Official #1 pick thread: Simmons or Ingram? Merging topics and a Poll

[Sportfan73]

I'm curious what we will do when Simmons is on the bench?

Will Saric step and run a similar role?

That would be neat. and if Saric's newfound shot is for real...he and Simmons could play in some weird ass small ball lineups too.

Saric and Simmons should be very interesting together. If Saric come off the bench then it will be great to have a point forward type on the floor at all times.

Now this, more than the 3 ball is where the NBA is going, playmakers OR shooters 1-4.

[05PhillyAI]

Years from now, When Simmons becomes Lamar Odom sans crack cocaine and Ingram is leading his team to the NBA finals, I along with many others will say "I told you so".

Ingram could very well be leading his team to the NBA finals and you can say "I told you so " but what good would it do when the team he is facing is lead by Embiid and Simmions. Your " told you so" becomes moot !!

And if Simmons becomes the Star and Ingram does not and we draft Ingram. What can we trade your "told you so" for?

Well, if Hinkie was still the GM at that time, I'd guess a future unprotected 1st round pick

[PhilasFinest]

I just hope Brown starts to try and expand the playbook a bit this year as we add more hopeful long term pieces.
Our offense has been so damn vanilla compared to what I was expecting to see. Then again, I guess thats what you get when
1.your not winning games and 2. playing with 20 year old D-leaguers with a constant roster in flux.

Imagining Simmons, Embiid, Saric, Covington in a Spurs/Hawks like system makes me giddy.

[phiphan]

The deal is [Ingram's] footspeed. He has a very plain first step. That is the real separator of "elite" talents. Nearly every "superstar" has a gdlk first step.

Underrated point

[FreesFro]

Years from now, When Simmons becomes Lamar Odom sans crack cocaine and Ingram is leading his team to the NBA finals, I along with many others will say "I told you so".

the fact that you probably wish for this to happen instead of Simmons being good says more about you than anything. I swear people would rather be right on the internet than their team having actual success.

I'll add to my post...if I'm wrong about Ingram v Simmons, I'll most certainly eat a big plate of crow.

I personally don't believe in passing on a guy who could lead the league in scoring one day.

Okafor has a better chance of one day leading the league in scoring than Ingram.

[HartfordWhalers]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/HowardBeck/status/734486401119588352[/tweet]

[Negrodamus]

After watching those Tobias Go-To playlist of Simmons again, he really starts to crap the bed against UF in Gainesville and really struggles against SEC teams (they were still very much in the tourney hunt at that time). Everything that's impressive about Simmons seems to occur in transition. Half court offense really looked like an issue and I'm concerned with some of the passes he attempts. Yes, he makes some beautiful passes, but some are incredibly reckless.

I will say that he should have averaged a few more assists per game, but his teammates struggled to finish. That said, for all the talk about him as a passer, he only had a +1.5 assist to turnover ratio (4.8 to 3.1). Dunn had +1.8, Valentine had 2.9 (7.8 to 2.7), Baldwin had 1.9 (5.2 to 2.8), Bembry with 2.25 (4.5 to 2.0). I post those guys because they are the future "playmakers" of their team. Dunn is a high turnover guy just like Simmons. The rest seem to control the ball.

As I said before, albeit a bit tongue in cheek: I like Simmons and think he could be a fun guy to tie an offense around because of his passing, but I do think he will be a rich mans Royce White if he wasn't crazy. They both were pretty terrible shooters but great passers. Simmons was a better scorer, rebounder, and taller. Is that something you build your team around? I guess that's for Bryan and Brett to decide.

If Simmons cannot be a guy who can hit an open shot nor be a SF, then he's someone we should pass on. I know he's got these super sexy traits and the ridiculous hype, but we have to be realistic in what he can become. I know we are all criticizing each other for being "psychologists", but if he doesn't have the mental makeup to shoot 2000 jumpers a day with a shooting coach to ensure he's capable of hitting a jumper, then I want Ingram. From what I've seen of him and his minimal improvements from HS, not to mention his documentary crew following him around, I'm not encouraged. Ask Kawhi Leonard if he simply had a "come to Jesus" moment in his jump shot or if he spent countless hours/days/weeks working on it.

