The Ben Simmons Megathread - Part IV

[Sixerscan]

If you think he played perfectly fine, then there’s nothing for anyone to debate anymore. You’re cool with having a #1 overall pick and 180M man being a defensive player who’s at best a third option on offense. Cool.

He’s like the 25th highest paid guy in the league. I don’t see any issue with that. Seems pretty clear that everyone in the league would gladly pay him that.

But obviously I mean that he hasn’t played in a way that’s changed his value at all. Which is why the only people saying that are the people that were already crapping on him before either of these games were played.

I agree, his value isn’t going to change off of two preseason games. But you know like I know Ben was given that contract largely off the potential of what he’s supposed to be. If in 1-2 years he’s still playing how he’s playing (highly likely) that contract isn’t going to look so good in my opinion.

Well like I said he’s getting paid like a borderline all star (I checked he’s actually tied for 21st/22nd highest paid) which I think even you would agree is a pretty good value for what he is now. His salary goes up over time up so will the cap and so will max contracts. Like next years rookie extension class will get paid more, and then the following years and following years. Plus the veteran maxs will also go up. As long as he doesn’t suffer some career altering injury that contract should look fine even if he just maintains his current level of play.

[Iverson Armband]

He’s like the 25th highest paid guy in the league. I don’t see any issue with that. Seems pretty clear that everyone in the league would gladly pay him that.

But obviously I mean that he hasn’t played in a way that’s changed his value at all. Which is why the only people saying that are the people that were already crapping on him before either of these games were played.

I agree, his value isn’t going to change off of two preseason games. But you know like I know Ben was given that contract largely off the potential of what he’s supposed to be. If in 1-2 years he’s still playing how he’s playing (highly likely) that contract isn’t going to look so good in my opinion.

Well like I said he’s getting paid like a borderline all star (I checked he’s actually tied for 21st/22nd highest paid) which I think even you would agree is a pretty good value for what he is now. His salary goes up over time up so will the cap and so will max contracts. Like next years rookie extension class will get paid more, and then the following years and following years. Plus the veteran maxs will also go up. As long as he doesn’t suffer some career altering injury that contract should look fine even if he just maintains his current level of play.

You make good points, and I agree he’s fairly paid right now, but I think there comes a certain threshold where the price bubble for him bursts no matter how much anyone else is making if he doesn’t improve. For example, I don’t think Al Horford is necessarily overpaid as a starting caliber-ish center relatively speaking, but that’s still considered a bad contract.

[Sixerscan]

I agree, his value isn’t going to change off of two preseason games. But you know like I know Ben was given that contract largely off the potential of what he’s supposed to be. If in 1-2 years he’s still playing how he’s playing (highly likely) that contract isn’t going to look so good in my opinion.

Well like I said he’s getting paid like a borderline all star (I checked he’s actually tied for 21st/22nd highest paid) which I think even you would agree is a pretty good value for what he is now. His salary goes up over time up so will the cap and so will max contracts. Like next years rookie extension class will get paid more, and then the following years and following years. Plus the veteran maxs will also go up. As long as he doesn’t suffer some career altering injury that contract should look fine even if he just maintains his current level of play.

You make good points, but I think there comes a certain threshold where the price bubble for him bursts no matter how much anyone else is making if he doesn’t improve. For example, I don’t think Al Horford is necessarily overpaid as a starting caliber-ish center relatively speaking, but that’s still considered a bad contract.

Horford is the 39th highest paid player and is only making $3 million less than Simmons (Ben actually would have made less than him had he not made all-nba), I’d say that’s a little more out of wack? Comparatively Ben is making $11 million less than Harden who is the 4th highest paid.

I agree that his upside does play a role in his trade value. But it’s the difference between his contract being a fine value and a total bargain like Embiid’s.

[Kobblehead]

There's a surprising amount of players in the league that can't score off the dribble making $30m+ annually.

[Sixerscan]

There's a surprising amount of players in the league that can't score off the dribble making $30m+ annually.

Yeah the new TV deal completely changed the game in terms of the money guys make. 6 years ago the Lakers were beyond insane for giving Kobe $23 million a year now guys are making 40.

[VDT]

Well like I said he’s getting paid like a borderline all star (I checked he’s actually tied for 21st/22nd highest paid) which I think even you would agree is a pretty good value for what he is now. His salary goes up over time up so will the cap and so will max contracts. Like next years rookie extension class will get paid more, and then the following years and following years. Plus the veteran maxs will also go up. As long as he doesn’t suffer some career altering injury that contract should look fine even if he just maintains his current level of play.

