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

[cksdayoff]

the sixers will select the player whom the forum member that tops the 100th page of this thread likes

brandon ingram

[marcush]

the sixers will select the player whom the forum member that tops the 100th page of this thread likes

brandon ingram

Congrats. The odds were with 76ciology.

[76ciology]

Here's my issue with drafting Ben Simmons—Because he's such a tough fit into a lineup, any team that wants to maximize him will have to build around him. That's fine if he turns out to be a franchise player, but as I already broke down about 20 pages ago, that's far from a sure thing for multiple reasons that extend well-beyond his jump shot. He legitimately struggles to score and facilitate in the half court and a disproportionate amount of his production at LSU came in transition. Not to mention most of his offense came from bullying smaller and less physically-imposing players, who he won't have the convenience of competing against in the NBA. These two weaknesses are HUGE red flags for a player that so many of you are ready to anoint as the future of our franchise. Like I'm sorry, but Ben Simmons isn't gonna lead us to **** if he can't consistently create offense for both himself and his teammates in the halfcourt. Then there's the fact that despite having the reputation for being an elite facilitator, there's very little evidence that Ben Simmons actually made his teammates better at LSU, minus when they got out in transition. Lastly, he's shown very little drive, toughness, competitiveness, etc. which is pretty **** important if you want to lead your team to an NBA title. IDK about you guys, but a player who crumbled in the face of adversity and quit on his college team sure doesn't sound like a future NBA Finals MVP to me. The guys who have those specific character concerns in college rarely change and they pretty much never turn into guys that you can count on to win you a championship.

Oh right, and he can't shoot and likely never becomes better than an average shooter.

I understand why the Sixers front office won't take this approach, but here's what imo is the reality of this situation. There isn't a legit franchise player in this draft. Sure, Ben Simmons probably has the best chance of becoming one, but that doesn't change the fact that even with moderate improvement, his flaws will likely prevent him from getting there. However, if you draft him, your only choice is to put all your eggs in the Ben Simmons basket and build the entire team around the guy. That will be great in the off-chance that he becomes a top 6 or 7 player, but in the likely event that he doesn't, you just went all in on a guy that was never actually good enough to get you anywhere meaningful. With Ingram, you don't have to gamble your entire future on him panning out. His game is so well-suited for the NBA that even if he doesn't become a star, you still have a very valuable roster piece who almost certainly would fit alongside whichever star the Sixers eventually pull.

Taking all this into consideration, I personally think that the Sixers best option is to take Ingram knowing that in all likelihood he could probably at least become a very solid #2 guy on a contender who will be able to fit nicely alongside any future franchise player. Then the Sixers need to tank one more year giving them a great shot at a top 3 pick in a 2017 draft that should be one of the strongest drafts of the 2000s. Pick BPA(someone like Jackson, Giles, Fultz, etc.) and pair him with Ingram and (hopefully) Embiid. Boom you've got a very legit trio of the future and the best part is that they'll all have games that are easy to build around and very well-suited for today's NBA.

Same sentiment. Here's my post regarding this matter. Altho I don't have much issue with his attitude. He just simply wants to the play in the NBA while I've watched enough sixers game to know how deflating it is to play with a sucky team. And I don't think we need to tank next season, maybe just need to trade up using our pick and LAL's pick.

Maybe we need to look at is not who's going to be better but which guy is going to make this team better 5 years from now.

I understand your sentiment. But drafting the BPA would allow you to be flexible with the guy you drafted as an asset. And that asset can either get you the player you need down the road. It's easier to trade down for fit than trade up for talent.

The thing that worries me is that I personally think Simmons is a tough player to build around. Playing small with a superstar wing would require that wing player being an elite defender (see LBJ, KD and Kawhi). Simmons would need to play small with a big that is more inclined to be a spacer, and most of these guys have deficiencies on defense (see Love and Bosh). And I have mixed feelings on Simmons' defense. Some days I feel like his lack of elite length limits him to be a good rim protector and he do slack off on defense. Some days I feel like he can be a good defender with his speed, steals and DBPM numbers.

