Malik Beasley

[AbeVigodaLive]

The fact is that assuming we are keeping Beasley to go along with DLO and KAT, that is easily 65-70 fairly efficient points per game. From a pure roster construction standpoint, Ball is redundant with DLO; Wiseman is redundant with KAT; and Edwards is redundant with Beasley. None of these potential top 3 prospects easily slot into a starting role. I know some of us think a Wiseman/KAT combination could be tantalizing, but the fact remains that opposing teams are going to lick their chops putting these two guys int Pick and Roll situations. Wiseman won't be good defensively for at least a couple years.

The second you get beyond those top 3 and into the next 5-8 prospects, you see all sorts of guys that could be excellent role players at more reasonable prices and won't feel entitled to a starting spot based on draft position. Trading out of this pick never made more sense to me than it does now.

I don't disagree........BUT that makes you wonder how many teams would actually give away assets if this draft is as flat as many think. If no one is convinced they are getting an absolute star at 1, then what does a deal look like? No way do I trade just to save money. If you get the #1 pick, flat draft or not, you do your homework and you take your top guy. In a normal year, where there are 1-2 "perceived" stars, then you can assess trade value. In flat draft, where many think pick 8 is just as likely as pick 1 to get best player in draft, not sure what we can do to generate a deal that betters the Wolves. A while back I was looking at other teams, and I just didn't see many appetizing deals that included a pick and player, which is what I would expect by moving back in draft. I also don't expect teams to be throwing future high draft picks to move up in this particular draft either.

The hope would be that some team absolutely has total man-crush on Edwards, Wiseman or Ball, which is certainly possible as draft nears.

I'm not sure this draft is a substantially different from typical drafts.

There are at least two players in this draft who are widely perceived as potential stars, namely Ball and Edwards, and possibly a third in Wiseman. I know that last year every team in the League perceived Zion as a future NBA star with no hesitation except for some concern about his physical durability. And I think it's fair to say that nearly all 30 teams probably saw Ja Morant as the clear number 2 and a likely NBA all-star. Yet, although Ball, Edwards and Wiseman all have more concerns surrounding them than either Zion or Ja had, they are still widely viewed as having clear star potential based on their combination of skills and physical attributes. I'm sure there were close to 28 teams last year who would have loved to trade up for Zion or Ja, and admittedly there are probably far fewer teams who feel that same way about Ball, Edwards or Wiseman. However, given the talent of those three and the way NBA GMs tend to think, I'm sure there are more than a handful of teams who would love to trade up to get one or more of them. So I have no doubt there will be a decent market of buyers who see those three as the only prospects with star potential and who will be willing to give up significant value to get one of them.

As for what value the Wolves should expect in return for trading down, that depends on your view of the near consensus top three prospects and on what the Wolves would get in return, including the alternative draft pick.

For me, getting Okongwu and the Knicks 2021 top 3 protected 1st round pick and current Knicks' 27th pick this year would be enough. I see a lot of value in what will likely be a pretty high lottery pick next year when we don't have any picks and I also see value in the #27 pick this year as a valuable trade chip for other assets or to move up from #17. However, I don't see me making that deal because I don't see Okongwu lasting to #8. A major premise of that trade for me is my view that Okongwu will develop into a better shot-blocking version of Bam. And even if I'm wrong about Okongwu's upside, everything I've read and seen tells me he has a relatively high floor and will at least become a very good starting big who would complement KAT well with defense and rim-protection. I'm convinced that the Knicks really want Ball and would be inclined to give up a lot to get him.

If the Bulls, Pistons, Pistons or Cavs love one of the top three prospects, then the Wolves should be able to solicit some decent offers to trade down and end up with Okongwu. Heurter from the Hawks and the rights to Okongwu would be a nice and I think realistic return for the #1 pick (and possible Nowell), assuming Okongwu falls that far.

On what earth do the Knicks trade the rights to Okongwu, give up a top 3 protected pick in what is considered a much stronger draft than this one and a 3rd first round pick for the 1st overall pick in a weak draft?

In a world where they believe Ball is going to be a transcendent star to build around - without knowing for sure where they'll be drafting next year or who will be available when they're on the clock, and also knowing that their pick would be top 3 protected while still having the Mav's unprotected first round pick. I don't know what value the Knicks put on Okongwu. I know their two best players play the same position as Okongwu. Is it likely the Knicks would do this deal? I don't know. Moving from #8 to #1 is a big move up if it lands a guy you see as a star -- and an entertaining flashy star to boot. But you seem totally sure of yourself, Kahns, so I'm not interested in trying to convince you.

