All things Anfernee Simons

[JRoy]

I LOVE Simons + his gravity but I a few questions & concerns:

1. Cost. If 2 picks + cap absorbing isn't enough, look elsewhere. Blazers are about to be a tax team so our ability to help shed salary shouldn't be overlooked as an asset.

2. Defense. He sucks and lacks instincts. Can that be masked by Mosley with schemes? Can playing with better defensive pressure push him to be better?

3. Playmaking & tablesetting. I love his offensive stylistic fit as a scorer, but I don't view him as the playmaking passer we may need. Maybe I'm wrong in my evaluation of what fits best with our core.

4. FT attemps. Not that good at drawing fouls. Just an observation.

As a POR fan from the Walton days, this is all true.

Simons is an excellent shooter on high volume, and has worked on his driving game but shies from contact. More likely to shoot an old school running hook than drive for a dunk.

His athleticism does not translate to in game situations. He is physically weak.

He is a poor primary playmaker but a solid secondary playmaker.

His defense is awful, but surrounded by defensive players would not look quite as bad as it has in POR.

Don’t buy any talk about potential, he is pretty much a finished product.

[Knightro]

Yeah, if we are paying a guy as our #1 perimeter option then I would prefer it to be a guy that has proven he can do it as a starter. Not into the idea of paying a guy, that hasn't actually done the job before, that amount of money hoping it works out.

At least with Simons you know what he's done in significant minutes on a bad defensive team with less options. He's the #1 or #2 option in Portland since Lillard left. In Orlando he will be option #3 flexing into option #1. Monk isn't in that conversation.

But other than physically playing starter minutes, has Simons actually done anything that would or should lead anyone to believe he's capable of being a starter for a team that plays games that matter?

Portland is 81-165 the last three years, ya know?

If you stuck Monk in Simons' spot on the Blazers and let him have a 28 USG% on a team where nothing mattered, I'm extremely confident Monk would have put up big counting numbers too.

But the numbers wouldn't have really meant anything.

[three3d]

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.

If my math is mathing..

It looks like in the last 2 years where Monk played less than 30mpg he averaged:

12.9 ppg on .425 FG% .338 3PT% in 22.8 MPG in 126 games

Not really sure what to make of this variance.. Inconsistency maybe? Monk had the privilege of playing on a great offensive team so Brown could roll with the Hot Hand if Monk’s shots were falling, and if not they had several other players they could rely on to produce? I don’t think Simons had that same luxury.

The more you dig into it, it looks like it’s possible Monk’s above average shooting is a mirage. 27% from 3 post all star break in 19 games. 35% for his career

Yeah, if we are paying a guy as our #1 perimeter option then I would prefer it to be a guy that has proven he can do it as a starter. Not into the idea of paying a guy, that hasn't actually done the job before, that amount of money hoping it works out.

At least with Simons you know what he's done in significant minutes on a bad defensive team with less options. He's the #1 or #2 option in Portland since Lillard left. In Orlando he will be option #3 flexing into option #1. Monk isn't in that conversation. I'll also take the hometown kid that is 2 years younger, with higher upside, and less contract years.

I honestly think Simons becomes your #2 option allowing Franz to be 3rd at worst. Take a look at Simons December numbers he was averaging 28 ppg with 5 assist.

[three3d]

With Paolo, Franz, and Simons you have a three headed monster that on any given night all three are capable of being your #1 scorer. Between those three starting that’s an easy 60+ points per night with 3 guys.

Can anyone provide the top 3 player scoring avg per team or the 10 highest scoring trios?

[VFX]

Yeah, if we are paying a guy as our #1 perimeter option then I would prefer it to be a guy that has proven he can do it as a starter. Not into the idea of paying a guy, that hasn't actually done the job before, that amount of money hoping it works out.

At least with Simons you know what he's done in significant minutes on a bad defensive team with less options. He's the #1 or #2 option in Portland since Lillard left. In Orlando he will be option #3 flexing into option #1. Monk isn't in that conversation.

But other than physically playing starter minutes, has Simons actually done anything that would or should lead anyone to believe he's capable of being a starter for a team that plays games that matter?

Portland is 81-165 the last three years, ya know?

If you stuck Monk in Simons' spot on the Blazers and let him have a 28 USG% on a team where nothing mattered, I'm extremely confident Monk would have put up big counting numbers too.

