He's not even all that hard to build around. You just need a big who can actually shoot the 3 with volume. Those are hard to find. If you find that, the rest is the same as any other team.
Ben Simmons wants out of Philadelphia
- Thread starter JCizzle
- Start date
- Status
.
What is WAS giving up if they are keeping Beal?
PHI isn't trading Simmons for Draymond
What is WAS giving up if they are keeping Beal?
I'll apologize for being inconsistent with the terminology, but if Simmons is not going to be the PG, he is naturally going to shift to a more off-ball role. I think it's reasonable to ask if he is going to do that, what can he bring to the table as off-ball player. Simmons' best skills offensively come out when he is the PG dictating the pace of the game; I think if you are insisting on him not being a PG anymore, you are limiting him even further offensively.
Did you read the quoted post? It's not counting for reality, it's just based on best fit for Simmons game.
No one is insisting on that? We all agree he will be the primary ball-handler. That doesn't mean he'll be the PG or that if he isn't, he'll be that in more of an off ball role.
It really sounds more like a terminology hang up because no one is suggesting to shift him to more of an off-ball role. That would be foolish for all the reasons you stated.
The times he does play off ball, it will probably look considerably different than it did in Philly, though. Whether it makes him more effective or not remains to be seen.
I think it's that I said that if people called him a PF nobody would care so much than he can't shoot 3s. The point was, not every player on the court needs to stretch, and a traditional PG doesn't really do the same thing for many teams as they did, they might bring it up, but in half court many teams spend most of the time with the ball in the hands of their best creator regardless of position.
Simmons wherever he goes, will be the offense initiator, but the thing is because of his size and ability, instead of what PHI does putting him with 3 wings and a C, you could put him with a small guard, 3 wings, or a 2 guards a wing and a stretch 5, you aren't limited to playing him at PG just because he is so good with the ball.
I mean a guy who would be great on a Simmons team would be...... Payton Pritchard. Simmons can do most of the initiating while Pritchard spreads the floor. Pritchard is the "PG" in that lineup, but Simmons is the one making decisions with the ball in his hands.
You guys are way smarter at fits then me. But We do we assume that whatever they get for Ben, Philly has to keep. If they can then turn and trade "a boat load of picks" for a shooter. Or "Sabonis/Turner" to whoever for whatever DOES fit.
Makes it more complicated but Morey gets paid alot to come up with these solutions.
Makes it more complicated but Morey gets paid alot to come up with these solutions.
Tatum, Brown, Simmons, Horford, Pritchard would be tremendous
Thoughts on starting PP with his +++ catch/shoot 3s (w/Smart, TL, Tatum, Brown)
https://www.celticsblog.com/2021/9/28/22698176/boston-celtics-lineups-in-defense-of-going-small-marcus-smart-jaylen-brown-jayson-tatum-al-horford
Last edited:
I think PHI would love to do that, but the problem is there really isn't another star to flip, so instead you'd get assets in the HOPE of flipping them.... problem becomes, what if you can't find a disgruntled star looking to move? What if the only one there is doesn't want to play with Embiid.
One reason Morey is slow playing this is that his options kinda suck right now. If he could flip Ben somewhere for assets then flip those assets to POR for Lillard he would, problem is POR won't, Beal.... doubt WAS does that, but even if they do... what if he walks? LaVine? Same problem CHI has, you literally are not allowed to offer him an extension he'd accept so you need to hope to re-sign him. So yeah, he could eventually cave and go for the "Step back for a future step forward" move, but there is a lot of risk, just ask Danny Ainge and his pile of assets.
I mean Ben isn't wrong, when you have 2 guys who both need the same space in the paint available if you want them to perform at their best, it isn't going to work. You can build around 2 guys who want to shoot 3s, plenty of space for both to operate, 2 guys whose best offense happens inside 10 feet, there just isn't enough room to operate in todays NBA.
It makes zero sense to sign a player to a max contract unless you think he can be one of the best 2-3 guys on a contending team. Otherwise, you’re better off looking for bargains and/or signing players to short commitments, so you can continue to look for those foundation pieces.
The Sixers have been good in the regular season, so I could understand thinking Simmons can be one of those 2-3 foundation guys. But he can’t stretch the floor, and you have to run your offense through him. After last year’s debacle in the playoffs, I’m not sure any GMs would sign up for that. I struggle to think of a team where Simmons would fit as a foundation piece.
