Ben Simmons Thread #2 (“Don’t make me contact Howard” Edition)

[Howard Cosell]

You guys are looking at these rumors too simplemindedly. I bet we're attached to the Simmons/Harris thing not because we would take both, but because we would take one as part of say a trade for Harden ($44 million) or Lillard ($39 million). Philadelphia likely wants to unload both players in a deal like this, increasing the odds a third team would be involved.

That’s quite possible but it’s not how the report read. It was called a “Simmons & Harris package deal”.

[Klomp]

You guys are looking at these rumors too simplemindedly. I bet we're attached to the Simmons/Harris thing not because we would take both, but because we would take one as part of say a trade for Harden ($44 million) or Lillard ($39 million). Philadelphia likely wants to unload both players in a deal like this, increasing the odds a third team would be involved.

That’s quite possible but it’s not how the report read. It was called a “Simmons & Harris package deal”.

Ever played the game Telephone? Shams heard from someone who heard from someone....it's probably not the full picture of the trade talks.

[younggunsmn]

Interesting. If the Nets are now open to talking about Harden, something has changed between them and Harden, who can be a free agent this summer.
The sole reason Philly would want to package Harris and Simmons would be to have cap space for Harden or Beal in the summer.
This means moving Russell to a 3rd team for an expiring (he'd have to be involved in any deal with that much salary coming in).
Where is the fit there? Boston for Horford?

We would give up Russell, which we dont want to do, and take on Harris's albatross, which is a yuck. I don't know if I'd do that straight up let alone attach draft picks.

The bad part is Harris' contract is basically untradeable, unless you are sending bad salary for bad salary.
Is there a team willing to take that?
The Kings for hield (3/63) + Bagley or Thompson (expring)?
Thunder for capspace at the cost of how many picks?

The one thing that could change for us is if the Wiz suddenly make Beal available, and Simmons doesnt want to go there.
Then a 3 way with us sending picks to the wizards suddenly becomes viable.

[winforlose]

Interesting. If the Nets are now open to talking about Harden, something has changed between them and Harden, who can be a free agent this summer.
The sole reason Philly would want to package Harris and Simmons would be to have cap space for Harden or Beal in the summer.
This means moving Russell to a 3rd team for an expiring (he'd have to be involved in any deal with that much salary coming in).
Where is the fit there? Boston for Horford?

We would give up Russell, which we dont want to do, and take on Harris's albatross, which is a yuck. I don't know if I'd do that straight up let alone attach draft picks.

The bad part is Harris' contract is basically untradeable, unless you are sending bad salary for bad salary.
Is there a team willing to take that?
The Kings for hield (3/63) + Bagley or Thompson (expring)?
Thunder for capspace at the cost of how many picks?

The one thing that could change for us is if the Wiz suddenly make Beal available, and Simmons doesnt want to go there.
Then a 3 way with us sending picks to the wizards suddenly becomes viable.

I read Harden wants to go to state with no income tax. Pennsylvania has the 5th highest taxes in the nation. Maybe he changes his mind for a chance to get a ring, otherwise I could see him headed to Florida or Texas.

[younggunsmn]

Also the possibility of picking off a player who doesnt necessarily fit in Philly in a 3 teamer. LIke John Collins from ATL for example.

[TheProdigy]

Interesting. If the Nets are now open to talking about Harden, something has changed between them and Harden, who can be a free agent this summer.
The sole reason Philly would want to package Harris and Simmons would be to have cap space for Harden or Beal in the summer.
This means moving Russell to a 3rd team for an expiring (he'd have to be involved in any deal with that much salary coming in).
Where is the fit there? Boston for Horford?

We would give up Russell, which we dont want to do, and take on Harris's albatross, which is a yuck. I don't know if I'd do that straight up let alone attach draft picks.

The bad part is Harris' contract is basically untradeable, unless you are sending bad salary for bad salary.
Is there a team willing to take that?
The Kings for hield (3/63) + Bagley or Thompson (expring)?
Thunder for capspace at the cost of how many picks?