I also think that building around Simmons would require you to shift entirely into small ball (not defining size but style and speed). Simmons thrive playing with a breakneck speed, similar to John Wall. They do take advantage of defense not being set (won't allow them to sag off and wait for them in the paint), thus you see 26% of Simmons offense is off transition and there's a big drop in Simmons FG% around the rim in transition vs halfcourt (75% vs 55%).

3 years and the cards were dealt with were mostly talented bigs. I think we should use it to our advantage. It's our edge against small ball. Shifting into small ball would require you to match the perimeter fire powers of KD/Westbrook, LBJ/Kyrie or Klay/Curry.

Building around Simmons would require you to cross more bridges before contention. You will have to bet that you can add star caliber perimeter players to strengthen the small ball movement. You will have to bet that you can get good returns for our bigs.

And most importantly, you will have to bet that Simmons will be in the same echelon with GOAT level wings like KD or LBJ. While if you bet on Ingram, you are good if he can just be a Kawhi or Paul George level wing, since you have talented bigs (potential of the Jah-Embiid frontcourt) to compensate for it.

[76ciology]

the sixers will select the player whom the forum member that tops the 100th page of this thread likes

brandon ingram

Congrats. The odds were with 76ciology.

Damn it. 2 posts late. Already planned a reason to post by quoting my post.

[tk76]

I understand why the Sixers front office won't take this approach, but here's what imo is the reality of this situation. There isn't a legit franchise player in this draft. Sure, Ben Simmons probably has the best chance of becoming one, but that doesn't change the fact that even with moderate improvement, his flaws will likely prevent him from getting there. However, if you draft him, your only choice is to put all your eggs in the Ben Simmons basket and build the entire team around the guy. That will be great in the off-chance that he becomes a top 6 or 7 player, but in the likely event that he doesn't, you just went all in on a guy that was never actually good enough to get you anywhere meaningful. With Ingram, you don't have to gamble your entire future on him panning out. His game is so well-suited for the NBA that even if he doesn't become a star, you still have a very valuable roster piece who almost certainly would fit alongside whichever star the Sixers eventually pull.

Yep, this is my concern. I see the most probable outcome being the Colangelo's rush to build a 45 win peak team with Simmons as the centerpiece and the other parts built to cater to his strengths (at the expense of keeping/acquiring higher ceiling teammates who are passed over because they are either ball dominant or not great shooters.)

Simmons fits into the make the biggest splash right away approach. While I see Ingram as part of a more measured, long view approach towards roster construction. Throw Jah-Simmons-Derozan-FA-Teague out there so you have something shiny on the court this year. Who cares about the future when you can jump to 42 wins and get exec of the year?

[Kobblehead]

the sixers will select the player whom the forum member that tops the 100th page of this thread likes

brandon ingram

About equal an argument for taking Ingram as any of the others that have been presented.

[Ericb5]

Here's my issue with drafting Ben Simmons—Because he's such a tough fit into a lineup, any team that wants to maximize him will have to build around him. That's fine if he turns out to be a franchise player, but as I already broke down about 20 pages ago, that's far from a sure thing for multiple reasons that extend well-beyond his jump shot. He legitimately struggles to score and facilitate in the half court and a disproportionate amount of his production at LSU came in transition. Not to mention most of his offense came from bullying smaller and less physically-imposing players, who he won't have the convenience of competing against in the NBA. These two weaknesses are HUGE red flags for a player that so many of you are ready to anoint as the future of our franchise. Like I'm sorry, but Ben Simmons isn't gonna lead us to **** if he can't consistently create offense for both himself and his teammates in the halfcourt. Then there's the fact that despite having the reputation for being an elite facilitator, there's very little evidence that Ben Simmons actually made his teammates better at LSU, minus when they got out in transition. Lastly, he's shown very little drive, toughness, competitiveness, etc. which is pretty **** important if you want to lead your team to an NBA title. IDK about you guys, but a player who crumbled in the face of adversity and quit on his college team sure doesn't sound like a future NBA Finals MVP to me. The guys who have those specific character concerns in college rarely change and they pretty much never turn into guys that you can count on to win you a championship.

Oh right, and he can't shoot and likely never becomes better than an average shooter.

