Bryan Colangelo recap from 97.5 interview

[Ericb5]

We use the number 1 pick for the most talented player we can get. Whether it is Simmons or Ingram they will still be secondary to Embiid.

If Simmons doesn't improve his shooting then he will be hampered for sure, but I don't think he needs to improve his shooting beyond mediocre to be a future MVP candidate.

Hmm.. I don't agree with this and maybe it's just a personal opinion. There's really a good correlation between shooting and star ability that is hard to deny. There are terribly few outliers.

Well there are terribly few mvp candidates generally but lebron Westbrook and Derozen were all top 10 scorers as perimeter players with mediocre at best outside shots. Kwahi certainly couldn't shoot like he can now as a 19 year old.

There's a correlation and it's an important skill to be sure but not having it isn't disqualifying, especially at this stage of his development. This isn't a 22 year old turner were talking about.

How about Magic, Barkley, and Kidd too?

[76ciology]

We use the number 1 pick for the most talented player we can get. Whether it is Simmons or Ingram they will still be secondary to Embiid.

If Simmons doesn't improve his shooting then he will be hampered for sure, but I don't think he needs to improve his shooting beyond mediocre to be a future MVP candidate.

Hmm.. I don't agree with this and maybe it's just a personal opinion. There's really a good correlation between shooting and star ability that is hard to deny. There are terribly few outliers.

Well there are terribly few mvp candidates generally but lebron Westbrook and Derozen were all top 10 scorers as perimeter players with mediocre at best outside shots. Kwahi certainly couldn't shoot like he can now as a 19 year old.

There's a correlation and it's an important skill to be sure but not having it isn't disqualifying, especially at this stage of his development. This isn't a 22 year old turner were talking about.

I do agree that it's unfair to put a cap on the upside of these prospects. But Simmons is starting off with a poor base rate. It's a touch issue where he's a natural righty but he shoots with his left, and his numbers would show that.

Maybe if I'm comparing Simmons and Dunn, i may overlook that fact and put my eggs on his shooting development. But there's Ingram who doesn't just fit the type and has a high upside, but also a much safer pick.

He's also 20 next season. LBJ was already shooting 35% from 3s and Kawhi at 37%. With Simmons, you're still deciding which hand should he use to shoot the ball. Well that left hand of his doesn't promising.

[76ciology]

Hmm.. I don't agree with this and maybe it's just a personal opinion. There's really a good correlation between shooting and star ability that is hard to deny. There are terribly few outliers.

Well there are terribly few mvp candidates generally but lebron Westbrook and Derozen were all top 10 scorers as perimeter players with mediocre at best outside shots. Kwahi certainly couldn't shoot like he can now as a 19 year old.

There's a correlation and it's an important skill to be sure but not having it isn't disqualifying, especially at this stage of his development. This isn't a 22 year old turner were talking about.

How about Magic, Barkley, and Kidd too?

Magic and Barkley played in a different era, where shooting is not THAT much of a need. Kidd eventually became a good shooter.

I've learned my lesson. I'm also an old head. Before I value ability to create shots and playmaking. But after diving into analytics and watching how the game is played. You will see how important shooting is, that when there's good ball/player movement, anyone can easily drive any type of defense as long as he is a threat from the outside. Best teams who maximize these are Spurs and Hawks. It allowed average and ball handling at best players (in general) like Horford and Diaw to drive and draw.

P.S. I created an entire thread about shooting that is evident in the evolution of bigs. I'll put it this way, even Steven Adams and Enes Kanter are shooting corner 3s. You're probability to be a star in this league has some relation to your ability to shoot. And that's probably why the most efficient scorer is a shooter and the least efficient is not a shooter.

[MGB8]

The notion that you project development against HOFers is exactly what is wrong. It's all emotion.

Did Evan Turner ever learn to shoot? How about MCW, who has a great handle and good passing ability? Or even Iguodala, who got better - but never great.

What about Tony Allen? Rajon Rondo? And we know for sure that those guys work very hard on their games.

Giannis also works hard - not much of a shooter - at least not yet. How's Marcus Smart looking in the shooting department?