The one thing that could change for us is if the Wiz suddenly make Beal available, and Simmons doesnt want to go there.
Then a 3 way with us sending picks to the wizards suddenly becomes viable.

The thing I find interesting about this rumor is that it may reveal Gupta's strategic valuation, and we really have no historical precedence for Gupta at this point. Here are some basic assumptions 1. KAT and Edwards are off limits, 2. We aren't willing to trade major draft capital if Simmons and Harris are coming back. This tells me that Gupta rightfully view Harris as a negative asset . So what would our outgoing offer be? I'm thinking something around Vando, DLo, Prince, and Beasley. That is the starting point - add limited draft capital (i.e. highly protected 1sts and/or 2nds) or other players as necessary.

KAT/Naz
Simmons/McDaniels
Harris/Okogie
Edwards/Bolmaro
Beverley/McLaughlin

[Howard Cosell]

Screw it…I would approve of the following deal for Twolves:

Russell
Beverley
Prince
Beasley
1 FRP

For

Simmons
Harris
Milton


Ben Simmons / Jordan McLaughlin/ Leandro Bolmaro

Anthony Edwards / Jaylen Nowell / Shake Milton

Tobias Harris / Josh Okogie / Jake Layman

Jarred Vanderbilt / Jaden McDaniels

Karl-Anthony Towns / Naz Reid

Gives Minnesota 3 year championship window right off the bat. Gives 76ers some flexibility next summer to go after Harden without giving up some of their vital pieces in a trade before the deadline. It also give them a better shot at the title this season.

With next years continued growth of Edwards, McDaniels and Vando…along with Nowell….pull the trigger Twolves if 76ers can’t find another trade for Simmons. I would be willing to throw in 1 FRP.

Let’s get it done.

This Twolves roster would cause trouble for all of Western Conference teams if Simmons gets his head back on straight.

[Klomp]

I definitely don't want to poo-poo the idea of Tobias Harris. One thing I value is versatility/switchability, and Harris has that ability to go between both forward positions. I would be comfortable being the third wheel in a Simmons trade even if we ended up with Harris instead of Simmons in the process.

[shrink]

Simmons fans give him extra trade value because of his long contract. They may be right, but I think it also makes him the riskiest contract in the league.

The NBA (and the world in general) has legal contracts so both sides can guarantee future participation from both sides of an agreement. We have contract law to enforce these deals, because these promises are critical for people and organizations to make future plans.

In the NBA, it is highly unusual for a player, even an unhappy one, to not live up to his contract. For the small subset who’s word isn’t enough, and contract law doesn’t scare them, there is always the money to force them to comply. Simmons is the first player who is committed/stubborn enough that he is willing to sacrifice all that money. So far, he has lost over $19 million dollars.

When a player has shown this type of commitment, and even money doesn’t matter, there is no way for a team to get him to play if he’s not happy. If he gets traded, and does the same stunt on the next team, NO owner will let their GM trade for him, and he becomes a $35 mil hole in your production for three more years. A team trading for Simmons will continually have to bend over backwards to make sure he is never unhappy, because he’s shown he’s the one guy who’s willing and able to launch the nuclear option.

[Klomp]

Simmons fans give him extra trade value because of his long contract. They may be right, but I think it also makes him the riskiest contract in the league.

The NBA (and the world in general) has legal contracts so both sides can guarantee future participation from both sides of an agreement. We have contract law to enforce these deals, because these promises are critical for people and organizations to make future plans.

In the NBA, it is highly unusual for a player, even an unhappy one, to not live up to his contract. For the small subset who’s word isn’t enough, and contract law doesn’t scare them, there is always the money to force them to comply. Simmons is the first player who is committed/stubborn enough that he is willing to sacrifice all that money. So far, he has lost over $19 million dollars.

When a player has shown this type of commitment, and even money doesn’t matter, there is no way for a team to get him to play if he’s not happy. If he gets traded, and does the same stunt on the next team, NO owner will let their GM trade for him, and he becomes a $35 mil hole in your production for three more years. A team trading for Simmons will continually have to bend over backwards to make sure he is never unhappy, because he’s shown he’s the one guy who’s willing and able to launch the nuclear option.