Based on your own previous thoughts regarding player values in trades, if a team values a complete unknown as worth 3 first round picks because they think he is a transcendent player does that not make you pause and wonder why you aren't taking the guy if he's that good? The goal at the end of the day is to end up with the best player so if someone is offering me 3 first round picks for an unknown who's not even the clear cut #1 prospect I would be asking myself what they see and know that I don't because that sounds exactly like someone we should be adding to this team. Keep in mind that we are getting more in return for Ball than the Hawks got for Doncic in this scenario. That basically just means the Knicks have to be complete suckers or geniuses and no in-between to make this offer at all which is why I don't find it realistic because that is insanely risky for a brand new front office to go all in on this particular draft.

Yes, it would give me pause. But then again, we're talking about the Knicks. :). The Doncic comparison isn't a good one. In that instance, the Mavs only moved up two slots from #5 to #3. Moreover, at the time Luka and Trae were considered on par with one another and no one (except maybe the Mavs) thought Luka would turn out to be the player he has quickly become. In the hypothetical I'm suggesting, this Knicks are moving up 7 slots from #8 to #1 to get one of only three players who are widely considered to have star potential.

I don't think the Knicks have to be suckers or geniuses to do a deal along the lines I suggested. They just have to really love Ball and feel a sense of urgency to make a splash in this draft. And of course, my scenario assumes the Knicks don't value Okongwu as highly as I do. None of those assumptions is outlandish given the fact that Ball is generally considered one of this year's three draft prospects with star potential and the fact that there seems to be a pretty wide spread of opinions on Okongwu's upside as reflected in the panoply of mock drafts. I do think the Knicks are a bit desperate. Would they be willing to give up their top pick next year with only top 3 protection. I don't know. I'm sure their first response would be no and, if interested at all, they might counter by offering their rights to the Mavs' 2021 first round pick.

Again, I don't think Okongwu will be around at #8, so my scenario is highly unlikely. And I would caution against drafting Ball in the hope that a good deal will materialize. You take Ball only if you want to keep him or you have a deal in place for precisely the players, including draft prospects, you want.

To be fair, Luka Doncic was considered the best player in the world's second best league. He showed progression and an all-around game in a team environment that led to wins. Ball played 12 games in Australia for a team that let him do whatever he wanted. He showed a very inconsistent shot and laughably bad defensive effort before shutting it down for the season.

The only good things we know about Ball are his height and his passing. I don't get the hype for this guy... or any of the top guys in this draft. In fact, I can't remember many drafts with this many clear red flags at the very top.

Even 2013. The big knock at the time was whether Oladipo's wonderful college season was a fluke. Well... ok... but a 30 game sample size would be welcomed and an advantage now. wW don't even have that to go on this season with Wiseman and Ball playing a combined 15 games.

I'm all in for trading down. I just don't expect anything too crazy to come out of it...

[Hicks123 [enjin:6700838]]

Lip,

Would you consider following?

Knicks get: #1 pick
Wolves get: #8 / Mitchell Robinson

Thoughts here: I think the Knicks are ALWAYS looking to make a splash. Ball seems to be a guy I could see them falling for (even though I am not a fan). They have been desperate for franchise PG for a long time. Also, he would provide that organization with some instant interest from fans.

For Wolves, I really like what Robinson offers. Great shot blocker on a super cheap contract for next 2 seasons. Certainly provides some of the interior defense many are looking for. Regarding draft pick, we would be looking at guys like Vassell, Haliburton, Patrick Williams. Likely some good "fits" for guys in this range. Would just need to be comfortable that one of those players would be a future key to team.

Thoughts?

[Lipoli390]

The fact is that assuming we are keeping Beasley to go along with DLO and KAT, that is easily 65-70 fairly efficient points per game. From a pure roster construction standpoint, Ball is redundant with DLO; Wiseman is redundant with KAT; and Edwards is redundant with Beasley. None of these potential top 3 prospects easily slot into a starting role. I know some of us think a Wiseman/KAT combination could be tantalizing, but the fact remains that opposing teams are going to lick their chops putting these two guys int Pick and Roll situations. Wiseman won't be good defensively for at least a couple years.

