Minnesota Sports Forum

Drew, I don't see anyone envisioning Simmons as a full-time PG. That doesn't mean he can't bring the ball up on occasion or help facilitate the offense. But keep in mind he averaged nearly 20 points 11 boards per game, so it's not like he can't excel in other areas as well.

Functionally, Simmons is a poor fit for Minnesota. He's a poor shooter and lackadaisical defender, the two functions we need most.

Positionally, he's a great fit because, like KAT, he can play small-ball or big-ball and we wouldn't have to adjust to what the other team is doing. So when teams decide to put a PF + 4 guards out there, we can just leave KAT and Simmons in and they can hang with that lineup in terms of quickness and mobility AND have a size advantage. When teams decide if they want to go big and strong versus small and quick, our answer to that is "we'll do both!".

Hopefully the front office is mocking up every scenario. Included in those scenarios is what they would accept in a trade, as everything can be traded for the right price. And that includes Ingram or Simmons.

Interesting discussion. I honestly think Simmons would fit better than Ingram. I think he will develop as a shooter and defender. It is way harder to develop his handle, vision, and rebounding skills.

Man, I need to control my excitement.

If we DID happen to get Simmons, I don't necessarily see him becoming a full time point (though I wouldn't rule it out either). And if he does develop a jumper and can play off the ball well, then I'd love to keep both Rubio and Simmons. But if Simmons DID pan out as a guy who can play for long stretches as a ball-handler/distributer who doesn't develop a very good jump shot, and teams learn how to exploit that defensively, then having him a Rubio on the same team could limit us and would push us to a choice.

A) Trade Simmons for somebody good who fits with Rubio (assuming we decide Simmons isn't as important to us as Rubio). In that case, my guess is Simmons will still be pretty valuable in a trade.

or

B) Trade Rubio or reduce his minutes with Simmons and roll with a more scoring-oriented point (which LaVine could actually be perfect for).

In the latter case which I'm kind of imagining, if Simmons is good enough in other areas (which I think he definitely could because of his rebounding, inside scoring, and transition game), then I think there could come a time to think about moving Rubio (who I've come to love as a player despite his limitations) or if he agrees reducing his minutes on the floor with Simmons, and shifting LaVine to play the 1 spot much more.

I've been totally opposed to relying on LaVine solely as a PG because I want him to concentrate on scoring and cut down on turnovers, and the offense just runs so much better with Rubio as a true distributor. And I LOVE Rubio's heart and leadership. But IF Simmons pans out like a Diaw or Green or (in passing ability) LeBron type of point-forward (which I think is possible), then that would make Rubio more expendable or move him to a bit more of a super-sub role and if we moved Zach to the 1 it would take the pressure off LaVine as a distributor and let him concentrate on perimeter shooting (which he's improving at) and scoring off cuts and drives. Meanwhile, LaVine has shown he can defend most opposing PGs, and he could still handle the ball and distribute some to take a little pressure of Simmons. So part of my excitement about Simmons actually has to do with my appreciation for Zach's development, especially at the end of the year.

In short, I'm excited about Simmons because while Simmons and Rubio might not be a good fit, Simmons and LaVine seem like they could be a perfect fit.

The binders regarding Rubio still amazes me. We need shooting but nobody would even think Rubio is a big reason for that. His defense is very overrated also gentleman. Metrics aren't aren't everything. Rubio will be on another team in two years. I guarantee it.

I'm sticking with my prediction of a top 3 pick. Start thinking Ingram, Simmons or a trade.

I would be against trading any pick we get. I just think the potential of a 19 year old is too valuable to give up for a vet. For those who would like a trade because you feel we need a vet/role player. Who would you target?

Target vets and role players in free agency.

I think if we get a top 3 pick we keep it and take Ingram, Simmons or Bender. If we don't get a top 3 pick, then I think we see if we can trade our pick for good value. Some ideas would be Sixers: Noel and 24th overall, Bucks: Middleton, Denver: 7th and 19th (we may need to add Bazz to the deal), Toronto: 9th and 29th, or Boston:16th, 23rd and a player (e.g. Olynyk).

Duke13 wrote:The binders regarding Rubio still amazes me. We need shooting but nobody would even think Rubio is a big reason for that. His defense is very overrated also gentleman. Metrics aren't aren't everything. Rubio will be on another team in two years. I guarantee it.

Why would Thibs trade a player that helps the team outscore opponents when he is on the floor? It's proof that his shooting isn't hurting the team. The team wins when he plays. It's when he sits that the team goes to shit.

TeamRicky wrote:I think if we get a top 3 pick we keep it and take Ingram, Simmons or Bender. If we don't get a top 3 pick, then I think we see if we can trade our pick for good value. Some ideas would be Sixers: Noel and 24th overall, Bucks: Middleton, Denver: 7th and 19th (we may need to add Bazz to the deal), Toronto: 9th and 29th, or Boston:16th, 23rd and a player (e.g. Olynyk).

The deal with the Sixers for Noel and the 24th pick makes sense to me for the Wolves, although I don't see the Sixers doing that deal. I also like the deal you suggest with the Bucks for Middleton. But again, I don't see the Bucks doing it unless, perhaps, we include Shabazz in the deal. Even then, I suspect they wouldn't bite. The Celtic deal looks closer to something that both sides might do. But I don't see much value to the Wolves in two first round picks given how full our roster is and how many young players we have. And I'm not sold on Olynyk although I have always liked him coming out of college.

Bottom line for me is this. I don't see the Wolves getting a what I'd consider an adequate return in exchange for what will likely be a 5th or 6th pick. Our pick will likely allow us to select a potentially elite 3-point shooter in either Hield or Murray. That seems to make the most sense given Thib's declaration that 3-point shooting is one of this team's two needs. I think Hield has the wingspan, athleticism and work ethic to become a decent if not good defender. Hield would also provide us with a mature player ready to hit the ground running as an NBA player. Murray's stats, especially his 3-point shooting, were really impressive for a teenage freshman. If we neither one is available when we're picking, I'd take Dunn. He's someone with the potential to be an elite defender -- filling the other need identified by Thibs.

I'd take Hield, Murray or Dunn over any two players we'd be in line to draft with two picks in the late teens or 20s. If all three are gone when we're on the clock, then trades become more enticing for me.