Now, Morey might have his own reasons for accepting a negative return for Simmons (keeps the salary slot, opens future trade possibilities), but that’s different from saying someone would jump at the opportunity to pay Simmons 4/140 in a vacuum. That is, at a minimum, an open question.
Ben Simmons would be the 3rd best player on every team in the league that isn't the Brooklyn Nets, and any team but Brooklyn would jump at the chance to add him. He'd be a foundation piece just about everywhere because he's gonna give you 15-20 with 8 reb, 8 ast and elite defense in the regular season, and he doesn't need shots so you can load up on guys who can shoot. If you try to build your team by not taking any players who aren't top 10 in the league superstars, you're just gonna be out of the league in 3 years. Ben Simmons makes less money than Tobias HArris, guys way worse than him get the max all the time. It's absolutely insane to not take a top 25 player in the league for free because you worry that he might only make you a top seed but not carry you to a title.
Last edited:
There are 50ish max contracts in the league at any year. https://www.basketball-reference.com/contracts/players.html
Look at that list and tell me with a straight face Simmons isn't a max player.
That's the thing. And some of those teams really don't need him to shoot or even carry a big scoring load. He immediately improves a lot of teams through his ballhandling, passing, and defense.
There are a lot of "max guys" that are worse than Ben Simmons, and I'm pretty bearish on him.
Seems like part of the problem with thinking of Simmons fitting on any team right now is that in addition to being unable to shoot outside, he can’t hit FTs and is now even scared of shooting layups. I mean, how exactly is he supposed to score?
Or are we just hand waving his run of playoff games where he took fewer shots than I have fingers in my hands in the 4th quarters combined?
This seems like more than a “bad fit with Embid.” It seems more like Simmons is just a broken player.
Or are we just hand waving his run of playoff games where he took fewer shots than I have fingers in my hands in the 4th quarters combined?
This seems like more than a “bad fit with Embid.” It seems more like Simmons is just a broken player.
Last edited:
Teams don't exactly have their pick of 2nd bananas to build their team around either. These types of players don't become available that often. And a lot of locations aren't very desirable. It's not like players are pining to play in Minnesota. If Simmons was willing to take a max offer from them, they are offering it.
If the C's could acquire Simmons today without offering Jaylen or Tatum, they should be doing so. Maybe Simmons wouldn't be the best fit with the current roster (TL, JRich, Smart, Schroder) but some of that might not be an issue and most of it can be rectified pretty easily the following off season or some other trades post Simmons. Building around Tatum, Brown and Simmons is ridiculously easy and I believe would be a serious title contender for quite awhile. That is a core.
If the bolded were true, there would be a robust trade market for him. There does not seem to be one.
Agreed on both, although I'd say that there are some teams where he creates as many problems as he solves (including his current team).
So yeah, he's a net positive on most teams and probably better than half of the max guys. Didn’t do the math on the latter, but it sounds right.
I don't get how people can look at the list of max players and come to any other conclusion. Most 2nd bananas are flawed basketball players. Even Giannis is a flawed basketball player. You are almost always still better with them than without them. At least the ones that aren't past their prime/injured. There would be a huge drop off filling 35 minutes internally with the current 76ers roster if Simmons were to sit out the season. There aren't really any solutions to that problem either, besides trading Ben Simmons.
Some of this board doesn't think the Tatum/Brown duo is enough to get it done without a 3rd star at least as good as Jaylen and/or that Jaylen isn't good enough as the 2nd guy unless Tatum becomes a top 5ish player.
Unless you are lucky enough to have two top 10 players, your 2nd star is going to have some warts. Maybe even your 1st. Tatum hasn't been spare criticism on this board. This is especially true the further you get away from the top 20.
Not everyone can have Lebron James and Anthony Davis. Most teams would be pretty lucky to have Ben Simmons as their 2nd best player, never mind 3rd best.
For free? Any team would. However, he isn't free.
We have no idea what the market is. If Morey said... we'll take a 1st and matching contracts (players don't matter) he'd have roughly 25 offers before the hour was over.
