76ers back to fining Ben Simmons

[Flash4thewin]

Someone explain to me how the Sixers are “Winning” here? Time to move on.

You (front office/Morey ) won’t let players on long term contracts dictate their own terms. That’s what winning means

These malcontents need to learn their lessons. It’s one thing for Celtics stealing kyrie from Cleveland when he was disgruntled and with 2 years left. For injured IT/first round unprotected pick. That’s trading for for 25 cents on the dollar. But if kyrie had 4 years left. He wouldn’t been able to pull that stunt.

The sixers will either lose in first or second round this season with or without Simmons. With or without role players being offered.

So why do the trades when it doesn’t help the sixers. That’s what we mean by winning.

Where do you draw the line at the # years remaining in the contract for you to say it's OK to demand a trade like the Kyrie situation? Is it 2 years? Maybe it's 3, but 4 is bad? And 1 year is cool too, so then Kawhi was in the right and Spurs fans were just whining. What I see is you're drawing the line in the place to justify Morey's position and calling it "winning."

There is no winner in this pissing contest between 2 egomaniacs. Both sides are losing. I agree Simmons is in the wrong here but the longer this drags out, the worse it gets for the Sixers. It's not about winning at this point but rather about cutting your losses.

“Cutting your losses” means giving into the player and his trade demand with 4 years left on the contract. I cannot stress how wrong that position is. Its about the big picture here. Say Luka as a hypo after signing his max demands a trade, “Cutting your losses” means giving in to the player? There is a huge difference between one year on the contract and 4 years on a just signed max extension.

[shangrila]

I’m a big supporter of player empowerment and awareness for mental health issues in this country, but I’m having a hard time finding sympathy for Ben. I’m sure he has some anxiety about playing for the Sixers but it’s a situation he’s caused.

If a guy cheats on his wife, and then texts her that he wants a divorce and is seeing someone else, and then also refuses to answer her calls for the next several weeks, he would have created an unpleasant situation. I’m sure this theoretical guy would indeed have anxiety about having to see his ex-wife face to face again too. That doesn’t mean he gets to claim the thought of having to face his ex is causing mental illness.

There’s a difference between having some anxiety about being in an uncomfortable position and having true mental illness.

WTF

What an oddly specific example that isn’t at all relevant.

Because you don’t understand analogies?

No, no, I get what you were trying to do.

I just laughed at how you tried to do it.

[Effigy]

WTF

What an oddly specific example that isn’t at all relevant.

Because you don’t understand analogies?

No, no, I get what you were trying to do.

I just laughed at how you tried to do it.

His analogy seemed fine to me.

And he’s right. People on the internet DON’T understand analogies. If you can’t come up with an example that’s exactly the same they call it a bad analogy. Proving they don’t know what an analogy is.

[Pythagoras]

WTF

What an oddly specific example that isn’t at all relevant.

Because you don’t understand analogies?

No, no, I get what you were trying to do.

I just laughed at how you tried to do it.

You laughed because you don’t seem to understand analogies. There’s no shame in that though.

[Pythagoras]

Because you don’t understand analogies?

No, no, I get what you were trying to do.

I just laughed at how you tried to do it.

His analogy seemed fine to me.

And he’s right. People on the internet DON’T understand analogies. If you can’t come up with an example that’s exactly the same they call it a bad analogy. Proving they don’t know what an analogy is.

Thank you. Someone gets it.

[Tomjas]

You (front office/Morey ) won’t let players on long term contracts dictate their own terms. That’s what winning means

These malcontents need to learn their lessons. It’s one thing for Celtics stealing kyrie from Cleveland when he was disgruntled and with 2 years left. For injured IT/first round unprotected pick. That’s trading for for 25 cents on the dollar. But if kyrie had 4 years left. He wouldn’t been able to pull that stunt.

The sixers will either lose in first or second round this season with or without Simmons. With or without role players being offered.

