Moderators: Sleepy51, Chris Porter's Hair, floppymoose
Twinkie defense wrote:vvoland wrote:Wiggins was an ironman
Wiggins has been totally unreliable the last two seasons due to family issues (and getting back to game shape after his family issues). I don't blame him for it, family is more important than basketball. But Wiggins is hardly an iron man.
CDM_Stats wrote:vvoland wrote:CDM_Stats wrote:
Ppg is not a good argument.. when PHI had him running the offense as pure point, he graded out positive both ways. Even when he was afraid to shoot. Nets have much lower usage, and that dropped him to negative. His defense remained elite
So there’s not been a sharp decline in anything but usage, and even if it were a sharp skills decline, he grades out per minute better than all but 3 Warriors last year: Curry, Dray, TJD
This is where I would probably say the numbers are lying more than the eyes are. And when you say "grades out per minute" do you mean last year, in his ~300 minutes?
The parallels to wiggins are not realistic. Aside from no 1 picks that lack the visible aggression on the basketball court, there are no similarities. Wiggins was an ironman, Simmons is made of cotton. Wiggins was a 20 ppg scorer who didn't put the effort in other areas. Simmons is someone who is has a phobia of scoring while giving the team pretty much everything else. Beyond the health, I have serious reservations about his desire to play basketball and how much he actually wants to win. If we're betting on an overpriced star that is at a value nadir, I'd rather gamble on lavine vs simmons.
So gamble on the guy you know isn't going to be helpful vs the guy who, despite his motivation issues, is still an impact defender? The one who's defensive impact has never actually wavered? The gamble, in its entirety, is on health. Because whether he does it with enough enthusiasm or not, the fact remains that he's an excellent role player when placed in a certain role, and its a role that the Warriors have a need for. Additionally, Lavine has a 3 year contract at near max dollars. Ben Simmons is expiring. So its less risk and higher upside, as well as providing a legitimate backup for one of the rarest archetypes in Draymond Green. So if the team did move on from him while keeping Curry, there wouldnt even need to be a systemic change. Or if they wanted to try and stagger Dray's minutes going forward
The parallels to how Wiggins was perceived are nearly identical, by the way. Wiggins was lazy, selfish, soft, the worst rotation player in the league, a loser, etc etc. Then when he had less responsibility and got away from his bully (Butler), turns out he was actually a very good role player despite being drafted #1. Simmons is lazy, selfish, soft, a loser, a cancer, etc etc. Drafted #1 and then traded for Harden. Get him away from his a-holes (Butler again and Embiid), give him less responsibility.. his peripherals blow Wiggins' out of the water... this is exactly how you turn a penny into a dollar. It shouldnt be plan A mind you, but the arguments that don't relate to health are baffling me at this point
Nvnervous45 wrote:I don't think these people fully appreciate how historically bad of a shooter ben simmons is. He's a 58% career shooter from the free throw line. For context that's dennis Rodman and shaq bad.
Nvnervous45 wrote:The last two years he shot 40% and 42% from the free throw line. In a league in which almost every primary ball handler can shoot (even draymond was way better last year in that regard) and we're gonna run out simmons in Kerr's motion offense. I don't think so.
Nvnervous45 wrote:The last two years he shot 40% and 42% from the free throw line. In a league in which almost every primary ball handler can shoot (even draymond was way better last year in that regard) and we're gonna run out simmons in Kerr's motion offense. I don't think so.
HiRez wrote: If Simmons were to come here I think the only way it works is finding elite shooters around him. We already have one, but if it's like Klay or Wiggins or Kuminga, or probably even Moody, then of course it's not going to work. When you have 2/5 positions offensively-challenged, you'd better be elite at the other 3 and right now they are not.
CDM_Stats wrote:HiRez wrote: If Simmons were to come here I think the only way it works is finding elite shooters around him. We already have one, but if it's like Klay or Wiggins or Kuminga, or probably even Moody, then of course it's not going to work. When you have 2/5 positions offensively-challenged, you'd better be elite at the other 3 and right now they are not.
Elite shooters arent needed.. its great to have them. But paying untold extra value for a small percentage point boost never really made sense to me. Find me a bunch of 'good enough' shooters instead. Moody, Wiggins, DDV from recent times. Guys who, if they have an open 3pt shot, you feel reasonably confident of 35-40%. Especially if they bring other skills like defense into the fold
Curry + 2 of Podz/Wiggins/Moody/Kuminga + 2 of Simmons/TJD/Draymond is likely going to be fine. Will it be elite shooting? Of course not.. but thats a damn good defensive team with a lot of handling. So then get some microwaves for the bench and be ready to adapt on the fly. The point is that the team's handling, plus motion offense, will create better looks. And if teams sink into the paint, then use high PnRs like well-coached teams do in that situation. Plenty of ways to make it work, just requires a desire to make it work. Not saying you are, but too many fans give up at the first roadblock, as if there is an answer that solves every problem we have if we look hard enough. Those days, the KD days, are over. We're back in the muck with everyone else, and need to lean into strengths just as much as addressing weaknesses
Nvnervous45 wrote:I don't think these people fully appreciate how historically bad of a shooter ben simmons is. He's a 58% career shooter from the free throw line. For context that's dennis Rodman and shaq bad.
HiRez wrote:CDM_Stats wrote:HiRez wrote: If Simmons were to come here I think the only way it works is finding elite shooters around him. We already have one, but if it's like Klay or Wiggins or Kuminga, or probably even Moody, then of course it's not going to work. When you have 2/5 positions offensively-challenged, you'd better be elite at the other 3 and right now they are not.
Elite shooters arent needed.. its great to have them. But paying untold extra value for a small percentage point boost never really made sense to me. Find me a bunch of 'good enough' shooters instead. Moody, Wiggins, DDV from recent times. Guys who, if they have an open 3pt shot, you feel reasonably confident of 35-40%. Especially if they bring other skills like defense into the fold
Curry + 2 of Podz/Wiggins/Moody/Kuminga + 2 of Simmons/TJD/Draymond is likely going to be fine. Will it be elite shooting? Of course not.. but thats a damn good defensive team with a lot of handling. So then get some microwaves for the bench and be ready to adapt on the fly. The point is that the team's handling, plus motion offense, will create better looks. And if teams sink into the paint, then use high PnRs like well-coached teams do in that situation. Plenty of ways to make it work, just requires a desire to make it work. Not saying you are, but too many fans give up at the first roadblock, as if there is an answer that solves every problem we have if we look hard enough. Those days, the KD days, are over. We're back in the muck with everyone else, and need to lean into strengths just as much as addressing weaknesses
I don't know, I guess I just don't trust most of our shooters to knock down those shots consistently. Definitely not Klay anymore, Wiggins and Podz have been all over the place with their shooting, Moody might or might not be a good shooter, he hasn't really played enough to tell yet. Maybe "reliable" is a better word than "elite" but I don't really see any of them being very reliable lately (hell, even Steph has been a little shaky at times, although some of that is probably fatigue). All shooters are going to have some big game to game variances but when you go into slumps that last a third or a half a season, I don't think you can live with that when you're hamstrung offensively at the 4/5.
Twinkie defense wrote:He had disc surgery to alleviate a nerve impingement. I had a nerve impingement some years back, it was by far the most painful thing I've experienced. Doctor had me taking six ibuprofen at a time, every six hours. Couldn't sit down. I felt like I wanted my arm amputated.
Twinkie defense wrote:He had disc surgery to alleviate a nerve impingement. I had a nerve impingement some years back, it was by far the most painful thing I've experienced. Doctor had me taking six ibuprofen at a time, every six hours. Couldn't sit down. I felt like I wanted my arm amputated.
Return to Golden State Warriors
