Ben Simmons trades go here (and here only): Expect warnings if not following forum rules

[Roy The Natural]

1. Edited.

2. I haven't seen Chuck's bias here. I'm seeing him state his beliefs in value, and oddly enough Blazers fans coming at him for them when he has zero reason to be biased either against them or for Curry. He even said himself he undervalued Curry in reality.

CJ just had the ultimate stinker of a playoffs (and I'm higher on him than most) and yet here we are, with him now being valued again. When right after the Blazers lost the entire forum felt he had to go.

Edited here too: And I am not getting into this thread's ridiculousness. Blazers fans don't seem keen on trading CJ. That's great.

Has CJ gained a bunch of value? I'm not arguing he has. I never had Simmons with extremely high value and I think his has dropped. I don't believe CJ for Simmons straight is palatable for Philly and have never suggested so. However the gulf between these 2 players isn't 6 years of draft control. It just isn't.

Well by RAPTOR's projections it's an awful lot! Like 2X CJ.

1. Edited.

2. I haven't seen Chuck's bias here. I'm seeing him state his beliefs in value, and oddly enough Blazers fans coming at him for them when he has zero reason to be biased either against them or for Curry. He even said himself he undervalued Curry in reality.

CJ just had the ultimate stinker of a playoffs (and I'm higher on him than most) and yet here we are, with him now being valued again. When right after the Blazers lost the entire forum felt he had to go.

Edited here too: And I am not getting into this thread's ridiculousness. Blazers fans don't seem keen on trading CJ. That's great.

With most things I in life, rash, emotion filled decisions usually are not the best way to gauge anything.

A similar thing has been seen with Simmons asking out. There was the initial backlash, but no cooler heads are prevailing.

My point being, choosing an emotional timeframe to judge an opinion isn’t always the best.

Ah, so nobody is being emotional now with daily Simmons updates while Portland has pretty much been out of the news cycle. Makes sense. I'd say one side is being fairly emotional still. Because I'll tell you one thing for sure, this hasn't been a rational discussion in a while.

I don't see RAPTORs proections as being all that reasonable. Their projection for CJ for 5.5 WAR which would be his lowest output in 3 years (with health assumptions for scaling last year) and they're projecting Ben Simmons to hit 8.4 WAR after sitting at 6.3, 3.9 and 5.9 WAR over the past 2 seasons.

It's plausible that this is how things work out. However I don't think those assumptions seem very supportable given the 3 year sample size preceding.

[Asianiac_24]

While I do agree that Simmons is better than CJ, the difference isn’t 3 picks and 3 swaps. That kind of draft capital is reserved for the truly elite superstars (ie. Harden, OKC George, soon to be Dame, etc). Ben Simmons is worth CJ + a pick at most. If that’s the asking price, might as well just hold him for the year.

[bondom34]

The sixers just still have people picking at the scabs, whereas the Blazers do not. However, I think as a whole, the perception of what to do with Ben has gotten more realistic over time, not less.

I agree with the first part here, but not the 2nd. The 1st is why I haven't read this thread a ton but see Chuck being treated unfairly so chimed in. Nothing's happening for a while, this is Philly's last real shot at a big shake up and there's no benefit in making a move to just be "OK" now. The 2nd, right now most here (not saying you, just plenty) are taking anyone of note off the table and we're getting to Beasley/Russell/LeVert/etc. There's zero reason for Philly to entertain that and they're better holding the asset even if Simmons won't play in hopes a star shakes loose later in the year.

Different people can have different views of players. The Athletic is behind a paywall. I saw your previous post but I couldn't look at anything to respond. There are numbers in the far right of the list. But there are no headers for us. What are those numbers?

The 1st number is Hollinger's salary projection I believe (this isn't a number I'd really put much weight into, I forget how it works but remember he had some really off the wall stuff like $20M for Whiteside or something crazy, but it's there and Partnow seems to find it helpful maybe). The 2nd is EPM wins.