Why is it bad to do what it takes to keep your employee happy?

[shrink]

Simmons fans give him extra trade value because of his long contract. They may be right, but I think it also makes him the riskiest contract in the league.

The NBA (and the world in general) has legal contracts so both sides can guarantee future participation from both sides of an agreement. We have contract law to enforce these deals, because these promises are critical for people and organizations to make future plans.

In the NBA, it is highly unusual for a player, even an unhappy one, to not live up to his contract. For the small subset who’s word isn’t enough, and contract law doesn’t scare them, there is always the money to force them to comply. Simmons is the first player who is committed/stubborn enough that he is willing to sacrifice all that money. So far, he has lost over $19 million dollars.

When a player has shown this type of commitment, and even money doesn’t matter, there is no way for a team to get him to play if he’s not happy. If he gets traded, and does the same stunt on the next team, NO owner will let their GM trade for him, and he becomes a $35 mil hole in your production for three more years. A team trading for Simmons will continually have to bend over backwards to make sure he is never unhappy, because he’s shown he’s the one guy who’s willing and able to launch the nuclear option.

Why is it bad to do what it takes to keep your employee happy?

We have 17 employees, and hundreds of others in the organization, and thousands of stakeholders. You need them all to be pulling in the same direction. Simmons clearly has shown he’s willing to screw over his teammates and his organization when he’s not getting things the way he wants them.

[shrink]

Let me go a step farther. It’s probably impossible to always do moves that keep any player happy, and you need some team loyalty for those moments.

Take Karl-Anthony Towns. For a non-free agent destination, we desperately have needed Towns to be happy and loyal. Yet, things have come up

1. Towns didn’t talk to the media during the Jimmy Butler fiasco.
2. Towns would have preferred we keep Ryan Saunders, because of his loyalty to the Saunders family.
3. Towns sounded annoyed he wasn’t contacted before Rosas was replaced.
4. Towns has had to suffer for many years with inferior teammates and lots of losses

Now this is life, and it happens even when we need to keep our star player happy. Looking at this list, I think Towns may have suffered through more than Simmons. Imagine how we would feel if Towns at some point had just flat out abandoned his team and teammates?

In Simmons, you are getting a guy who actually does that.

[Klomp]

Sorry Klomp didn’t mean to offend. Let’s go down your road for a minute. Your bench is JMAC, Nowell, JO, V8, Knight. Without Prince to balance the shooting now you have the death pair of JO and V8. If Knight cannot shoot 3s and JMAC remains inconsistent then Nowell is your only deep threat. Nowell is streaky and is shooting 35.2% on the season. Meanwhile the paint is packed, we are terribly outsized, and our bench scoring (one of our biggest strengths recently) becomes a serious problem. Also worth noting that V8 is one hell of a utility player. He creates possessions even when isn’t credited with the rebound or forcing the turnover (he stands people up, hurry’s them up, ect…) Now Prince has to replace Bevs production and Simmons must make up V8’s. V8 is averaging 7 points and 9 rebounds on the season. I think to be fair let’s bump that up to 10 points as Finch has reworked the offense and V8 is consistently scoring around there in the new space scheme. Even if Simmons gets you 20 points and 10 rebounds while maintaining the same level of defense, is it really worth a major bench downgrade and loss of locker room leadership to get 10 points and 1 rebound?

I want to go back down this road about depth for a second.

I agree, it is unfortunate that our bigger salaries for trade purposes are also our better-shooting role players.


Let's go back to the original 3-team proposal you are arguing against. However, let's tweak things a little by subbing in Prince for Beasley. I don't think values are that far off.

Prince + Beverley + Reid + McDaniels for Simmons and Gill (a filler)

Now, add in the Boston rumor, trading Beasley for Richardson and Nesmith.