But the numbers wouldn't have really meant anything.

And we will never know...lol

You can make any argument about Monk vs Simons you want. Kings decided to start Huerter over him in nearly all games despite Monk still playing more minutes.

Huerter averaged 24mpg and Monk 26mpg, so that tells me that they preferred Monk off the bench regardless and left him in when he was hot. Doesn't really scream trustworthy as a starter does it?

I mean.. we are arguing about which fringe semi-attainable starter can mask Orlando's consistent perimeter deficiencies. If you want to take on a slightly older, less qualified, more expensive, longer contract option, with more to prove then so be it. I don't know what to tell you. If Simons is coming off the bench for Sacramento, instead of Monk, is he putting up more points than he would in Portland against starters instead of bench units? Can't answer that either can we?

[three3d]

Worst case scenario you have Simons on a two year contract right now and that’s all. If he plays well and looks good next season in his role it’s a win. If not you have a 25-26 year old next summer on his last year of his contract to think about trading. Win win ?

[Skybox]

Simons v. Monk is a good debate, with merits on both sides. Casually inserting Trae is a WHOLE different animal. If Monk's main advantage over Simons is not giving up trade assets...consider what Trae will cost to acquire. The conversation probably starts with Suggs, if not Franz (I know we wouldn't, but then we're probably not in the conversation- maybe Black and Jett +++).

Then, consider the effect on our entire offensive hierarchy. Trae, like Luka, is a system unto himself...he has no role other than QB1. That would be a tremendous compromise upon the things that make Paolo and Franz special. They weren't born to rebound, catch lobs, and spot up for open 3's. I'm not knocking Trae - kind of the opposite - he's so dynamic that you can't ask him to change his game to suit others. I just think it's equivalent to a complete teardown of all ORL has built...Personally, I'd prefer Murray, Simons, or Monk...all of whom would fit seamlessly in to the core and take it to another level, especially considering the cost to obtain and the implied max deal.

I think the only way there's a Trae announcement in ORL...it would involve Franz. I hope not, but ATL is too good to just re-boot.

[Ducklett]

It’s funny because Paolo is asking for a PG to take the ball out of his hands.

Paolo said he doesnt want another scorer, he wants a PG to organize the offense. Simons is a scorer who cant organize offense badum tss.
We really want to pretend smaller Tim Hardaway jr. will somehow fix our offense ? Paolo and Franz can move all over the court but Simons just cant create for them at high enough level. People act like Simons and Young are in similar tier as passers.

Alot of stuff being thrown around about Simons that simply isn't true.

Simons cant organize offense

Simons cant create

Fact is, you dont average 22.6 ppg and 5.5 apg in the NBA by accident.

Evan Fournier averaged 20ppg and 4apg the year before we traded him. You absolutely can get those stats accidently.

[Residual-Heat]

Yeah, if we are paying a guy as our #1 perimeter option then I would prefer it to be a guy that has proven he can do it as a starter. Not into the idea of paying a guy, that hasn't actually done the job before, that amount of money hoping it works out.

At least with Simons you know what he's done in significant minutes on a bad defensive team with less options. He's the #1 or #2 option in Portland since Lillard left. In Orlando he will be option #3 flexing into option #1. Monk isn't in that conversation.

But other than physically playing starter minutes, has Simons actually done anything that would or should lead anyone to believe he's capable of being a starter for a team that plays games that matter?

Portland is 81-165 the last three years, ya know?

If you stuck Monk in Simons' spot on the Blazers and let him have a 28 USG% on a team where nothing mattered, I'm extremely confident Monk would have put up big counting numbers too.

But the numbers wouldn't have really meant anything.

And we will never know...lol

You can make any argument about Monk vs Simons you want. Kings decided to start Huerter over him in nearly all games despite Monk still playing more minutes.

Huerter averaged 24mpg and Monk 26mpg, so that tells me that they preferred Monk off the bench regardless and left him in when he was hot. Doesn't really scream trustworthy as a starter does it?

I mean.. we are arguing about which fringe semi-attainable starter can mask Orlando's consistent perimeter deficiencies. If you want to take on a slightly older, less qualified, more expensive, longer contract option, with more to prove then so be it. I don't know what to tell you. If Simons is coming off the bench for Sacramento, instead of Monk, is he putting up more points than he would in Portland against starters instead of bench units? Can't answer that either can we?

