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

[Unbreakable99]

That's the main thing that has me leaning slightly toward Simmons now. While I think Ingram is more of what they need and has a better chance of being a better NBA scorer, I don't think Ingram will ever be an elite scorer. He's not Durant. At the very best he's Durant-lite-lite. And even though people know this, when his name keeps being mentioned in the same breath with Durant, people probably subconsciously envision him being "a Durant" for the Sixers. He will not be a Durant. I think the Sixers can find guys like Ingram in free agency, when we eventually become a destination for free agents.

I think Simmons could be a bust, but he also could be really special if he hits his ceiling. More special than Ingram. The Sixers better dedicate every resource they have to developing him though. Like, take all the resources they put into keeping Embiid healthy in the last year, and multiply that by 100. 1,000 jumpers a day? Make that 5,000.

Can Simmons really be a bust though?

He still is going to be a menace on the court, even if he never learns to shoot.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I can't see Simmons being a bust. It's possible he never reaches his ceiling but if that's the case he will just be a high end role player. That's not a bust to me. It's just he never reached his potential. A high end role player is very valuable in today's game.

[Kobblehead]

There's always a chance that Ben Simmons could be a mentality / personality bust. It happens all the time. However, as a basketball player, there's zero chance he's a bust. Even if his shot never develops, he does so many other things well.

He generates steals, he rebounds, he distributes, he's a one man fastbreak in transition (often times off of his own rebound or steal, going coast to coast), he slashes to the rim and finishes at a high rate, etc.

Ask yourselves this question: What if Brandon Ingram's three point shot doesn't translate? The man depends literally 95% of the time on teammates assisting his shots from beyond the arc. His midrange numbers are just okay and his free throw shooting is abysmal. How do we know this shot of his is a lock to translate?

And if that shot doesn't translate, what the hell else does he even do on the court? He has a higher probability of busting than Simmons WITHOUT the upside OF Simmons. So what is there to discuss?

[LongLiveHinkie]

That's the main thing that has me leaning slightly toward Simmons now. While I think Ingram is more of what they need and has a better chance of being a better NBA scorer, I don't think Ingram will ever be an elite scorer. He's not Durant. At the very best he's Durant-lite-lite. And even though people know this, when his name keeps being mentioned in the same breath with Durant, people probably subconsciously envision him being "a Durant" for the Sixers. He will not be a Durant. I think the Sixers can find guys like Ingram in free agency, when we eventually become a destination for free agents.

I think Simmons could be a bust, but he also could be really special if he hits his ceiling. More special than Ingram. The Sixers better dedicate every resource they have to developing him though. Like, take all the resources they put into keeping Embiid healthy in the last year, and multiply that by 100. 1,000 jumpers a day? Make that 5,000.

Can Simmons really be a bust though?

He still is going to be a menace on the court, even if he never learns to shoot.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I can't see Simmons being a bust. It's possible he never reaches his ceiling but if that's the case he will just be a high end role player. That's not a bust to me. It's just he never reached his potential. A high end role player is very valuable in today's game.

You have to factor in where Simmons is drafted. If he just becomes a solid NBA player for 10 years, then he's a bust, because he was drafted #1. Picking #1 is supposed to get you a star.

I hear a lot of people comparing him to Lamar Odom. If he becomes Lamar Odom, then he will indeed be a bust in my eyes. Sorry, gotta do better than that picking #1. If he went 10th or whatever, and became Lamar Odom, that would change things.

Whether or not a player is a bust, isn't just how good they become. It's how good they are/where they were taken ratio.

[Ericb5]

Can Simmons really be a bust though?

He still is going to be a menace on the court, even if he never learns to shoot.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I can't see Simmons being a bust. It's possible he never reaches his ceiling but if that's the case he will just be a high end role player. That's not a bust to me. It's just he never reached his potential. A high end role player is very valuable in today's game.

You have to factor in where Simmons is drafted. If he just becomes a solid NBA player for 10 years, then he's a bust, because he was drafted #1. Picking #1 is supposed to get you a star.

I hear a lot of people comparing him to Lamar Odom. If he becomes Lamar Odom, then he will indeed be a bust in my eyes. Sorry, gotta do better than that picking #1. If he went 10th or whatever, and became Lamar Odom, that would change things.