I understand why the Sixers front office won't take this approach, but here's what imo is the reality of this situation. There isn't a legit franchise player in this draft. Sure, Ben Simmons probably has the best chance of becoming one, but that doesn't change the fact that even with moderate improvement, his flaws will likely prevent him from getting there. However, if you draft him, your only choice is to put all your eggs in the Ben Simmons basket and build the entire team around the guy. That will be great in the off-chance that he becomes a top 6 or 7 player, but in the likely event that he doesn't, you just went all in on a guy that was never actually good enough to get you anywhere meaningful. With Ingram, you don't have to gamble your entire future on him panning out. His game is so well-suited for the NBA that even if he doesn't become a star, you still have a very valuable roster piece who almost certainly would fit alongside whichever star the Sixers eventually pull.

Taking all this into consideration, I personally think that the Sixers best option is to take Ingram knowing that in all likelihood he could probably at least become a very solid #2 guy on a contender who will be able to fit nicely alongside any future franchise player. Then the Sixers need to tank one more year giving them a great shot at a top 3 pick in a 2017 draft that should be one of the strongest drafts of the 2000s. Pick BPA(someone like Jackson, Giles, Fultz, etc.) and pair him with Ingram and (hopefully) Embiid. Boom you've got a very legit trio of the future and the best part is that they'll all have games that are easy to build around and very well-suited for today's NBA.

The future of the Sixers is Embiid regardless of whether or not we take Simmons or Ingram.

Your post glosses over the main point. We haven't been at the top of the draft in 20 years, and Simmons is the most likely player to turn into a franchise player. You are turning an algebra problem into a calculus problem.

You take the most talented player, period.

Whatever you do to build around Embiid will be compatible with Simmons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[oddwolfhooligan]

Here's my issue with drafting Ben Simmons—Because he's such a tough fit into a lineup, any team that wants to maximize him will have to build around him. That's fine if he turns out to be a franchise player, but as I already broke down about 20 pages ago, that's far from a sure thing for multiple reasons that extend well-beyond his jump shot. He legitimately struggles to score and facilitate in the half court and a disproportionate amount of his production at LSU came in transition. Not to mention most of his offense came from bullying smaller and less physically-imposing players, who he won't have the convenience of competing against in the NBA. These two weaknesses are HUGE red flags for a player that so many of you are ready to anoint as the future of our franchise. Like I'm sorry, but Ben Simmons isn't gonna lead us to **** if he can't consistently create offense for both himself and his teammates in the halfcourt. Then there's the fact that despite having the reputation for being an elite facilitator, there's very little evidence that Ben Simmons actually made his teammates better at LSU, minus when they got out in transition. Lastly, he's shown very little drive, toughness, competitiveness, etc. which is pretty **** important if you want to lead your team to an NBA title. IDK about you guys, but a player who crumbled in the face of adversity and quit on his college team sure doesn't sound like a future NBA Finals MVP to me. The guys who have those specific character concerns in college rarely change and they pretty much never turn into guys that you can count on to win you a championship.

Oh right, and he can't shoot and likely never becomes better than an average shooter.

I understand why the Sixers front office won't take this approach, but here's what imo is the reality of this situation. There isn't a legit franchise player in this draft. Sure, Ben Simmons probably has the best chance of becoming one, but that doesn't change the fact that even with moderate improvement, his flaws will likely prevent him from getting there. However, if you draft him, your only choice is to put all your eggs in the Ben Simmons basket and build the entire team around the guy. That will be great in the off-chance that he becomes a top 6 or 7 player, but in the likely event that he doesn't, you just went all in on a guy that was never actually good enough to get you anywhere meaningful. With Ingram, you don't have to gamble your entire future on him panning out. His game is so well-suited for the NBA that even if he doesn't become a star, you still have a very valuable roster piece who almost certainly would fit alongside whichever star the Sixers eventually pull.

Taking all this into consideration, I personally think that the Sixers best option is to take Ingram knowing that in all likelihood he could probably at least become a very solid #2 guy on a contender who will be able to fit nicely alongside any future franchise player. Then the Sixers need to tank one more year giving them a great shot at a top 3 pick in a 2017 draft that should be one of the strongest drafts of the 2000s. Pick BPA(someone like Jackson, Giles, Fultz, etc.) and pair him with Ingram and (hopefully) Embiid. Boom you've got a very legit trio of the future and the best part is that they'll all have games that are easy to build around and very well-suited for today's NBA.