There is no way to know what the market is like until there is a deal or concrete leaks. What teams are willing to get anywhere near Morey's valuation (and who can get there with the pieces they have) is very different from what teams would take Simmons if he were a FA.
Like LAL for example... they'd jump at the chance to swap Westbrook for Simmons... but that's not something PHI would do and they have no assets. LAC would love to have him, they have nothing to trade. I mean the GS owner just got fined for basically saying "we'd love him, but it's tough to find a deal that works".
I bet Brad as much as he loves him, would drive Marcus and Josh Richardson to Philly the first day they are trade eligible if that's all it took.
Trades are complicated and difficult, but don't mistake a trade not happening for teams not wanting the player if they could get him for a good price. The question was... if teams could get him for 4/140 tomorrow, without giving up any assets would they. Anyone who answers anything but a resounding "yes very nearly every team in the league would" is not paying enough attention to how the NBA works (or how good Simmons has been), even if you're just gonna rehab his rep and trade him you'd do that.
Simmons has 4/140 left on his deal. A lot of the guys on this list earn materially less than that.
With the exception of Siakam, I’d argue that every guy on that list who is slated to earn more than $30M next season either (a) is better than Simmons (most of them), (b) is on a bad contract, (c) has more upside than Simmons, or (d) is an overpaid complementary player who fits well on his team (such as Khris Middleton and Jrue Holiday).
I presume that the Sons of Andrew Toney aren't lurking this thread, since the Cs aren't anywhere involved in the speculation that's out there. But I do wonder about what Sixers fans think of an appropriate Simmons return right now. They must be pretty split.
He just turned 25. He's 13th all-time in triple-doubles and will be the best defensive player in the NBA over the next 5 seasons.
Even with his terrible playoffs this year (12ppg/8rpg/8.8apg) where he couldn't hit a FT, the Celtics would hand over a lot for him.
People are defining his career on one play and now saying he's scared to take layups
Phila did have the best record in the EC last season, with Ben as their 2nd best player.
I get the Philly hate, watching their soap opera over the last decade has been great fodder. I have gladly crapped all over their boneheaded moves. But Ben Simmons with the JAYs would be title contenders.
Even with his terrible playoffs this year (12ppg/8rpg/8.8apg) where he couldn't hit a FT, the Celtics would hand over a lot for him.
People are defining his career on one play and now saying he's scared to take layups
Phila did have the best record in the EC last season, with Ben as their 2nd best player.
I get the Philly hate, watching their soap opera over the last decade has been great fodder. I have gladly crapped all over their boneheaded moves. But Ben Simmons with the JAYs would be title contenders.
ok? What do you expect anyone to say to that? And what exactly is your point? That there are some max players better than Simmons and some max players worse?
Seriously, you listed 4 options and 3 of those options you admit are worse players than Ben Simmons at this moment. Yet you are going to argue that Ben Simmons isn't worth his contract because other players on the max are B, C and D? Did Ben Simmons run over your dog?
edit: I want to hear your argument for Wiggins over Simmons. Oh, bad contract. See? You left yourself an out for every single player that is worse than Ben Simmons who is on a max.
Last edited:
Nobody is going to pay Ben Simmons 4/140 because Andrew Wiggins is making similar money, or John Wall is making even more. It’s not relevant. Similarly, it’s not relevant that franchise guys are getting paid as much or more, or that guys like Jamal Murray are getting paid for upside. Nor is it relevant that great complementary players are earning that kind of money, unless you think Simmons is such a player. (In that case, we can agree to disagree, as I think you need to run your offense through Simmons.)
Siakam is a decent parallel, and that’s not an awful deal like the Wiggins and Wall contracts. But I think the Raptors would be hard-pressed to unload that contract right now without taking back negative assets.
For those that think Simmons would be a bad fit on the C’s, it would be like replacing TL’s 24 minutes with Simmons’ 35. It’s a significantly better player at both ends of the court while playing a similar role and for more minutes a game, and more games per year. He would absolutely make the C’s legit contenders.He just turned 25. He's 13th all-time in triple-doubles and will be the best defensive player in the NBA over the next 5 seasons.
Even with his terrible playoffs this year (12ppg/8rpg/8.8apg) where he couldn't hit a FT, the Celtics would hand over a lot for him.
People are defining his career on one play and now saying he's scared to take layups
Phila did have the best record in the EC last season, with Ben as their 2nd best player.
