Ben Simmons Talk Revived

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I agree. I don't think Simmons is a good fit with DLO, Edwards and KAT. Simmons needs to be a primary ball-handler and facilitate the offense to maximize his skills. He's not a good fit for any team playing off the ball. If I were Rosas, I'd offer a package that included DLO, but not McDaniels and with fewer picks than the Beasley packages that some have suggested. DLO, Okogie or Layman, the rights to Bolmaro, two 1st-round picks and four 2nd-round picks would be the most I'd offer.

Lip, I couldn't disagree more, respectfully. I think Ben Simmons' strengths and weaknesses are highlighted when he's forced to be the team's primary ball-handler.

Yes, he's a fantastic facilitator with great court vision. Yes, he's 6'11 with exceptional athleticism and continues to be a massive threat when he attacks the rim. However, these skills are not specific to being a lead guard -- meaning his ability to make reads and execute passes in various ways or pressure the rim aren't exclusive to his current role. You put Simmons in short roll action as a four and he's going to excel at both of those things I talked about above. He might actually be more dangerous in that role because his defender will likely be a step out of position when he gets the ball.

The issues with Simmons being the primary ball-handler are well-documented. He's not a perimeter shooter. He isn't an aggressive scorer. Defenders will never play his jumper, which means that they'll either go under screens or sag off of him completely and clog the painted area. Both reactions create issues offensively because it reduces the space for which the other four players on the court can operate. That isn't to say that Simmons isn't effective in this role because he definitely is. But to me that's not the best possible way -- nor the only way -- for him to be used offensively. I think it's a collection of both on-ball and off-ball.

Philadelphia was forced to use him as their lead ball-handler because they never had another capable guard to handle those duties. If Minnesota retains D'Angelo Russell, and Anthony Edwards continues to play at the level he did in the second half of last season, Simmons won't be relied on as much to handle the ball. In my mind, utilizing Simmons as a screener would simplify the game for him, minimize his weaknesses, and provide a plethora of scoring opportunities for not only himself but his teammates too. That's the aspect of Simmons' game that I feel like hasn't been unlocked through his four seasons in the NBA.

[Porckchop]

I agree. I don't think Simmons is a good fit with DLO, Edwards and KAT. Simmons needs to be a primary ball-handler and facilitate the offense to maximize his skills. He's not a good fit for any team playing off the ball. If I were Rosas, I'd offer a package that included DLO, but not McDaniels and with fewer picks than the Beasley packages that some have suggested. DLO, Okogie or Layman, the rights to Bolmaro, two 1st-round picks and four 2nd-round picks would be the most I'd offer.

Lip, I couldn't disagree more, respectfully. I think Ben Simmons' strengths and weaknesses are highlighted when he's forced to be the team's primary ball-handler.

Yes, he's a fantastic facilitator with great court vision. Yes, he's 6'11 with exceptional athleticism and continues to be a massive threat when he attacks the rim. However, these skills are not specific to being a lead guard -- meaning his ability to make reads and execute passes in various ways or pressure the rim aren't exclusive to his current role. You put Simmons in short roll action as a four and he's going to excel at both of those things I talked about above. He might actually be more dangerous in that role because his defender will likely be a step out of position when he gets the ball.

The issues with Simmons being the primary ball-handler are well-documented. He's not a perimeter shooter. He isn't an aggressive scorer. Defenders will never play his jumper, which means that they'll either go under screens or sag off of him completely and clog the painted area. Both reactions create issues offensively because it reduces the space for which the other four players on the court can operate. That isn't to say that Simmons isn't effective in this role because definitely he is. But to me that's not the best possible way -- nor the only way -- for him to be used offensively. I think it's a collection of both on-ball and off-ball.

