Q12543 wrote:But boy, Simmons is almost a Giannis-sized conundrum.....Yes, he will absolutely help you win games and get you to the playoffs, but at some point that shooting....I just don't know if you can have one of your featured guys have that issue and win a title.
He's making Giannis look like a solid to even good shooter.
Q , now you understand what I was saying about Rubio his first go around here. You guys believed him to be a vital piece back then regardless of his shooting.
Now you acknowledge this about Simmons even tho he brings way more to the table than Ricky did.
Not trying to make this a Rubio thread tho.
Mmmm, I kind of hear ya, but I think I was always honest about Ricky's flaws and felt that he was more of a complimentary piece that indeed needed scorers and shooters around him. He never became the star many of us hoped when he was originally drafted, but he was absolutely a plus player for this franchise and I always defended him as a plus player versus the guy to lay blame on for our losing ways.
Some of us initially thought that Ricky would eventually develop into a good perimeter shooter based on his terrific free-throw shooting. But alas, there came a point before he left MN when it was clear he'd never become a good shooter. At that point, I was with Q in seeing Ricky as a good complementary player. The lesson of Simmons is a team is that it's particularly difficult to win a championship if one of your team's two stars is a really bad perimeter and free-throw shooter. That's part of the challenge the Bucks face with Giannis.
I haven't watched the Sixers much this year but I've felt like they have some other flaws on that team besides Simmons shooting which I'm not dismissing. I think they likely miss Danny Green quite a bit. Even if the other guards have stepped up as starters it hurts the bench.
Danny Green wasn't doing much for them in the playoffs, so I'm not sure how much they miss him. But they'd certainly be better off to some degree having Green available. The Sixers are a great team with two elite players (Simmons and Embiid) and an allstar (Harris). They also have some nice depth behind those three. The Sixers really have two flaws: Simmons' poor perimeter/free-throw shooting and Embiid's lack of durability. Otherwise, they'd be the team to beat now with two of the Nets' three stars hurting.
To expand on my limited informed position...are they really a great team though? 8 more wins better than the Knicks and the Hawks even in a shortened season doesn't scream great to me. I'm curious if you have any thoughts about if Doc Rivers done anything different than Brett Brown?
As for Danny Green the Sixers need shooting and he was hitting nearly 38% from there and had the 2nd highest rate of 3's taken in the playoffs to Curry who has been absolutely bombing them in the playoffs. Green has played in 153 playoff games won 3 championships with 3 different teams and can still play. Nobody else on the Sixers has won at that level. Obviously Green is basically a role player more than a star and I know you are skeptical of vet experience in the playoffs but you have to admit Green's resume is much more impressive than the other guys that will play minutes instead of him. Green has always been a guy I've liked and there are some things he does uniquely that don't show up in the box score.
Also can the Hawks (and Nate McMillen) get some credit for actually being a good basketball team? I'm certainly not suggesting they are Steph Curry and the Warriors but when they made their first championship run nobody was predicting they would end up being THE team everyone would have to go through for a number of years. Yes comparing the Hawks and Warriors is hyperbole on purpose but my point is maybe people are underrating the Hawks to some extent in all this and sometimes young teams do emerge somewhat unexpectedly. There are also times teams are really playing well at the right time.
Q12543 wrote:But boy, Simmons is almost a Giannis-sized conundrum.....Yes, he will absolutely help you win games and get you to the playoffs, but at some point that shooting....I just don't know if you can have one of your featured guys have that issue and win a title.
He's making Giannis look like a solid to even good shooter.
Q , now you understand what I was saying about Rubio his first go around here. You guys believed him to be a vital piece back then regardless of his shooting.
Now you acknowledge this about Simmons even tho he brings way more to the table than Ricky did.
Not trying to make this a Rubio thread tho.
Mmmm, I kind of hear ya, but I think I was always honest about Ricky's flaws and felt that he was more of a complimentary piece that indeed needed scorers and shooters around him. He never became the star many of us hoped when he was originally drafted, but he was absolutely a plus player for this franchise and I always defended him as a plus player versus the guy to lay blame on for our losing ways.