I get the Philly hate, watching their soap opera over the last decade has been great fodder. I have gladly crapped all over their boneheaded moves. But Ben Simmons with the JAYs would be title contenders.
Here's the thing to me... Simmons is both a much better player than, and a lot younger and healthier than Gordon Hayward. Gordon Hayward got 4/120 when he hit the market, Ben Simmons is better than Brandon Ingram... Ingram got the max, Simmons is 7 years younger than and a much better player than DeRozan, DeRozan got 28.3M a year, Tobias Harris had the first good year of his career, he was older and not as good as Simmons... he got 5/180, Middleton, same thing.
YOU may not want to pay Simmons 4/140, but we have ample evidence of what the NBA thinks is a player worth that kind of money, and if Ben Simmons was a UFA in the upcoming free agent period, the only reason he wouldn't get 4/140 would because someone (likely everyone with the room) would come in with a 5 year max.
https://www.theringer.com/nba/2021/9/28/22698824/ben-simmons-trade-philadelphia-76ers
I think this from Kevin O'Connor is good.
It goes over some of what Klutch is thinking (basically that Simmons should be playing more small 5, and without a traditional interior big, that he wants to be in a place that uses him more like Giannis, initiating the offense, but also in SnR with a shooting PG. Someplace that will push pace, which fits his best qualities). KOC notes that while this might work, Simmons is not the freakish rim finisher Giannis is.
Other notes... PHI has received serious draft pick based offers, but isn't interested. Most players can't be traded until 12/15 so a lot of teams are waiting it out knowing PHI wants players.
Morey really thinks Simmons will return, and is willing to wait.
Beal and Lillard aren't available, but PHI might be willing to wait into the season to see if they shake loose.
Also, Doc talked up staggering minutes with Embiid more, and playing him at 5 with 4 shooters like he wants and borrowing from MIL offense around GIannis, but Simmons was unconvinced (probably partially because they didn't do it last year, and it still leaves the late game problem of him standing around watching Embiid post with nothing to do).
Good outline. PHI is an awkward fit, he wants a better one, most offers have been pick based, PHI would rather wait and hope he caves or a STAR becomes available.
I think this from Kevin O'Connor is good.
It goes over some of what Klutch is thinking (basically that Simmons should be playing more small 5, and without a traditional interior big, that he wants to be in a place that uses him more like Giannis, initiating the offense, but also in SnR with a shooting PG. Someplace that will push pace, which fits his best qualities). KOC notes that while this might work, Simmons is not the freakish rim finisher Giannis is.
Other notes... PHI has received serious draft pick based offers, but isn't interested. Most players can't be traded until 12/15 so a lot of teams are waiting it out knowing PHI wants players.
Morey really thinks Simmons will return, and is willing to wait.
Beal and Lillard aren't available, but PHI might be willing to wait into the season to see if they shake loose.
Also, Doc talked up staggering minutes with Embiid more, and playing him at 5 with 4 shooters like he wants and borrowing from MIL offense around GIannis, but Simmons was unconvinced (probably partially because they didn't do it last year, and it still leaves the late game problem of him standing around watching Embiid post with nothing to do).
Good outline. PHI is an awkward fit, he wants a better one, most offers have been pick based, PHI would rather wait and hope he caves or a STAR becomes available.
Simmons is one of those unique players that's incredibly difficult to build around. And he's not Robin, he's more like Marvin, Wendy, and Wonderdog. He's not good enough to be the second dog, because he just doesn't shoot the damned ball. And not just terrified of shooting outside the paint (although that's a huge fucking problem), he's increasingly afraid of shooting in the paint for fear of having to go to the free throw line (seriously, his FGA/g have gone down every year). I racked my brain trying to find NBA teams where he'd be a natural fit outside of Minnesota and Indiana. I didn't have a lot of luck.
Anyway, paying an AAV of $35 million for your third best player is how you end up in luxury tax heck very quickly. Which imperils your position if you're a GM. And that's assuming that you have the personnel to make Simmons work. Which almost no one does. Now, if he were a theoretical free agent would some team desperate for a splash signing offer him 25% of the cap? Probably. But at 30% I'm pretty sure that a lot of teams would balk.