Monk still played more minutes than Huerter and coach Brown usually closed games with him in the line up. He played more minutes in the 4th quarter than Huerter.

Yeah, if we are paying a guy as our #1 perimeter option then I would prefer it to be a guy that has proven he can do it as a starter. Not into the idea of paying a guy, that hasn't actually done the job before, that amount of money hoping it works out.

At least with Simons you know what he's done in significant minutes on a bad defensive team with less options. He's the #1 or #2 option in Portland since Lillard left. In Orlando he will be option #3 flexing into option #1. Monk isn't in that conversation.

Monk was literally the third option on a 47 win team this year, and he did at times lead his team in scoring.

[cedric76]

I LOVE Simons + his gravity but I a few questions & concerns:

1. Cost. If 2 picks + cap absorbing isn't enough, look elsewhere. Blazers are about to be a tax team so our ability to help shed salary shouldn't be overlooked as an asset.

2. Defense. He sucks and lacks instincts. Can that be masked by Mosley with schemes? Can playing with better defensive pressure push him to be better?

3. Playmaking & tablesetting. I love his offensive stylistic fit as a scorer, but I don't view him as the playmaking passer we may need. Maybe I'm wrong in my evaluation of what fits best with our core.

4. FT attemps. Not that good at drawing fouls. Just an observation.

As a POR fan from the Walton days, this is all true.

Simons is an excellent shooter on high volume, and has worked on his driving game but shies from contact. More likely to shoot an old school running hook than drive for a dunk.

His athleticism does not translate to in game situations. He is physically weak.

He is a poor primary playmaker but a solid secondary playmaker.

His defense is awful, but surrounded by defensive players would not look quite as bad as it has in POR.

Don’t buy any talk about potential, he is pretty much a finished product.

Jroy knows Simons more than anyone here, listen to him.

Portland s fans want Simons out and king s fans want monk to stay

This is very telling

[orlando_joe]

i wonder what suggs could score if you told him dont use any energy on defense and shoot as many 3s as you can ...he would get a bigger contract for sure...but lets bring in a guy to do that and tell others cover his defense ,take less shots so he can get paid
that should go over well

[OrlChamps2030]

It feels a little unfair to hold Portland’s lack of success against Simons. He’s clearly miscast into a #1 role when in reality he’s a #3 option.

Y’all don’t remember that Monk played on a losing team for years too? The difference is Monk snorted so much blow that Charlotte let him walk to LA for a 1.7 million dollar deal while the Blazers locked Simons into a 100 million dollar deal.. It feels a little cheap to call Monk a winner and Simons a loser haha

Do we really think a team with Monk as a #1 option would amount to anything?

[JRoy]

I LOVE Simons + his gravity but I a few questions & concerns:

1. Cost. If 2 picks + cap absorbing isn't enough, look elsewhere. Blazers are about to be a tax team so our ability to help shed salary shouldn't be overlooked as an asset.

2. Defense. He sucks and lacks instincts. Can that be masked by Mosley with schemes? Can playing with better defensive pressure push him to be better?

3. Playmaking & tablesetting. I love his offensive stylistic fit as a scorer, but I don't view him as the playmaking passer we may need. Maybe I'm wrong in my evaluation of what fits best with our core.

4. FT attemps. Not that good at drawing fouls. Just an observation.

As a POR fan from the Walton days, this is all true.

Simons is an excellent shooter on high volume, and has worked on his driving game but shies from contact. More likely to shoot an old school running hook than drive for a dunk.

His athleticism does not translate to in game situations. He is physically weak.

He is a poor primary playmaker but a solid secondary playmaker.

His defense is awful, but surrounded by defensive players would not look quite as bad as it has in POR.

Don’t buy any talk about potential, he is pretty much a finished product.

Jroy knows Simons more than anyone here, listen to him.

Portland s fans want Simons out and king s fans want monk to stay

This is very telling

There is more to it than that; Simons can’t play with Scoot or Sharpe. He needs to go.

[zaymon]

With Paolo, Franz, and Simons you have a three headed monster that on any given night all three are capable of being your #1 scorer. Between those three starting that’s an easy 60+ points per night with 3 guys.