For every HOFer there are 100 guys with tons of natural talent that didn't develop.

You can't just assume, because of the hype, that Ben Simmons is a HOF type talent. He's very quick for a 6'10 guy, and he was very strong for a freshman, he has a good handle and very good passing ability, and some explosion to the rim and ability around it (though unclear how he'll do against length). But you don't gamble and scramble on a Ben Simmons type talent. He's not Lebron. Not close.

[Ericb5]

Hmm.. I don't agree with this and maybe it's just a personal opinion. There's really a good correlation between shooting and star ability that is hard to deny. There are terribly few outliers.

Well there are terribly few mvp candidates generally but lebron Westbrook and Derozen were all top 10 scorers as perimeter players with mediocre at best outside shots. Kwahi certainly couldn't shoot like he can now as a 19 year old.

There's a correlation and it's an important skill to be sure but not having it isn't disqualifying, especially at this stage of his development. This isn't a 22 year old turner were talking about.

I do agree that it's unfair to put a cap on the upside of these prospects. But Simmons is starting off with a poor base rate. It's a touch issue where he's a natural righty but he shoots with his left, and his numbers would show that.

Maybe if I'm comparing Simmons and Dunn, i may overlook that fact and put my eggs on his shooting development. But there's Ingram who doesn't just fit the type and has a high upside, but also a much safer pick.

He's also 20 next season. LBJ was already shooting 35% from 3s and Kawhi at 37%. With Simmons, you're still deciding which hand should he use to shoot the ball. Well that left hand of his doesn't promising.

To be fair, he really has shot 3's at all. If his feet are set and he starts shooting them this year then he might shoot them better than you think.

[Sixerscan]

Hmm.. I don't agree with this and maybe it's just a personal opinion. There's really a good correlation between shooting and star ability that is hard to deny. There are terribly few outliers.

Well there are terribly few mvp candidates generally but lebron Westbrook and Derozen were all top 10 scorers as perimeter players with mediocre at best outside shots. Kwahi certainly couldn't shoot like he can now as a 19 year old.

There's a correlation and it's an important skill to be sure but not having it isn't disqualifying, especially at this stage of his development. This isn't a 22 year old turner were talking about.

I do agree that it's unfair to put a cap on the upside of these prospects. But Simmons is starting off with a poor base rate. It's a touch issue where he's a natural righty but he shoots with his left, and his numbers would show that.

Maybe if I'm comparing Simmons and Dunn, i may overlook that fact and put my eggs on his shooting development. But there's Ingram who doesn't just fit the type and has a high upside, but also a much safer pick.

He's also 20 next season. LBJ was already shooting 35% from 3s and Kawhi at 37%. With Simmons, you're still deciding which hand should he use to shoot the ball. Well that left hand of his doesn't promising.

Lebron shot 35% one year then didn't shoot that high again until 2012.

[Ericb5]

The notion that you project development against HOFers is exactly what is wrong. It's all emotion.

Did Evan Turner ever learn to shoot? How about MCW, who has a great handle and good passing ability? Or even Iguodala, who got better - but never great.

What about Tony Allen? Rajon Rondo? And we know for sure that those guys work very hard on their games.

Giannis also works hard - not much of a shooter - at least not yet. How's Marcus Smart looking in the shooting department?

For every HOFer there are 100 guys with tons of natural talent that didn't develop.

You can't just assume, because of the hype, that Ben Simmons is a HOF type talent. He's very quick for a 6'10 guy, and he was very strong for a freshman, he has a good handle and very good passing ability, and some explosion to the rim and ability around it (though unclear how he'll do against length). But you don't gamble and scramble on a Ben Simmons type talent. He's not Lebron. Not close.

We aren't basing it off of hype, we are basing it off of watching him play.

I think that shooting is his only weakness, and we aren't really debating his ability to make the HOF, although there has never been an MVP winner in history that didn't make the HOF, so that is the implication.

I'm saying that he can be an MVP candidate without having shooting as a strength. He will have to be competent at it, but he doesn't have to be great at it. Derrick Rose won an MVP without much of a shot.

