Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 169 of 271 FirstFirst ... 69119159167168169170171179219269 ... LastLast
Results 2,521 to 2,535 of 4056
  1. #2521
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    68,324
    Quote Originally Posted by smith&wesson View Post
    I was talking about the pacers.

    but to your point, I think a Murray/Walker package would actually be nice for Philly. I like Murray.
    White is the guy in SAS that interests me more. If there were a 3 team with White and Brogdon to get done Iíd do it. Maybe we could move Curry and a pick for Brooks (or Thybulle or Springer). White on the bench with Brogdon, Green, Brooks starting.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #2522
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The 6
    Posts
    31,745
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    White is the guy in SAS that interests me more. If there were a 3 team with White and Brogdon to get done Iíd do it. Maybe we could move Curry and a pick for Brooks (or Thybulle or Springer). White on the bench with Brogdon, Green, Brooks starting.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


    How about a package built around Brogdon/Lamb? or Murray/White

    Both of those work salary wise.

  3. #2523
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,999
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    In an improved East, yes, I do think its going to be difficult for Philly to advance if they literally get nothing from Simmons. I think most would argue Milwuakee and Brooklyn would be favored over them no matter what. Atlanta beat them last year with Simmons. Miami is probably better. So there's 4 Ted already who have a very real shot of beating Philly in the playoffs. And that says nothing of Chicago, Boston, NYK or Indy, who could all be pretty decent and I wouldnt be shocked if one or two of those teams are better than Philly minus Simmons.
    Is the East improved?

  4. #2524
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The 6
    Posts
    31,745
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Is the East improved?
    Id say so

    The bucks are champs,
    Nets are contenders,
    Miami got better,
    Hawks will be better from experience alone,
    Boston should be better simply with growth,
    If the Pacers are healthy they should be a lot better,
    Bulls improved throug free agency
    Knicks added some vets

    Phily would be the only one that didn't improve, of those playoff teams. And you can argue that with out Simmons or at least getting something for Simmons, the 6ers actually got worse.

  5. #2525
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    13,532
    Quote Originally Posted by smith&wesson View Post
    Mcbuckets is a spur now.

    But I agree I think the Pacers would be a good fit for Simmons.
    He was using Sabonis stats from last year so I took the team from last year for the comp. But yes, he is.

  6. #2526
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    13,532
    Quote Originally Posted by smith&wesson View Post
    Id say so

    The bucks are champs,
    Nets are contenders,
    Miami got better,
    Hawks will be better from experience alone,
    Boston should be better simply with growth,
    If the Pacers are healthy they should be a lot better,
    Bulls improved throug free agency
    Knicks added some vets

    Phily would be the only one that didn't improve, of those playoff teams. And you can argue that with out Simmons or at least getting something for Simmons, the 6ers actually got worse.
    Exactly. Nets got deeper and Harden and Durant actually getting time together again will help. I think just the confidence from getting over the hump makes the bucks more dangerous. Miami is clearly better. Chicago is clearly better. Agree on Hawks. Boston is maybe worse but who knows, kemba was kind of nothing for them. Knicks aren't worse. Pacers will show up more I think. Toronto is worse. Philly is worse if Ben quits on the team or doesn't play.

  7. #2527
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    13,532
    Quote Originally Posted by beasted86 View Post
    I don't see a really high value as another GM. This problem with Simmons is so multi-layered. Maybe a couple years ago he could play the Jason Kidd's Nets role and be the best player on a contending team without being the goto scorer, but not in today's league.

    In today's NBA if Simmons is your best player, I think it would be hard since he seems like a terrible leader. So, not only do you need the perfect roster composition, you need a team that already has a leader on the floor. Next, a problem is what Philly is looking for if they are moving on from Simmons. The 76ers would be leaching the shooters in any trade, the very thing that would make a Simmons run team workable. Lastly, it complicates roster construction because it's established he can't be the lead scorer, so as a GM looking to bring in a lead scorer you have to worry if Simmons will turn butthurt again in case he feels less important.

    I think all of this spells why offers have been underwhelming. If I could buy Simmons really low and my team has sucked for a really long time (Kings, Wolves, etc.) I clearly have nothing to lose. Any playoff team or team giving up a top 30 player I can't take the risk, sorry.
    I think people sometimes get a bit carried away with your best player has to be your closer. Not comparing Simmons to these guys, but giannis isn't neccesariyl the closer, Middleton is. Shaq was better than Kobe and wade, but he needed those dudes to be the closer. Heck, Duncan was never really the closer for most of those Spurs teams. Dwight took a team to the championship with Hedo was the closer.

    I agree that Ben needs the right team. But having a guy like Ben who is versatile as a potential front court guy helps unlock the combo guard types too. Like I'm not a Collin Sexton fan, but Ben helps unlock the Collin Sexton types. Sexton is a PG in size, but doesn't distribute well enough to actually run the offense and isn't a good defender. Simmons can defend the top perimeter guy while also distributing to allow sexton to focus on trying to score the basketball.