So why do the trades when it doesn’t help the sixers. That’s what we mean by winning.

Where do you draw the line at the # years remaining in the contract for you to say it's OK to demand a trade like the Kyrie situation? Is it 2 years? Maybe it's 3, but 4 is bad? And 1 year is cool too, so then Kawhi was in the right and Spurs fans were just whining. What I see is you're drawing the line in the place to justify Morey's position and calling it "winning."

There is no winner in this pissing contest between 2 egomaniacs. Both sides are losing. I agree Simmons is in the wrong here but the longer this drags out, the worse it gets for the Sixers. It's not about winning at this point but rather about cutting your losses.

“Cutting your losses” means giving into the player and his trade demand with 4 years left on the contract. I cannot stress how wrong that position is. Its about the big picture here. Say Luka as a hypo after signing his max demands a trade, “Cutting your losses” means giving in to the player? There is a huge difference between one year on the contract and 4 years on a just signed max extension.

The Sixers aren’t fining Simmons because they want him around for 4 years

They want to trade Simmons and in the meantime have him return to pump up his value until someone caves into Morey’s demands

This is not simply Simmons demanding a trade & is hardly a secret

[bigbreakfast]

I am firmly against Ben Simmons on this topic. I find the argument that people are quick to take the side of the corporations not valid here. The players themselves have a representative body that dictates the rules of engagement. And unlike most other regulatory practices they meet and change these up every few years through a collaborative process. I find its absolute nonsense that a player would not follow these established guidelines. Again, if the guidelines were different all good too. I think there’s this overarching attitude in America of protest / unfairness but not that same energy toward the slow boring work of let’s put systems / rules in place through a democratic process…and then let’s follow those rules. If I was a player in the NBA i’d hope they’d take away 100% of his salary or give it to charity or something.

Follow the rules and get paid or don’t follow the rules and don’t get paid. It’s not more complex than that. If the rules suck make sure they get changed next time around…cuz the players have plenty of power in shaping the way the league operates.

what simmons, and on a broader scale, klutch sports have done is absolutely bad for nba players and the nbapa. there's no way the owners are not going to use this and fight for contracts and terms that make it harder for players to get guaranteed money in the next cba.

[Ayt]

Lol, it is. The hardest thing about American politics (it's everywhere but way worse in the US) is that so much of the whole game is the right posturing about how being tough, taking control, not making excuses, etc is the solution for everything, and that line of talk is so effective/dominant that the rest of politics is basically struggling to compromise so there's something--anything, however small--besides that stance in power. There's never a real conversation about the best way to deal with social or economic issues, since the threat of 'just shut up, the system is the system and everyone should suffer if they don't fall in line with it' starts as the dominant voice. Climate change? Wild inequality? Pandemic killing people? Shut up and don't even think about blaming the system, just go out there and do what you have to--only weaklings, extremists with agendas, and pathetic people who can't get over their feelings can't man up and thrive in this system we got.

I only have 1 word to say to you... clueless. The world isn't the US of A. And everything you're sold is a lie. The modern left is the harbinger of doom, and you knobs don't even realize it. Let's start with something as benign as climate change... without even getting into real and actual politics or economic policy. For a living, I am involved with companies/exchanges that profit from selling you the idea that climate control is achievable or desirable. You're a dumbass if you believe it, because our only goal is to convince you that it is real... the court of public opinion can be so very profitable. We (the industry) makes **** loads of money thru carbon credit trading and our personal project funding. I'm ashamed to admit it... but we control everything from good work being done in 3rd world countries (for carbon credits), and our companies don't even use our own money but use charitable donations (mostly from the US gov or US Christian organizations) to fund that work, yet we've created separate rating agencies which these NGOs have to pay a fee to in order to get a carbon credit rating, and when they've earned a carbon credit they have to sell it to companies such as the one I'm involved with for a pittance (it doesn't even matter that we're the ones issuing the ratings that allow them to earn a credit). "We" then get to sell these credits to EU/US companies for millions/billions. The biggest clientele is EU, because they're much more corrupt than US companies but still have a moral/social facade to maintain. We can't sell as much to Asian/African/South American companies because they're the most corrupt of all. They will literally laugh at us for trying to sell them a credit... and the only time they buy is if they have to maintain an appearance to the US, lol. The only industry that has been more profitable in the last 10-15 years is oil... excluding early crypto investors.

