should be motivated to doing something major, especially in the twilight of Pop's career.
Simmons/Maxey for Murray/White would work $$$ wise, round it out with picks.

Is Pop a Klutch fan after the MaMo shenanigans? Not sure who played Pop but he got left at the alter
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,786
Simmons could work well on Indiana too. This assumes Warren is 100% healthy and that Sabonis can hit 35% of his 3s on decent volume.

I don't think Philly would have much use for Turner though, and he'd definitely be included. Then Philly could pick from LaVert or Brogdon. They'd definitely have a use for either of them. I think some would even prefer Brogdon to DLo. Beasley would probably be a more useful 2nd piece than Turner but with Embiid's injury history, maybe not.

Even Simmons for Sabonis makes some sense for Indiana. It doesn't make much sense for the 76ers. But the question asked is what the best on court situation would be for Simmons.

Brogdon obviously makes a ton of sense and I think many people would prefer him over DLo. Beasley is a better 2nd piece than Turner to a team like Philly. Although with Embiid's health issues, maybe having Turner around isn't so bad.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Apr 9, 2007
14,269
Washington
Brooklyn would be less-than-ideal because Simmons would pretty much never have the ball and would basically just be a defender/rebounder. I think Denver would be good; he can be the PG while also being surrounded by shooters and other creators, and his defense would be a big upgrade for them.
Yeah, that makes sense. In my defense, I was mentally subtracting Kyrie from Brooklyn based on the vaccination stuff. I really wouldn't be surprised if Kyrie doesn't play if he doesn't get his way. But I also understand that Harden will have the ball in his hands a lot regardless.

Denver does sound good.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,505
around the way
Yeah, that makes sense. In my defense, I was mentally subtracting Kyrie from Brooklyn based on the vaccination stuff. I really wouldn't be surprised if Kyrie doesn't play if he doesn't get his way. But I also understand that Harden will have the ball in his hands a lot regardless.

Denver does sound good.
Any place with a shooting big and enough ball to go around, preferably with other shooters too of course. Not enough ball in Brooklyn.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,786
I agree, and I don't know why we're expanding the deal to include Beasley.

DLo plus a top-10 protected first for Simmons. Trade fits in the machine. Make it happen Theo. Morey won't get a better deal and fit than that.
To save some face for Philly because Simmons for DLo straight up is hard to sell. Beasley is a decent scorer on a good contract but has some off court issues and wouldn't be a huge loss for the Wolves. I'm sure the Wolves would rather keep him but if it meant getting Simmons for DLo, you include Beasley in the deal. They could probably get Maxey back in return easily enough.

Another option is Prince instead of Beasley. I'm not sure who the 76ers or Wolves would prefer.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,407
Santa Monica
Any place with a shooting big and enough ball to go around, preferably with other shooters too of course. Not enough ball in Brooklyn.
a team with enough shooting around him.

Ben could easily start playing half his minutes as a small ball Center that can distribute
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,471
To save some face for Philly because Simmons for DLo straight up is hard to sell. Beasley is a decent scorer on a good contract but has some off court issues and wouldn't be a huge loss for the Wolves. I'm sure the Wolves would rather keep him but if it meant getting Simmons for DLo, you include Beasley in the deal. They could probably get Maxey back in return easily enough.

Another option is Prince instead of Beasley. I'm not sure who the 76ers or Wolves would prefer.
Okogie might make sense, he's a cheap wing with some upside
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
6,505
around the way
To save some face for Philly because Simmons for DLo straight up is hard to sell. Beasley is a decent scorer on a good contract but has some off court issues and wouldn't be a huge loss for the Wolves. I'm sure the Wolves would rather keep him but if it meant getting Simmons for DLo, you include Beasley in the deal. They could probably get Maxey back in return easily enough.

Another option is Prince instead of Beasley. I'm not sure who the 76ers or Wolves would prefer.
I hear you, but Morey isn't getting retail pricing here.

I'm with you on preferring Brogdon to DLo, if that were on the table. And I'd take C.J. too.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,786
Imagine if all it did take was DLo though.

KAT/Prince/Edwards/Beasley/Simmons is scary. 3 of those guys can shoot and Edwards showed a lot last year.

How come BBref isn't listing the Prince trade anyway? Spotrac doesn't list it either but they have Prince on the Wolves.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,008
Not accounting for trade realities, what is the absolute best on-the-court situation for Simmons? Brooklyn?
Simmons for Kyrie……who says no now that we know Kyrie won’t play in more than half the games this year including those in the playoffs?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,786
I hear you, but Morey isn't getting retail pricing here.

I'm with you on preferring Brogdon to DLo, if that were on the table. And I'd take C.J. too.
People in Minnesota know what Beasley did. Pulling a rifle on a 13 year old isn't gong to endear you to the home crowd. I wouldn't be the shocked if they were trying to move on from him.