[ET Da Gawd]

I'm curious what we will do when Simmons is on the bench?

Will Saric step and run a similar role?

They should literally play the same role, should always keep our offense fluid

[cksdayoff]

The deal is [Ingram's] footspeed. He has a very plain first step. That is the real separator of "elite" talents. Nearly every "superstar" has a gdlk first step.

Underrated point

footspeed can be improved on. burst can be improved on. jeremy lin improved his first step which is almost elite through various drills. ingram has a long stride, he may not need an elite first step to get past his defender, but i think he can improve in his quickness if he really wants to

[Negrodamus]

I'm curious what we will do when Simmons is on the bench?

Will Saric step and run a similar role?

They should literally play the same role, should always keep our offense fluid

So a ball handling 6'10 point forward? I sure hope he has similar transcendent ability like Simmons to play this position. If not, then I'm not sure who our PG will be. Canaan? Hope not.

[05PhillyAI]

The PG question is certainly important. And in reality, the near future of that position for the Sixers kind of hinges on who they take between Ingram and Simmons. If you take Simmons, you technically wouldn't need a "true PG" in a sense. Probably a more offensive/shooting oriented guy. With Ingram they'd need more of a distributor.

[Unbreakable99]

The PG question is certainly important. And in reality, the near future of that position for the Sixers kind of hinges on who they take between Ingram and Simmons. If you take Simmons, you technically wouldn't need a "true PG" in a sense. Probably a more offensive/shooting oriented guy. With Ingram they'd need more of a distributor.

True. I think Simmons makes it easier to not be too reliant to get a PG. we still would need one though. We can't just kick our feet up and relax.

[Ericb5]

I'm curious what we will do when Simmons is on the bench?

Will Saric step and run a similar role?

They should literally play the same role, should always keep our offense fluid

So a ball handling 6'10 point forward? I sure hope he has similar transcendent ability like Simmons to play this position. If not, then I'm not sure who our PG will be. Canaan? Hope not.

Even if Simmons runs the team we still will need a point guard. It's just that we can live with a combo guard in the starting lineup.


Sent from my iPad using RealGM Forums

[tk76]

The deal is [Ingram's] footspeed. He has a very plain first step. That is the real separator of "elite" talents. Nearly every "superstar" has a gdlk first step.

Underrated point

It depends a lot on how good his jumper is, because if defenders are scared of the jumper then then it will help Ingram blow past them on close outs.

[76ciology]

After watching those Tobias Go-To playlist of Simmons again, he really starts to crap the bed against UF in Gainesville and really struggles against SEC teams (they were still very much in the tourney hunt at that time). Everything that's impressive about Simmons seems to occur in transition. Half court offense really looked like an issue and I'm concerned with some of the passes he attempts. Yes, he makes some beautiful passes, but some are incredibly reckless.

I will say that he should have averaged a few more assists per game, but his teammates struggled to finish. That said, for all the talk about him as a passer, he only had a +1.5 assist to turnover ratio (4.8 to 3.1). Dunn had +1.8, Valentine had 2.9 (7.8 to 2.7), Baldwin had 1.9 (5.2 to 2.8), Bembry with 2.25 (4.5 to 2.0). I post those guys because they are the future "playmakers" of their team. Dunn is a high turnover guy just like Simmons. The rest seem to control the ball.

As I said before, albeit a bit tongue in cheek: I like Simmons and think he could be a fun guy to tie an offense around because of his passing, but I do think he will be a rich mans Royce White if he wasn't crazy. They both were pretty terrible shooters but great passers. Simmons was a better scorer, rebounder, and taller. Is that something you build your team around? I guess that's for Bryan and Brett to decide.