    I think if you put him with guys like Mitchell, Heild and Haliburton, you could create some interesting lineups too. Simmons and Mitchell can be back court menaces on defense whole Heild can be hidden on the worst back court or wing option on defense and be allowed to score, while Hali sits. But nine of those Kings guards are true PGs or playmakers, but having someone like Simmons who can be your 3/4 but take on those more traditional PG roles allows you to cram a bunch more of the non traditional playmakers in the back court.

    And I agree on who should trade for him. Kyrie is a wild card. Assuming Ben would accept the role, which is a big if, I could see him working in Brooklyn for contenders. If GS really wanted to reconfigure the team, Ben could possibly work as a Draymond replacement. And Portland has been in wierd purgatory for so long and they havent had an impactful wing in ages that they should take a shot. But those are probably the only 3 teams that are even remotely contenders that should even kind of consider it.

    But for non contenders, (ignoring the actual trade package for now) he would fit really well on Minnesota with Kat and Edwards. He'd fit well as a Fox swap in Sacramento. I think he works with Green and Wood in Houston. If Washington disappoints again and wants to keep beal, trying those two together could make sense. OKC really doesnt have anyone that taking a shot on him could work. San Antonio is in a similar boat of just an underwhelming roster that you could try to do a quick reset focused on Simmons. I don't think Cleveland works as currently constructed, but unless Mobley is a stud, he'd be their best guy and they could reset the roster around Simmons.

  8. #2528
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    17,819
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    I think people sometimes get a bit carried away with your best player has to be your closer. Not comparing Simmons to these guys, but giannis isn't neccesariyl the closer, Middleton is. Shaq was better than Kobe and wade, but he needed those dudes to be the closer. Heck, Duncan was never really the closer for most of those Spurs teams. Dwight took a team to the championship with Hedo was the closer.

    I agree that Ben needs the right team. But having a guy like Ben who is versatile as a potential front court guy helps unlock the combo guard types too. Like I'm not a Collin Sexton fan, but Ben helps unlock the Collin Sexton types. Sexton is a PG in size, but doesn't distribute well enough to actually run the offense and isn't a good defender. Simmons can defend the top perimeter guy while also distributing to allow sexton to focus on trying to score the basketball.

    I think if you put him with guys like Mitchell, Heild and Haliburton, you could create some interesting lineups too. Simmons and Mitchell can be back court menaces on defense whole Heild can be hidden on the worst back court or wing option on defense and be allowed to score, while Hali sits. But nine of those Kings guards are true PGs or playmakers, but having someone like Simmons who can be your 3/4 but take on those more traditional PG roles allows you to cram a bunch more of the non traditional playmakers in the back court.

    And I agree on who should trade for him. Kyrie is a wild card. Assuming Ben would accept the role, which is a big if, I could see him working in Brooklyn for contenders. If GS really wanted to reconfigure the team, Ben could possibly work as a Draymond replacement. And Portland has been in wierd purgatory for so long and they havent had an impactful wing in ages that they should take a shot. But those are probably the only 3 teams that are even remotely contenders that should even kind of consider it.

    But for non contenders, (ignoring the actual trade package for now) he would fit really well on Minnesota with Kat and Edwards. He'd fit well as a Fox swap in Sacramento. I think he works with Green and Wood in Houston. If Washington disappoints again and wants to keep beal, trying those two together could make sense. OKC really doesnt have anyone that taking a shot on him could work. San Antonio is in a similar boat of just an underwhelming roster that you could try to do a quick reset focused on Simmons. I don't think Cleveland works as currently constructed, but unless Mobley is a stud, he'd be their best guy and they could reset the roster around Simmons.
    You make solid points for sure, but it all works under the assumption that Simmons CAN do better and was in the wrong situation/roster and completely disregards the idea that Simmons mentally CANNOT lead a team. It's fun to think about Simmons just running in the open court like Giannis, spinning off guys and dunking over whoever he wants averaging 20/10/10, but maybe, just maybe that's never going to be him. Maybe on a team without efficient scorers around him and shooters he's a passive 10 FGA guy who is afraid to initiate contact because of FTs.

    Philly did everything reasonable, short of trading Embiid to accommodate Simmons. They coddled him, let him work with his brother and continue to shoot lefty. They added shooters, they never brought in a ball dominant guard, they tried to make it work with Simmons at PG. Let's at least leave the door open that he just can't, not that he hasn't yet.

    So with that door open, I just can't see anyone in their right mind trading Fox (even with how bad of a dumpster fire the Kings are) or many other really good players. You have to REALLY buy low with Simmons for it to make sense. Fox, CJ, other guys who are admittedly outside the top 30, I still can't give up for Simmons with that door open.

  9. #2529
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,984
    Quote Originally Posted by smith&wesson View Post
    How about a package built around Brogdon/Lamb? or Murray/White

    Both of those work salary wise.
    Give me Brogdon/Lavert

  10. #2530
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    120,531
    Quote Originally Posted by smith&wesson View Post
    Id say so

    The bucks are champs,
    Nets are contenders,
    Miami got better,
    Hawks will be better from experience alone,
    Boston should be better simply with growth,
    If the Pacers are healthy they should be a lot better,
    Bulls improved throug free agency
    Knicks added some vets

    Phily would be the only one that didn't improve, of those playoff teams. And you can argue that with out Simmons or at least getting something for Simmons, the 6ers actually got worse.
    not true at all... We now have a stretch 4 worth a damn... Also drummond will be able to play with ben unlike howard. Then we gotta hope maxey/thyb grows and joel is healthy for the playoffs. All these things are key.