The second you get beyond those top 3 and into the next 5-8 prospects, you see all sorts of guys that could be excellent role players at more reasonable prices and won't feel entitled to a starting spot based on draft position. Trading out of this pick never made more sense to me than it does now.

I don't disagree........BUT that makes you wonder how many teams would actually give away assets if this draft is as flat as many think. If no one is convinced they are getting an absolute star at 1, then what does a deal look like? No way do I trade just to save money. If you get the #1 pick, flat draft or not, you do your homework and you take your top guy. In a normal year, where there are 1-2 "perceived" stars, then you can assess trade value. In flat draft, where many think pick 8 is just as likely as pick 1 to get best player in draft, not sure what we can do to generate a deal that betters the Wolves. A while back I was looking at other teams, and I just didn't see many appetizing deals that included a pick and player, which is what I would expect by moving back in draft. I also don't expect teams to be throwing future high draft picks to move up in this particular draft either.

The hope would be that some team absolutely has total man-crush on Edwards, Wiseman or Ball, which is certainly possible as draft nears.

I'm not sure this draft is a substantially different from typical drafts.

There are at least two players in this draft who are widely perceived as potential stars, namely Ball and Edwards, and possibly a third in Wiseman. I know that last year every team in the League perceived Zion as a future NBA star with no hesitation except for some concern about his physical durability. And I think it's fair to say that nearly all 30 teams probably saw Ja Morant as the clear number 2 and a likely NBA all-star. Yet, although Ball, Edwards and Wiseman all have more concerns surrounding them than either Zion or Ja had, they are still widely viewed as having clear star potential based on their combination of skills and physical attributes. I'm sure there were close to 28 teams last year who would have loved to trade up for Zion or Ja, and admittedly there are probably far fewer teams who feel that same way about Ball, Edwards or Wiseman. However, given the talent of those three and the way NBA GMs tend to think, I'm sure there are more than a handful of teams who would love to trade up to get one or more of them. So I have no doubt there will be a decent market of buyers who see those three as the only prospects with star potential and who will be willing to give up significant value to get one of them.

As for what value the Wolves should expect in return for trading down, that depends on your view of the near consensus top three prospects and on what the Wolves would get in return, including the alternative draft pick.

For me, getting Okongwu and the Knicks 2021 top 3 protected 1st round pick and current Knicks' 27th pick this year would be enough. I see a lot of value in what will likely be a pretty high lottery pick next year when we don't have any picks and I also see value in the #27 pick this year as a valuable trade chip for other assets or to move up from #17. However, I don't see me making that deal because I don't see Okongwu lasting to #8. A major premise of that trade for me is my view that Okongwu will develop into a better shot-blocking version of Bam. And even if I'm wrong about Okongwu's upside, everything I've read and seen tells me he has a relatively high floor and will at least become a very good starting big who would complement KAT well with defense and rim-protection. I'm convinced that the Knicks really want Ball and would be inclined to give up a lot to get him.

If the Bulls, Pistons, Pistons or Cavs love one of the top three prospects, then the Wolves should be able to solicit some decent offers to trade down and end up with Okongwu. Heurter from the Hawks and the rights to Okongwu would be a nice and I think realistic return for the #1 pick (and possible Nowell), assuming Okongwu falls that far.

On what earth do the Knicks trade the rights to Okongwu, give up a top 3 protected pick in what is considered a much stronger draft than this one and a 3rd first round pick for the 1st overall pick in a weak draft?

In a world where they believe Ball is going to be a transcendent star to build around - without knowing for sure where they'll be drafting next year or who will be available when they're on the clock, and also knowing that their pick would be top 3 protected while still having the Mav's unprotected first round pick. I don't know what value the Knicks put on Okongwu. I know their two best players play the same position as Okongwu. Is it likely the Knicks would do this deal? I don't know. Moving from #8 to #1 is a big move up if it lands a guy you see as a star -- and an entertaining flashy star to boot. But you seem totally sure of yourself, Kahns, so I'm not interested in trying to convince you.

Based on your own previous thoughts regarding player values in trades, if a team values a complete unknown as worth 3 first round picks because they think he is a transcendent player does that not make you pause and wonder why you aren't taking the guy if he's that good? The goal at the end of the day is to end up with the best player so if someone is offering me 3 first round picks for an unknown who's not even the clear cut #1 prospect I would be asking myself what they see and know that I don't because that sounds exactly like someone we should be adding to this team. Keep in mind that we are getting more in return for Ball than the Hawks got for Doncic in this scenario. That basically just means the Knicks have to be complete suckers or geniuses and no in-between to make this offer at all which is why I don't find it realistic because that is insanely risky for a brand new front office to go all in on this particular draft.