Even if we lower the bar one more rung from MVP candidate just down to the Carmelo Anthony level then that is still a superstar.

The point that I'm really making is that he can be a superstar without being a good shooter. He is a unique talent.

Shooting is a skill. Vision, and feel are talents that you are born with.

[phiphan]

Listened to the interview and never heard the word "transcendent." He said Simmons could be "transformational," but in the same breath said Ingram could "change the game" due to his length... Also said don't believe any website that says they're leaning one way.

[MGB8]

The notion that you project development against HOFers is exactly what is wrong. It's all emotion.

Did Evan Turner ever learn to shoot? How about MCW, who has a great handle and good passing ability? Or even Iguodala, who got better - but never great.

What about Tony Allen? Rajon Rondo? And we know for sure that those guys work very hard on their games.

Giannis also works hard - not much of a shooter - at least not yet. How's Marcus Smart looking in the shooting department?

For every HOFer there are 100 guys with tons of natural talent that didn't develop.

You can't just assume, because of the hype, that Ben Simmons is a HOF type talent. He's very quick for a 6'10 guy, and he was very strong for a freshman, he has a good handle and very good passing ability, and some explosion to the rim and ability around it (though unclear how he'll do against length). But you don't gamble and scramble on a Ben Simmons type talent. He's not Lebron. Not close.

We aren't basing it off of hype, we are basing it off of watching him play.

I think that shooting is his only weakness, and we aren't really debating his ability to make the HOF, although there has never been an MVP winner in history that didn't make the HOF, so that is the implication.

I'm saying that he can be an MVP candidate without having shooting as a strength. He will have to be competent at it, but he doesn't have to be great at it. Derrick Rose won an MVP without much of a shot.

Even if we lower the bar one more rung from MVP candidate just down to the Carmelo Anthony level then that is still a superstar.

The point that I'm really making is that he can be a superstar without being a good shooter. He is a unique talent.

Shooting is a skill. Vision, and feel are talents that you are born with.

First, while you can improve shooting to a degree, in large part it's innate. That's why Steph and Seth, children of Dell, can shoot lights out, while others like Turner, MCW, Iggy, etc., can only ever get themselves to mediocre.

I compare Simmons to Giannis - with Simmons coming in physically stronger, but Giannis having and edge in length and a big advantage defensive intensity and ability to guard 1-5. That's a talented guy (though LSU's failure of a season is a HUGE red flag for me). And Giannis can certainly become a superstar - he isn't too far from it right now.

But I don't re-set a roster around a Giannis. I'd re-set around a Lebron, or a KAT or Davis... but those guys you don't have to re-set around because they don't have glaring weaknesses for their position. Keep in mind that when you are trading guys to re-set your roster, you rarely get value on your trades.

Ingram, to me, does merit the "poor man's Durant" comparison - or a comparison to a longer, SF version of Klay Thompson. He's going to get thicker and stronger as he gets older, and he's always going to be able to just shoot over people. And if you watched him play, he certainly had vision and feel for the game - making strong passes, having an idea of when to drive vs. dish, etc.

When you already have a blue chip interior scorer like Okafor - and maybe Embiid (who would likely mean that Okafor eventually needs to go) - you don't jettison them for a Giannis-type guy. You grab an equally, if differently, talented guy like Ingram, who is going to make Okafor or Embiid that much more dangerous because he'll force teams to defend out to the three point line.

[Unbreakable99]

I do think Saric would ask BC and BB on who they are leaning to draft right now. I think he'd prefer a player who doesn't play his role (think okafor-noel situation). So if Saric decides to come over here, I'd take that as a slight sign that the team will draft Ingram.

I think you're onto something here. If Saric comes, we take Ingram. Saric doesn't fit with Simmons, especially on defense.

Ingram has every bit of upside that Simmons does and picking Ingram doesn't force you to trade most of your other lottery picks. Simmons just isn't that good. Now that JoJo looks healthy, he is the one we are building around, IMO.

You don't pass on Simmons because Saric is coming over. We are getting to levels of asinine. Saric is not close to the level of prospect Simmons is. People just need to accept the fate that Simmons will be drafted by the Sixers whether Saric comes over or not. Simmons baby.