The text for said players:

Spoiler:

I don't see RAPTORs proections as being all that reasonable. Their projection for CJ for 5.5 WAR which would be his lowest output in 3 years (with health assumptions for scaling last year) and they're projecting Ben Simmons to hit 8.4 WAR after sitting at 6.3, 3.9 and 5.9 WAR over the past 2 seasons.

It's plausible that this is how things work out. However I don't think those assumptions seem very supportable given the 3 year sample size preceding.

And to note: Using RAPTOR WAR = reasonable

Using the same metric for projections = not reasonable.

Frankly I choose not to really use either much but this is a choice that seems.....off.

[BullyKing]

I still think the Sixers ask is too much, but BullyKing disagrees despite us both being board mods and both being biased.

To be clear, I didn't disagree with the concept that it was too much as if it is crazy of Portland to say no. I disagreed with characterizing the ask as ridiculous. I think the difference in value between CJ and Simmons is much closer to 3 1sts/3 swaps than nothing but still think there is a reasonable enough deal to be made for less than 3 1sts/3 swaps.

[Blazer1776]

I'm trying to think what the proper pick balance is for a CJ/Ben swap. 2 picks from POR? A pick and 2 swaps? Just one pick feels short to me.

I agree there. My big bugaboo is I don’t think Ben is happy in Portland long term. I think he would be happy short term because it isn’t Philly. Makes it hard to what to give up anything for him.

However, I think the right trade is somewhere toward the middle of what Portland is offering (CJ for Ben I think) and what Philly is asking (CJ + 3 picks + 3 Swaps).

[Roy The Natural]

The sixers just still have people picking at the scabs, whereas the Blazers do not. However, I think as a whole, the perception of what to do with Ben has gotten more realistic over time, not less.

I agree with the first part here, but not the 2nd. The 1st is why I haven't read this thread a ton but see Chuck being treated unfairly so chimed in. Nothing's happening for a while, this is Philly's last real shot at a big shake up and there's no benefit in making a move to just be "OK" now. The 2nd, right now most here (not saying you, just plenty) are taking anyone of note off the table and we're getting to Beasley/Russell/LeVert/etc. There's zero reason for Philly to entertain that and they're better holding the asset even if Simmons won't play in hopes a star shakes loose later in the year.

Different people can have different views of players. The Athletic is behind a paywall. I saw your previous post but I couldn't look at anything to respond. There are numbers in the far right of the list. But there are no headers for us. What are those numbers?

The 1st number is Hollinger's salary projection I believe (this isn't a number I'd really put much weight into, I forget how it works but remember he had some really off the wall stuff like $20M for Whiteside or something crazy, but it's there and Partnow seems to find it helpful maybe). The 2nd is EPM wins.

The text for said players:

Spoiler:

I don't see RAPTORs proections as being all that reasonable. Their projection for CJ for 5.5 WAR which would be his lowest output in 3 years (with health assumptions for scaling last year) and they're projecting Ben Simmons to hit 8.4 WAR after sitting at 6.3, 3.9 and 5.9 WAR over the past 2 seasons.

It's plausible that this is how things work out. However I don't think those assumptions seem very supportable given the 3 year sample size preceding.

And to note: Using RAPTOR WAR = reasonable

Using the same metric for projections = not reasonable.

Frankly I choose not to really use either much but this is a choice that seems.....off.

Regardless of tiering here. A quick look at the scaled number there has CJ adding 11.7 wins over an 82 game season and Curry adding 6.6. assuming that EPM wins accounts for games played like all other wins metrics. I still think that's a major gap in impact.

[Roy The Natural]

The sixers just still have people picking at the scabs, whereas the Blazers do not. However, I think as a whole, the perception of what to do with Ben has gotten more realistic over time, not less.