Some of us initially thought that Ricky would eventually develop into a good perimeter shooter based on his terrific free-throw shooting. But alas, there came a point before he left MN when it was clear he'd never become a good shooter. At that point, I was with Q in seeing Ricky as a good complementary player. The lesson of Simmons is a team is that it's particularly difficult to win a championship if one of your team's two stars is a really bad perimeter and free-throw shooter. That's part of the challenge the Bucks face with Giannis.
I haven't watched the Sixers much this year but I've felt like they have some other flaws on that team besides Simmons shooting which I'm not dismissing. I think they likely miss Danny Green quite a bit. Even if the other guards have stepped up as starters it hurts the bench.
Danny Green wasn't doing much for them in the playoffs, so I'm not sure how much they miss him. But they'd certainly be better off to some degree having Green available. The Sixers are a great team with two elite players (Simmons and Embiid) and an allstar (Harris). They also have some nice depth behind those three. The Sixers really have two flaws: Simmons' poor perimeter/free-throw shooting and Embiid's lack of durability. Otherwise, they'd be the team to beat now with two of the Nets' three stars hurting.
To expand on my limited informed position...are they really a great team though? 8 more wins better than the Knicks and the Hawks even in a shortened season doesn't scream great to me. I'm curious if you have any thoughts about if Doc Rivers done anything different than Brett Brown?
As for Danny Green the Sixers need shooting and he was hitting nearly 38% from there and had the 2nd highest rate of 3's taken in the playoffs to Curry who has been absolutely bombing them in the playoffs. Green has played in 153 playoff games won 3 championships with 3 different teams and can still play. Nobody else on the Sixers has won at that level. Obviously Green is basically a role player more than a star and I know you are skeptical of vet experience in the playoffs but you have to admit Green's resume is much more impressive than the other guys that will play minutes instead of him. Green has always been a guy I've liked and there are some things he does uniquely that don't show up in the box score.
Also can the Hawks (and Nate McMillen) get some credit for actually being a good basketball team? I'm certainly not suggesting they are Steph Curry and the Warriors but when they made their first championship run nobody was predicting they would end up being THE team everyone would have to go through for a number of years. Yes comparing the Hawks and Warriors is hyperbole on purpose but my point is maybe people are underrating the Hawks to some extent in all this and sometimes young teams do emerge somewhat unexpectedly. There are also times teams are really playing well at the right time.
I don't disagree with your characterization of Green as a great shooter with an impressive resume. My only point was that he wasn't contributing much in the playoffs this season before his injury. Yes, they'll potentially miss what he's capable of doing. But they won't be missing much when measured against his contribution to date in this year's playoffs.
I think the Sixers are a great team when healthy. Embiid, Simmons and Harris are a terrific core three and they have some really good supporting-cast players. But I agree with you about the Hawks. They're a very good and, I think, underrated team. They should get credit for taking the Sixers to 7 games and they'll deserve the credit if they win the series, which I believe they can do.
Q12543 wrote:But boy, Simmons is almost a Giannis-sized conundrum.....Yes, he will absolutely help you win games and get you to the playoffs, but at some point that shooting....I just don't know if you can have one of your featured guys have that issue and win a title.
He's making Giannis look like a solid to even good shooter.
Q , now you understand what I was saying about Rubio his first go around here. You guys believed him to be a vital piece back then regardless of his shooting.
Now you acknowledge this about Simmons even tho he brings way more to the table than Ricky did.
Not trying to make this a Rubio thread tho.
Mmmm, I kind of hear ya, but I think I was always honest about Ricky's flaws and felt that he was more of a complimentary piece that indeed needed scorers and shooters around him. He never became the star many of us hoped when he was originally drafted, but he was absolutely a plus player for this franchise and I always defended him as a plus player versus the guy to lay blame on for our losing ways.
