Correct. Definitely a huge issue but one still makes it possible to be a net + while DDr never really could.
Didn’t we just get rid of a guy who didn’t take threes?
At least this one plays defense I guess.
Correct. Definitely a huge issue but one still makes it possible to be a net + while DDr never really could.
Yeah, and that guy took long 2's. This guy won't even attempt long 2's. Not that I'm advocating for long 2's... but at least it stretches the offense somewhat. Everything is close to the rim.
The Pros & Cons of Ben simmons
Pros
- great perimeter defender
- play maker
- has Size
- still has upside/all star talent
Cons-
-refuses to shoot/can’t shoot
- bit of a diva
- work ethic questions
There’s plenty more that could be added but if a deal is right I’d say the spurs should go for it! I think it’s really hard to find a guy as talent as he can be with his size, and having someone his size is so crucial to today’s game.
Team would still be heavily reliant on the 3 and D guys, even moreso than with Demar. But we just added the worst statistical defender in the League. And McDermott who has blow-by potential. And Demar scored from the midrange and inside. Ben only scores inside. Is a FT disaster unlike Demar. Demar ended up averaging 6 APG last year too. So offensively, its not even close how much of a downturn he'd be.
The only advantage and difference is his D. Which makes the question does the defensive change overcome the offensive one? Given the other 3 and D guys on the roster Id say naw.
This team is like a 34-48 team without Simmons. And like 38-44 with. About exactly what we were with Demar. But in order to get Simmons, we lose picks and solid bench or starters.
None of this makes sense.
The only way the Spurs get back is through the draft.
The issue with Simmons isn't his 3 point shooting, it's his FT shooting -- that makes him unplayable in the crutch.
DRR, by contrast, was one of the best FT shooters in the entire league. Sure, neither can shoot 3s but the FT shooting makes it a huge difference between them.
Im simply saying, metrics wise, Simmons despite his flaws has graded out as a net positive. Ddr never really has despite all of the above.
Maybe. Seems like Simmons has a way better shot at getting a team like Sa to the playoffs where his short comings will be exposed. DDR can’t even get you to the playoffs but if he did he may not be as easy to expose.
If the point is simply that Simmons is a better player, you're probably right. But when discussing their respective deficiencies, FT shooting is a huge factor.
Spurs need to tank for 2 seasons. This isn’t complicated. Only way they screw things up at this point is if they go out of their way to screw things up.
Just TANK
Yes. But all that matters is net good or bad. He’s consistently been a net + whereas DDR has not. For whatever reason. Despite many flaws.
we dont even have to tank really with the extra firsts from Chicago and the potential for another with a Thad Young trade. We'll suck for another year probably so we should get a shot at a high lottery pick. Those picks, the extra 2nds we have, and the Spurs player development system ought to get us back to annual playoff runs within the next 2 to 3 years.
I feel really good saying a team of Johnson, White, Primo, Murray, Jones, Vassell, Samanich, Poeltl?, Jock, plus several other first rounders get us back to relevancy sooner than a potential Simmons trade ever will, imo.
What does this mean? What has Simmons proven that he can do that any other guard on our team can't do, other than be scared to shoot the basketball and be so bad at free throw shooting that the hawks won a playoff series against the 76ers by going to hack a simmons? That you have to take him off the floor at the end of games against some teams because he doesn't make free throws, he doesn't threaten the defense, and really good players don't have any problems scoring against him so he doesn't even help your defense late in games.
What am I missing? What exactly is Ben Simmons basketball talent other than being really tall for the position he desires to play, which is point guard?
Thats because Simmons doesn't carry any offensive responsibility for a team other than passing the ball where Derozan has the responsibility of passing it, scoring, getting to the line, etc.
I'm not a fan of Derozan but Ben is several tiers below him as a player, primarily because you can at least give derozan the ball and because of his high level scoring, passing, and sometimes playmaking ability, he can be the lead guard in a really efficient and fast paced offense. Not possible for Ben due to his inability to shoot and shrinking at the end of games cause he scared to go to the freethrow line. Derozan has missed more than his fair share of end of game freethrows, but at least he stays aggressive and gets to the line to take them. Ben won't ever have high pressure end of game freethrows cause the second he touches the ball at the end of games he is passing it to someone cause he scared to death to get fouled and have to shoot the freethrows.
As I said before, Simmons and DeRozan are close when you factor in things like at ude and durability. But DeRozan is at his peak, while Simmons even physically isn't quite there. He doesn't have to learn to shoot to improve notably. He just has to become better at what he already does. I think his prime is going to be when he finally slows down enough to where he HAS to play PF, because he'll be dominant there.
East Coast team, w skilled big
If he goes west we will see. I’m not strongly advocating anything here; just going by the actual numbers we’ve seen so far * shrugs *
Only Murray has real value in that amalgamation. Two never where’s, and an ending contract is the rest.
Too bad contracts don't match cause I'd only give one for one for Simmons. White or Murray n nothing else...and again we'll regret it
Man, sugus is the voice of reason and offset doing work as well.
I was swept away in the Simmons deal and you two really brought me back to reality.
I think we are just looking at the roster mess and eager for a move and Simmons got a bit lusted after but yeah, it's a terrible idea.
Not cool with letting Murray go and I want to retain poeltl too.
I don't know how I forgot about Brogdon (who the Pacers supposedly offered, along with a 1st, for Simmons a while back), but he's pretty much exactly what I've been describing. I'd tweak it . . .
Pacers: Murray, Samanic
76ers: Brogdon, Smith, Spurs lightly protected '22 1st, Bulls '25 protected 1st and 2nd (via Spurs)
Suns: Young, Eubanks
Spurs: Simmons, Saric, Suns '23 protected 1st
It's probably not quite enough for the Pacers or 76ers though.
I've been trying to tell them for years, but they don't get it. They're still drinking the Spurs mystique Kool-Aid and conflating most of these players being solid or potentially so and good value relative to where picked for being the makings of a team of consequence in the future.
I’m not sure Simmons is worth that money nor convinced he would even want to be in SA long term. Then you have to think if we are even contenders with that team. All of which looks doubtful. Very unlikely a trade where Simmons is on the Spurs works. Maybe the Spurs want to just be a part of some multi-team trades where they get first rounders and Phi gets our assets.
The problem is . . .
And yet those guys will somehow be traded for . . .
Not trying to flame (is that the internet word?) on ya, but it does make you wonder.
The problem is, you either didn't read or comprehend because you were too caught up in trying to play "gotcha".
My fake proposals have had little to no Spurs going to the 76ers and the point wasn't that the Spurs' youth has no value individually, it's that collectively they're lacking.
Sorry, man, I didn't realize your proposals were fake.
(Jesus Christ, I just did it again. )
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)