He is currently serving his120 day jail sentence though. As far as basketball goes, that's probably a good thing. What is he going to do in jail? Work out and play basketball. He gets out sometime in October.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
15,068
This was before we knew Kyrie wouldn’t be available for crucial playoff games, no?
I believe Kyrie's camp put it out there that he would rather retire than play for another team. It works on paper, not sure it works with the personalities involved.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Apr 9, 2007
14,269
Washington
Simmons for Kyrie……who says no now that we know Kyrie won’t play in more than half the games this year including those in the playoffs?
If not Durant, Kyrie will. He'll take his ball and go home. After that, he'll probably walk the earth, meet people... get into adventures.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,241
Genuine question: If Simmons does not have the basketball, what is he doing on offense?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,471
Genuine question: If Simmons does not have the basketball, what is he doing on offense?
Getting into position to receive the basketball and score? I mean, the same thing as most players when they don't have the ball. The one thing he won't do is stand in the corner, but you shouldn't use him that way anyway, he should be involved in as many of the actions as possible given his passing and the mismatches he creates. Particularly both roles in screen and roll, which he should have been doing way more but PHI didn't because they wanted Embiid to be the roll man, and also they wanted to run a lot of post-ups (arguably good because Embiid) and not PnR, a different team is running tons of PnR with Simmons as both the ball handler and the roll man.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
17,241
Getting into position to receive the basketball and score? I mean, the same thing as most players when they don't have the ball. The one thing he won't do is stand in the corner, but you shouldn't use him that way anyway, he should be involved in as many of the actions as possible given his passing and the mismatches he creates. Particularly both roles in screen and roll, which he should have been doing way more but PHI didn't because they wanted Embiid to be the roll man, and also they wanted to run a lot of post-ups (arguably good because Embiid) and not PnR, a different team is running tons of PnR with Simmons as both the ball handler and the roll man.
But if Simmons isn't a PG, and you are shifting him away from being a primary ball-handler, his role on the team greatly decreases. I'm sure a new team would want to use him as a screener, but the fact is he isn't a good screen-setter and has never been a frequent screener. For someone whose development plateaued, it's a big ask for him to just become a good and willing screener on his new team.

If he's frustrated playing around Embiid, I'm not sure he is eagerly going to go to a team and elect for a more off-ball role than he has in Philadelphia. He still wants to be a PG and on his dream new team, he will be playing that role.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,008
Genuine question: If Simmons does not have the basketball, what is he doing on offense?
Simmons is a phenomenal playmaker. Why wouldn’t he have the ball? He is able to create mismatches and score with the ball. I do question his mental toughness as we saw in the playoffs but that has nothing to do with his offensive skill level, elite playmaking and elite defense.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,471
But if Simmons isn't a PG, and you are shifting him away from being a primary ball-handler, his role on the team greatly decreases. I'm sure a new team would want to use him as a screener, but the fact is he isn't a good screen-setter and has never been a frequent screener. For someone whose development plateaued, it's a big ask for him to just become a good and willing screener on his new team.

If he's frustrated playing around Embiid, I'm not sure he is eagerly going to go to a team and elect for a more off-ball role than he has in Philadelphia. He still wants to be a PG and on his dream new team, he will be playing that role.
I think he'll be the offense initiator anywhere he goes, as he should, you don't have to be the PG to be the primary offense initiator, is Giannis the PG in MIL, LeBron in LA, Kawhi in LA, Butler in MIA, etc. no, but they run a ton of PnR as the handler, Iso, screen game, etc. because they are the offense creator. As to playing roll man, I don't think it will be an issue for Simmons, his lack of playing there had far more to do with his role than any lack of skill/willingness. His numbers overall as the roll man are solid (around 1.02 PPP).

Looking back though, his best off-ball roll will be as a cutter, he puts up great numbers there 1.27 PPP.
He's a versatile player, he just can't stretch the floor at all.

Edit- I really don't get this idea that Simmons is going to ruin your offense he's been on an offense with just about the worst possible star player pairing for him (a non-stretch big) and his team's have been 8th/13th/13th in offense. Simmons is a good offensive player, who will be at least as good if not better on a team without Embiid. He'll get you and efficient 15-20 without ever shooting a 3, and create a lot of great shots for his teammates.
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
18,786
But if Simmons isn't a PG, and you are shifting him away from being a primary ball-handler, his role on the team greatly decreases. I'm sure a new team would want to use him as a screener, but the fact is he isn't a good screen-setter and has never been a frequent screener. For someone whose development plateaued, it's a big ask for him to just become a good and willing screener on his new team.

If he's frustrated playing around Embiid, I'm not sure he is eagerly going to go to a team and elect for a more off-ball role than he has in Philadelphia. He still wants to be a PG and on his dream new team, he will be playing that role.
Why are they shifting him away from primary ball-handler? You asked what he would do when he didn't have the basketball. I'm assuming he will most of the time.

You seem fixated on the primary ball-handler being a traditional PG.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.