Some of us initially thought that Ricky would eventually develop into a good perimeter shooter based on his terrific free-throw shooting. But alas, there came a point before he left MN when it was clear he'd never become a good shooter. At that point, I was with Q in seeing Ricky as a good complementary player. The lesson of Simmons is a team is that it's particularly difficult to win a championship if one of your team's two stars is a really bad perimeter and free-throw shooter. That's part of the challenge the Bucks face with Giannis.
I haven't watched the Sixers much this year but I've felt like they have some other flaws on that team besides Simmons shooting which I'm not dismissing. I think they likely miss Danny Green quite a bit. Even if the other guards have stepped up as starters it hurts the bench.
Danny Green wasn't doing much for them in the playoffs, so I'm not sure how much they miss him. But they'd certainly be better off to some degree having Green available. The Sixers are a great team with two elite players (Simmons and Embiid) and an allstar (Harris). They also have some nice depth behind those three. The Sixers really have two flaws: Simmons' poor perimeter/free-throw shooting and Embiid's lack of durability. Otherwise, they'd be the team to beat now with two of the Nets' three stars hurting.
To expand on my limited informed position...are they really a great team though? 8 more wins better than the Knicks and the Hawks even in a shortened season doesn't scream great to me. I'm curious if you have any thoughts about if Doc Rivers done anything different than Brett Brown?
As for Danny Green the Sixers need shooting and he was hitting nearly 38% from there and had the 2nd highest rate of 3's taken in the playoffs to Curry who has been absolutely bombing them in the playoffs. Green has played in 153 playoff games won 3 championships with 3 different teams and can still play. Nobody else on the Sixers has won at that level. Obviously Green is basically a role player more than a star and I know you are skeptical of vet experience in the playoffs but you have to admit Green's resume is much more impressive than the other guys that will play minutes instead of him. Green has always been a guy I've liked and there are some things he does uniquely that don't show up in the box score.
Also can the Hawks (and Nate McMillen) get some credit for actually being a good basketball team? I'm certainly not suggesting they are Steph Curry and the Warriors but when they made their first championship run nobody was predicting they would end up being THE team everyone would have to go through for a number of years. Yes comparing the Hawks and Warriors is hyperbole on purpose but my point is maybe people are underrating the Hawks to some extent in all this and sometimes young teams do emerge somewhat unexpectedly. There are also times teams are really playing well at the right time.
I don't disagree with your characterization of Green as a great shooter with an impressive resume. My only point was that he wasn't contributing much in the playoffs this season before his injury. Yes, they'll potentially miss what he's capable of doing. But they won't be missing much when measured against his contribution to date in this year's playoffs.
I think the Sixers are a great team when healthy. Embiid, Simmons and Harris are a terrific core three and they have some really good supporting-cast players. But I agree with you about the Hawks. They're a very good and, I think, underrated team. They should get credit for taking the Sixers to 7 games and they'll deserve the credit if they win the series, which I believe they can do.
I agree with what you said in this post but I do think even though Green's stats or maybe general play didn't look that exciting so far like I said he often does things that don't show up and like I said I think there is a drop off to another guy off the bench. Korkmaz (sp) seems to have found his game. It feels like he has been around forever but if I remember right he is 23.
I'm curious do you think Harris and Simmons fit well together? Harris shoots the ball well but he doesn't take a high volume. I wonder between Emibiid Simmons and Harris maybe that doesn't maximize Simmons. I'll hang up and listen. :)
BloopOracle wrote:Jesus, 76er fans are souring on Simmons so much that a large number on social media are openly welcoming a Dlo swap lol
I think they probably feel like DLO's shooting would really open things up for Harris and Embiid. The problem is having Seth Curry and DLO as your backcourt defensive tandem....yikes!
BloopOracle wrote:Jesus, 76er fans are souring on Simmons so much that a large number on social media are openly welcoming a Dlo swap lol
I think they probably feel like DLO's shooting would really open things up for Harris and Embiid. The problem is having Seth Curry and DLO as your backcourt defensive tandem....yikes!
Russell and Beasley for Simmons and George Hill. That's probably still not enough (lots of bad defensive guards to Philly!) and it would suck to lose Beasley since we would need shooting but adding Simmons would make that other guard position really flexible as you wouldn't have to play a PG there.