[PhillySixers22]

So are we basically writing off Giannis as well due to his lack of a jumper? I mean obviously Simmons is going to need to put in the work to improve his shooting, but to basically cap his potential based on the expectation that he can't/won't improve seems a bit foolish. Should we also assume Ingram won't improve as a defender or will stay under 200 pounds? And I know that is something that typically improves naturally as players mature physically, but the point is we're not judging them based solely on who they are currently, and if we were Simmons would still be the pick imo. The only real advantage Ingram has skill wise is his shooting and there are currently a number of examples in the NBA that a player can still be dominant without a strong jumper.

[Agnostifarian]

I do think Saric would ask BC and BB on who they are leaning to draft right now. I think he'd prefer a player who doesn't play his role (think okafor-noel situation). So if Saric decides to come over here, I'd take that as a slight sign that the team will draft Ingram.

I think you're onto something here. If Saric comes, we take Ingram. Saric doesn't fit with Simmons, especially on defense.

Ingram has every bit of upside that Simmons does and picking Ingram doesn't force you to trade most of your other lottery picks. Simmons just isn't that good. Now that JoJo looks healthy, he is the one we are building around, IMO.

You don't pass on Simmons because Saric is coming over. We are getting to levels of asinine. Saric is not close to the level of prospect Simmons is. People just need to accept the fate that Simmons will be drafted by the Sixers whether Saric comes over or not. Simmons baby.

You pass on Simmons because you build around JoJo, not specifically because of Saric. You can especially afford to pass on Simmons because Ingram is a more complete player and will run the PNR better with other bigs. In fact, Saric will run the PNR better than Simmons too because he has a jump shot.

[Negrodamus]

So are we basically writing off Giannis as well due to his lack of a jumper? I mean obviously Simmons is going to need to put in the work to improve his shooting, but to basically cap his potential based on the expectation that he can't/won't improve seems a bit foolish. Should we also assume Ingram won't improve as a defender or will stay under 200 pounds? And I know that is something that typically improves naturally as players mature physically, but the point is we're not judging them based solely on who they are currently, and if we were Simmons would still be the pick imo. The only real advantage Ingram has skill wise is his shooting and there are currently a number of examples in the NBA that a player can still be dominant without a strong jumper.

I wouldn't write Giannis off because he has a 7'3 wingspan (like someone I know), and scores 53.8% on 2pt FG in the NBA. That last part is important because he's not playing against the vertically challenged SEC, but rather the highest level. Having that kind of length allows him to do such a thing.

[Unbreakable99]

I think you're onto something here. If Saric comes, we take Ingram. Saric doesn't fit with Simmons, especially on defense.

Ingram has every bit of upside that Simmons does and picking Ingram doesn't force you to trade most of your other lottery picks. Simmons just isn't that good. Now that JoJo looks healthy, he is the one we are building around, IMO.

You don't pass on Simmons because Saric is coming over. We are getting to levels of asinine. Saric is not close to the level of prospect Simmons is. People just need to accept the fate that Simmons will be drafted by the Sixers whether Saric comes over or not. Simmons baby.

You pass on Simmons because you build around JoJo, not specifically because of Saric. You can especially afford to pass on Simmons because Ingram is a more complete player and will run the PNR better with other bigs. In fact, Saric will run the PNR better than Simmons too because he has a jump shot.

Simmons is a better all around player than Ingram. You build around Simmons. Embiid fits with Simms so it's great. You can build around both. They are both going to be great.

[CoreyGallagher]

I wouldn't write Giannis off because he has a 7'3 wingspan (like someone I know), and scores 53.8% on 2pt FG in the NBA. That last part is important because he's not playing against the vertically challenged SEC, but rather the highest level. Having that kind of length allows him to do such a thing.

Idk, I would probably write him off. Very few players that tall ever develop the handles, passing, and vision that Giannis has, expecting Ingram to get there is quite unlikely imo. Simmons doesn't have elite length, but he has some and his athleticism allows him to play smaller than most 6'10 guys.