You make good points, but I think there comes a certain threshold where the price bubble for him bursts no matter how much anyone else is making if he doesn’t improve. For example, I don’t think Al Horford is necessarily overpaid as a starting caliber-ish center relatively speaking, but that’s still considered a bad contract.

Horford is the 39th highest paid player and is only making $3 million less than Simmons (Ben actually would have made less than him had he not made all-nba), I’d say that’s a little more out of wack? Comparatively Ben is making $11 million less than Harden who is the 4th highest paid.

I agree that his upside does play a role in his trade value. But it’s the difference between his contract being a fine value and a total bargain like Embiid’s.

The problem is that a fairly paid (which is also debatable) player doesnt help you win the title unless you have other players on bargain contracts. And since teams usually get this extra value from their stars, Simmons needs to provide this extra value (on whatever team he is) otherwise you could argue he would hold the team back in terms of winning a title.

[Arsenal]

The guy whose value is DROPPING by the day is this guy. Out there partying in violation of NBA protocols in the face of a pandemic:

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[Sixerscan]

You make good points, but I think there comes a certain threshold where the price bubble for him bursts no matter how much anyone else is making if he doesn’t improve. For example, I don’t think Al Horford is necessarily overpaid as a starting caliber-ish center relatively speaking, but that’s still considered a bad contract.

Horford is the 39th highest paid player and is only making $3 million less than Simmons (Ben actually would have made less than him had he not made all-nba), I’d say that’s a little more out of wack? Comparatively Ben is making $11 million less than Harden who is the 4th highest paid.

I agree that his upside does play a role in his trade value. But it’s the difference between his contract being a fine value and a total bargain like Embiid’s.

The problem is that a fairly paid (which is also debatable) player doesnt help you win the title unless you have other players on bargain contracts. And since teams usually get this extra value from their stars, Simmons needs to provide this extra value (on whatever team he is) otherwise you could argue he would hold the team back in terms of winning a title.

Well I'm just trying to make the point as clear and objective as possible. If you want you can get into the weeds and factor in that all of these max guys have artificial caps on the salary they can earn. If Ben could make Harden's money I'm sure almost the whole league would offer it to him if they could, Harden could make 60 I'm sure people would offer it to him, and so on.

I don't know, I'm sure you are reading and listening to all the same NBA stuff I am. When these Harden trade rumors come up is anyone saying that Ben's contract is a potential issue? If anything I see people saying how him being locked up on this deal is a massive benefit.

[Iverson Armband]

Horford is the 39th highest paid player and is only making $3 million less than Simmons (Ben actually would have made less than him had he not made all-nba), I’d say that’s a little more out of wack? Comparatively Ben is making $11 million less than Harden who is the 4th highest paid.

I agree that his upside does play a role in his trade value. But it’s the difference between his contract being a fine value and a total bargain like Embiid’s.

The problem is that a fairly paid (which is also debatable) player doesnt help you win the title unless you have other players on bargain contracts. And since teams usually get this extra value from their stars, Simmons needs to provide this extra value (on whatever team he is) otherwise you could argue he would hold the team back in terms of winning a title.

Well I'm just trying to make the point as clear and objective as possible. If you want you can get into the weeds and factor in that all of these max guys have artificial caps on the salary they can earn. If Ben could make Harden's money I'm sure almost the whole league would offer it to him if they could, Harden could make 60 I'm sure people would offer it to him, and so on.

I don't know, I'm sure you are reading and listening to all the same NBA stuff I am. When these Harden trade rumors come up is anyone saying that Ben's contract is a potential issue? If anything I see people saying how him being locked up on this deal is a massive benefit.

Because I think there’s still this narrative of him being an ascending player, which I disagree with. After this year, I think that view of him changes a little bit and I think it already has to some degree. Remember, not too long ago there was a time a lot of Sixers fans would have laughed you off the stage for suggesting a Ben/Booker swap. Now Phoenix doesn’t even pick up the phone.

[Arsenal]

You make good points, but I think there comes a certain threshold where the price bubble for him bursts no matter how much anyone else is making if he doesn’t improve. For example, I don’t think Al Horford is necessarily overpaid as a starting caliber-ish center relatively speaking, but that’s still considered a bad contract.

Horford is the 39th highest paid player and is only making $3 million less than Simmons (Ben actually would have made less than him had he not made all-nba), I’d say that’s a little more out of wack? Comparatively Ben is making $11 million less than Harden who is the 4th highest paid.

I agree that his upside does play a role in his trade value. But it’s the difference between his contract being a fine value and a total bargain like Embiid’s.