Anyway, you're clueless... as is most anyone I've ever spoken to about anything politically. Just read... that's all I ever say, just read! Learn the history of this world and about all of its people and all of their actions. We cannot have selective amnesia preferences when it comes to history (<<< even if you disagree with me about anything else I say, you cannot disagree with this 1 statement). AFAIC, white people aren't a problem, they and what they have done in the last 50-100 years is the solution. The problem we (the rest of the world) faces, as people, going forward, is the new world elites, who come from non-white races... because our cultures and thought processes are not as generous or benign as theirs are today (i.e., Judeo-Christian + British common law based). If you disagree, let's have a conversation about this.

And if you disagree, then before I have a conversation with you, I'd like you to name just one non-white country that ever gave as much credence to human lives + rights as the USA does. If you can't even name one... you're not worth my time.

So I'm literally a professional lobbyist who has worked for NGOs for years, and yes I understand that there's always money (and clout) to be made off of whatever public policy wins the day and that we're all always exaggerating our own positions to win that argument and gain in various ways from that. I also have a PhD in comparative humanities, for what it's worth, so yes I have a good grasp on various civilizations and empires and how the hunt for power is constant and ruthless.

I'm not gonna wade through this piece by piece or anything, but I will make one simple observation that hopefully helps you out here. I made a little crack about an obvious thing about US politics--as soon as any proposal about anything arises, there's an immediate backlash telling people to shut up since everything is totally fine that governs that conversation; and you instinctively responded with a massive wall of text that jumped from climate change is fake, I'm a sheep for not seeing that's all about money, white people are more benevolent than other ruling groups, non-white elites are the real problem we need to be scared about, etc.

Can you see why this might maybe exemplify how bringing up any problem is immediately met with an aggressive 'shut up about your little problem!'?

That post was so embarrassing he tried to delete it.

[Nate505]

The team owners should gather around a table in a dark, smoke filled room and make a pact to put these spoiled brats in their place.

1850 is calling and wants to make America great again.

Bunch of old (mostly) white sociopathic property owners cracking the whip on labor.

Isn't it interesting how quickly people can be to give corporations and business owners the benefit of the doubt over individual people?

I'm not saying Ben is right here, I don't know, it's just interesting how many people jump to the side of the Sixers. Really there isn't nearly enough known about this at all.

It's pretty simple, at least to me (perhaps it isn't to others, which is fair). In the case of professional sports, if labor is free to choose where they go at any whim of their choice, it will pretty much be a league of haves and have nots. People who fans of individual players (and not teams) or the European soccer model may not care about that, but US culture is engrained in terms of being fans of teams, and fans of teams in less desirable markets do care about that. In basketball this is exasperated as the difference between a star and role player in terms of team wins is significant. It's less important in football and baseball (though with a star QB or pitcher, it's still pretty important).

Also, in this case, the labor is insanely financially compensated, so the average person making $50k a year or whatever doesn't give a flying **** about their preferred place of living, especially if their want is to leave a place. Most people would probably live anywhere on the planet short of Kabul to make the money they are making.

Third, in this case, the guy is refusing to honor a contract he signed. One that pays him handsomely. And now he's trying to still get paid but not choosing to honor his contract. That doesn't sit well with a lot of people, especially considering the financial compensation he's getting.

[shangrila]

Because you don’t understand analogies?

No, no, I get what you were trying to do.

I just laughed at how you tried to do it.