I agree with the first part here, but not the 2nd. The 1st is why I haven't read this thread a ton but see Chuck being treated unfairly so chimed in. Nothing's happening for a while, this is Philly's last real shot at a big shake up and there's no benefit in making a move to just be "OK" now. The 2nd, right now most here (not saying you, just plenty) are taking anyone of note off the table and we're getting to Beasley/Russell/LeVert/etc. There's zero reason for Philly to entertain that and they're better holding the asset even if Simmons won't play in hopes a star shakes loose later in the year.

Different people can have different views of players. The Athletic is behind a paywall. I saw your previous post but I couldn't look at anything to respond. There are numbers in the far right of the list. But there are no headers for us. What are those numbers?

The 1st number is Hollinger's salary projection I believe (this isn't a number I'd really put much weight into, I forget how it works but remember he had some really off the wall stuff like $20M for Whiteside or something crazy, but it's there and Partnow seems to find it helpful maybe). The 2nd is EPM wins.

The text for said players:

Spoiler:

I don't see RAPTORs proections as being all that reasonable. Their projection for CJ for 5.5 WAR which would be his lowest output in 3 years (with health assumptions for scaling last year) and they're projecting Ben Simmons to hit 8.4 WAR after sitting at 6.3, 3.9 and 5.9 WAR over the past 2 seasons.

It's plausible that this is how things work out. However I don't think those assumptions seem very supportable given the 3 year sample size preceding.

And to note: Using RAPTOR WAR = reasonable

Using the same metric for projections = not reasonable.

Frankly I choose not to really use either much but this is a choice that seems.....off.

To your final note... Yes.. yes it is reasonable to use data to extract past performance. Using historical similarities to predict future impact isn't nearly the same boat. Given everything we've seen from Ben Simmons, expecting a large jump in impact seems a bit much considering the marginal levels of improvement he's shown in the majority of areas of his game to this point.

[Myth]

I think Portland may cave on the picks. Especially if they can get Thybulle or Maxey as a young piece back. Big ask but it is a nice all-in move.

I hope they don't cave. That is too far out for a guy that I expect to leave at the end of his contract at the latest, and may push to leave earlier in a big fit if things don't go his way. I'm in the CJ+1 1st boat and if 76ers balk, I can accept that. I'd be fine if they are squeezed for another small asset, but not for unprotected picks going to an era with no Ben and old or no Dame.

[bondom34]

The sixers just still have people picking at the scabs, whereas the Blazers do not. However, I think as a whole, the perception of what to do with Ben has gotten more realistic over time, not less.

I agree with the first part here, but not the 2nd. The 1st is why I haven't read this thread a ton but see Chuck being treated unfairly so chimed in. Nothing's happening for a while, this is Philly's last real shot at a big shake up and there's no benefit in making a move to just be "OK" now. The 2nd, right now most here (not saying you, just plenty) are taking anyone of note off the table and we're getting to Beasley/Russell/LeVert/etc. There's zero reason for Philly to entertain that and they're better holding the asset even if Simmons won't play in hopes a star shakes loose later in the year.

Different people can have different views of players. The Athletic is behind a paywall. I saw your previous post but I couldn't look at anything to respond. There are numbers in the far right of the list. But there are no headers for us. What are those numbers?

The 1st number is Hollinger's salary projection I believe (this isn't a number I'd really put much weight into, I forget how it works but remember he had some really off the wall stuff like $20M for Whiteside or something crazy, but it's there and Partnow seems to find it helpful maybe). The 2nd is EPM wins.

The text for said players:

Spoiler:

I don't see RAPTORs proections as being all that reasonable. Their projection for CJ for 5.5 WAR which would be his lowest output in 3 years (with health assumptions for scaling last year) and they're projecting Ben Simmons to hit 8.4 WAR after sitting at 6.3, 3.9 and 5.9 WAR over the past 2 seasons.

It's plausible that this is how things work out. However I don't think those assumptions seem very supportable given the 3 year sample size preceding.

And to note: Using RAPTOR WAR = reasonable

Using the same metric for projections = not reasonable.

Frankly I choose not to really use either much but this is a choice that seems.....off.

To your final note... Yes.. yes it is reasonable to use data to extract past performance. Using historical similarities to predict future impact isn't nearly the same boat. Given everything we've seen from Ben Simmons, expecting a large jump in impact seems a bit much considering the marginal levels of improvement he's shown in the majority of areas of his game to this point.

And a decline in CJ is not at all plausible. I'd say it's more plausible these numbers aren't being used properly and frankly using them to rank players isn't a good idea.

Regardless of tiering here. A quick look at the scaled number there has CJ adding 11.7 wins over an 82 game season and Curry adding 6.6. assuming that EPM wins accounts for games played like all other wins metrics. I still think that's a major gap in impact.

1. I mean I can't say stating that CJ missing 25 games is an advantage but framing it this way seems to try to do so. That's again not how things work.

2. Curry didn't play every game either. He missed 15. And again, I wouldn't say they're "equal" either. Just saying that they're not wildly far off to me to an extent I'd pay CJ 4X as much and apparently to someone who's actually worked in analytics with a front office they're not terribly far off at all.

You can't just blindly look at impact numbers and rank players that's not how they work. Using them this way results in things like Danny Green being more valuable than Simmons too and I really like Danny Green but I'm sorry.

[Myth]

Simmons attitude and the impact on his value is being severely underplayed here. He has shown he is willing to put himself before the team and burn whoever he has to, to make it happen.

What happens when he gets to Portland and he is unhappy because of his touches? What happens when he gets to Minnesota and KAT is still the focal point of their offense? Any team trading for Ben is accepting that they are going to cater to his demands. A player with Bens attitude and demands can have a huge negative impact, and derail a team, regardless of the skilll he adds to the court.

I’m also in the boat that his skill set also severely limits his value. He has to be the fulcrum of the offense because his inability/unwillingness to shoot, and there aren’t many teams who need that, especially Portland. They need his defense, and that’s about it.

Bens value is probably more than CJ/Brogdons, but is certainly closer to that than what is said to being proposed by Philly.

Not to mention, I don’t think Ben turns Portland into much more of a contender, and I don’t think CJ turns Philly into much more of a contender.

This is a massive reason why I don't sell the boat on Simmons.

[BullyKing]

Simmons attitude and the impact on his value is being severely underplayed here. He has shown he is willing to put himself before the team and burn whoever he has to, to make it happen.

What happens when he gets to Portland and he is unhappy because of his touches? What happens when he gets to Minnesota and KAT is still the focal point of their offense? Any team trading for Ben is accepting that they are going to cater to his demands. A player with Bens attitude and demands can have a huge negative impact, and derail a team, regardless of the skilll he adds to the court.

I’m also in the boat that his skill set also severely limits his value. He has to be the fulcrum of the offense because his inability/unwillingness to shoot, and there aren’t many teams who need that, especially Portland. They need his defense, and that’s about it.

Bens value is probably more than CJ/Brogdons, but is certainly closer to that than what is said to being proposed by Philly.

Not to mention, I don’t think Ben turns Portland into much more of a contender, and I don’t think CJ turns Philly into much more of a contender.

This is a massive reason why I don't sell the boat on Simmons.

Wouldn't you just prefer for Portland to trade Dame now then? I don't mean that pejoratively. I agree with you that Simmons isn't good enough to make a Portland a true contender. But no one better is on the market and if they were, Portland likely doesn't have the assets to get them. So then what's the point and why not just trade Dame now?

[Roy The Natural]

I agree with the first part here, but not the 2nd. The 1st is why I haven't read this thread a ton but see Chuck being treated unfairly so chimed in. Nothing's happening for a while, this is Philly's last real shot at a big shake up and there's no benefit in making a move to just be "OK" now. The 2nd, right now most here (not saying you, just plenty) are taking anyone of note off the table and we're getting to Beasley/Russell/LeVert/etc. There's zero reason for Philly to entertain that and they're better holding the asset even if Simmons won't play in hopes a star shakes loose later in the year.