Same sentiment. Here's my post regarding this matter. Altho I don't have much issue with his attitude. He just simply wants to the play in the NBA while I've watched enough sixers game to know how deflating it is to play with a sucky team. And I don't think we need to tank next season, maybe just need to trade up using our pick and LAL's pick.

Maybe we need to look at is not who's going to be better but which guy is going to make this team better 5 years from now.

I understand your sentiment. But drafting the BPA would allow you to be flexible with the guy you drafted as an asset. And that asset can either get you the player you need down the road. It's easier to trade down for fit than trade up for talent.

The thing that worries me is that I personally think Simmons is a tough player to build around. Playing small with a superstar wing would require that wing player being an elite defender (see LBJ, KD and Kawhi). Simmons would need to play small with a big that is more inclined to be a spacer, and most of these guys have deficiencies on defense (see Love and Bosh). And I have mixed feelings on Simmons' defense. Some days I feel like his lack of elite length limits him to be a good rim protector and he do slack off on defense. Some days I feel like he can be a good defender with his speed, steals and DBPM numbers.

I also think that building around Simmons would require you to shift entirely into small ball (not defining size but style and speed). Simmons thrive playing with a breakneck speed, similar to John Wall. They do take advantage of defense not being set (won't allow them to sag off and wait for them in the paint), thus you see 26% of Simmons offense is off transition and there's a big drop in Simmons FG% around the rim in transition vs halfcourt (75% vs 55%).

3 years and the cards were dealt with were mostly talented bigs. I think we should use it to our advantage. It's our edge against small ball. Shifting into small ball would require you to match the perimeter fire powers of KD/Westbrook, LBJ/Kyrie or Klay/Curry.

Building around Simmons would require you to cross more bridges before contention. You will have to bet that you can add star caliber perimeter players to strengthen the small ball movement. You will have to bet that you can get good returns for our bigs.

And most importantly, you will have to bet that Simmons will be in the same echelon with GOAT level wings like KD or LBJ. While if you bet on Ingram, you are good if he can just be a Kawhi or Paul George level wing, since you have talented bigs (potential of the Jah-Embiid frontcourt) to compensate for it.

That was a good read. Nice post.

I disagree about the attitude issues and tanking though. Yes, it's deflating to play on a sucky team, but the guys who are extremely competitive and driven don't let that discourage them from giving their all on the court(i.e. TJ McConnell).

As for next years draft, it's the anti-2016 draft. Not only will it have like 5 potential stars, it's also extremely deep and filled with guys who can be very good players in the NBA. I know how painful losing is, but this is an actual draft that's worth tanking for and if the Sixers can manage to land in the top 3 for their own pick and the top 4-6 with the Lakers pick, that would be unbelievable huge.

If the Sixers decide to become a 35 win team next season, I'm very confident that we'll look back on that decision with regret when everyone sees what kind of talent we passed up in order to make the jump to mediocrity.

[Ericb5]

Here's my issue with drafting Ben Simmons—Because he's such a tough fit into a lineup, any team that wants to maximize him will have to build around him. That's fine if he turns out to be a franchise player, but as I already broke down about 20 pages ago, that's far from a sure thing for multiple reasons that extend well-beyond his jump shot. He legitimately struggles to score and facilitate in the half court and a disproportionate amount of his production at LSU came in transition. Not to mention most of his offense came from bullying smaller and less physically-imposing players, who he won't have the convenience of competing against in the NBA. These two weaknesses are HUGE red flags for a player that so many of you are ready to anoint as the future of our franchise. Like I'm sorry, but Ben Simmons isn't gonna lead us to **** if he can't consistently create offense for both himself and his teammates in the halfcourt. Then there's the fact that despite having the reputation for being an elite facilitator, there's very little evidence that Ben Simmons actually made his teammates better at LSU, minus when they got out in transition. Lastly, he's shown very little drive, toughness, competitiveness, etc. which is pretty **** important if you want to lead your team to an NBA title. IDK about you guys, but a player who crumbled in the face of adversity and quit on his college team sure doesn't sound like a future NBA Finals MVP to me. The guys who have those specific character concerns in college rarely change and they pretty much never turn into guys that you can count on to win you a championship.

Oh right, and he can't shoot and likely never becomes better than an average shooter.

