lordjeff05 wrote:You don’t have to tell me that Zion next to Adams worked offensively. I was making that argument all of last year. Zion can play around non scorers. It’s not as easy as when the floor is spaced. I don’t think I’m necessarily saying Fox is a better get than Simmons, but I think Fox for the assets he would take may be a better move.
I disagree with this logic. I am a firm believer in paying for what you want apposed to settling because of cost. Doing that usually leads to that short cut becoming far more expensive & costly over time. It's the philosophy I've posted on the Memphis board over the last 3yrs.. See overpayment to land their rookie target Zaire. Never settle, know exactly what you want & pay for it.
lordjeff05 wrote: I think my overall point is that the Pels should build around Ingram not Zion. Z is a good kid. I have full faith that he will figure it out and be a force in the league. But the idea that it’s gonna happen while he is unhappily recuperating for a team he doesn’t want to play for that he can hold hostage is unlikely.
I’d rather build around the guy who has shown up and bought in.
Now, the ceiling of a team with Zion as the guy will be higher than a ceiling with Ingram but the floor will be lower. The Pelicans need to build a consistent winner in New Orleans, and you do that by developers culture. I think Ingram and Fox can be the centerpiece of that. Especially with a coach like Willie Green.
So going back to the original point, I think if the idea is to build a consistent winner around your all star wing, then the ideal move is to get the scoring point guard who is also easier to build around.
IMO when building a team from lottery, you don't try & fit pieces until the team has the necessary overall talent needed. That's why NO's are top heavy with little depth quality. Their issue is hey have too many weak links that drag down their top perfomers production. This offseason, Pels GM went & got a floor spacer at point to compliment a player that was expected to handle PG duties but has yet to play a game. Any guess why the team can't win & have a need for a pg/playmaker ?. They stopped short of compiling the necessary talent & quality depth before adjusting for chemistry & fit around an often injured player. How do you succeed, when the guy you built around has yet to play a game & hasn't proven he can stay healthy ? Next man up only work when you build a balanced team, not one that caters, especially to one that has played the equivalent to 1 season in 3 yrs.
I see your logic but I also see a red flag in it concerning Fox. Realize his current dip in play could be linked or attributed to the emergence of Haliburton's play... Reason, why so called good players on bad teams, that need to dominate the ball & have high usage, don't really elevate their team, only their individual stats. For example, Morant in 2yrs has lifted Memphis Grizz into PO contention from a 2yr rebuild but Fox can't though many have compared the 2 in terms of talent. What's the difference, if they were same level to be compared at any point ? Morant knows how & when not to be ball dominant, he lets others dominate the game & controls the pace etc.. He can & does play well off ball, lots of movement. The fact that another players emergence has possibly led to Fox's play slipping despite your reference to his spot up shooting... I don't know man.. that's a big contract.
Whereas, with Simmons & all his faults as a player, he had Philly a top seed last yr with his elite defense, versatility & pass first game.. he, elevated his teammates as seen by their dip with his absence. He's also a player in which Philly could not fully exploit because Embiid is a fixture at C. A position where I think Simmons has the most value to the team trading for him, see GS interest. Teams are going to play small to try & run Jonas off the court, so having Simmons versatile enough to play his game there forces a teams hand into how NO's will want to play. Unlike Philly with Embiid, NO's have Jonas signed to a value contract at 15m with him being a team first consumate professional that would accept being moved to the bench no questions asked. Sharing his minutes at C with Simmons has a 2 fold benefit from play style to bolstering the bench which has struggled for NO's this yr.
In short I see far more benefit in targeting SImmons than Fox as well as him having a higher floor in trade with his elite defense & versatility. Fit wise, Pelicans may not have the spacing GS have or had with Curry & Klay. However, I think after putting Simmons with BI, Herb & Zion, IMO all Pelicans would really need is a 3&D guard to replace Graham to round out that rotation with a good balance of versatility, defense, shooting & playmaking. 3 + defenders in Simmons, Herb, 3&D guard. 3 ball handlers, playmakers in Zion, BI, Simmons. The versatility to play Simmons 1-5 which opens several rotational options for Green from point G, point forward to point C. Herb also has the defensive versatility to play 1-4. Where those 2 combined make up 2 of the best defenders in the game, tons of defensive swithcability which gives NO's a defensive base/identity to build off of if nothing else..
Zion or no Zion.