Philadelphia was forced to use him as their lead ball-handler because they never had another capable guard to handle those duties. If Minnesota retains D'Angelo Russell, and Anthony Edwards continues to play at the level he did in the second half of last season, Simmons won't be relied on as much to handle the ball. In my mind, utilizing Simmons as a screener would simplify the game for him, minimize his weaknesses, and provide a plethora of scoring opportunities for not only himself but his teammates too. That's the aspect of Simmons' game that I feel like hasn't been unlocked through his four seasons in the NBA.

Are we sure Simmons is the type of guy that would switch team's only to find himself being used as a screener and less as facilitator? NBA players run the asylum these days. If he don't like the way he's being used he'll see too it that he's moved. Again.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Are we sure Simmons is the type of guy that would switch team's only to find himself being used as a screener and less as facilitator? NBA players run the asylum these days. If he don't like the way he's being used he'll see too it that he's moved. Again.

I don't see the two being mutually exclusive. Maybe that's the disconnect. I don't think Ben Simmons being used as a screener negatively impacts his ability to facilitate. Rather, I could see him being even more dangerous in that role.

The easy example of this is Draymond Green. Would anyone here argue that Green is a lead guard or primary ball-handler? Would anyone here be surprised to find that Green's assist percentage last year was actually higher than Simmons'? Green is a transition menace and a short roll killer. That's what he does on offense and he picks teams apart. You do not have to be the main ball-handler to be an effective facilitator.

[Wolvesfan21]

I'd prefer to see Ant and Simmons as the primary handlers and facilitators which is why I like DLO moving on. I see Ant as growing in his ability to distribute the ball.

Plus our defense could be so much better with a defense orientated PG like Beverley, then add in Jaden and Simmons. We could actually have a good defensive team.

[Monster]

Are we sure Simmons is the type of guy that would switch team's only to find himself being used as a screener and less as facilitator? NBA players run the asylum these days. If he don't like the way he's being used he'll see too it that he's moved. Again.

I don't see the two being mutually exclusive. Maybe that's the disconnect. I don't think Ben Simmons being used as a screener negatively impacts his ability to facilitate. Rather, I could see him being even more dangerous in that role.

The easy example of this is Draymond Green. Would anyone here argue that Green is a lead guard or primary ball-handler? Would anyone here be surprised to find that Green's assist percentage last year was actually higher than Simmons'? Green is a transition menace and a short roll killer. That's what he does on offense and he picks teams apart. You do not have to be the main ball-handler to be an effective facilitator.

Cam to me we can say the role we both envision for Simmons is a good one but we can't be sure he would embrace it. I'm still impressed that Giannis did AND that his coaching staff actually utilized him that way which I believe was key to winning a championship.

This isn't meant to back you into a corner or anything but a purely hypothetical question let's say Morey tells you he will not trade Simmons without getting Russell back. What do you do?

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Are we sure Simmons is the type of guy that would switch team's only to find himself being used as a screener and less as facilitator? NBA players run the asylum these days. If he don't like the way he's being used he'll see too it that he's moved. Again.

I don't see the two being mutually exclusive. Maybe that's the disconnect. I don't think Ben Simmons being used as a screener negatively impacts his ability to facilitate. Rather, I could see him being even more dangerous in that role.

The easy example of this is Draymond Green. Would anyone here argue that Green is a lead guard or primary ball-handler? Would anyone here be surprised to find that Green's assist percentage last year was actually higher than Simmons'? Green is a transition menace and a short roll killer. That's what he does on offense and he picks teams apart. You do not have to be the main ball-handler to be an effective facilitator.

Cam to me we can say the role we both envision for Simmons is a good one but we can't be sure he would embrace it. I'm still impressed that Giannis did AND that his coaching staff actually utilized him that way which I believe was key to winning a championship.

This isn't meant to back you into a corner or anything but a purely hypothetical question let's say Morey tells you he will not trade Simmons without getting Russell back. What do you do?

What would make you think that Ben Simmons wouldn't embrace that role? Is there a time in his career where he was considered a poor team player that would lead you to believe that? Or are we just trying to find ways in which Simmons doesn't fit so we can prepare for the possibility that he's not traded to Minnesota? Please let me know.