If Simmons cannot be a guy who can hit an open shot nor be a SF, then he's someone we should pass on. I know he's got these super sexy traits and the ridiculous hype, but we have to be realistic in what he can become. I know we are all criticizing each other for being "psychologists", but if he doesn't have the mental makeup to shoot 2000 jumpers a day with a shooting coach to ensure he's capable of hitting a jumper, then I want Ingram. From what I've seen of him and his minimal improvements from HS, not to mention his documentary crew following him around, I'm not encouraged. Ask Kawhi Leonard if he simply had a "come to Jesus" moment in his jump shot or if he spent countless hours/days/weeks working on it.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWiB2gc8zxs[/youtube]

This is against probably the best defensive team in SEC as per Kenpom at 93.9 DRTG. Was a win or go home game.

Texas A&M well scouted Simmons, let him took jumpers and guarded his right hand in finishing around the rim.

[PhilasFinest]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/HowardBeck/status/734486401119588352[/tweet]

Hmmm. Not jumping to any conclusions, but last week BC was on 97.5 for an interview and spoke on a plethora of topics. When describing Simmons he mentioned he could be "transformational". I see someone else caught it as well.

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.

Maybe he just likes the word "Transformational"...but he mentions it again here. Is Simmons the guy?

[Mik317]

yes if Simmons' jump shot never improves he probably isn't worth it.

that seems to be the base argument people are having here.

Obviously if you take him you must be confident that he will improve. Just like if you take Ingram you must be confident that he will get stronger and fill out. Neither are guaranteed. That is the nature of the beast tho. You can post all the videos and stats you want...that will not change minds man.

Ideally in the NBA, the extra space and lack of zone helps alleviate issues ,for both actually, while they work on their issues. But also their teammates. Simmons became easier to stop when it was obvious his teammates wouldn't be able to make teams pay. Hornsby went down and suddenly spacing got worse. You can point to the team making the NCAA a year prior...but they lost two of their best players (Mickey and Martin)..technically 3 if you count Hornsby. Quaterman struggled off the ball. Blakeney was a real freshman. The rest was bad. A lot of Simmons' highlights often have some scrub missing a wide open layup or shot. Hopefully our FO fixes that. Hell, even our scrub lords can hit open shots and layups. Noel will now have someone else to throw lobs to him. If Jah stays, he won't have to constantly repost because of our guards not being able to get him the ball. Our scrublord shooters now will get the ball in rhythm instead of having to always adjust to the pass. Small things like that are the idea of Simmons. Too many folks are focusing on his scoring prowess alone. This team needs shooters...no doubt and again I get the appeal of Ingram fully. But we also need a creator or at the very least a guy who can get others the ball where they need it at. Again we run a lot of sets where the distributor is a big at the top of the key. The last time it "worked" was when we had Hawes. Simmons is that plus the threat of actually driving. Adding a shot is crucial. No one will argue that. But I imagine most who are pro Simmons believes it can happen. His jumper isn't broken. A few tweaks and a "hey doofus shoot it instead of forcing it" from the coach will do wonders.

it is just weird how much of the pro Ingram manifesto involves overanalyzing others flaws and yet many of Ingrams own flaws are totally fixable with time.

[76ciology]

again it is meaningless if you can't and dont use it in game. Jordan Farmar has a 42 inch vert. Westbrook apparently "only" 35 inch.

[YouTube]http://youtu.be/xZYbnT32wiM[/YouTube]

He can jump high and use it in game. It's just I don't think he's THAT explosive. And 40+% of his FGs are 3s.

[76ciology]

yes if Simmons' jump shot never improves he probably isn't worth it.

that seems to be the base argument people are having here.

Obviously if you take him you must be confident that he will improve. Just like if you take Ingram you must be confident that he will get stronger and fill out. Neither are guaranteed. That is the nature of the beast tho. You can post all the videos and stats you want...that will not change minds man.