Yes, it would give me pause. But then again, we're talking about the Knicks. :). The Doncic comparison isn't a good one. In that instance, the Mavs only moved up two slots from #5 to #3. Moreover, at the time Luka and Trae were considered on par with one another and no one (except maybe the Mavs) thought Luka would turn out to be the player he has quickly become. In the hypothetical I'm suggesting, this Knicks are moving up 7 slots from #8 to #1 to get one of only three players who are widely considered to have star potential.

I don't think the Knicks have to be suckers or geniuses to do a deal along the lines I suggested. They just have to really love Ball and feel a sense of urgency to make a splash in this draft. And of course, my scenario assumes the Knicks don't value Okongwu as highly as I do. None of those assumptions is outlandish given the fact that Ball is generally considered one of this year's three draft prospects with star potential and the fact that there seems to be a pretty wide spread of opinions on Okongwu's upside as reflected in the panoply of mock drafts. I do think the Knicks are a bit desperate. Would they be willing to give up their top pick next year with only top 3 protection. I don't know. I'm sure their first response would be no and, if interested at all, they might counter by offering their rights to the Mavs' 2021 first round pick.

Again, I don't think Okongwu will be around at #8, so my scenario is highly unlikely. And I would caution against drafting Ball in the hope that a good deal will materialize. You take Ball only if you want to keep him or you have a deal in place for precisely the players, including draft prospects, you want.

To be fair, Luka Doncic was considered the best player in the world's second best league. He showed progression and an all-around game in a team environment that led to wins. Ball played 12 games in Australia for a team that let him do whatever he wanted. He showed a very inconsistent shot and laughably bad defensive effort before shutting it down for the season.

The only good things we know about Ball are his height and his passing. I don't get the hype for this guy... or any of the top guys in this draft. In fact, I can't remember many drafts with this many clear red flags at the very top.

Even 2013. The big knock at the time was whether Oladipo's wonderful college season was a fluke. Well... ok... but a 30 game sample size would be welcomed and an advantage now. wW don't even have that to go on this season with Wiseman and Ball playing a combined 15 games.

I'm all in for trading down. I just don't expect anything too crazy to come out of it...

So Luka was really that good coming out of Europe?? :) You're a master of the obvious. But just remember, Abe, that two players were selected ahead of Luka and I only saw one mock draft that had him higher than 3rd, which was the near consensus mock status of Luka. Luka was highly rated and I loved him as a prospect that year, but he wasn't widely considered the equivalent of a LeBron, Hakeem or Anthony Davis.

My only point was that there's a big difference between trading up two slots (from 5 to 3) to get the 3rd rated player in a draft and moving up 7 slots from 8 to 1 to get one of only three prospects widely considered to have star potential. The Mavs gave up a top 5 protected first round pick to move up two slots for Luka. It's not inconceivable that the Knicks would trade a top 3 protected first to move up 7 slots for Ball. My guess is that the Knicks, if interested, would push back hard and offer the Dallas pick instead or in the alternative insist on at least top 10 protection. But the Knicks trading their next year's first round pick with some protection in exchange for the draft rights to Ball at #1 isn't crazy, especially when we're talking about the Knicks.

By the way, I'm not high on Ball either. I find his combination of poor shooting stats and motor questions alarming. But a lot of analysts and probably a number of team front offices obviously think very highly of him. Schmitz is a very solid, smart scout/analysis and he has him rated the top talent in the draft. I sort or get it watching him and seeing his combination of size and skills at his position. But I'm stay away if I were Rosas and I wouldn't trade up for him if I were in charge of the Knicks.

[WildWolf2813]

I just can't see the Knicks going all-in on Ball when all they've been preaching is asset management. With Thibs there now, I don't even know how enthused he'd be to suggest to management that they should get Ball. He'd probably rather want someone like Vassell anyway.

Thibs isn't the president of basketball operations in New York. He's not even GM
and he has no front office position. And Dolan is the most meddling owner in the League. So Thibs won't dictate the team's draft strategy. The Knicks have no cornerstone player on the roster and will find it hard to resist the flash, star power and potential of Ball.