53.8% on 2pt FG, 31.8% outside of 5 feet. He's able to score effectively without much of an outside shot for a multitude of reasons, not just his length. Length is obviously beneficial and is obviously preferable, but let's not act like a 7" wingspan is stubby either.

[Negrodamus]

I wouldn't write Giannis off because he has a 7'3 wingspan (like someone I know), and scores 53.8% on 2pt FG in the NBA. That last part is important because he's not playing against the vertically challenged SEC, but rather the highest level. Having that kind of length allows him to do such a thing.

Idk, I would probably write him off. Very few players that tall ever develop the handles, passing, and vision that Giannis has, expecting Ingram to get there is quite unlikely imo. Simmons doesn't have elite length, but he has some and his athleticism allows him to play smaller than most 6'10 guys.

53.8% on 2pt FG, 31.8% outside of 5 feet.

No, I'm agreeing with you. Giannis is a freak of nature. He's like mixing Ingram and Simmons together without inheriting the jumpshot. He's here to stay.

[LongLiveHinkie]

You don't pass on Simmons because Saric is coming over. We are getting to levels of asinine. Saric is not close to the level of prospect Simmons is. People just need to accept the fate that Simmons will be drafted by the Sixers whether Saric comes over or not. Simmons baby.

You pass on Simmons because you build around JoJo, not specifically because of Saric. You can especially afford to pass on Simmons because Ingram is a more complete player and will run the PNR better with other bigs. In fact, Saric will run the PNR better than Simmons too because he has a jump shot.

Simmons is a better all around player than Ingram. You build around Simmons. Embiid fits with Simms so it's great. You can build around both. They are both going to be great.

Is he though? I mean, he may do more things on a basketball court, but more versatile doesn't necessarily mean all around better. For example, Andre Iguodala can do a lot. Pass, defend, rebound, score a little(in his prime) but he's not better than James Harden who pretty much is primarily a scorer and plays absolutely zero defense.

Not saying that's who I am comparing Simmons and Ingram to, but being more versatile doesn't necessarily make you a better player. A lot more goes into it.

[Kobblehead]

The problem with all of these discussions is that Ingram is being presented as some alpha scorer. He's not, he's just a lanky shooter. His finishing rate at the rim this year at Duke was identical to T.J. McConnell's during his rookie campaign. A pathetic 58%.

Clunky athlete
Average handle
Doesn't have a distributing aptitude
Can't defend
Can't finish.

Brandon Ingram is incredibly overrated.

[LongLiveHinkie]

He's not an alpha scorer. I personally think this draft is overrated at the top. But I think he'll be a better NBA scorer than Simmons.

Ingram has a good arsenal. He can drive pretty well for a guy who is as lanky as he is, he has a strong back to the basket game that should only get better as he learns to better utilize his length, he has a nice fadeaway jumper, strong pull-up jumper. Good spot shooter.

No, he's not Kevin Durant. Durant IMO will retire a top 10 all-time NBA player. But Simmons is not Lebron James either.

[76ciology]

I think you're onto something here. If Saric comes, we take Ingram. Saric doesn't fit with Simmons, especially on defense.

Ingram has every bit of upside that Simmons does and picking Ingram doesn't force you to trade most of your other lottery picks. Simmons just isn't that good. Now that JoJo looks healthy, he is the one we are building around, IMO.

You don't pass on Simmons because Saric is coming over. We are getting to levels of asinine. Saric is not close to the level of prospect Simmons is. People just need to accept the fate that Simmons will be drafted by the Sixers whether Saric comes over or not. Simmons baby.

You pass on Simmons because you build around JoJo, not specifically because of Saric. You can especially afford to pass on Simmons because Ingram is a more complete player and will run the PNR better with other bigs. In fact, Saric will run the PNR better than Simmons too because he has a jump shot.

This.

You have to build a small ball team with Simmons. Then if you make him the main guy out of your small ball team, then you better hope he's right there with GOAT level players like Curry, KD, Westbrook and LeBron or else you won't be able to match-up the fire

Ingram is not just the low risk high upside guy, he's also a great fit with what we currently have.