The problem is that a fairly paid (which is also debatable) player doesnt help you win the title unless you have other players on bargain contracts. And since teams usually get this extra value from their stars, Simmons needs to provide this extra value (on whatever team he is) otherwise you could argue he would hold the team back in terms of winning a title.

Especially true since we have Tobias Harris providing massive negative value on his contract.

[Negrodamus]

The guy whose value is DROPPING by the day is this guy. Out there partying in violation of NBA protocols in the face of a pandemic:

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Clearly was an old clip. This would be burning the news cycle if he was getting hammer since joining the team.

[elchengue20]

Ben was labeled as a pretty sure bet for future top 5 player after his rookie season. A couple of seasons later and its already considered a longshot by most people. After another season of being basically the same player,its going to be considered neary impossible.

His value and potential have already declined, and its very likely to continue. We should take advantage while we can, also we cant keep waisting Embiids prime.

[Ellington]

Simmons took a 3 in his last game. If he keeps doing that most games then he has turned the corner and most definitely isn’t the same player as previous seasons.

[Iverson Armband]

Simmons took a 3 in his last game. If he keeps doing that most games then he has turned the corner and most definitely isn’t the same player as previous seasons.

He needs to do a lot more than just take one 3 in “most” games.

[Stanford]

Ben's problem is not 3 pointers. Sorry, guys. He can't just start jacking up threes and fix everything wrong with the offense. You guys are fooling yourselves.

[elchengue20]

Lol he took a 3 in a preseason game, MVP Simmons incoming. At least its a signal hes trying to do something, i will give you that. But last peseason he made a 3 and we know it didnt mean anything.

If he hits 10 threes in the first 20/25 games of the season then maybe we can start to think hes turning the corner as a shooter.Also he has to draw more fouls and hit his free throws.

[HotelVitale]

I agree, his value isn’t going to change off of two preseason games. But you know like I know Ben was given that contract largely off the potential of what he’s supposed to be. If in 1-2 years he’s still playing how he’s playing (highly likely) that contract isn’t going to look so good in my opinion.

Well like I said he’s getting paid like a borderline all star (I checked he’s actually tied for 21st/22nd highest paid) which I think even you would agree is a pretty good value for what he is now. His salary goes up over time up so will the cap and so will max contracts. Like next years rookie extension class will get paid more, and then the following years and following years. Plus the veteran maxs will also go up. As long as he doesn’t suffer some career altering injury that contract should look fine even if he just maintains his current level of play.

You make good points, and I agree he’s fairly paid right now, but I think there comes a certain threshold where the price bubble for him bursts no matter how much anyone else is making if he doesn’t improve. For example, I don’t think Al Horford is necessarily overpaid as a starting caliber-ish center relatively speaking, but that’s still considered a bad contract.

Woah down there, you're talking yourself into something strange. Simmons isn't 'fairly paid' he's getting paid what most teams would be very happy to pay for him. He's already an all-star and just entering his prime so the value should hold steady, and 90% of teams would happily give us assets to take him on. There's no other way to measure a good contract.

Horford by contrast is already making more than any team wants to pay for him, plus he's at the age where steep decline might come and thus in danger of becoming a really bad contract. We of course had to trade a 1st rounder just to get off him.

[VDT]

Well like I said he’s getting paid like a borderline all star (I checked he’s actually tied for 21st/22nd highest paid) which I think even you would agree is a pretty good value for what he is now. His salary goes up over time up so will the cap and so will max contracts. Like next years rookie extension class will get paid more, and then the following years and following years. Plus the veteran maxs will also go up. As long as he doesn’t suffer some career altering injury that contract should look fine even if he just maintains his current level of play.

You make good points, and I agree he’s fairly paid right now, but I think there comes a certain threshold where the price bubble for him bursts no matter how much anyone else is making if he doesn’t improve. For example, I don’t think Al Horford is necessarily overpaid as a starting caliber-ish center relatively speaking, but that’s still considered a bad contract.

Woah down there, you're talking yourself into something strange. Simmons isn't 'fairly paid' he's getting paid what most teams would be very happy to pay for him. He's already an all-star and just entering his prime so the value should hold steady, and 90% of teams would happily give us assets to take him on. There's no other way to measure a good contract.

Horford by contrast is already making more than any team wants to pay for him, plus he's at the age where steep decline might come and thus in danger of becoming a really bad contract. We of course had to trade a 1st rounder just to get off him.

What teams (i.e at least one team) are happy to pay is not necessarily related to the contract being good. The Wolves were happy to pay Wiggins and, as you mentioned, the Sixers were happy to pay Horford. In fact someone was happy to give all of the league bad contracts.