I'm telling you,as someone who lives here, the fanbase would be cool with having Ball, but it's not something they're pressuring management to go get. Most Knicks fans just wanna add another couple of solid rookies to go with Barrett and Robinson and see what they have. If the fans were demanding it, I could see the team making more overtures, but the only connection Ball has to Leon Rose is that he's a CAA client and Dolan loves those guys. That said, he's not the only CAA client in this draft.


In NY, the Knicks might as well give up on "star power" moves. The Nets with KD, Kyrie and now Nash at coach, they have the star power in terms of basketball. The Giants have Barkley. The Jets got rid of their star. The Yankees have a bunch of stars and the Mets have DeGrom. Even the Liberty have Ionescu and the Rangers and Islanders have their guys. The Knicks aren't in a position to make a move for the sake of star power and I think their fans acknowledge that.

[Lipoli390]

I just can't see the Knicks going all-in on Ball when all they've been preaching is asset management. With Thibs there now, I don't even know how enthused he'd be to suggest to management that they should get Ball. He'd probably rather want someone like Vassell anyway.

Thibs isn't the president of basketball operations in New York. He's not even GM
and he has no front office position. And Dolan is the most meddling owner in the League. So Thibs won't dictate the team's draft strategy. The Knicks have no cornerstone player on the roster and will find it hard to resist the flash, star power and potential of Ball.

I'm telling you,as someone who lives here, the fanbase would be cool with having Ball, but it's not something they're pressuring management to go get. Most Knicks fans just wanna add another couple of solid rookies to go with Barrett and Robinson and see what they have. If the fans were demanding it, I could see the team making more overtures, but the only connection Ball has to Leon Rose is that he's a CAA client and Dolan loves those guys. That said, he's not the only CAA client in this draft.


In NY, the Knicks might as well give up on "star power" moves. The Nets with KD, Kyrie and now Nash at coach, they have the star power in terms of basketball. The Giants have Barkley. The Jets got rid of their star. The Yankees have a bunch of stars and the Mets have DeGrom. Even the Liberty have Ionescu and the Rangers and Islanders have their guys. The Knicks aren't in a position to make a move for the sake of star power and I think their fans acknowledge that.

Interesting insight, Wild. I appreciate it. But I have a Knicks season ticket holder friend in NY who thinks the organization is highly motivated to add star power precisely because of all the star power the other NY franchises have. He said the organization and fans love Robinson, but he's obviously not viewed as a guy with star power. He told me fans are pretty apprehensive when it comes to Barrett - which isn't surprising since he wasn't much better than Culver last season. We'll see. I'll reiterate that I don't see a deal between the Wolves and Knicks actually happening, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does.

[Lipoli390]

Lip,

Would you consider following?

Knicks get: #1 pick
Wolves get: #8 / Mitchell Robinson

Thoughts here: I think the Knicks are ALWAYS looking to make a splash. Ball seems to be a guy I could see them falling for (even though I am not a fan). They have been desperate for franchise PG for a long time. Also, he would provide that organization with some instant interest from fans.

For Wolves, I really like what Robinson offers. Great shot blocker on a super cheap contract for next 2 seasons. Certainly provides some of the interior defense many are looking for. Regarding draft pick, we would be looking at guys like Vassell, Haliburton, Patrick Williams. Likely some good "fits" for guys in this range. Would just need to be comfortable that one of those players would be a future key to team.

Thoughts?

I'd like that deal a lot for the Wolves. But I don't see the Knicks going along with it. They're high on Robinson and rightly so. And part of the appeal of getting Ball is pairing him with Robinson.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Someone sell me on the Wolves taking Anthony Edwards over Devin Vassell because the more I watch and the more I think about fit, skill profile, etc. -- I come away wanting Vassell on my team a lot more.

I see a thoroughbred in Edwards with the mentality of a turkey -- that's to say that he's lacking in basketball smarts.

[thedoper]

Someone sell me on the Wolves taking Anthony Edwards over Devin Vassell because the more I watch and the more I think about fit, skill profile, etc. -- I come away wanting Vassell on my team a lot more.

I see a thoroughbred in Edwards with the mentality of a turkey -- that's to say that he's lacking in basketball smarts.

I think the only real counter is that Vassel hasn't had the primary scorer mentality. He's been in complimentary roles so far, and may only end up being a complimentary piece. Edwards is a lead pony with quite a few issues. I'm not convinced with Edwards as the guy, but his athletic profile is intriguing. That and the fact that he put up significant raw numbers as the primary focus of opposing defenses is attractive to development types who think they can mold him. I do think you properly identified the decision making as a red flag.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Someone sell me on the Wolves taking Anthony Edwards over Devin Vassell because the more I watch and the more I think about fit, skill profile, etc. -- I come away wanting Vassell on my team a lot more.