  11. #2531
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    64,690
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    He was using Sabonis stats from last year so I took the team from last year for the comp. But yes, he is.
    Warren played 4 games last year and Levert played 35. You were kind of taking the best from both


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  12. #2532
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    64,690

    Trade destinations for Ben Simmons

    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    not true at all... We now have a stretch 4 worth a damn... Also drummond will be able to play with ben unlike howard. Then we gotta hope maxey/thyb grows and joel is healthy for the playoffs. All these things are key.
    Other then Harris and Butler for half a year the Sixers have done a terrible job putting talent around Joel.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by ewing; 10-15-2021 at 06:09 AM.
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  13. #2533
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    68,324
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    Other then Harris and Butler for half a year the Sixers have done a terrible job putting talent around Joel.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Because theyíve been trying to make it work around Ben. Itís been two coaches and three GMs that have said Joel can get his when he wants and itís Ben that the plays are designed around. Heck go back to the offseason we gave Harris his contract, let JJ walk, swapped Butler for JRich (whoís team Kyrie FWIW), and signed Horford. I was saying then you got to commit to either Ben or Embiid and this half assed trying to build around both wonít work.

    **** even back to that draft 5/6 years ago I was making the argument then that Ingram was better for us because Simmons was a bed fit with Embiid and (at the time) Saric because Benís best position was the 4. **** even the draft after where we move up for Fultz; I was calling to just get rid of the pick for a player completely.

    Iíll support Ben as a player because he has the talent to be great. But the fit here was never great and this lack of desire to make the fit with Embiid a little smoother took too long for management to realize it wasnít working. And honestly, I put some of that on regular season success. That first year together was too good and hid the flaws of the fit too well; blinding ownership/management to the flaw in the fit.

    Of course part of the issue was Colangelo but thatís a different rant.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #2534
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    64,690

    Trade destinations for Ben Simmons

    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    Because theyíve been trying to make it work around Ben. Itís been two coaches and three GMs that have said Joel can get his when he wants and itís Ben that the plays are designed around. Heck go back to the offseason we gave Harris his contract, let JJ walk, swapped Butler for JRich (whoís team Kyrie FWIW), and signed Horford. I was saying then you got to commit to either Ben or Embiid and this half assed trying to build around both wonít work.

    **** even back to that draft 5/6 years ago I was making the argument then that Ingram was better for us because Simmons was a bed fit with Embiid and (at the time) Saric because Benís best position was the 4. **** even the draft after where we move up for Fultz; I was calling to just get rid of the pick for a player completely.

    Iíll support Ben as a player because he has the talent to be great. But the fit here was never great and this lack of desire to make the fit with Embiid a little smoother took too long for management to realize it wasnít working. And honestly, I put some of that on regular season success. That first year together was too good and hid the flaws of the fit too well; blinding ownership/management to the flaw in the fit.

    Of course part of the issue was Colangelo but thatís a different rant.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Paying a good role player 40 million bc he was drafted 1st and treating him like a franchise cornerstone was a mistake. I was saying years ago they should try to move Simmons for a Conley or Lowery type or even Malcolm which you might still be able to do. I still think they could have done better with him. Al was the only other needle-moving move and it was a really bad one.

    I know we have had this conversation before but the "fit" stuff is just funny to me at this point. I think he fits fine. He just isn't that good. Joel is the most versatile offensive center in the NBA and plays on the outside more than he should to accommodate Ben. If Ben doesn't fit with him he's a 5. Every player who isn't a 5 should be able to play with Embiid. If you require every other player on the floor to stay behind the 3 point line at all times and to only play at a super fast pace you just aren't that good. I was a shooter I'm would have scored more if my HS PG ran and passed like J Kidd doesn't mean it was a "bad" fit.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by ewing; 10-15-2021 at 09:44 AM.
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  15. #2535
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    39,999
    Quote Originally Posted by smith&wesson View Post
    Id say so

    The bucks are champs,
    Nets are contenders,
    Miami got better,
    Hawks will be better from experience alone,
    Boston should be better simply with growth,
    If the Pacers are healthy they should be a lot better,
    Bulls improved throug free agency
    Knicks added some vets

    Phily would be the only one that didn't improve, of those playoff teams. And you can argue that with out Simmons or at least getting something for Simmons, the 6ers actually got worse.
    The Bucks are champs from last year, are they better this year?
    The Nets were contenders last year, this year they may not have Kyrie, are they better this year?
    Not sure Miami is better now than last year.
    Hawks I agree.
    Boston I don't agree.
    Bulls may be better.
    Knicks I'm not sold yet.
    Sixers could slip.

    I just don't see any clear reason to think this year's East is significantly better than last year's.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •