All things Anfernee Simons

[VFX]

I understand the criticism and concern over acquiring Simons. The negatives don’t outweigh the positives IMO.

Ultimately, the reason for acquiring Simons is the fact that Orlando has an extremely limited offense. Limited to the point that the counter argument to acquiring a guy like Simons is relying solely on development.

The Magic cannot just “hope” they have a high volume high % back court player in AB or Jett. The window is open now and Orlando’s offense isn’t even considered good yet. The weaknesses are obvious.

Do Paolo, Suggs, and Franz need to develop as better, more consistent, shooters? Yes. Do we need to develop Jett and AB? Yes.

All of that can be true AND Orlando needs to add another reliable outlet on offense that isn’t in their mid 30s.

I’m higher on the potential of a guy like Simons than that of a career role player off the bench in Monk.

[CocoaFan]

I'm still on the develop our lotto talent bandwagon. AB, Jett, and Suggs might develop into the backcourt scoring/playmaking we need.

If we make a move for Simons I'll struggle to reconcile the move with a useful vision for AB and Jett.

I'm also on the Monk over Simons bandwagon and understand the need to get AB and Jett meaningful roles. if AB ends up better than Monk in the starting lineup you move Monk to the bench and have a 6th man of the year candidate. Jett would fill in as the backup SG. In either scenario getting Simons or Monk, Cole will have to go.

[Knightro]

Not sure how negligible it is really, Monk shot 35% from 3 his last two season. Only has one season ever shooting
40% + from 3 point range and also is about 2 years older than Simons.

Simons clearly has a better shot + he’s younger and he also hasn’t bounced around from team to team to team. What else can we see from Monk that 3 other teams haven’t fully tried to get out of him? At least with Simons there is possibility of more left to unlock in his game.

Monk is 16 months older than Simons, so closer to 1 year than 2 years older.

Simons is the better 3PT shooter for sure... but that's it?

Monk is the better slasher. Higher FT rate and a better FG% at the rim and in the paint.

Monk is the better playmaker. Higher AST% and more AST/100.

Monk is the slightly better defender - although they're both poor on that end - with a better average defensive EPM over the last few years and the better single season high water mark for defensive EPM as well.

Like I said, I don't think there's a significant difference between them.

[Residual-Heat]

Not sure how negligible it is really, Monk shot 35% from 3 his last two season. Only has one season ever shooting
40% + from 3 point range and also is about 2 years older than Simons.

Simons clearly has a better shot + he’s younger and he also hasn’t bounced around from team to team to team. What else can we see from Monk that 3 other teams haven’t fully tried to get out of him? At least with Simons there is possibility of more left to unlock in his game.

Monk is 16 months older than Simons, so closer to 1 year than 2 years older.

Simons is the better 3PT shooter for sure... but that's it?

Monk is the better slasher. Higher FT rate and a better FG% at the rim and in the paint.

Monk is the better playmaker. Higher AST% and more AST/100.

Monk is the slightly better defender - although they're both poor on that end - with a better average defensive EPM over the last few years and the better single season high water mark for defensive EPM as well.

Like I said, I don't think there's a significant difference between them.

Im curious about Sexton's defensive EPM, how does he compare to Monk and Simons?

[Residual-Heat]

At the end of the day, if we get Simons for no more than Cole+2 1sts Ill be okay with it, but I prefer Monk all things considered. Some if it is personal taste, I am not a big fan of Simons' game. Very little effort on defense and way too many pull up threes (though ill agree that's not entirely his fault given his teammates) for my taste. I find Monk to be a much more enjoyable player to watch.

[Knightro]

I’m higher on the potential of a guy like Simons than that of a career role player off the bench in Monk.

This seems a little unfair.

1. They're not that far apart in age or experience.

2. Monk has actually played meaningful games recently with 3500+ minutes on a team that's made the playoffs each of the last two years. Simons has for the last three years mostly played completely meaningless minutes for a tanker.

[Knightro]

Im curious about Sexton's defensive EPM, how does he compare to Monk and Simons?

All three guys are very similar.

Sexton Defensive EPM by Year
2024: 436
2023: 332
2022: 166 (only 11 games played)
2021: 414
2020: 420
2019: 478

Simons Defensive EPM by Year
2024: 518
2023: 351
2022: 478
2021: 505
2020: 473
2019: 425 (only 20 games played)

Monk Defensive EPM by Year
2024: 418
2023: 263
2022: 431
2021: 413
2020: 459
2019: 414

[VFX]

I’m higher on the potential of a guy like Simons than that of a career role player off the bench in Monk.

This seems a little unfair.

1. They're not that far apart in age or experience.

2. Monk has actually played meaningful games recently with 3500+ minutes on a team that's made the playoffs each of the last two years. Simons has for the last three years mostly played completely meaningless minutes for a tanker.

The difference between the two is that Monk will sometimes go multiple games without scoring 13-15 points and that’s just not happening with Simons. Maybe that’s because of minutes maybe not. If they are paying someone that kind of cap space I’d probably want more consistency as a starter. Not less.

[Audi]

I’m higher on the potential of a guy like Simons than that of a career role player off the bench in Monk.

This seems a little unfair.

1. They're not that far apart in age or experience.

2. Monk has actually played meaningful games recently with 3500+ minutes on a team that's made the playoffs each of the last two years. Simons has for the last three years mostly played completely meaningless minutes for a tanker.

The difference between the two is that Monk will sometimes go multiple games without scoring 13-15 points and that’s just not happening with Simons. Maybe that’s because of minutes maybe not. If they are paying someone that kind of cap space I’d probably want more consistency as a starter. Not less.

Good point.

In 2024 thus far:
Monk shooting 30% from 3 on 5apg.
Simons shooting 38% from 3 on 8apg.

This board would have torn Monk a new arse putting those numbers up as a starter.

[Skybox]

This seems a little unfair.

1. They're not that far apart in age or experience.

2. Monk has actually played meaningful games recently with 3500+ minutes on a team that's made the playoffs each of the last two years. Simons has for the last three years mostly played completely meaningless minutes for a tanker.

The difference between the two is that Monk will sometimes go multiple games without scoring 13-15 points and that’s just not happening with Simons. Maybe that’s because of minutes maybe not. If they are paying someone that kind of cap space I’d probably want more consistency as a starter. Not less.

Good point.

In 2024:
Monk shot 30% from 3 on 5apg.
Simons shot 38% from 3 on 8apg.

That's a gigantic difference for THIS team. Simons is an absolutely elite threat from 3...he's the antidote to double teams. Let's not forget that Monk scored a career high 15.4 ppg, while Simons was at 22.6...Monk had his best season ever, Simons has been putting up numbers for a few years now. Also, much has been made of Monk's playmaking. He had a respectable 5.1 apg playing with Fox, Simons had 5.5 playing with Scoot...I understand that assist numbers don't tell the whole story, but I think Simons' playmaking has been undervalued in the comparisons with Monk. Simons is more of an overall offensive machine and the difference in the 3pt shooting should be really critical to ORL's plans, especially if Suggs continues to bomb away...Paolo should be racking triple-doubles with all of the gravity he creates. For all of the concerns about "taking the ball out of Paolo and Franz' hands", who would you prefer spotting up at the line?

I'd be very happy with Monk, but I think Simons is a little more proven and a lot better floor spreader. I'd also take my chances defensively with Simons 6'9" wingspan and freakish athleticism in Mosley's hands.

[Skybox]

The Monk/Simons comparisons are a very solid topic. They both bring a lot of what I believe we are looking for in a Lead Guard and have a lot of similarities.

How to get them is the big differentiator...if it's a couple of late picks as the difference, give me the elite 3pt shooter if the rest is nearly equivalent...which I feel it is.

[Knightro]

The difference between the two is that Monk will sometimes go multiple games without scoring 13-15 points and that’s just not happening with Simons. Maybe that’s because of minutes maybe not. If they are paying someone that kind of cap space I’d probably want more consistency as a starter. Not less.

I mean one guy has averaged 35 MPG the last two years and one guy has averaged 24 MPG. That's a significant difference.

Over the last two years, Simons did not play less than 20 minutes in a single game.

In that same time frame, Monk has played fewer than 20 minutes in a game 36 times.

Now the question is...

Does Monk play less minutes because he's not capable of playing more or just because that wasn't the role the Kings had for him with Fox already in place and on a max contract?

Over the last two years, when Monk has played 30 minutes or more in a game, he's been far more productive than Simons has been playing 30+ minutes.

Malik Monk Last 2 Years 30+ MPG
21 games, 33.6 MPG, 24.8 PPG, 3.7 RPG, 6.5 APG, 1.0 SPG, 0.4 BPG, 2.6 TOV, .521 FG%, .424 3PT%, .860 FT%.

The Kings are 14-7 in those games.

[Knightro]

This seems a little unfair.

1. They're not that far apart in age or experience.

2. Monk has actually played meaningful games recently with 3500+ minutes on a team that's made the playoffs each of the last two years. Simons has for the last three years mostly played completely meaningless minutes for a tanker.

The difference between the two is that Monk will sometimes go multiple games without scoring 13-15 points and that’s just not happening with Simons. Maybe that’s because of minutes maybe not. If they are paying someone that kind of cap space I’d probably want more consistency as a starter. Not less.

Good point.

In 2024 thus far:
Monk shooting 30% from 3 on 5apg.
Simons shooting 38% from 3 on 8apg.

This board would have torn Monk a new arse putting those numbers up as a starter.

The Blazers also went 9-24 in the 35 games you're referring to and got blown by 20+ nine times. These were not overly competitive games.

EDITED OUT THIS LINE AS I WAS INCORRECT

[Skybox]

The difference between the two is that Monk will sometimes go multiple games without scoring 13-15 points and that’s just not happening with Simons. Maybe that’s because of minutes maybe not. If they are paying someone that kind of cap space I’d probably want more consistency as a starter. Not less.

Good point.

In 2024 thus far:
Monk shooting 30% from 3 on 5apg.
Simons shooting 38% from 3 on 8apg.

This board would have torn Monk a new arse putting those numbers up as a starter.

The Blazers also went 9-24 in the 35 games you're referring to and got blown by 20+ nine times. These were not overly competitive games.

And Simons averaged 5.6 APG during that stretch, not 8.

I took his "Apg" as 3pt attempts per game...which is important for us

[Knightro]

Good point.

In 2024 thus far:
Monk shooting 30% from 3 on 5apg.
Simons shooting 38% from 3 on 8apg.

This board would have torn Monk a new arse putting those numbers up as a starter.

The Blazers also went 9-24 in the 35 games you're referring to and got blown by 20+ nine times. These were not overly competitive games.

And Simons averaged 5.6 APG during that stretch, not 8.

I took his "Apg" as 3pt attempts per game...which is important for us

You're correct. I edited my post as I was wrong.

[Rainwater]

Not sure how negligible it is really, Monk shot 35% from 3 his last two season. Only has one season ever shooting
40% + from 3 point range and also is about 2 years older than Simons.

Simons clearly has a better shot + he’s younger and he also hasn’t bounced around from team to team to team. What else can we see from Monk that 3 other teams haven’t fully tried to get out of him? At least with Simons there is possibility of more left to unlock in his game.

Monk is 16 months older than Simons, so closer to 1 year than 2 years older.

Simons is the better 3PT shooter for sure... but that's it?

Monk is the better slasher. Higher FT rate and a better FG% at the rim and in the paint.

Monk is the better playmaker. Higher AST% and more AST/100.

Monk is the slightly better defender - although they're both poor on that end - with a better average defensive EPM over the last few years and the better single season high water mark for defensive EPM as well.