Russell / McLaughlin / Wright
Edwards / Nowell / Bolmaro
Richardson / Nesmith / Layman
Simmons / Vanderbilt / Okogie / Gill
Towns / Knight

Yeah the depth is a little weaker now than when you started (especially in the post), but I feel like your starters are much more complete. The shooting is boosted more after the Boston trade as well (let's not act like Beasley is Mr. Reliable). You don't need a great backup to Towns. Heck, you could probably trade Okogie for one (WCS?). Honestly, there are plenty of matchups where Simmons could even get center minutes.

[winforlose]

Sorry Klomp didn’t mean to offend. Let’s go down your road for a minute. Your bench is JMAC, Nowell, JO, V8, Knight. Without Prince to balance the shooting now you have the death pair of JO and V8. If Knight cannot shoot 3s and JMAC remains inconsistent then Nowell is your only deep threat. Nowell is streaky and is shooting 35.2% on the season. Meanwhile the paint is packed, we are terribly outsized, and our bench scoring (one of our biggest strengths recently) becomes a serious problem. Also worth noting that V8 is one hell of a utility player. He creates possessions even when isn’t credited with the rebound or forcing the turnover (he stands people up, hurry’s them up, ect…) Now Prince has to replace Bevs production and Simmons must make up V8’s. V8 is averaging 7 points and 9 rebounds on the season. I think to be fair let’s bump that up to 10 points as Finch has reworked the offense and V8 is consistently scoring around there in the new space scheme. Even if Simmons gets you 20 points and 10 rebounds while maintaining the same level of defense, is it really worth a major bench downgrade and loss of locker room leadership to get 10 points and 1 rebound?

I want to go back down this road about depth for a second.

I agree, it is unfortunate that our bigger salaries for trade purposes are also our better-shooting role players.


Let's go back to the original 3-team proposal you are arguing against. However, let's tweak things a little by subbing in Prince for Beasley. I don't think values are that far off.

Prince + Beverley + Reid + McDaniels for Simmons and Gill (a filler)

Now, add in the Boston rumor, trading Beasley for Richardson and Nesmith.

Russell / McLaughlin / Wright
Edwards / Nowell / Bolmaro
Richardson / Nesmith / Layman
Simmons / Vanderbilt / Okogie / Gill
Towns / Knight

Yeah the depth is a little weaker now than when you started (especially in the post), but I feel like your starters are much more complete. The shooting is boosted more after the Boston trade as well (let's not act like Beasley is Mr. Reliable). You don't need a great backup to Towns. Heck, you could probably trade Okogie for one (WCS?). Honestly, there are plenty of matchups where Simmons could even get center minutes.

1. V8 provides great production as a starting PF. We agree he would need to go to the bench to make this work. V8 is listed at 26 minutes per game, and that number should be closer to 27-28 with increased load since taking over as a starter. If Simmons plays 30 minutes (kinda low,) that means V8 plays 18. That is in my view a negative. That also assumes no drop in production playing fewer minutes from the bench.

2. Four players for one is always a huge risk. Now your moving Beasley as well. Our bench scoring is going to take a major hit. JMAC is still inconsistent and Nowell is the only 3 point shooter. Nesmith is 6’5 and therefore undersized. He is also a prospect rather than a sure thing. So Vando is the only player with average to above average height and he is thin for the position as well.

3. Is Richardson an improvement over Beverly? If not then we downgraded one position to marginally upgrade another. Worse still, we are soo top heavy it isn’t funny. One injury and now instead of being a little underpowered you are massively underpowered.

4. I still think for money and talent you could just about anyone. You could get James Harden for that price, or Beal, or just about anyone. If we are going to massively overpay for someone make them a shooter who can play with V8.

[Klomp]

4. I still think for money and talent you could just about anyone. You could get James Harden for that price, or Beal, or just about anyone. If we are going to massively overpay for someone make them a shooter who can play with V8.

Vanderbilt is having a great season and has a lot of talent, but I think it's a mistake for a franchise to make a roster decision based on if they can play with Jarred Vanderbilt. He is literally the only player in the regular rotation who would be a poor fit with Simmons.

