RealGM

Time for blockbuster, I don’t think done here before...

Wizards Trade: Beal + Smith
Wizards Receive:
Culver
Horford
#1 Overall (assuming Wolves FRP #1)
#16 (Nets FRP via Wolves)
2021 or 2022 76ers FRP (unprotected, Wizards option)
2023 Wolves FRP (unprotected, next after GSW owed)

76ers Trade: Embiid + Richardson + Horford
76ers Receive:
Towns
Russell
J. Johnson (expiring)

Wolves Trade: Towns + Russell + JJ + Culver + 2020 FRP + #16 + 2023 FFRP
Wolves Receive:
Embiid
Richardson
Beal
Smith

—

Wizards Why: trade Beal for youth and picks while they wait our Wall and Horford contracts.

76ers Why: becomes Simmons team. Add shooting around Simmons.
C: Towns
F: Harris or Simmons
F: Simmons or Harris
G: Thybulle | Kork | Smith
G: Russell

Wolves Why: need to win now so the balance their lineup with perfect mix of O and D.
C: Embiid
F: Gomez (re-sign)
F: Richardson
G: Beasley (re-sign)
G: Beal

It feels like sixers just got worse after that trade.

I think Russell and Simmons are both players who are more comfortable with the ball in their hands. I’m not sure how well they would coexist.

Godaddycurse wrote:It feels like sixers just got worse after that trade.

I would be interested to see why you say that.

I can see one saying Embiid is better than Towns. And even Richardson is better than Russell. Both debatable.

But the overall idea — and end result — is final roster and roster makeup. 76ers get to:

1. Play Simmons at ideal role — point forward. Plus have another slasher/ball handler on the court when in the half set so Simmons can play forward in half set (again covering a weakness of Simmons).

2. Surround Simmons with more shooting.

3. Towns and Russell get surrounded with ton more D: Simmons, Thybulle and even Harris as compared to their roster in MN.

4. Roster gets out of cap heII (mainly moving Horford) and doesn’t have to figure out what to do with expiring Richardson. Does that lead to more options (upgrades, subsequent consolidation trade, etc.)?

5. New core is all the same age: Towns at 24 is oldest. Towns, Simmons, Russell, and Thybulle all locked in, can lead 76ers for many, many years to come.

You just removed 3 of their best defenders. Simmons and Thybulle are good but they are not that good to cover for the deficiencies for Towns/Russell and Harris. Esp considering KAT and russell being amongst the worst in their positions. I would put their defense as middle of the pack if not below average now overall.

As the other poster mentioned, Russell is also a questionable fit with Simmons as well on offense. They also don't save much money since Horford + Embiid makes similar to KAT + Russell, so they are still in cap hell.

Not a bad try, but Philly should probably get another asset or save some more money.

Godaddycurse wrote:You just removed 3 of their best defenders. Simmons and Thybulle are good but they are not that good to cover for the deficiencies for Towns/Russell and Harris. Esp considering KAT and russell being amongst the worst in their positions. I would put their defense as middle of the pack if not below average now overall.

As the other poster mentioned, Russell is also a questionable fit with Simmons as well on offense. They also don't save much money since Horford + Embiid makes similar to KAT + Russell, so they are still in cap hell.

I think Simmons needs another ball handler but not a true PG. See Russell (and my post above as to why).

rugbyrugger23 wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:You just removed 3 of their best defenders. Simmons and Thybulle are good but they are not that good to cover for the deficiencies for Towns/Russell and Harris. Esp considering KAT and russell being amongst the worst in their positions. I would put their defense as middle of the pack if not below average now overall.

As the other poster mentioned, Russell is also a questionable fit with Simmons as well on offense. They also don't save much money since Horford + Embiid makes similar to KAT + Russell, so they are still in cap hell.

I think Simmons needs another ball handler but not a true PG. See Russell (and my post above as to why).

what do you mean by simmons can play forward? he has no range so he is most effective with the ball in his hands Unless you mean he can set screens for others and roll to the rim..?

Ruzious wrote:Not a bad try, but Philly should probably get another asset or save some more money.

Not all trades solve all problems. But in this case, trade JJ for lesser expiring, or to GSW for TPE (and save huge) or buy him out for savings. All kinds of options with a manageable-playable-expiring-contract player like JJ vs. Horford on his mega deal.

Godaddycurse wrote:

rugbyrugger23 wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:You just removed 3 of their best defenders. Simmons and Thybulle are good but they are not that good to cover for the deficiencies for Towns/Russell and Harris. Esp considering KAT and russell being amongst the worst in their positions. I would put their defense as middle of the pack if not below average now overall.

As the other poster mentioned, Russell is also a questionable fit with Simmons as well on offense. They also don't save much money since Horford + Embiid makes similar to KAT + Russell, so they are still in cap hell.

I think Simmons needs another ball handler but not a true PG. See Russell (and my post above as to why).

what do you mean by simmons can play forward? he has no range so he is most effective with the ball in his hands

Simmons with ball in hand is most effective in transition, leading the break — not initiating a half court set. His non shooting and non elite slashing skills get exposed (sadly even hidden in the corner on half court sets).

With a slasher scorer (and a big man who is elite outside the arc) like Russell (who prefers ball in hand during offensive sets), Russell can be threat to break down his defender and most importantly allow Simmons to enter the paint and even post his man up — imagine offensive sets with Towns at the arc and Simmons miss match (his height to size elite ratio) trying to be guarded by a forward closer to the rim (only pace Simmons is a threat to shoot, post up, score or pass). Simmons becomes a multi threat player again (again meaning as he is in transition).

rugbyrugger23 wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:

rugbyrugger23 wrote:I think Simmons needs another ball handler but not a true PG. See Russell (and my post above as to why).

what do you mean by simmons can play forward? he has no range so he is most effective with the ball in his hands

Simmons with ball in hand is most effective in transition, leading the break — not initiating a half court set. His non shooting and non elite slashing skills get exposed (sadly even hidden in the corner on half court sets).

With a slasher scorer (and a big man who is elite outside the arc) like Russell (who prefers ball in hand during offensive sets), Russell can be threat to break down his defender and most importantly allow Simmons to enter the paint and even post his man up — imagine offensive sets with Towns at the arc and Simmons miss match (his height to size elite ratio) trying to be guarded by a forward closer to the rim (only pace Simmons is a threat to shoot, post up, score or pass). Simmons becomes a multi threat player again (again meaning as he is in transition).

Now imagine teams scoring at the rim at will while Russell continues his career as a low efficiency volume shooter.

I get the logic behind it, it’s just not a better result.

GutUNC wrote:

rugbyrugger23 wrote:

Godaddycurse wrote:
what do you mean by simmons can play forward? he has no range so he is most effective with the ball in his hands

Simmons with ball in hand is most effective in transition, leading the break — not initiating a half court set. His non shooting and non elite slashing skills get exposed (sadly even hidden in the corner on half court sets).

With a slasher scorer (and a big man who is elite outside the arc) like Russell (who prefers ball in hand during offensive sets), Russell can be threat to break down his defender and most importantly allow Simmons to enter the paint and even post his man up — imagine offensive sets with Towns at the arc and Simmons miss match (his height to size elite ratio) trying to be guarded by a forward closer to the rim (only pace Simmons is a threat to shoot, post up, score or pass). Simmons becomes a multi threat player again (again meaning as he is in transition).

Now imagine teams scoring at the rim at will while Russell continues his career as a low efficiency volume shooter.

I get the logic behind it, it’s just not a better result.

To each there own — whatever prism you want to look through.

this looks pretty bad for Philly unless they are intent on getting rid of Embiid. In which case, they should just keep Horford (rather than selling low) and get some nice players for Embiid only.

I think the value Minnesota is giving up for Beal isn't terrible though depending on WAS valuation of Culver. Culver, #1 overall, 16, and a FFRP seems like a nice package for Beal - if WAS is looking to get young (which i think they should). Does adding JJ make it work salary wise?

The Wolves would be even MORE offense only, but what an offensive juggernaut they would be!

As a Sixers fan, this seems fair. Embiid comes with his own question marks (conditioning, injury history) and he and KAT are close before you consider all of that. Swapping out JRich who you wouldve had to worry about resigning/losing for nothing anyway for Loading is more than fair. Also can't gloss over that you're shedding one of the top 2/3 worst contracts in the league in Horford in doing this.

Nobody wants to trade Embiid but if they ever did you need to win that trade to keep the city from figuratively burning down. Surrounding Simmons with two other high upside budding young stars who compliment him (while also shedding a bad contract or bringing in a great draft pick) is definitely how you do that.

jbent87 wrote:As a Sixers fan, this seems fair. Embiid comes with his own question marks (conditioning, injury history) and he and KAT are close before you consider all of that. Swapping out JRich who you wouldve had to worry about resigning/losing for nothing anyway for Loading is more than fair. Also can't gloss over that you're shedding one of the top 2/3 worst contracts in the league in Horford in doing this.

Nobody wants to trade Embiid but if they ever did you need to win that trade to keep the city from figuratively burning down. Surrounding Simmons with two other high upside budding young stars who compliment him (while also shedding a bad contract or bringing in a great draft pick) is definitely how you do that.

D'Angelo Russell?

GutUNC wrote:

jbent87 wrote:As a Sixers fan, this seems fair. Embiid comes with his own question marks (conditioning, injury history) and he and KAT are close before you consider all of that. Swapping out JRich who you wouldve had to worry about resigning/losing for nothing anyway for Loading is more than fair. Also can't gloss over that you're shedding one of the top 2/3 worst contracts in the league in Horford in doing this.

Nobody wants to trade Embiid but if they ever did you need to win that trade to keep the city from figuratively burning down. Surrounding Simmons with two other high upside budding young stars who compliment him (while also shedding a bad contract or bringing in a great draft pick) is definitely how you do that.

D'Angelo Russell?

he's 24 years old and would absolutely get buckets on a team with KAT and Simmons. You wouldn't be as good defensively obviously but Thybulle helps there.

If you're asking me do I want Simmons + Richardson + Embiid or Simmons + DLoading + KAT going forward I take the latter, every time.

jbent87 wrote:

GutUNC wrote:

jbent87 wrote:As a Sixers fan, this seems fair. Embiid comes with his own question marks (conditioning, injury history) and he and KAT are close before you consider all of that. Swapping out JRich who you wouldve had to worry about resigning/losing for nothing anyway for Loading is more than fair. Also can't gloss over that you're shedding one of the top 2/3 worst contracts in the league in Horford in doing this.

Nobody wants to trade Embiid but if they ever did you need to win that trade to keep the city from figuratively burning down. Surrounding Simmons with two other high upside budding young stars who compliment him (while also shedding a bad contract or bringing in a great draft pick) is definitely how you do that.

D'Angelo Russell?

he's 24 years old and would absolutely get buckets on a team with KAT and Simmons. You wouldn't be as good defensively obviously but Thybulle helps there.

If you're asking me do I want Simmons + Richardson + Embiid or Simmons + DLoading + KAT going forward I take the latter, every time.

To me, Russell is the very definition of a one way, low efficiency chucker. Would he have a role on a Sixers roster that lacks people who can get their own shot? Sure. But in no way do I see his skill set being that of a "high upside budding young star".

GutUNC wrote:

jbent87 wrote:

GutUNC wrote:


D'Angelo Russell?

he's 24 years old and would absolutely get buckets on a team with KAT and Simmons. You wouldn't be as good defensively obviously but Thybulle helps there.

If you're asking me do I want Simmons + Richardson + Embiid or Simmons + DLoading + KAT going forward I take the latter, every time.

To me, Russell is the very definition of a one way, low efficiency chucker. Would he have a role on a Sixers roster that lacks people who can get their own shot? Sure. But in no way do I see his skill set being that of a "high upside budding young star".

Okay, maybe that was a little much then. So take the "high upside" part out. You're still receiving two budding young stars in return for your one "superstar" who I guess in this universe we have arrived at the notion that Simmons and Embiid aren't optimal together and we may not ever win it all with them. Considering Embiids injury history, turning that $100 bill into two $50 bills isn't that bad of a move.

KAT obviously isn't as dominant as Embiid but you make up for that in what should be a longer career for KAT. one of the best shooting bigs and a microwave 24 year old SG to grow with Simmons is far from worst case scenario in trade returns for either of our alphas.

jbent87 wrote:

GutUNC wrote:

jbent87 wrote:
he's 24 years old and would absolutely get buckets on a team with KAT and Simmons. You wouldn't be as good defensively obviously but Thybulle helps there.

If you're asking me do I want Simmons + Richardson + Embiid or Simmons + DLoading + KAT going forward I take the latter, every time.

To me, Russell is the very definition of a one way, low efficiency chucker. Would he have a role on a Sixers roster that lacks people who can get their own shot? Sure. But in no way do I see his skill set being that of a "high upside budding young star".

Okay, maybe that was a little much then. So take the "high upside" part out. You're still receiving two budding young stars in return for your one "superstar" who I guess in this universe we have arrived at the notion that Simmons and Embiid aren't optimal together and we may not ever win it all with them. Considering Embiids injury history, turning that $100 bill into two $50 bills isn't that bad of a move.

KAT obviously isn't as dominant as Embiid but you make up for that in what should be a longer career for KAT. one of the best shooting bigs and a microwave 24 year old SG to grow with Simmons is far from worst case scenario in trade returns for either of our alphas.

I was solely reacting to the description of Russell.