What is important is whether the contract helps you win, i.e whether it has above average value for money. That is true even more for max players who are expected to provide most of the extra value. If you max players are not providing this extra value you have almost no chance to win the title. Is Simmons providing that? Most would say no, at least with the current team construction. He still has some upside though (less and less every year) which is what you are basically giving up in a trade.

[Sixerscan]

You make good points, and I agree he’s fairly paid right now, but I think there comes a certain threshold where the price bubble for him bursts no matter how much anyone else is making if he doesn’t improve. For example, I don’t think Al Horford is necessarily overpaid as a starting caliber-ish center relatively speaking, but that’s still considered a bad contract.

Woah down there, you're talking yourself into something strange. Simmons isn't 'fairly paid' he's getting paid what most teams would be very happy to pay for him. He's already an all-star and just entering his prime so the value should hold steady, and 90% of teams would happily give us assets to take him on. There's no other way to measure a good contract.

Horford by contrast is already making more than any team wants to pay for him, plus he's at the age where steep decline might come and thus in danger of becoming a really bad contract. We of course had to trade a 1st rounder just to get off him.

What teams (i.e at least one team) are happy to pay is not necessarily related to the contract being good. The Wolves were happy to pay Wiggins and, as you mentioned, the Sixers were happy to pay Horford. In fact someone was happy to give all of the league bad contracts.

What is important is whether the contract helps you win, i.e whether it has above average value for money. That is true even more for max players who are expected to provide most of the extra value. If you max players are not providing this extra value you have almost no chance to win the title. Is Simmons providing that? Most would say no, at least with the current team construction. He still has some upside though (less and less every year) which is what you are basically giving up in a trade.

Well in the case of Horford the Sixers literally outbid every other team in the NBA with cap space whereas with Simmons they were capped by a limit and virtually every other team would have outbid them if they could. We’re talking about a guy like Wiggins who only makes slightly less than Simmons and is barely even a starter.

I don’t think “most” would have Simmons not being worth $30 million this year. 538 has him at 35, for example.

[HotelVitale]

You make good points, and I agree he’s fairly paid right now, but I think there comes a certain threshold where the price bubble for him bursts no matter how much anyone else is making if he doesn’t improve. For example, I don’t think Al Horford is necessarily overpaid as a starting caliber-ish center relatively speaking, but that’s still considered a bad contract.

Woah down there, you're talking yourself into something strange. Simmons isn't 'fairly paid' he's getting paid what most teams would be very happy to pay for him. He's already an all-star and just entering his prime so the value should hold steady, and 90% of teams would happily give us assets to take him on. There's no other way to measure a good contract. Horford by contrast is already making more than any team wants to pay for him, plus he's at the age where steep decline might come and thus in danger of becoming a really bad contract. We of course had to trade a 1st rounder just to get off him.

What teams (i.e at least one team) are happy to pay is not necessarily related to the contract being good. The Wolves were happy to pay Wiggins and, as you mentioned, the Sixers were happy to pay Horford. In fact someone was happy to give all of the league bad contracts. What is important is whether the contract helps you win, i.e whether it has above average value for money. That is true even more for max players who are expected to provide most of the extra value. If you max players are not providing this extra value you have almost no chance to win the title. Is Simmons providing that? Most would say no, at least with the current team construction. He still has some upside though (less and less every year) which is what you are basically giving up in a trade.

This feels like an argument we don't need to have, difference is obvious here. We're talking about current value, not value at the time a contract was given out: Wiggins now is obviously a bad contract and no teams would happily/readily take him on with compensation, while Simmons is the opposite and many many teams would line up to give us assets to take him on. Horford is obviously the former. And at the time Wiggins' contract was a reluctant bet made on someone who was not a plus player yet but had a chance of becoming one, Simmons' contract was an easy decision that any other team would do for a player who was already an all-star and had a chance of becoming better.

Also this idea that all max players on a contending team have to be enormous value 1st options is ahistorical and cuts against the norm. Most contenders are carrying at least two full max slots and usually have at least one other very large contract; one of those 3 players usually needs to be mega-elite but the others don't. The Warriors were maxing Steph, KD, Klay and Dray at one point, and before KD they also had Iggy on a near max, the Cavs had Lebron, Kyrie, and Love on full maxes, Raptors had Kawhi as their main guy plus Lowry and Gasol making near-max $ (plus Ibaka making a ton of $, and they added Siakam to the max list the next year), and so on. We obviously don't have a Lebron or Kawhi now...but if one becomes available we'll need a Simmons-type to either be his elite sidekick or be trade bait to get him to come.