Whether or not a player is a bust, isn't just how good they become. It's how good they are/where they were taken ratio.

Well if that is how you are defining a bust then he could bust.

I think that there is a very small chance of him not being a star, with a really good chance at being a superstar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ericb5]

I love DraftExpress, but how the hell does it take them 10 days to get their first post lottery mock up?

That should have been up the night of the lottery, especially considering that the lottery went exactly to form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mksp]

I like Kevin Pelton's "longer Khris Middleton" comp for him. Zeroes in on his inability to create offense for himself / others.

Actually 45% of Middleton's shots this season were unassisted, identical to Leonard and Durant.

That's surprising, nice find.

[eyeatoma]

I love DraftExpress, but how the hell does it take them 10 days to get their first post lottery mock up?

That should have been up the night of the lottery, especially considering that the lottery went exactly to form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This isn't their first post lottery mock... They had an extended one the day of the draft...

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft-extended.php

[Ericb5]

I love DraftExpress, but how the hell does it take them 10 days to get their first post lottery mock up?

That should have been up the night of the lottery, especially considering that the lottery went exactly to form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This isn't there first post lottery mock... They had an extended one the day of the draft...

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft-extended.php

Hmm, I missed that one because when I clicked on the mock draft 2016 link that it said last updated on May 15th, and explicitly stated that team needs hadn't been factored in.

They finally updated their main mock to something post lottery today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[76thBearCub]

For me, after some time (prob less then a lot of you), I am on Team Simmons. He is too big and too skilled to pass on.

[76ciology]

There's always a chance that Ben Simmons could be a mentality / personality bust. It happens all the time. However, as a basketball player, there's zero chance he's a bust. Even if his shot never develops, he does so many other things well.

He generates steals, he rebounds, he distributes, he's a one man fastbreak in transition (often times off of his own rebound or steal, going coast to coast), he slashes to the rim and finishes at a high rate, etc.

Ask yourselves this question: What if Brandon Ingram's three point shot doesn't translate? The man depends literally 95% of the time on teammates assisting his shots from beyond the arc. His midrange numbers are just okay and his free throw shooting is abysmal. How do we know this shot of his is a lock to translate?

And if that shot doesn't translate, what the hell else does he even do on the court? He has a higher probability of busting than Simmons WITHOUT the upside OF Simmons. So what is there to discuss?

Again..

Ingram is not just a spot up shooter.

He can defend, create with the ball (again, 40% of his offense comes from iso, PnR, hand-off and transition. ISO & PnR both higher PPS than Durant. Source Draftexpress.), steals and blocks.

You doubt Ingram's 41%3pt%shooting, but I think you need to doubt more Simmons' 75FG% at the rim and 9FTA/G because Simmons dealing with bigger defenders is a bigger factor than what Ingram deals with. There's naturally more pressure in the paint than at the perimeter.

And we saw that down the season, NCAA defenses have scouted simmons that lead him to struggle. We saw his effectiveness was limited with them forcing him left and take jumpers.

In the end, you weigh which skill between both guys that can translate into next level. It's difficult wings to translate well abusing smaller defenders in the paint at NCAA. Because we all know how big and athletic the NBA defenders are. That's probably why every players (bigs, westbrook, LBJ and etc.) are evolving into shooters.

[05PhillyAI]

Well well well... Mr. Brandon Ingram at #1 himself aka PJ Carlesimo has been hired as top asst coach for the Sixers. I realize he won't have anywhere near final say on who they draft but it's definitely interesting to say the least. I wonder if he has a permanent restraining order against Spree??

[tk76]

The odds of Ingram's shot not translating to the NBA is about as minimal as the odds of Simmons' passing or rebounding not translating.

The odds of Simmons never developing a respectable jumper is much higher than the odds of Ingram not being a good NBA three point shooter because Ingram will have that NBA skill from day one... and it remains to be seen if Simmons develops a respectable shot. So I'm not sure you can compare those outcomes equally.

There are legit reasons to think Simmons is the better prospect without suggesting that Ingram's elite 3-D skillet and potential is a mirage. Whereas questions about Simmons potential as a shooter and his limitations as a rim protector as your PF are real.

[Ericb5]

The odds of Ingram's shot not translating to the NBA is about as minimal as the odds of Simmons' passing or rebounding not translating.