The 1st number is Hollinger's salary projection I believe (this isn't a number I'd really put much weight into, I forget how it works but remember he had some really off the wall stuff like $20M for Whiteside or something crazy, but it's there and Partnow seems to find it helpful maybe). The 2nd is EPM wins.

The text for said players:

Spoiler:

And to note: Using RAPTOR WAR = reasonable

Using the same metric for projections = not reasonable.

Frankly I choose not to really use either much but this is a choice that seems.....off.

To your final note... Yes.. yes it is reasonable to use data to extract past performance. Using historical similarities to predict future impact isn't nearly the same boat. Given everything we've seen from Ben Simmons, expecting a large jump in impact seems a bit much considering the marginal levels of improvement he's shown in the majority of areas of his game to this point.

And a decline in CJ is not at all plausible. I'd say it's more plausible these numbers aren't being used properly and frankly using them to rank players isn't a good idea.

Regardless of tiering here. A quick look at the scaled number there has CJ adding 11.7 wins over an 82 game season and Curry adding 6.6. assuming that EPM wins accounts for games played like all other wins metrics. I still think that's a major gap in impact.

1. I mean I can't say stating that CJ missing 25 games is an advantage but framing it this way seems to try to do so. That's again not how things work.

2. Curry didn't play every game either. He missed 15. And again, I wouldn't say they're "equal" either. Just saying that they're not wildly far off to me to an extent I'd pay CJ 4X as much and apparently to someone who's actually worked in analytics with a front office they're not terribly far off at all.

You can't just blindly look at impact numbers and rank players that's not how they work.

Of course its plausible, but I wouldn't consider it the most likely scenario at this moment. Especially coming off a career year and having a type of game CJ does.

I scaled the win totals for both. 6.6 for Curry over 82 games and 11.7 for McCollum over 82.

Now obviously you couldn't expect to plug either player just anywhere and expect them if healthy to actually add that level of impact. But I think it's a good barometer of differentiation between a high level rotation player and a player who's a good deal more than that.

For what it's worth Simmons has the same +3.1 EPM as CJ, and Curry's actual EPM is +1.1

[bondom34]

To your final note... Yes.. yes it is reasonable to use data to extract past performance. Using historical similarities to predict future impact isn't nearly the same boat. Given everything we've seen from Ben Simmons, expecting a large jump in impact seems a bit much considering the marginal levels of improvement he's shown in the majority of areas of his game to this point.

And a decline in CJ is not at all plausible. I'd say it's more plausible these numbers aren't being used properly and frankly using them to rank players isn't a good idea.

Regardless of tiering here. A quick look at the scaled number there has CJ adding 11.7 wins over an 82 game season and Curry adding 6.6. assuming that EPM wins accounts for games played like all other wins metrics. I still think that's a major gap in impact.

1. I mean I can't say stating that CJ missing 25 games is an advantage but framing it this way seems to try to do so. That's again not how things work.

2. Curry didn't play every game either. He missed 15. And again, I wouldn't say they're "equal" either. Just saying that they're not wildly far off to me to an extent I'd pay CJ 4X as much and apparently to someone who's actually worked in analytics with a front office they're not terribly far off at all.

You can't just blindly look at impact numbers and rank players that's not how they work.

Of course its plausible, but I wouldn't consider it the most likely scenario at this moment. Especially coming off a career year and having a type of game CJ does.

I scaled the win totals for both. 6.6 for Curry over 82 games and 11.7 for McCollum over 82.

Now obviously you couldn't expect to plug either player just anywhere and expect them if healthy to actually add that level of impact. But I think it's a good barometer of differentiation between a high level rotation player and a player who's a good deal more than that.

For what it's worth Simmons has the same +3.1 EPM as CJ.

But again, you can't just "scale them" like that, nor can you blindly rank players with impact metrics like that. That's not how it works. And McCollum is a 30 year old SG. I would consider it highly unlikely he continues to perform at his current level for 5 more years, and consider it far more likely Simmons does that and gets a bit better.