I see a thoroughbred in Edwards with the mentality of a turkey -- that's to say that he's lacking in basketball smarts.

Reason number 214 we should trade down. We have our scorers well in hand and the "great role player" potential seems much higher in the next tier down than the "great overall player" potential in the first three slots.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

Someone sell me on the Wolves taking Anthony Edwards over Devin Vassell because the more I watch and the more I think about fit, skill profile, etc. -- I come away wanting Vassell on my team a lot more.

I see a thoroughbred in Edwards with the mentality of a turkey -- that's to say that he's lacking in basketball smarts.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2020/2/12/21134535/anthony-edwards-nba-draft-2020-georgia

This is a good profile on him that is honest with his flaws and identifies what kind of team he needs to go to in order to be a successful player. It makes me think he actually fits here really well even if I'm not the biggest fan of him. He would get to come in here and be the third option on offense with not a ton of pressure on him to run the team offensively with Russell on the floor. He's a capable 3 point shooter and his shot isn't broken so he doesn't have to come in and be a volume shooter off the dribble for us immediately and can be more of a catch and shoot guy while he improves his shot selection off the dribble. He also complements Towns and Russell in that they are more finesse players and he has the size and strength to be a more aggressive power player that gives our offense a nice wrinkle.

Everyone talks so negatively about his mentality but this is a guy who could have gone to any big program in the country to play on a good team and he chose Georgia to play for Tom Crean specifically because of what Crean was able to do with D Wade and Oladipo in terms of player development. It took those guys 3 years under Crean to become good college players so Edwards unfortunately isn't sticking around long enough to get to that point, but I think that is a good character trait to identify at that young age that you want to play like 2 guys that coach helped develop regardless of it is a big basketball program or not. If he has his eyes on becoming the next D Wade or Oladipo that's a good start towards having the right mentality for the game even if it's not all there yet in terms of basketball smarts and 100% effort.

It's also hard to know how much being "the guy" on a bad team with not a lot of help drains your mentality in college and allows the laziness to set in. People seem to forget that Simmons was in the same boat out of college as a very talented player who just wasn't trying hard all game long especially on defense. Then he gets to the NBA, he's playing on a good team with talented players and he's all of sudden an all-nba defender.

Here's an exert from his draft profile back when he was a prospect:

"Defensively, Simmons has elite instincts and anticipation skills, as evidenced by the terrific 12.9 rebounds, 2.1 steals and .9 blocks he averages per-40 minutes. He sees loose balls coming off the rim in an uncanny way, and is able to react and go grab rebounds before anyone else. When engaged and motivated, Simmons shows the ability to defend a variety of different positions on the floor, moving his feet well enough to stay in front of wings and even guards, while possessing the strength needed to slow down most power forwards in the post.

The problem is that Simmons rarely plays up to his full potential on this end of the floor. He often looks very lazy here, not making any effort whatsoever to close out on shooters and avoiding contact and physicality in a very concerning way when challenged by opposing players. He often resorts to swiping down at the ball aimlessly in hopes of generating a steal, instead of getting in a fundamentally sound stance and trying to stop his man from scoring.

While the red flags around Simmons' defense were there from the moment he stepped on the floor at the college level, as LSU's season went on, he gradually gave less and less effort here, even in his team's most important games, which raised serious question marks about his competitiveness in NBA circles. - Source: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Ben-Simmons-61928/ ©DraftExpress"

I'm not saying Edwards has the same defensive tool bag as someone as good as Simmons nor the same brains for the game, but he does have a good physical profile to be a good defender for his position and I see the same mentality comments on Edwards that we saw with Simmons at the time. I do think being on a bad team in college with the whole team's weight on your shoulders does eventually wear guys down at 18 years old and it can be refreshing towards their mentality to get to the pros and play with superior talent where they know it's not all on them. Simmons was a phenomenal talent with big red flags around his attitude and effort and that all went away immediately when he got to the big leagues and played on a real team. Not everyone is Andrew Wiggins and just the fact that Edwards is looking at guys like Wade and Oldadipo as guys to model his game after has me believing he doesn't have the same Wiggins mentality and is closer to the Simmons mentality where college just eventually wore him down and he's ready for the next level.