The odds of Simmons never developing a respectable jumper is much higher than the odds of Ingram not being a good NBA three point shooter because Ingram will have that NBA skill from day one... and it remains to be seen if Simmons develops a respectable shot. So I'm not sure you can compare those outcomes equally.

There are legit reasons to think Simmons is the better prospect without suggesting that Ingram's elite 3-D skillet and potential is a mirage. Whereas questions about Simmons potential as a shooter and his limitations as a rim protector as your PF are real.

Ingram has legit 3 point range, and is a long fluid athlete. I like him a lot more than Kobble. I think he will score in the NBA for sure.

Simmons is better at everything else. People say that Ingram has more potential as a defender due to his length, but Simmons is a better athlete, and will be a more versatile defender most likely. I think that is largely a wash.

If Simmons develops an average jump shot, he will be the MUCH better player. That's primarily the reason that you take him. People DO get better at shooting. Not all of them, but enough of them to make this worth the gamble.


Sent from my iPad using RealGM Forums

[76ers 2020]

Simmons will just make me a hypocrite. Always get annoyed with the ridiculous foul calls the select few get. I'm sure I'll be able to stomach it now. His college free throw rate was absurd. Only 1 guy that scored 18 or more per game in the NBA this season was in the ball park while in college. Demarcus Cousins. Simmons had .769 Cousins .726. You have to go all the way down to .600 for the next guy Anthony Davis. Joel Embiid had an absurd .836. Two guys that can get the opponent in foul trouble. Kind of valuable.

[Kobblehead]

The odds of Ingram's shot not translating to the NBA is about as minimal as the odds of Simmons' passing or rebounding not translating.

The odds of Simmons never developing a respectable jumper is much higher than the odds of Ingram not being a good NBA three point shooter because Ingram will have that NBA skill from day one... and it remains to be seen if Simmons develops a respectable shot. So I'm not sure you can compare those outcomes equally.

There are legit reasons to think Simmons is the better prospect without suggesting that Ingram's elite 3-D skillet and potential is a mirage. Whereas questions about Simmons potential as a shooter and his limitations as a rim protector as your PF are real.

A few issues, here:

- Simmons is a better basketball player regardless of whether or not he develops a shot.
- Brandon Ingram being an elite 3&D prospect is a gross exaggeration. He wasn't a good defender at all last year and he will be grossly overmatched physically for the first 3-4 years of his career. Andrew Wiggins still can't guard forwards and he is an elite athlete with more muscle tone than Ingram.
- There's no such thing as rim protection from a wing / small ball PF. Why would Ben Simmons ever be the last line of defense in a half court set?
- Brandon Ingram's 3 point shot absolutely will be less consistent as he's asked to take more pull-ups shots at the next level. Unless of course he maintains his 95% assisted 3 point field goal rate. Which brings up the question of who in the world would take a catch-and-shoot guy that does nothing else over a swiss army knife like Simmons?

[wainseven]

Unless you see Ingram could become the next scoring champ, you take simmons for his size, passing and vision

[tk76]

- There's no such thing as rim protection from a wing / small ball PF. Why would Ben Simmons ever be the last line of defense in a half court set?

So PF's no longer need to provide any rim protection?

Sure, there are other keys do defense, such as being able to switch on P&R and rebounding (strong areas for Simmons)... but rim protection is has not lost its importance. And PF's do have to cross cover bigs too.

Guys on contenders like Green, Ibaka and Aldridge can shoot... and stop someone at the rim. Same with Porzingis and a lot of emerging stretch 4s. I still think Simmons has lots of strengths, but he also has weaknesses that require roster building to his abilities.

[cksdayoff]

i read an article where chad ford (if i recall correctly) watched an Ingram workout where he was hitting NBA 3's and said Ingram was well ahead of the curve. He mentioned most prospects coming out of college have trouble shooting 3's from NBA range but Ingram had no trouble shooting from there

[76ciology]

The odds of Ingram's shot not translating to the NBA is about as minimal as the odds of Simmons' passing or rebounding not translating.

The odds of Simmons never developing a respectable jumper is much higher than the odds of Ingram not being a good NBA three point shooter because Ingram will have that NBA skill from day one... and it remains to be seen if Simmons develops a respectable shot. So I'm not sure you can compare those outcomes equally.