Like I said, I don't think there's a significant difference between them.

When Monk does this as a starter I will always believe Simons is better.

[Knightro]

That's a gigantic difference for THIS team. Simons is an absolutely elite threat from 3...he's the antidote to double teams. Let's not forget that Monk scored a career high 15.4 ppg, while Simons was at 22.6...Monk had his best season ever, Simons has been putting up numbers for a few years now. Also, much has been made of Monk's playmaking. He had a respectable 5.1 apg playing with Fox, Simons had 5.5 playing with Scoot...I understand that assist numbers don't tell the whole story, but I think Simons' playmaking has been undervalued in the comparisons with Monk. Simons is more of an overall offensive machine and the difference in the 3pt shooting should be really critical to ORL's plans, especially if Suggs continues to bomb away...Paolo should be racking triple-doubles with all of the gravity he creates. For all of the concerns about "taking the ball out of Paolo and Franz' hands", who would you prefer spotting up at the line?

I'd be very happy with Monk, but I think Simons is a little more proven and a lot better floor spreader. I'd also take my chances defensively with Simons 6'9" wingspan and freakish athleticism in Mosley's hands.

I just get very weary of thinking about certain raw stats like this when guys are playing on clear tanking teams where nothing matters.

Like how relevant is it that Simons put up 21.7 PPG, 3.0 RPG, 4.7 APG on .439/.381/.905 the last two years for Portland, when the Blazers went 38-70 in those games?

The games weren't really relevant or competitive.

Anyone can put up reasonable counting numbers if they play 35 MPG and get as many possessions as they want on a mid 20s win roster.

[Skybox]

That's a gigantic difference for THIS team. Simons is an absolutely elite threat from 3...he's the antidote to double teams. Let's not forget that Monk scored a career high 15.4 ppg, while Simons was at 22.6...Monk had his best season ever, Simons has been putting up numbers for a few years now. Also, much has been made of Monk's playmaking. He had a respectable 5.1 apg playing with Fox, Simons had 5.5 playing with Scoot...I understand that assist numbers don't tell the whole story, but I think Simons' playmaking has been undervalued in the comparisons with Monk. Simons is more of an overall offensive machine and the difference in the 3pt shooting should be really critical to ORL's plans, especially if Suggs continues to bomb away...Paolo should be racking triple-doubles with all of the gravity he creates. For all of the concerns about "taking the ball out of Paolo and Franz' hands", who would you prefer spotting up at the line?

I'd be very happy with Monk, but I think Simons is a little more proven and a lot better floor spreader. I'd also take my chances defensively with Simons 6'9" wingspan and freakish athleticism in Mosley's hands.

I just get very weary of thinking about certain raw stats like this when guys are playing on clear tanking teams where nothing matters.

Like how relevant is it that Simons put up 21.7 PPG, 3.0 RPG, 4.7 APG on .439/.381/.905 the last two years for Portland, when the Blazers went 38-70 in those games?

The games weren't really relevant or competitive.

Anyone can put up reasonable counting numbers if they play 35 MPG and get as many possessions as they want on a mid 20s win roster.

yes...it's definitely a concern. I've seen enough highlights of Monk in the last year or two, displaying a ferocity that I just don't know if Simons has. Hard to know until you're tested in big moments...Paolo erased any concerns this year. Garland seemed to shrivel, for example. D'Lo looks great on paper, but is almost known for disappearing when it matters...Just don't know.

[Knightro]

When Monk does this as a starter I will always believe Simons is better.

I mean that's quite literally the gamble on a guy like Monk.

You're asking him to do something he's never actually done, even though there are indicators he *could* thrive in a larger role.

Simons stats are ok, but he basically hasn't played a meaningful game in his career as a starter and hasn't played a meaningful game period in four years.

[eyriq]

If we are going to make a trade, the target should be Trae Young. Trae has arguably been a top 10 player twice already in his young career.