BloopOracle wrote:Jesus, 76er fans are souring on Simmons so much that a large number on social media are openly welcoming a Dlo swap lol
I think they probably feel like DLO's shooting would really open things up for Harris and Embiid. The problem is having Seth Curry and DLO as your backcourt defensive tandem....yikes!
Russell and Beasley for Simmons and George Hill. That's probably still not enough (lots of bad defensive guards to Philly!) and it would suck to lose Beasley since we would need shooting but adding Simmons would make that other guard position really flexible as you wouldn't have to play a PG there.
I wouldn't do that deal if I were Rosas. I'd swap DLO and Culver for Simmons and I might even throw in a future 2nd round pick, but that's it. I've been a huge Simmons fan, but I've soured on him a bit seeing how much of a liability his poor shooting is in the playoffs.
I'm ready to roll with DLO now that we have Ant and McDaniels. Ant potentially gives us the second star we need and also has the potential to be a two-way star. McDaniels looks like a budding defensive stalwart. With those two, we can rely less on DLO. Add a defensive big to this roster and I like our chances to make the playoffs next season and be a legitimate contender the following season.
I'll add that, as we know, Rosas won't trade DLO this offseason. DLO was his guy. He had a vision of KAT and DLO as a dynamic duo that would propel the Wolves into championship contention. He was wrong, but having the number 1 pick and taking Edwards last year will get Rosas off the hook as he won't have to rely on DLO as the team's 2nd star. Meanwhile, the fact that DLO and KAT are close friends has to be a factor that will discourage Rosas from dealing DLO. So the Sixers might trade Simmons this off season, but it won't be to the Wolves.
BloopOracle wrote:Jesus, 76er fans are souring on Simmons so much that a large number on social media are openly welcoming a Dlo swap lol
I think they probably feel like DLO's shooting would really open things up for Harris and Embiid. The problem is having Seth Curry and DLO as your backcourt defensive tandem....yikes!
Russell and Beasley for Simmons and George Hill. That's probably still not enough (lots of bad defensive guards to Philly!) and it would suck to lose Beasley since we would need shooting but adding Simmons would make that other guard position really flexible as you wouldn't have to play a PG there.
I wouldn't do that deal if I were Rosas. I'd swap DLO and Culver for Simmons and I might even throw in a future 2nd round pick, but that's it. I've been a huge Simmons fan, but I've soured on him a bit seeing how much of a liability his poor shooting is in the playoffs.
I'm ready to roll with DLO now that we have Ant and McDaniels. Ant potentially gives us the second star we need and also has the potential to be a two-way star. McDaniels looks like a budding defensive stalwart. With those two, we can rely less on DLO. Add a defensive big to this roster and I like our chances to make the playoffs next season and be a legitimate contender the following season.
Ben Simmons is a defensive big. I'm making this theoretical trade (I don't think it will happen) because I'm getting a very good player that's about to turn 25 that I think would fit well next to Towns. It will also open up some salary after this year.
I think Rosas would probably wider trading Russell for Simmons. I think the price for Simmons is likely going to be high. He is no doubt a better player than Aaron Gordon and he got a pretty nice haul. Remember Aimmons is a PF that's good at basketball. Those guys are super valuable right now.
Ultimately I agree with you that the Wolves should look to put a bigger defensive player next to Towns but if I could make the deal I suggested to get Simmons I would probably do it. I'm setting an alarm to watch game 7 today I'm looking forward to seeing both team play I hope it's a compete with game. I'm actually cheering for the Hawks to win it.
There's something wrong with Ben Simmons. His head isn't in the right place... offensively.
I'd take a chance at him being a reclamation project... change of scenery... role... type of thing. He'd never actually be worth that $40M deal down the line... but I think he has the potential to be a bigger game-changer than Russell or Beasley.
In any event, it isn't happening.
[Note: Pretty crazy to see how far/fast this guy is falling. Will be interesting to see how he responds.]