There are legit reasons to think Simmons is the better prospect without suggesting that Ingram's elite 3-D skillet and potential is a mirage. Whereas questions about Simmons potential as a shooter and his limitations as a rim protector as your PF are real.

Dean on draft, one of my favorite draft analysts by dean demakis. Requested his insight on the subject on twitter.

He also raises some questions with Ingram but he preferred Ingram over Simmons.

https://deanondraft.com/2016/05/27/who-should-go-1-simmons-or-ingram/

Ben Simmons is the enigmatic prospect of the duo, as he has the talent to be as good as LeBron James but the red flags to be as disappointing as Michael Beasley. He is 6’10” with elite speed, athleticism, ball skills, rebounding, and touch near the rim. The only skill that separates him from LeBron is shooting, which is something that he is not hopeless to acquire given his youth.

His glaring concerns are his lack of competitive drive and defense, which are difficult to quantify from afar. But a quick look at LSU’s bottom line is not encouraging. In 2013-14 with freshmen Jordan Mickey and Jarrell Martin, LSU was the #58 kenpom team in the country. In 2014-15 they were the #44 team before losing both to the NBA draft and replacing them with Ben Simmons and Antonio Blakeney.

Simmons vs. Martin and Mickey

It may be natural to think that Martin and Mickey are NBA players and Blakeney is not, so some level of decline should be expected. But the summation of Simmons (11.6) and Blakeney’s (1.6) BPMs exceed that of Mickey (5.5) and Martin (5.3), and with other returning players progressing it is easy to argue that LSU should have taken a leap forward. Pre-season projections tended to agree, as they were projected #30 by SI.com, #32 team rankings, and #49 kenpom. Yet the Tigers instead fell off a cliff finishing #92 in spite of Simmons exceeding expectations statistically.

This does not necessarily prove that Simmons’ statistics are empty, as key wing Keith Hornsby missed 13 games, and Simmons was playing out of position at center where he is not a rim protector like Mickey. But LSU’s defensive 2P% in conference play was 14th out of 14 at an abysmal 54.7%, far behind #13 Missouri (52.4%) and 12th Auburn (49.0%).

It’s fair to expect a decline from their #4 ranking (44.7%) the prior year after losing Mickey, but plummeting like that bodes ill for Simmons’ defensive performance. And even if you want to shift the blame to his teammates, coach, and Mickey’s goodness– it doesn’t explain why the offense barely improved from #77 and #84 in the prior two years to #69 with their center now having superstar PG skills.

Where does this leave us?

It leaves us with a 6’10” player that anchored an awful defense and couldn’t even compensate by leading a particularly good offense even though PG skills are a key selling point on his prospect profile. At best he is a serious risk to land in the dreaded intersection of poor defense and poor shooting, and at worst he is simply not hardwired to make winning basketball plays.

I did not watch enough LSU basketball to have a strong opinion on the matter, but when statistical trends align with behind the scenes narratives it is easy to hop on the skepticism train. If he does not have great competitive drive, do you really want to gamble that he learns to shoot and/or defend? And if he proves to be poor in both of those areas, how good can he truly be since his PG skills more conducive to producing highlights than efficient offense.

I cannot say with certainty that he will not be great. He is clearly the most talented player in the draft, and perhaps both statistics and narratives overstate concerns about his NBA future. This is a thinly sliced argument, after all. But if I were an NBA executive immersed in the evaluation process, I *suspect* the conclusions I would arrive at are:

Brandon Ingram is a better prospect than Ben Simmons
I would rather roll the dice on Dragan Bender at #2 overall (to add an even more thinly sliced prospect to the equation!) than gamble on Simmons’ talent overcoming his warts.
I do not believe there is a 3rd prospect who merits consideration about Simmons, but my gut feeling is that he is an underdog to become a clearly positive NBA player. Again, this is all thin analysis from afar and it could be wrong, but it’s my foggy perspective and I am in the mood to share it.

Same sentiment. Playmaking skills effectiveness be limited without shooting. it's worse if defensive issues are true.

[eagereyez]

The odds of Ingram's shot not translating to the NBA is about as minimal as the odds of Simmons' passing or rebounding not translating.

I'd like to know how you came to that conclusion. College FT% is a better indicator of success as a shooter in NBA than college 3P%.