You laughed because you don’t seem to understand analogies. There’s no shame in that though.

Your condescension is appreciated

[shangrila]

Because you don’t understand analogies?

No, no, I get what you were trying to do.

I just laughed at how you tried to do it.

His analogy seemed fine to me.

And he’s right. People on the internet DON’T understand analogies. If you can’t come up with an example that’s exactly the same they call it a bad analogy. Proving they don’t know what an analogy is.

I can't believe I'm debating this, but fine.

An analogy is a comparison of two things that seem unrelated through a common element. Does his post fit that? Sure. Funnily enough for you two scholars, I really didn't mention anything about analogies (that was the first guy) so...reading next time perhaps maybe yes?

Beyond that, it's an overt example of poisoning the well. By comparing Ben Simmons to a cheating husband, you paint him as the sole antagonist in this scenario and evoke an emotional response against him (since few people will empathise with a cheater). It was also, as I pointed out, oddly specific and a huge leap in seriousness.

That's what I was chuckling at. Unfortunately this guy pulled out the red herring, which I didn't bite (you did, sadly) and now here we are. Fun.

[PennSports]

The 76ers are in **** if Embiid goes down, not sure what they are waiting for, trade Simmons for some assets and try to compete or risk Embiid getting injured and suck again for the next 5 years.

any team is screwed if their star goes down bro. If they even somehow get Dame for Simmons Embiid getting hurt still ruins the season so not real sure what your point is lol. If your top 10 player isnt playing then you are screwed, duh.

[PennSports]

Imagine your employer asking for your mental health records (aka the notes of your sessions with your therapist).

Now imagine your employer is likely to leak those notes to the public: your family, friends, anyone you care for present and in the future.

"Either because he's making it up or because he's difficult". Fanhood doesn't mean reducing ya own humanity mayne.

the sixers are asking for proof of appointments, literally the bare minimum. No idea where you got the idea they wanted to essentially sit in on his sessions and leak them to media.

doctor patient confidentiality still exists

[PennSports]

Why give him away for free? Bring him back, make him play, trade him for fair value. The crappy deals will always be there, they aren't going anywhere. You keep holding out if you are Philly, it's also setting a precedent. Look at Houstons return on Harden. Are they better off, at all?

Houston wanted to rebuild and got what the wanted.
Philly doesn't want to rebuild, that's the difference.

Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

The real question is how does Embiid feel about it? If you play chicken with Ben and don't trade him and he doesn't play again then isn't Embiid going to be pretty upset? I'm sure if Embiid thinks management is more interested in this personal war with Ben Simmons than they are with helping him win a title he's going to look to leave too.

Embiid and Morey are tight. Embiid is on the record that getting picks or prospects in return wouldn't really help them win right now and he is fine letting this play out. We'll see if he changes his mind because Sixerland does revolve around him. If something happens its probably because he wanted it to happen or was becoming unhappy.

[Rastas]

Imagine your employer asking for your mental health records (aka the notes of your sessions with your therapist).

Now imagine your employer is likely to leak those notes to the public: your family, friends, anyone you care for present and in the future.

"Either because he's making it up or because he's difficult". Fanhood doesn't mean reducing ya own humanity mayne.

the sixers are asking for proof of appointments, literally the bare minimum. No idea where you got the idea they wanted to essentially sit in on his sessions and leak them to media.

doctor patient confidentiality still exists

No they want alot more than that.
If this was just about how many sessions it would of been supplied.
And 100% any details that they can spin to discredit Ben will be released.
The Sixers/Morey are playing Jilted Lover's here if you haven't figured it out.

[SaveTheHens]

Morey lacks flexibility tbh, ready to die on this molehill with Simmons rather than moving on. Sucks for the league but hey Philly hope you learn from it, don't let half your team rip on your superstar if you actually want to keep him, give him support when he was still in your good favour not after when the foundation of trust is lost.
And Doc's overrated, dealing with old school players that welcome that strict attitude worked, but todays world is different, Doc's not really all that ready for this NBA.