But more importantly you can't just use impact metrics this way. And of course if you'd really like to follow through, note said impact metrics in the playoffs (where sample size is incredibly small but still). But yeah, you can't just use them as blind rankings and ignore aging and a ton of other factors.

[Roy The Natural]

Simmons attitude and the impact on his value is being severely underplayed here. He has shown he is willing to put himself before the team and burn whoever he has to, to make it happen.

What happens when he gets to Portland and he is unhappy because of his touches? What happens when he gets to Minnesota and KAT is still the focal point of their offense? Any team trading for Ben is accepting that they are going to cater to his demands. A player with Bens attitude and demands can have a huge negative impact, and derail a team, regardless of the skilll he adds to the court.

I’m also in the boat that his skill set also severely limits his value. He has to be the fulcrum of the offense because his inability/unwillingness to shoot, and there aren’t many teams who need that, especially Portland. They need his defense, and that’s about it.

Bens value is probably more than CJ/Brogdons, but is certainly closer to that than what is said to being proposed by Philly.

Not to mention, I don’t think Ben turns Portland into much more of a contender, and I don’t think CJ turns Philly into much more of a contender.

This is a massive reason why I don't sell the boat on Simmons.

Wouldn't you just prefer for Portland to trade Dame now then? I don't mean that pejoratively. I agree with you that Simmons isn't good enough to make a Portland a true contender. But no one better is on the market and if they were, Portland likely doesn't have the assets to get them. So then what's the point and why not just trade Dame now?

I wouldn't mind moving Dame... Though it would hurt. However now would be one of the worst times to do it. You want to do it nearer to the draft when you understand the value of the many picks involved.

[eminence]

I'm trying to think what the proper pick balance is for a CJ/Ben swap. 2 picks from POR? A pick and 2 swaps? Just one pick feels short to me.

I agree there. My big bugaboo is I don’t think Ben is happy in Portland long term. I think he would be happy short term because it isn’t Philly. Makes it hard to what to give up anything for him.

However, I think the right trade is somewhere toward the middle of what Portland is offering (CJ for Ben I think) and what Philly is asking (CJ + 3 picks + 3 Swaps).

It's a fair concern, though personally I'm not too worried about that for Portland in particular. I could be wrong.

I think I'd come down to CJ+'22 1st+'24 1st (light protections) for Ben as about as high as I'd go for Portland.

I was trying to find a way to rope OKC in to dump some salary on, but neither PHI or POR really has any bad salary they want to dump, so an odd situation where they both wind up just over the luxury tax line. A Covington for Green or Curry swap (take out a 1st from POR) would get Portland under the tax.

[dive135]

It may just be me but if a player has played 4 seasons and was ROY and then an all-star the following 3 years, I don't think he should be correctly labeled fringe all-star.

I'm crazy like that though I guess.

Perhaps is because he is a negative on offense to the point he won't even attempt east shots, and where it's a liability to have him on the floor in a close playoff game.

[Myth]

Still waiting for one person to explain how I dislike Blazers posters as a group and still waiting for one person to explain how that translates into bias.

I'm just catching up on this thread. I see things went off the rails a bit. So I'm just here to state that I like you, Chuck.

[Roy The Natural]

And a decline in CJ is not at all plausible. I'd say it's more plausible these numbers aren't being used properly and frankly using them to rank players isn't a good idea.




1. I mean I can't say stating that CJ missing 25 games is an advantage but framing it this way seems to try to do so. That's again not how things work.

2. Curry didn't play every game either. He missed 15. And again, I wouldn't say they're "equal" either. Just saying that they're not wildly far off to me to an extent I'd pay CJ 4X as much and apparently to someone who's actually worked in analytics with a front office they're not terribly far off at all.

You can't just blindly look at impact numbers and rank players that's not how they work.