[winforlose]

4. I still think for money and talent you could just about anyone. You could get James Harden for that price, or Beal, or just about anyone. If we are going to massively overpay for someone make them a shooter who can play with V8.

Vanderbilt is having a great season and has a lot of talent, but I think it's a mistake for a franchise to make a roster decision based on if they can play with Jarred Vanderbilt. He is literally the only player in the regular rotation who would be a poor fit with Simmons.

Let me ask it this way. How much of an improvement is Simmons over V8. Aside from paying 7 times more and giving up all your young talent, bench depth, and trade chips to make this happen, what is it about Simmons that makes him THE guy. He has a poor track record in the playoffs, mental health issues, ect… I don’t see an X factor that makes him worth 10 to 20 wins simply by plugging him in. V8 is the better rebounder, better locker room presence, better contract, there defense is similar, ect… All Simmons adds is ball handling and that comes at the cost of free throw shooting. Long story short, it just isn’t much of an upgrade with a huge transaction cost and a huge salary cap hit.

[Neeva]

4. I still think for money and talent you could just about anyone. You could get James Harden for that price, or Beal, or just about anyone. If we are going to massively overpay for someone make them a shooter who can play with V8.

Vanderbilt is having a great season and has a lot of talent, but I think it's a mistake for a franchise to make a roster decision based on if they can play with Jarred Vanderbilt. He is literally the only player in the regular rotation who would be a poor fit with Simmons.

Let me ask it this way. How much of an improvement is Simmons over V8. Aside from paying 7 times more and giving up all your young talent, bench depth, and trade chips to make this happen, what is it about Simmons that makes him THE guy. He has a poor track record in the playoffs, mental health issues, ect… I don’t see an X factor that makes him worth 10 to 20 wins simply by plugging him in. V8 is the better rebounder, better locker room presence, better contract, there defense is similar, ect… All Simmons adds is ball handling and that comes at the cost of free throw shooting. Long story short, it just isn’t much of an upgrade with a huge transaction cost and a huge salary cap hit.

Simmons is more hype than anything.

[Klomp]

The situation is what it is. People will draw their own conclusions. Honestly, I see some similarities between this and the Jimmy Butler situation, especially when it comes to public perception. There isn't much changing minds going on. Both viewpoints are pretty entrenched. Jimmy took his ball and went home too. Thibs was going to Morey it until Taylor had Layden step in. Before it got to that point, Butler made plenty of scenes, both behind closed doors and publicly. Simmons has done the same, though Morey isn't budging. Does that make Butler a better man only because he did enough damage to force his way out sooner?

I don't like how dealing with mental health is now viewed here as a detriment to a player. Are we that jaded as a sports society that all players must perform as robots and anyone who cracks under pressure is weak? Why is Butler's charade viewed positively in retrospect while Simmons doesn't get that same benefit?

[shrink]

4. I still think for money and talent you could just about anyone. You could get James Harden for that price, or Beal, or just about anyone. If we are going to massively overpay for someone make them a shooter who can play with V8.

Vanderbilt is having a great season and has a lot of talent, but I think it's a mistake for a franchise to make a roster decision based on if they can play with Jarred Vanderbilt. He is literally the only player in the regular rotation who would be a poor fit with Simmons.

I would add DLo too, since Russell has a better chance with the ball in his hands to come close to be worth a max deal, just like Simmons. You might even add that KAT and Edwards are a little more limited since the lane may be more crowded since Simmons can’t shoot and spread the floor. This isn’t a big deal if Simmons is replacing Vando (who also can’t shoot), instead of pushing Beverley to the bench. Finally, I think he may reduce the growth of Jaden McDaniels, but you guys know the X’s and O’s better than me.

[shrink]

Jimmy took his ball and went home too.

No, we can all hate him for his off court behavior, but Jimmy played 10 of 13 games. In those games, he played hard, and he played well.

That ain’t anything close to the same as Simmons.

And I don’t think anyone views Jimmy’s behavior “positively.” But as upset as he was, as uncomfortable as the situation was for everybody, he honored his contract, showed up and played most game until Thibs found a trade.