I understand why the Sixers front office won't take this approach, but here's what imo is the reality of this situation. There isn't a legit franchise player in this draft. Sure, Ben Simmons probably has the best chance of becoming one, but that doesn't change the fact that even with moderate improvement, his flaws will likely prevent him from getting there. However, if you draft him, your only choice is to put all your eggs in the Ben Simmons basket and build the entire team around the guy. That will be great in the off-chance that he becomes a top 6 or 7 player, but in the likely event that he doesn't, you just went all in on a guy that was never actually good enough to get you anywhere meaningful. With Ingram, you don't have to gamble your entire future on him panning out. His game is so well-suited for the NBA that even if he doesn't become a star, you still have a very valuable roster piece who almost certainly would fit alongside whichever star the Sixers eventually pull.

Taking all this into consideration, I personally think that the Sixers best option is to take Ingram knowing that in all likelihood he could probably at least become a very solid #2 guy on a contender who will be able to fit nicely alongside any future franchise player. Then the Sixers need to tank one more year giving them a great shot at a top 3 pick in a 2017 draft that should be one of the strongest drafts of the 2000s. Pick BPA(someone like Jackson, Giles, Fultz, etc.) and pair him with Ingram and (hopefully) Embiid. Boom you've got a very legit trio of the future and the best part is that they'll all have games that are easy to build around and very well-suited for today's NBA.

Same sentiment. Here's my post regarding this matter. Altho I don't have much issue with his attitude. He just simply wants to the play in the NBA while I've watched enough sixers game to know how deflating it is to play with a sucky team. And I don't think we need to tank next season, maybe just need to trade up using our pick and LAL's pick.

Maybe we need to look at is not who's going to be better but which guy is going to make this team better 5 years from now.

I understand your sentiment. But drafting the BPA would allow you to be flexible with the guy you drafted as an asset. And that asset can either get you the player you need down the road. It's easier to trade down for fit than trade up for talent.

The thing that worries me is that I personally think Simmons is a tough player to build around. Playing small with a superstar wing would require that wing player being an elite defender (see LBJ, KD and Kawhi). Simmons would need to play small with a big that is more inclined to be a spacer, and most of these guys have deficiencies on defense (see Love and Bosh). And I have mixed feelings on Simmons' defense. Some days I feel like his lack of elite length limits him to be a good rim protector and he do slack off on defense. Some days I feel like he can be a good defender with his speed, steals and DBPM numbers.

I also think that building around Simmons would require you to shift entirely into small ball (not defining size but style and speed). Simmons thrive playing with a breakneck speed, similar to John Wall. They do take advantage of defense not being set (won't allow them to sag off and wait for them in the paint), thus you see 26% of Simmons offense is off transition and there's a big drop in Simmons FG% around the rim in transition vs halfcourt (75% vs 55%).

3 years and the cards were dealt with were mostly talented bigs. I think we should use it to our advantage. It's our edge against small ball. Shifting into small ball would require you to match the perimeter fire powers of KD/Westbrook, LBJ/Kyrie or Klay/Curry.

Building around Simmons would require you to cross more bridges before contention. You will have to bet that you can add star caliber perimeter players to strengthen the small ball movement. You will have to bet that you can get good returns for our bigs.

And most importantly, you will have to bet that Simmons will be in the same echelon with GOAT level wings like KD or LBJ. While if you bet on Ingram, you are good if he can just be a Kawhi or Paul George level wing, since you have talented bigs (potential of the Jah-Embiid frontcourt) to compensate for it.

That was a good read. Nice post.

I disagree about the attitude issues and tanking though. Yes, it's deflating to play on a sucky team, but the guys who are extremely competitive and driven don't let that discourage them from giving their all on the court(i.e. TJ McConnell).

As for next years draft, it's the anti-2016 draft. Not only will it have like 5 potential stars, it's also extremely deep and filled with guys who can be very good players in the NBA. I know how painful losing is, but this is an actual draft that's worth tanking for and if the Sixers can manage to land in the top 3 for their own pick and the top 4-6 with the Lakers pick, that would be unbelievable huge.

If the Sixers decide to become a 35 win team next season, I'm very confident that we'll look back on that decision with regret when everyone sees what kind of talent we passed up in order to make the jump to mediocrity.