Of course its plausible, but I wouldn't consider it the most likely scenario at this moment. Especially coming off a career year and having a type of game CJ does.

I scaled the win totals for both. 6.6 for Curry over 82 games and 11.7 for McCollum over 82.

Now obviously you couldn't expect to plug either player just anywhere and expect them if healthy to actually add that level of impact. But I think it's a good barometer of differentiation between a high level rotation player and a player who's a good deal more than that.

For what it's worth Simmons has the same +3.1 EPM as CJ.

But again, you can't just "scale them" like that, nor can you blindly rank players with impact metrics like that. That's not how it works. And McCollum is a 30 year old SG. I would consider it highly unlikely he continues to perform at his current level for 5 more years, and consider it far more likely Simmons does that and gets a bit better.

But more importantly you can't just use impact metrics this way. And of course if you'd really like to follow through, note said impact metrics in the playoffs (where sample size is incredibly small but still). But yeah, you can't just use them as blind rankings and ignore aging and a ton of other factors.

If clearly hedged many times when using them. But there's a simple reality of Occam's Razor here. If all the metrics are telling you something, it's probably closer to reality than obtuse hypothesizing about hidden impact or value.

I simply think many are underrating and overrating the value of certain players. I have never said that CJ for Simmons straight is equal value. Even if you concede that they are similarly impactful players it doesn't play well to a game of value. Given age as you said. I just don't think that the age gap is anywhere near worth giving up 6 years of draft control.

I'm not overly enamored with Simmons coming to the Blazers for a price tag of 2 picks and a swap which I think is a bit more fair. However, at this point I'm willing to bite the bullet and bank on better fit being a boon for Simmons and the Blazers... Even if there's a high probability of a backfire there.

It's sort of a... Different isnt always better, but it's normally more exciting.

[Myth]

Simmons attitude and the impact on his value is being severely underplayed here. He has shown he is willing to put himself before the team and burn whoever he has to, to make it happen.

What happens when he gets to Portland and he is unhappy because of his touches? What happens when he gets to Minnesota and KAT is still the focal point of their offense? Any team trading for Ben is accepting that they are going to cater to his demands. A player with Bens attitude and demands can have a huge negative impact, and derail a team, regardless of the skilll he adds to the court.

I’m also in the boat that his skill set also severely limits his value. He has to be the fulcrum of the offense because his inability/unwillingness to shoot, and there aren’t many teams who need that, especially Portland. They need his defense, and that’s about it.

Bens value is probably more than CJ/Brogdons, but is certainly closer to that than what is said to being proposed by Philly.

Not to mention, I don’t think Ben turns Portland into much more of a contender, and I don’t think CJ turns Philly into much more of a contender.

This is a massive reason why I don't sell the boat on Simmons.

Wouldn't you just prefer for Portland to trade Dame now then? I don't mean that pejoratively. I agree with you that Simmons isn't good enough to make a Portland a true contender. But no one better is on the market and if they were, Portland likely doesn't have the assets to get them. So then what's the point and why not just trade Dame now?

No, I would rather keep Dame now and keep the picks for the future, or trade a little bit of future picks for Ben to be teamed with Dame, or if I'm really trading away the future it better be for a player who I view as more of an upgrade than Simmons who has a better attitude.

[Texas Chuck]

It may just be me but if a player has played 4 seasons and was ROY and then an all-star the following 3 years, I don't think he should be correctly labeled fringe all-star.

I'm crazy like that though I guess.

Perhaps is because he is a negative on offense to the point he won't even attempt east shots, and where it's a liability to have him on the floor in a close playoff game.

Again. The debate is whether a player who is literally an all-star every year should be named an all-star or a fringe all-star in comparison with another player who has never been an all-star and has been in the league 2x as many seasons.

If the debate is CJ is a better offensive player than Simmons that's a completely different debate. As is which player we would rather have on the court in a close playoff game.

I would have those being 3 very different discussions, but the initial one seems very clear cut. Ben Simmons is an all-star player. CJ is not.