Ideally in the NBA, the extra space and lack of zone helps alleviate issues ,for both actually, while they work on their issues. But also their teammates. Simmons became easier to stop when it was obvious his teammates wouldn't be able to make teams pay. Hornsby went down and suddenly spacing got worse. You can point to the team making the NCAA a year prior...but they lost two of their best players (Mickey and Martin)..technically 3 if you count Hornsby. Quaterman struggled off the ball. Blakeney was a real freshman. The rest was bad. A lot of Simmons' highlights often have some scrub missing a wide open layup or shot. Hopefully our FO fixes that. Hell, even our scrub lords can hit open shots and layups. Noel will now have someone else to throw lobs to him. If Jah stays, he won't have to constantly repost because of our guards not being able to get him the ball. Our scrublord shooters now will get the ball in rhythm instead of having to always adjust to the pass. Small things like that are the idea of Simmons. Too many folks are focusing on his scoring prowess alone. This team needs shooters...no doubt and again I get the appeal of Ingram fully. But we also need a creator or at the very least a guy who can get others the ball where they need it at. Again we run a lot of sets where the distributor is a big at the top of the key. The last time it "worked" was when we had Hawes. Simmons is that plus the threat of actually driving. Adding a shot is crucial. No one will argue that. But I imagine most who are pro Simmons believes it can happen. His jumper isn't broken. A few tweaks and a "hey doofus shoot it instead of forcing it" from the coach will do wonders.

it is just weird how much of the pro Ingram manifesto involves overanalyzing others flaws and yet many of Ingrams own flaws are totally fixable with time.

Yeah. I think it's consensus that how special simmons will be depends on his jumpshot.

But then, for Ingram. All I see is physique problem. Personally,I didn't see it much of an issue in duke where he can still grab rebounds and post people unlike Skal.

While there seems to be far more people who can fill their body after 18 than people who can improve their jumpshot. And I'm not saying this because I'm fat and I can't shoot like Curry.

[Negrodamus]

yes if Simmons' jump shot never improves he probably isn't worth it.

that seems to be the base argument people are having here.

Obviously if you take him you must be confident that he will improve. Just like if you take Ingram you must be confident that he will get stronger and fill out. Neither are guaranteed. That is the nature of the beast tho. You can post all the videos and stats you want...that will not change minds man.

Ideally in the NBA, the extra space and lack of zone helps alleviate issues ,for both actually, while they work on their issues. But also their teammates. Simmons became easier to stop when it was obvious his teammates wouldn't be able to make teams pay. Hornsby went down and suddenly spacing got worse. You can point to the team making the NCAA a year prior...but they lost two of their best players (Mickey and Martin)..technically 3 if you count Hornsby. Quaterman struggled off the ball. Blakeney was a real freshman. The rest was bad. A lot of Simmons' highlights often have some scrub missing a wide open layup or shot. Hopefully our FO fixes that. Hell, even our scrub lords can hit open shots and layups. Noel will now have someone else to throw lobs to him. If Jah stays, he won't have to constantly repost because of our guards not being able to get him the ball. Our scrublord shooters now will get the ball in rhythm instead of having to always adjust to the pass. Small things like that are the idea of Simmons. Too many folks are focusing on his scoring prowess alone. This team needs shooters...no doubt and again I get the appeal of Ingram fully. But we also need a creator or at the very least a guy who can get others the ball where they need it at. Again we run a lot of sets where the distributor is a big at the top of the key. The last time it "worked" was when we had Hawes. Simmons is that plus the threat of actually driving. Adding a shot is crucial. No one will argue that. But I imagine most who are pro Simmons believes it can happen. His jumper isn't broken. A few tweaks and a "hey doofus shoot it instead of forcing it" from the coach will do wonders.

it is just weird how much of the pro Ingram manifesto involves overanalyzing others flaws and yet many of Ingrams own flaws are totally fixable with time.

My point with Ingram is that he came into Duke at 170 lbs and gained 25 lbs before the season. I don't know how much he weighs right now, but I image that he knows his lack of bulk is a minus right now. I'd guess that he's been making an attempt to get stronger since the end of the season. I don't know if that's true, but based on how seriously he took it last offseason, I'd have to assume he did this year.

Ben is right hand dominant but shoots left handed. I can relate because I am the same way. When I look at his jump shot, it just looks awkward to me. I feel like he is extremely uncomfortable. When you look at him take those shots in HS, I feel the same way. I want to know what steps he's taken to alleviate this concern.

I pointed this out earlier when you look at both guy's weaknesses in HS and College on the DX videos. If Simmons did anything to make me feel as though he's working on these issues, I'd feel a lot better.