[bbalnation]

Imagine your employer asking for your mental health records (aka the notes of your sessions with your therapist).

Now imagine your employer is likely to leak those notes to the public: your family, friends, anyone you care for present and in the future.

"Either because he's making it up or because he's difficult". Fanhood doesn't mean reducing ya own humanity mayne.

the sixers are asking for proof of appointments, literally the bare minimum. No idea where you got the idea they wanted to essentially sit in on his sessions and leak them to media.

doctor patient confidentiality still exists

You're making this up. Nobody has specified that the sixers are asking for proof of appointment.

Besides, Ben has been seeing the NBPA therapist since the summer.

With that statement you've shown me you have a very very limited understanding with what you're talking about in the world of medicine, psychology (confidentiality), public relations, etc.

[SaveTheHens]

You (front office/Morey ) won’t let players on long term contracts dictate their own terms. That’s what winning means

These malcontents need to learn their lessons. It’s one thing for Celtics stealing kyrie from Cleveland when he was disgruntled and with 2 years left. For injured IT/first round unprotected pick. That’s trading for for 25 cents on the dollar. But if kyrie had 4 years left. He wouldn’t been able to pull that stunt.

The sixers will either lose in first or second round this season with or without Simmons. With or without role players being offered.

So why do the trades when it doesn’t help the sixers. That’s what we mean by winning.

Where do you draw the line at the # years remaining in the contract for you to say it's OK to demand a trade like the Kyrie situation? Is it 2 years? Maybe it's 3, but 4 is bad? And 1 year is cool too, so then Kawhi was in the right and Spurs fans were just whining. What I see is you're drawing the line in the place to justify Morey's position and calling it "winning."

There is no winner in this pissing contest between 2 egomaniacs. Both sides are losing. I agree Simmons is in the wrong here but the longer this drags out, the worse it gets for the Sixers. It's not about winning at this point but rather about cutting your losses.

“Cutting your losses” means giving into the player and his trade demand with 4 years left on the contract. I cannot stress how wrong that position is. Its about the big picture here. Say Luka as a hypo after signing his max demands a trade, “Cutting your losses” means giving in to the player? There is a huge difference between one year on the contract and 4 years on a just signed max extension.

Just make it a learning experience & move on. Organizations have to get used to the idea that players power is tremendous nowadays, you gotta approach them in multi-faceted ways & not just get lucky that they signed a contract. You need to have and uphold mutual respect, you need to communicate well, support your player when they're down, etc etc. Almost 20 years ago Vince demanded his way out of Toronto and was traded for Mourning who then refused to play for the team. The precedent has already been set but since that time the Raptors didn't just complain & be stubborn but instead found a way to get competent people in. Philly needs to do the same, let the players squabble but the coach, GM need to be peacekeepers, need to help players feel respected & supported. If they gotta address things say it to the player directly & don't go through the media.
Forget the precedence of contracts, contracts are not some magical thing that ensure things stay as they are. Sure they make negotiations easier but it shouldn't surprise people when a superstar that's been thrown under the bus by their own team wants out, these people become great because of their super ego's, if you diss them that openly you better be a master communicator afterwords because that stuff won't just solve itself. Imo Doc was an idiot for kicking Simmons out of practice the first day he came back too, ease people into it don't just place demand on demand when they're already starting to submit.

[Sixerscan]

Where do you draw the line at the # years remaining in the contract for you to say it's OK to demand a trade like the Kyrie situation? Is it 2 years? Maybe it's 3, but 4 is bad? And 1 year is cool too, so then Kawhi was in the right and Spurs fans were just whining. What I see is you're drawing the line in the place to justify Morey's position and calling it "winning."

There is no winner in this pissing contest between 2 egomaniacs. Both sides are losing. I agree Simmons is in the wrong here but the longer this drags out, the worse it gets for the Sixers. It's not about winning at this point but rather about cutting your losses.