Can anyone provide the top 3 player scoring avg per team or the 10 highest scoring trios?

Points dont add up like that, look at Phoenix Suns.
Paolo, Franz and Simons follow the worst constructed teams right now. 3 scorers with noone to really set the offense.
Assets used on Simons are assets we cant use in hipothetical Young trade.

[Knightro]

Do we really think a team with Monk as a #1 option would amount to anything?

Of course not. But that isn't what anyone is suggesting.

People are saying they wouldn't take Monk because he's never been a starter and would rather take Simons because has been a starter.

But Simons' starting experience has been pretty much putrid in irrelevant games. So why are we lending it so much more importance?

[fendilim]

Do we really think a team with Monk as a #1 option would amount to anything?

Of course not. But that isn't what anyone is suggesting.

People are saying they wouldn't take Monk because he's never been a starter and would rather take Simons because has been a starter.

But Simons' starting experience has been pretty much putrid in irrelevant games. So why are we lending it so much more importance?

it shouldn’t matter if Monk starts or not, 6th man is a vital role to any team’s success.

Also, Monk has finished more important games (which is what matters), as a 6th man.

[Knightro]

it shouldn’t matter if Monk starts or not, 6th man is a vital role to any team’s success.

Also, Monk has finished more important games (which is what matters), as a 6th man.

I would not sign Monk for 22-25M AAV unless the organization was confident he could assume a 30-35 MPG starting role. Otherwise it's not worth signing him IMO.

I would not pay close to double Cole's salary to get someone to assume Cole's role. That just doesn't make sense to me from an asset management perspective.

[Ducklett]

With Paolo, Franz, and Simons you have a three headed monster that on any given night all three are capable of being your #1 scorer. Between those three starting that’s an easy 60+ points per night with 3 guys.

Can anyone provide the top 3 player scoring avg per team or the 10 highest scoring trios?

Points dont add up like that, look at Phoenix Suns.
Paolo, Franz and Simons follow the worst constructed teams right now. 3 scorers with noone to really set the offense.
Assets used on Simons are assets we cant use in hipothetical Young trade.

Why aren't you pushing for Cade over Young? If you simply want a guy who can set the offense (they don't really exist anymore) the one that would actually be obtainable who does it best would be Cade, not Trae.

[jonbob17]

Worst case scenario you have Simons on a two year contract right now and that’s all. If he plays well and looks good next season in his role it’s a win. If not you have a 25-26 year old next summer on his last year of his contract to think about trading. Win win ?

I don't know that Simon's is that good where we have to worry about a big contract down the road. His contract is probably about neutral to somewhat positive depending on the desperation of the team that wants him(e.g. the Magic). I'd be surprised if anyone is bidding against the Magic, and if he cost more than a first plus seconds or 2nd chance guy(s). Unless he drastically improves on defense he's a 18-20% of cap guy.

Honestly on the trade front the Magic probably has the upper hand with Portland with how many other guys that may be available and may be preferable: Monk, KCP, Russell, Lavine, Brogdon, Rozier, Chris Paul to a degree. Maybe there is a team i am not thinking of, but a lot of the younger teams are kind of loaded at guard. Most contenders don't really need a score first, very flawed defending guard that makes $26M a year.

Now that I am thinking about it the Magic may really get a steal this offseason...but it may take some patience...and we really are desperate for the half court offense, so it might be tough. Maybe they can leverage the market against some of these guys leading up to free agency.

[OrlChamps2030]

Do we really think a team with Monk as a #1 option would amount to anything?

Of course not. But that isn't what anyone is suggesting.

People are saying they wouldn't take Monk because he's never been a starter and would rather take Simons because has been a starter.

But Simons' starting experience has been pretty much putrid in irrelevant games. So why are we lending it so much more importance?

It’s probably important because no projection is required. No matter what team Simons plays for, you can expect volume 3 point shooting at >~38%.

We’ve posted on here for a long time.. we both know the list of Per 36 all stars that never lived up to their projections is almost as long as the list of summer league superstars that amounted to nothing.

Are you getting the Monk that shot 39% from 3 in >30mpg or the Monk that shot 30% from 3 in 2024?

I’d be happy with Monk I just see a bit more offensive upside in Simons and his shooting is a level above Monk’s.