tk76 wrote:
Given Ingram was ahead by a small margin after 2-3 days, it's pretty clear that sentiment has shifted strongly towards Simmons But it is not clear how man people have changed their minds as opposed to the undecideds being convinced that Simmons is the way to go.
.......
I still feel like Simmons is an all or nothing type pick in terms of the team's shot at building into a contender, where the team's ceiling will be closely tied to Simmons outcome... but I can certainly see how this could turn out for the best. But personally, I'm still not sold on either Simmons or Ingram being able to completely live up to their hype, and feel that picking Ingram would allow for more than one route to contention (whether he reaches his ceiling or not.) For example, should they have a high pick in 2017, there is no way they would bring in a dynamic, ball dominant wing or great forward unless that guy is already a good shooter. That might mean passing on a future Westbrook or Griffin type talent because on draft day they will want guys who fit with Simmons unique skill set. That type of risk only pays off if Simmons hits as a top 10 superstar.
The team has some good assets on the roster and a bunch of potentially great assets coming in down the road through picks, cap space and potential trades. Having Ingram would maximize your options for the types/roles of the other players you will need to add to become a contender. IMO, having Simmons on the roster will limit the types of players you can cash in your assets for- such as having to shy away from other potential stars on draft day if they are not pure shooters (whether the potential star is another big or ball dominant.) Along the same lines, if a star like Westbrook or Griffin hits the trade market next season, I doubt they cash in their chips in a trade due to worries about poor fit with Simmons... while with Ingram, you can trade in your other assets to plug that type of win-now star piece alongside Embiid-Ingram.
I think this is right. I also think the shift reflects radio and just a general sense that Simmons is the pick.
I'll say this - Simmons is the more talented prospect, overall. He's bigger, stronger, faster, quicker, has a better handle (though it is overrated) and very impressive vision. But, the inconsistency shooting and on defense, and the question marks about his competitiveness and level of competition....
Simmons is not Lebron... He's not even on the Anthony Davis / KAT (who had poor stats) / Durant / Melo level of prospect. He is above Okafor and Jabari Parker as a prospect -maybe on the tier of Wiggins - checks all the physical boxes, has production, still key questions / weaknesses (Okafor similar, but not quite the same physical profile for his position).
Simmons has solid length and plus height (at the 3 - at the 4 it's just solid/solid), and plus speed, strength, lateral quickness, burst, handle, and extra-plus passing/vision, with minus shooting and question mark defense.
Ingram has "extra-plus" length, plus height, minus strength, solid burst, solid handle, solid speed, solid lateral quickness, solid passing, plus shooting, and question mark defense. He has fewer questions in terms of competition, but it's not like he consistently dominated, he struggled against some of the better opponents, and had less production in college than Simmons (noting that scheme and role and surroundings impacted that to Simmons benefit and Ingram's detriment).
So if Simmons is a Wiggins level prospect, Ingram is an Okafor or Jabari level prospect - checks some but not all of the physical boxes for a proto-type, also key questions/weaknesses.
Simmons *should* be higher rated in that absolute sense. But that doesn't mean that you don't really evaluate which player is better for your team, or who you think has a better chance to maximize their potential.