“Cutting your losses” means giving into the player and his trade demand with 4 years left on the contract. I cannot stress how wrong that position is. Its about the big picture here. Say Luka as a hypo after signing his max demands a trade, “Cutting your losses” means giving in to the player? There is a huge difference between one year on the contract and 4 years on a just signed max extension.

Just make it a learning experience & move on. Organizations have to get used to the idea that players power is tremendous nowadays, you gotta approach them in multi-faceted ways & not just get lucky that they signed a contract. You need to have and uphold mutual respect, you need to communicate well, support your player when they're down, etc etc. Almost 20 years ago Vince demanded his way out of Toronto and was traded for Mourning who then refused to play for the team. The precedent has already been set but since that time the Raptors didn't just complain & be stubborn but instead found a way to get competent people in. Philly needs to do the same, let the players squabble but the coach, GM need to be peacekeepers, need to help players feel respected & supported. If they gotta address things say it to the player directly & don't go through the media.
Forget the precedence of contracts, contracts are not some magical thing that ensure things stay as they are. Sure they make negotiations easier but it shouldn't surprise people when a superstar that's been thrown under the bus by their own team wants out, these people become great because of their super ego's, if you diss them that openly you better be a master communicator afterwords because that stuff won't just solve itself. Imo Doc was an idiot for kicking Simmons out of practice the first day he came back too, ease people into it don't just place demand on demand when they're already starting to submit.

The difference is that Raptors team was bad and the Sixers were the top seed in the East with him and are currently in first without him.

Also that Raptors team went like 12 years after trading Carter before they won a playoff round again I'm not sure how that's a model a team would want to follow.

People are just taking it as a given that there's some sort of built in advantage to just getting rid of him and I'm not seeing how that is the case. Morey is gonna wait for the right trade that improves the team (it's harder to improve a good team instead of a bad team), the team will play pretty well in the meantime, Ben can join them if he wants and if he wants to play dumb games he's not getting paid. (And obviously if they're not going to pay him they have to give a reason and it will be leaked to Woj because that's how things work.) Not seeing the problem here.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

He may not be a weak part in a vacuum but we're not talking about something that happens in a vacuum. We are talking about a dispute between a billion-dollar organization and one of its millionaire athletes. Let's not pretend that the parties in an equal position here. They aren't. The Sixers are absolutely in a much stronger position than Simmons and they have already taken advantage of that position in the past (see the Markelle Fultz situation). Simmons may not be a weak part per se but he's definitely the weaker part in this dispute.

There's no weak part here, using this kind of arguments for a guy on a 170m contract drives me nuts.
What I am saying is that we should support people whose life can be ruined and that can't defend themselves.
People who can't talk about their problems, that would lose everything without their job.
People who than can be forced by the stronger part to give up their right and that are not in position to negotiate a fair treatment.
The Simmons-76ers relationship is nothing like that, Simmons has all the means necessary to defend his rights in an arbitration, if he decides so.

Actually, recently we've seen more star players bully the teams (Leonard, Harden, Davis) who were actually the weaker part not in position to really defend their rights.

The underlined part is incorrect, though. Your timeline is wrong. According to the reports, Simmons has sought mental health help from the NBPA ever since this summer. This preceded a lot of the incidents that you mentioned (such as the practice incident and most, if not all, of the fines). So, no, Simmons didn't claim mental health issues after he stopped seeing the money. He has claimed those issues for a long time now (some Sixers fans are claiming that these issues started before even the Hawks series) but we just didn't know about it until recently.

If this was the truth, he would have flagged it earlier as the reason why he couldn't come back. The moment it comes after demanding a trade, the holdout, the halfassed return after the fine, the suspension and the fake back pain this story holds little credibility.
To be clear, I believe he might have been seeking help during the summer, what I don't believe is that's something that doesn't allow him to play.