The tank is over dude. It is over.

If we win 35 games next year we will likely win more than the Kings who we can swap with, plus we have the Lakers pick.

We still have a very high likelihood of having two top ten picks in the 2017 draft.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[76ciology]

At this point, I have already accepted that Sixers will draft Simmons.

Is Randle a "poor man's" version of Simmons? Less skillset, slower and less athletic?

Both guys have similar attributes

6'10
7' wingspan
8'10-8'11 standing reach
likes to score inside
difficulty in shooting outside
almost similar FG% and % of FG at the rim in college (70-75% FG%; Randle has struggled in NBA)
almost similar 2pt jumper and FT% (Julius randle better % in 2pt jumpers and FT%; 34.5% vs 32.9%)
Simmons is much quicker and athletic, but both guys are quicker than most PFs
they like to grab and go

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sug6ilp9oX0[/youtube]

[FreesFro]

At this point, I have already accepted that Sixers will draft Simmons.

Is Randle a "poor man's" version of Simmons? Less skillset, slower and less athletic?

Both guys have similar attributes

6'10
7' wingspan
8'10-8'11 standing reach
likes to score inside
difficulty in shooting outside
almost similar FG% and % of FG at the rim in college (70-75% FG%; Randle has struggled in NBA)
almost similar 2pt jumper and FT% (Julius randle better % in 2pt jumpers and FT%; 34.5% vs 32.9%)
Simmons is much quicker and athletic, but both guys are quicker than most PFs
they like to grab and go

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sug6ilp9oX0[/youtube]

No, Randle is a "poor, poor, poor, poor, poor, poor, poor man's" version of Simmons. And for some of the reasons you mentioned.

[freshie2]

When I watch the two play, i never would think to compare as the skill levels are so different, but I get where you are going.

Randle looks like a of that tries to make some PG plays, while Simmons is a PG in a PF body. Perimeter jumper is the opportunity for both to improve, similar to how Blake Griffin has improved his jumper significantly since entering the league.

[Negrodamus]

At this point, I have already accepted that Sixers will draft Simmons.

Is Randle a "poor man's" version of Simmons? Less skillset, slower and less athletic?

Both guys have similar attributes

6'10
7' wingspan
8'10-8'11 standing reach
likes to score inside
difficulty in shooting outside
almost similar FG% and % of FG at the rim in college (70-75% FG%; Randle has struggled in NBA)
almost similar 2pt jumper and FT% (Julius randle better % in 2pt jumpers and FT%; 34.5% vs 32.9%)
Simmons is much quicker and athletic, but both guys are quicker than most PFs
they like to grab and go

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sug6ilp9oX0[/youtube]

I've made this comparison before since both are very much faceup 4s with elite quickness against other 4s. Obviously Simmons is a better passer, but I would take Randle's jumper over Simmons's.

Another thing I felt was interesting is how Okafor and Simmons had very similar advanced stats in college.





We're looking to get rid of Okafor while we're bringing in a guy who was slightly worse offensively (6.8 OBPM vs 6.3), less win shares and better PER. In fact, the only things Simmons is better at is PProd, FTr, AST%, STL%, and TRB%(better DRB% but not ORB%) and that shouldn't come as any surprise. He gets steals, he was the point guard, his offense is derived from driving to the rim which draws fouls, and he's going to produce more points because of his passing ability. He just didn't get those points as efficiently. Either way, comparable.

If you want to go a step further, Okafor had an ORtg of 119.9 and a DRtg of 95.4 to Ben Simmons's 117.2 ORtg and 98.4 DRtg.

I think this is important because if Okafor and Simmons can't coexist, then what is the upside of completely shaking up the roster to make Ben Simmons work when we have a guy who had similar advanced statistics (some could argue better) in college?

I also ask because most points get discredited or reinforced with these advanced stats. Here's a situation where we have someone who was as effective coming out of college as Simmons and we might be forcing a square peg in a round hole. Or we're trading a Ben Simmons caliber prospect for something less than.

Is Ben Simmons that much better of a prospect than National Champion Jahlil Okafor or are we just enamored with the 19 ppg, 11 rpg, and 5 apg? I think it's something to consider.

[Kobblehead]

Passing the torch!!!