Last edited:
Hayward makes $29M. I'd rather have Simmons on the max. Russell I guess you would argue is a bad contract same as Will Barton. PDX would trade McCollum for Simmons if Morey would take it. Wiggins is discussed. I guess Chris Paul is more valuable than Simmons to PHX right now but that contract is going to get bad soon I think.
I mean John Collins was just given $125M. You don't think teams would give Simmons the max if they had the cap space?
I don’t know how much you follow NBA contract stuff but I think plenty of teams would pay this for Simmons. It doesn’t make sense until you realize how underpaid true stars are and how much that subsidizes the salaries of very good players.
I was thinking that Simmons does the good things that Marcus does (defense at multiple positions and passing) better than Marcus, and does far less of that which drives this board nuts about Marcus (shoot myriad 3’s at a low %).
It's weird because if Ben Simmons shot a myriad of 3s at the same low % as Smart, he'd be a top 5-10 player in the league.
Someone said he's way better than Ingram which I'm not sure I agree with. I think he's better but in the same tier. At the same time, I think NO and Philly are both better with Ingram than Simmons. Ingram is more plug and play and I think he'd actually be a great fit with Embiid. NO might be one of the worst fits for Simmons though. The C's would be better with Simmons but they'd be a title contender with Simmons or Ingram. There aren't many players that won't work with the Jays.
Ingram is the probably the better offensive player, but the defensive gap is.... woof.
Simmons is legit one of the best players on that end in the league, Ingram was a bad defender from the jump and he's been going the wrong way... he's one of the worst defenders in the league for his position (so culling out the small guards and broken down bigs).
Now PHI could probably make it work with Embiid on the back line though I think Ingram hurt more than people think, given that they don't really need a scorer in Simmons' place, and Ingram isn't really that strong a passer.
I think Simmons is on the fringe of the tier Ingram is in and the one above, while Ingram is towards the bottom of his tier.
Agreed with that. I was more thinking about his desire to play more small ball 5, where I think he would be a killer. He had a few games in Embiid’s absence last year that shows what he is capable of in that role (I think he had 40 against Gobert). He would probably end up playing some non-5 minutes along with Horford, where he could act as a very rich man’s Smart Swiss Army knife type.
This is inherently incorrect. Even if it WAS correct then Simmons would qualify on nearly every team. The reality is that small market teams or those who would be ecstatic to climb to .500 and participate in the playoffs would also snap sign Simmons to a max tomorrow. Not every team in the league has a goal of winning a championship in the short term.
If Simmons were as mentally tough as Marcus he'd be celebrating his second MVP award by now.
This is also where the Simmons/Draymond comparisons fall apart. Hell, at this point calling him tall Rondo would be an insult to Rondo.
Simmons would make sense on a crappy team that aspires to be respectable— you’d run the offense through him and assemble complementary players around him to hide his inability to shoot.
Not sure I can point to the team that’s going to do that, let alone part with talent and/or picks for the privilege. For example, if you’re the Cavs or the Pistons, wouldn’t you just continue to tank? Simmons would fit well in Washington, but I think they’re going to tank too once Beal leaves, and I don’t think Simmons convinces Beal to stay.
I get it — Simmons is a good player and should have a market. I’m just not sure what that market is.
What It hink is being missed is what I like to call the "Nate Duncan fallacy" which is that all teams are the same in goals and situation and style at all points in time . That makes for easy analysis of the league and any team, but it's regularly off when you think it through against a specific team at a specific point in time given their real market situation and ownership preferences. So sure, in the abstract from the perspective of a big market team who wants to win a title you don't want to trade for Simmons unless he's the missing piece for a title. But that profile doesn't fit everyone, and the variance is where the opportunity is likely to lie for Morey.
To pick a "local" example of this, the Ray Allen trade for the Celtics makes no sense using the approach mauf outlines above---he didn't make them a real contender so they'd have been better off continuing the rebuild and keeping lottery picks to get stars, right? But in reality, he was part of a set of moves designed to make them appealing for the apex star--Garnett--who was potentially (and in the end, in fact) out there.
