bwgood77 wrote:Ghost of Kleine wrote:bwgood77 wrote:
I don't see why they would take Ball. Firstly, they have talked for a year about Simmons running point. So they don't really need a ball handler at either guard spot as much as a shooter. And while Ball shot well, that's not his primary strength so it still feels like they should take Monk....or even just a PG with a better inside scoring game like Fox. Smith might be their best fit...if they want a another ball handler who can also shoot.
Yes, They most likely have talked about having Simmons run the point for a year now. However, I might tend to believe that is due more to the fact that they probably didn't have any better options at the time.
And now, IF given the opportunity to utilize him more in a point forward capacity( Lamar Odom type) whilst still being able to acquire a high potential "passing guard" in ball, who can most likely better setup their plethora of bigs in ( Embiid , Okafor ) etc. and still be productive shooting the three pointer as the defense drops in on them(Embiid, Okafor) given (balls' decent three point shooting ability), I just can't see them passing on ball at #3, IF the Lakers DO pass on him at #2. I just don't think their rumored interest in a point guard such as (Lowry)is merely a coincidence.
And I Do agree that monk Is by far the ideal choice for them as well, But I just see them taking Ball(IF there at #3) And going after Reddick in free agency as their target for 2 guard.The one thing we know for sure, Is that it is going to truly be a bizzare and crazy draft with many somewhat unconventional trades taking place.
I still don't see it. Simmons, if not playing point forward, drastically reduces his impact, given he isn't a great scorer. You want a scorer at each guard spot and preferably one who can shoot and score in all kinds of ways...Monk, Smith, etc. In addition to that, if you were a Suns fan when Colangelo ran the team you would know he shied away from players with baggage (even traded Kidd in his prime because of domestic dispute, which could steer him away from Jackson as well).
Why couldn't Simmons still play point forward? There have been quite a few teams that have had multiple distributors, including point forwards who still pass( Diaw, Odom) whilst still having a passing point guard as well. And I'm in agreement with you in that it would be nice to have a scorer at each position, But as I'm sure you know, This is not always accomplished through the draft alone.
I'm sure that there interest in J.J. Reddick in free agency does give some insight into their perceived interest for a shooting guard. Also, has ball really shown to not be adequate enough as a three point shooter to be able to spot up for them as Okafor, and Embiid would draw in the defenses? Also, I'm sure you are aware that having multiple distributors can only potentially increase a teams scoring ability. And who is deemed to be the best potential distributor in this draft again? ......Wasn't it Lonzo Ball?
Now, If I was a" suns fan" back in the Congelo era, Which actually I was by the way.
I would remember Jerrys' adamant position on not bringing in players with character issues right? Although, If you remember, They still gave many opportunities to players that fall into that category. My favorite being Richard Dumas back then. (have his signed hat by the way).
Man was he a high flying talent. It's really too bad about his substance abuse problems. I thought he really could have been special.But they also took chances on players like stephon Marbury, Jason kidd (relevant to our topic), as well as Barkley! all said players had carried some sort of character issues/ concerns by teams, Yet we consistently took chances on them due to their potential.
Anyways, The point is that many franchises took chances on high potential talents in spite of potential character flaws, They called it a "risk vs. reward scenario".
Now as for Coangelos' perspective concern on ball in philly:
Jerry Coangelo speaks on Philly Comcast sports:
http://www.csnphilly.com/philadelphia-76ers/jerry-colangelo-talks-nba-draft-lonzo-ball-sam-hinkie .
The Ball family
Is Lonzo Ball worth the potential headaches that father LaVar might cause?
"I think Ball is a terrific prospect and could have an outstanding NBA future," Colangelo said. "I think it's going to be challenging with the people around him without being specific, and yet I don't think teams should bypass the player because they have those concerns. I think at the end of the day what wins in this league is talent and this is a very talented young man."
That is from the man himself giving his position on Lonzo Ball. So he doesn't seem that taken aback by balls' family.
I think we both realize, That talent and potential trump most concerns teams have over prospects.