[76ciology]

At this point, I have already accepted that Sixers will draft Simmons.

Is Randle a "poor man's" version of Simmons? Less skillset, slower and less athletic?

Both guys have similar attributes

6'10
7' wingspan
8'10-8'11 standing reach
likes to score inside
difficulty in shooting outside
almost similar FG% and % of FG at the rim in college (70-75% FG%; Randle has struggled in NBA)
almost similar 2pt jumper and FT% (Julius randle better % in 2pt jumpers and FT%; 34.5% vs 32.9%)
Simmons is much quicker and athletic, but both guys are quicker than most PFs
they like to grab and go

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sug6ilp9oX0[/youtube]

I've made this comparison before since both are very much faceup 4s with elite quickness against other 4s. Obviously Simmons is a better passer, but I would take Randle's jumper over Simmons's.

Another thing I felt was interesting is how Okafor and Simmons had very similar advanced stats in college.





We're looking to get rid of Okafor while we're bringing in a guy who was slightly worse offensively (6.8 OBPM vs 6.3), less win shares and better PER. In fact, the only things Simmons is better at is PProd, FTr, AST%, STL%, and TRB%(better DRB% but not ORB%) and that shouldn't come as any surprise. He gets steals, he was the point guard, his offense is derived from driving to the rim which draws fouls, and he's going to produce more points because of his passing ability. He just didn't get those points as efficiently. Either way, comparable.

If you want to go a step further, Okafor had an ORtg of 119.9 and a DRtg of 95.4 to Ben Simmons's 117.2 ORtg and 98.4 DRtg.

I think this is important because if Okafor and Simmons can't coexist, then what is the upside of completely shaking up the roster to make Ben Simmons work when we have a guy who had similar advanced statistics (some could argue better) in college?

I also ask because most points get discredited or reinforced with these advanced stats. Here's a situation where we have someone who was as effective coming out of college as Simmons and we might be forcing a square peg in a round hole. Or we're trading a Ben Simmons caliber prospect for something less than.

Is Ben Simmons that much better of a prospect than National Champion Jahlil Okafor or are we just enamored with the 19 ppg, 11 rpg, and 5 apg? I think it's something to consider.

For me, people just are enamored with Jah's DRPM/DBPM without considering he was playing among the worst defenders in the league and played through a very deflating season that at one point made Noel looked bad on defense.

For me, both Jah and Simmons are elitely skilled players that have average size at their position. The key is how well they can slide down to a lower position. Both Jah and Simmons needs to have higher motor on D and improve perimeter shot to play PF and SF, respectively.

[Kobblehead]

Why wear a shirt when you can blast your guns and Hershey's kiss nipples all day?

[tk76]

if I were the captain of a pick-up game (shirts vs skins) I'd choose Simmons... and then be shirts. The guy sort of reminds me of Kobe in his creepy fashion phase.

[Sixerscan]

You don't have to "completely shake up the roster." Just trade Okafor for a guard or two.

And it's not about "making Simmons work" he'll be a fine player regardless it's just that he's going to play power forward next year and it's dumb to have a talent like Okafor hanging out on your bench most of the game when your starting guards right now are Stauskas and McConnell.

[phiphan]

For me, people just are enamored with Jah's DRPM/DBPM without considering he was playing among the worst defenders in the league and played through a very deflating season that at one point made Noel looked bad on defense.

For me, both Jah and Simmons are elitely skilled players that have average size at their position. The key is how well they can slide down to a lower position. Both Jah and Simmons needs to have higher motor on D and improve perimeter shot to play PF and SF, respectively.

I appreciate your posts, but I think you kind of have blinders on for Okafor and that's the reason you have been so supportive of drafting Ingram (as Simmons and Okafor just won't fit together at all). Embrace the hate for Okafor and you will see the light

I think playing Simmons at SF eliminates his current strengths on offense and may hurt his confidence. Try him at SF when he shows improvement on his jumper and post game. Right now he's gotta play PF.

[Kobblehead]

Regardless of what position Simmons is listed on the line-up card, he's going to be initiating half-court drives from beyond the arc along the perimeter. He's never going to be a Power Forward (in essence).

When the Sixers talk about him as a 4, they're essentially committing to playing a 4 perimeter player offense.