So who might fit that now? Detroit is a possibility---pair Simmons with Cade and move more rapidly to where you are a quality team who might add one more piece? Indiana (forever more interested in second round of playoffs than true contention) could consolidate some of its interesting pieces to get younger and sustain their playoffs-but-not-really-a-contender window. Cleveland could look to balance it's roster a bit (but seems less likely to me given they already have an expensive mostly non-shooter locked in). I don't think it is true that all teams think indefinite tanking and non-contenition is the right approach, and as HRB says there's likely a number of teams who see real value in Simmons---which is in part that you own his right for four years which is something many smaller market teams cannot regularly get outside of drafting someone.
My guess at what is clogging the Simmons market now is not a lack of teams offering stuff, it is Morey wanting a pretty hefty and also pretty specific (with short-term value, e.g. guys who can play at a high level right now) return. But as always, I could be wrong...
To pick a "local" example of this, the Ray Allen trade for the Celtics makes no sense using the approach mauf outlines above---he didn't make them a real contender so they'd have been better off continuing the rebuild and keeping lottery picks to get stars, right? But in reality, he was part of a set of moves designed to make them appealing for the apex star--Garnett--who was potentially (and in the end, in fact) out there.
So who might fit that now? Detroit is a possibility---pair Simmons with Cade and move more rapidly to where you are a quality team who might add one more piece? Indiana (forever more interested in second round of playoffs than true contention) could consolidate some of its interesting pieces to get younger and sustain their playoffs-but-not-really-a-contender window. Cleveland could look to balance it's roster a bit (but seems less likely to me given they already have an expensive mostly non-shooter locked in). I don't think it is true that all teams think indefinite tanking and non-contenition is the right approach, and as HRB says there's likely a number of teams who see real value in Simmons---which is in part that you own his right for four years which is something many smaller market teams cannot regularly get outside of drafting someone.
My guess at what is clogging the Simmons market now is not a lack of teams offering stuff, it is Morey wanting a pretty hefty and also pretty specific (with short-term value, e.g. guys who can play at a high level right now) return. But as always, I could be wrong...
If Morey said that he was just going to dump Simmons into cap space without needing anything in return, there's not a team in the league that wouldn't take him - so long as they could create cap space. I don't know why this is so hard.
Even OKC would take Simmons into cap space because they'd be confident they could turn into him (even with his contract) into picks/assets.
Simmons at 4/$140 is not a negative value contract. If Morey wanted to trade him for picks, he could do so tomorrow. We can debate how much positive value the contract has, but he's the kind of talent a lot of teams don't have a chance to acquire unless they are drafting at the top of the lottery.
An Indiana deal would be interesting, something like Brogdon+picks+filler, if Brogdon agreed to extend.
I agree with you WBCD---and also agree with you the MPJ contract demonstrates the same. MPJ is at least as flawed a player overall as Simmons (thought their flaws are wildly different, nearly opposite) and just got the same contract. He's not much younger, has a scarier injury history by a longshot, and has shown the same lack of growth at one end that Simmons has at the other.
Which of those guys would you want? Depends for sure on your roster, but they are only a year or so apart in age. Frankly, both teams would probably be better off if they swapped them, though Denver would need to backfill some shooting especially with Murray out.
Which of those guys would you want? Depends for sure on your roster, but they are only a year or so apart in age. Frankly, both teams would probably be better off if they swapped them, though Denver would need to backfill some shooting especially with Murray out.
I just finished a post about MPJ in the off-season thread. He's at 4/$132M with a partial fifth year guarantee (though it's pretty likely DEN will pick up the contract unless he's injured) so make that 5/$172M with a chance (remote as it may be) that he gets to $207M. I also posted an article (earlier) that in the playoffs, opposing teams shot 57% from 3P when MPJ was "guarding" the shooter.
And it's actually worse when you watch clips of MPJ.
In the NBA, unless a team is tanking, if a team has a top 50 player, that team is going to re-sign him for a lot of money because there's no assurance they are going to be able to replace him with anyone nearly as good. We've seen this time and time again from Otto Porter to Wiggins to Russell to now MPJ etc. etc. etc. And Ben Simmons is way better than most of these guys.
I agree. Thanks for posting that.
Based on the article, having all this resolved no later than the end of December makes sense. If all the better deals offered now are pick heavy and that isn't expected to change until Dec 15th, there isn't much that will change the on-the-court product for the Sixers unless Simmons is willing to play ball for a while. It's messy, but Philly needs to be patient.
- Status