That's a difficult question to answer considering I don't think Daryl Morey is the kind of decision-maker that lacks flexibility. Negotiations are almost never that black and white. I think Morey's tremendously intelligent and knows that trade value can be compensated for in various forms. Not to mention, in your hypothetical situation, is Morey wanting additional assets along with D'Angelo Russell? Does he just want a one-for-one swap? There are so many variables at play that it's hard to say. Ultimately, the same idea remains true for me. Keeping Karl-Anthony Towns, Anthony Edwards, and Russell while adding Simmons leads to the most dangerous team the Wolves can assemble. You make that happen by almost any means, in my opinion.

[Monster]

Are we sure Simmons is the type of guy that would switch team's only to find himself being used as a screener and less as facilitator? NBA players run the asylum these days. If he don't like the way he's being used he'll see too it that he's moved. Again.

I don't see the two being mutually exclusive. Maybe that's the disconnect. I don't think Ben Simmons being used as a screener negatively impacts his ability to facilitate. Rather, I could see him being even more dangerous in that role.

The easy example of this is Draymond Green. Would anyone here argue that Green is a lead guard or primary ball-handler? Would anyone here be surprised to find that Green's assist percentage last year was actually higher than Simmons'? Green is a transition menace and a short roll killer. That's what he does on offense and he picks teams apart. You do not have to be the main ball-handler to be an effective facilitator.

Cam to me we can say the role we both envision for Simmons is a good one but we can't be sure he would embrace it. I'm still impressed that Giannis did AND that his coaching staff actually utilized him that way which I believe was key to winning a championship.

This isn't meant to back you into a corner or anything but a purely hypothetical question let's say Morey tells you he will not trade Simmons without getting Russell back. What do you do?

What would make you think that Ben Simmons wouldn't embrace that role? Is there a time in his career where he was considered a poor team player that would lead you to believe that? Or are we just trying to find ways in which Simmons doesn't fit so we can prepare for the possibility that he's not traded to Minnesota? Please let me know.

That's a difficult question to answer considering I don't think Daryl Morey is the kind of decision-maker that lacks flexibility. Negotiations are almost never that black and white. I think Morey's tremendously intelligent and knows that trade value can be compensated for in various forms. Not to mention, in your hypothetical situation, is Morey wanting additional assets along with D'Angelo Russell? Does he just want a one-for-one swap? There are so many variables at play that it's hard to say. Ultimately, the same idea remains true for me. Keeping Karl-Anthony Towns, Anthony Edwards, and Russell while adding Simmons leads to the most dangerous team the Wolves can assemble. You make that happen by almost any means, in my opinion.

Simmons is basically a PG...and also a big. I'm not saying Simmons won't do the things we both have suggested I just don't think it's a sure thing he will. Towns still isn't good in the screen game especially for something as truly talented as he is. There is no certainty that Simmons will embrace that role. It's also not a certainty that Simmons Russell Edwards and Towns will find a way to share the ball. Like I said before it's a good problem to have but it's not certain to work out. I'm not against a Simmons trade and I've already mentioned I think there is a real possibility of it happening. I'm looking at every angle of a possible deal.

I think your answer to my question for Russell is fair as I think you get I was conjuring up a theoretical dilemma that isnt reality. Ultimately I think you answered it in you really believe in keeping the group of top players all together. Im not against that but I'm willing to move Russell IF he is a significant asset in the trade. Some people are worried about dealing Beasley and Russell. I highly doubt that will happen that's too much salary since Philly doesn't really have players they are trying to unload. Maybe Beasley could go to another team in a multi team deal but unless the Wolves got another shooter back I don't see Rosas moving Simmons for both of those guys.

[FNG]

This is what blows my mind about all this Simmons talk. Lip acknowledges that he doesn't fit in well with a lineup composed of our best players. Then says I wouldn't give up more than two firsts and DLo for him.
If he doesn't fit with our core guys why the heck would we give up anything for him?

Maybe because he is the consensus best defender in the NBA?

[FNG]

I've felt all along that if the Wolves are serious about landing Simmons, they need to assume that he will be the exact same player he's been since he was a rookie. He's added literally nothing to his game and the same weaknesses exist.

My #1 fear if we land Simmons is that rather than him helping to change our defensive culture, our chronically poor culture changes him instead. I could easily see us scratching our heads at times wondering where the Philly version of Ben's defense went....

Q, maybe Simmons has peaked and his offense never gets any better than it is right now. Or maybe he improves on offense as much in the next 5 years as he did in his first 5. You say that he has added literally nothing to his game since his rookie year, but his shooting stats show some improvement.

-He has raised his free throw percentage from 56% to 61.3%...still not a good percentage, but a significant improvement which leaves him not far behind the reigning NBA Finals MVP.

-His TS% was already pretty good as a rookie at 55.7%, but he has continued to improve it to a very strong 58.4%.

Who knows if the pressure chamber that is Philadelphia basketball hasn't had a significant negative impact on Ben's confidence and shooting...Target Center is a completely different environment. If anything, we might be too forgiving as a fan base. NBA players tend to get smarter as they progress in the league and learn how to emphasize their strengths and it appears that what Ben has done. We don't know if he will continue to improve his efficiency as he gets more experienced, but since he's only 25, I would bet on it.

And I'm not as concerned about his defense falling apart when he joins us. Excellent defense is a product of length, athleticism, size and effort, and I would say the first three characteristics are the key to Ben's defensive success...and those aren't things that go away barring injury. I think he would instantly transform our defense.

[Lipoli390]

https://dunkingwithwolves.com/2021/09/10/the-minnesota-timberwolves-should-not-trade-for-ben-simmons/

This is an interesting opinion arguing against trading for Simmons. There's one sentence stating that Simmons would add nothing to the Wolves. I clearly disagree with that opinion. But this article is still a thoughtful take on the case against trading for Simmons. My view is that Simmons would definitely improve the Wolves defense. But there are reasons to join the majority of teams that are, apparently, not actively engaged in the Simmons sweepstakes:

1. His really bad perimeter and free-throw shooting is a double whammy that makes him a liability on the offensive end, especially in crunch time and in the playoffs. Watching video of him playing off the ball is not a pretty sight. Watching him with the ball can be exciting, but also sometimes excruciating as he gets fouls but can't hit free throws or gets passes picked off because he so predictably won't shoot.

2. The fact that he refuses to take perimeter shots, which exacerbates the negative impact of his poor shooting since he's not even a threat to score from outside the paint.

3. His apparently failure to seriously work on his game in the offseason, which accounts for his failure to even slightly improve his shooting in 4 NBA seasons. This is a troubling characteristic for a team like the Wolves that lacks a strong team personality and needs to build a culture of hard work and accountability.

4. His apparent failure to take direction from his coaches as evidence by his steadfast refusal to take perimeter shots even though he's been admonished by his coaches to do so. Again, this is a troubling characteristic for a Wolves team without a strong team personality and with a need to build a culture of accountability.

5. The fact that the Sixers decided to aggressively shop him despite all his positive attributes and the team's success with him, including this past season's best record in the East. No one knows a player better than the team he's on. Yet, Simmons' teams was anxious to move him immediately after finishing with the best record in the East. To me that is telling.

As I reflect on these five factors, I'm reminded of the need to build a different culture in the Wolves organization - a culture with some toughness and an edge that's committed to hard work and accountability. I don't see Simmons helping to build that culture and there are some signs that he might undermine the effort to build that sort of culture. Nevertheless, I acknowledge his talent and the stats to back it up. That's why I'm interested in the Wolves trading for him. But I probably draw the line more narrowly than most on what I'd be willing to give up to get him based on some serious concerns surrounding him.