OT - Sixers

[knowyourenemy]

I didn't say he wasn't a good shooter, but I wouldn't say a great one.

Personally, I'd be fine with Isaac at #5 and taking whoever falls to #10 out of Monk, Ntilikina, Markkanen, and Smith. Obviously, the team would need to make another move to bring in a SG if Markkanen is the only one left out of those four.

I wouldn't be upset with Jackson at #3, but think Fox is the better fit and is a very good defender, as well.

Ending up with Isaac and Markkanen is pretty much a nightmare scenario for this team. Although, if Markkanen is left at #10, there are probably a number of teams that would be willing to trade for him. Not sure how much they'd get in return -- but he's a valuable commodity.

 

[knowyourenemy]

So he got better at it as the year went on. He's a young developing player. And his game isn't to jack up threes. Instead he got to the line 15 TIMES twice during the month!



This team is SLOW. If you add those guys it is STILL SLOW!

Monk is a very good athlete. He would fit in well on the team -- but I have questions about his defense.

 

[Iggloo]

I would take Fox. Worse case scenario you have two PGs, which is not the end of the world.

 

[knowyourenemy]

I would take Fox. Worse case scenario you have two PGs, which is not the end of the world.

They'll need a secondary ball handler and I don't think we should count on Saric to be that guy.

 

[eaglesnut]

Monk is a very good athlete. He would fit in well on the team -- but I have questions about his defense.

Then he's not a good enough athlete.

Fox will get all up in opposing PGs asses. That's what we need.

 

[SixthStreet]

Monk's crappy wingspan all but assures he'll be a bad defender in the NBA. Not to mention he doesn't actually have any good defensive habits when he's on the floor.

I'm willing to tolerate bad defense/wingspan from a shot creating guard (like how I've liked DSJ since the beginning of this thread) but not from a strictly one dimensional player like Monk.

Shooting is overvalued in the draft these days because of the Curry phenomenon. It's vitally important to win, no doubt, but you can find it pretty easily once you have the star foundation in place. Cleveland found all their shooting on the cheap after LeBron came back. Drafting at 3 you need to focus on upside. I'm taking Jackson at 3 with absolutely no hesitation. Fox I'd be happy with too. But it really should be one of those two guys.

 

[old duke]

I love Monk, but I hear that he is only 6'2", not 6.3 or 6.4, that's why I wouldn't take him until 5 at least. I think Fox or Jackson @ #3, at this point, unless we trade up for Fultz, and I wouldn't give up 2 #1s + Simmons, as some re[port, which I think is insane. we need to see how good Simmons will be.

 

[Rey]

I wouldn't try to re-invent the wheel here ... to me Josh Jackson is a super-safe and value pick at 3. His outside shooting showed real improvement as the year went along and he can help in so many areas. Remember, barring us making the playoffs next season we're likely going to have 2 lottery picks. If we do make the playoffs we'll more than likely have the Lakers lottery pick (they're a much longer shot imo to make the playoffs). We can always grab a Guard like George Hill in free agency to help Simmons as we will have oodles of money to play with in free agency.

 

[old duke]

What do you think of Otto Porter, as a free agent? I would really like to see them sign a good free agent, or trade for one if they have to. Ala, Jimmy Butler?

 

[Rey]

What do you think of Otto Porter, as a free agent? I would really like to see them sign a good free agent, or trade for one if they have to. Ala, Jimmy Butler?

I've heard Washington will match any offer to Porter. Young guys in their prime likely ain't going anywhere as their teams can all pay more. I think a vet like George Hill would be great for this young team.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

I love Monk, but I hear that he is only 6'2", not 6.3 or 6.4, that's why I wouldn't take him until 5 at least. I think Fox or Jackson @ #3, at this point, unless we trade up for Fultz, and I wouldn't give up 2 #1s + Simmons, as some re[port, which I think is insane. we need to see how good Simmons will be.

What? Simmons is 10 X's the prospect than Fultz. I wouldn't give up Simmons for Fultz and Boston next 5 first round picks.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

I wouldn't try to re-invent the wheel here ... to me Josh Jackson is a super-safe and value pick at 3. His outside shooting showed real improvement as the year went along and he can help in so many areas. Remember, barring us making the playoffs next season we're likely going to have 2 lottery picks. If we do make the playoffs we'll more than likely have the Lakers lottery pick (they're a much longer shot imo to make the playoffs). We can always grab a Guard like George Hill in free agency to help Simmons as we will have oodles of money to play with in free agency.

Jackson would make us a great defensive team... but poor shooting. He could wind up being the superstar of this draft. I'd be really scared to trade up for Fultz. Boston could walk away with him and picks. Take Jackson and worry about accumulating PG and SG with our 1st rounders from LA and Sacramento

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

No way. Then who guards other PGs?? This pick has to be a guy that can defend PGs! The first guy on that list is Fox.

Take Jackson... He's the better player. I'm of the opinion you ALWAYS take the better player.

Case in point... years ago the AZ Cardinals OLINE was atrocious. They selected Levi Brown instead of Adrian Peterson. Thats what happens when you draft for need over best player.

 

[Funk]

What? Simmons is 10 X's the prospect than Fultz. I wouldn't give up Simmons for Fultz and Boston next 5 first round picks.

What a homer. Simmons, has more question marks than Fultz does. Fultz does everything well, Simmons is a great passer, but much like Lonzo Ball, he's not great in the half court and his shot is suspect.

Simmons is a prospect that you make try to beat you, Fultz is a prospect that you have to stop so they dont beat you.

 

[knowyourenemy]

What a homer. Simmons, has more question marks than Fultz does. Fultz does everything well, Simmons is a great passer, but much like Lonzo Ball, he's not great in the half court and his shot is suspect.

Simmons is a prospect that you make try to beat you, Fultz is a prospect that you have to stop so they dont beat you.

If Fultz is so good, why is the 1st overall pick allegedly available? Philadelphia would not have even considered trading #1 last draft. For anyone to suggest that Philly would consider trading Simmons AND multiple first round picks for Fultz, they'd have to be on drugs.

 

[Funk]

Allegedly is the key term there. Boston is in a win now mode and I still dont think they trade Fultz away.

Nobody in their right mind is dumb enough to think Philly would trade Simmons and multiple 1sts, for anyone no named Kawhi or Giannis, thats idoicy. Fans are bad at coming up with trade ideas, this isnt new.

As for last years draft, it was way weaker than this years draft, there is no way to know where Simmons goes in this draft, you can try to assume he goes 1st, but there is no way to know. He's right there with Josh Jackson and Lonzo Ball in terms of question marks, tons of skills, but glaring holes. Fultz doesnt have that problem.


Who's the Better Prospect: Markelle Fultz or Ben Simmons?

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

What a homer. Simmons, has more question marks than Fultz does. Fultz does everything well, Simmons is a great passer, but much like Lonzo Ball, he's not great in the half court and his shot is suspect.

Simmons is a prospect that you make try to beat you, Fultz is a prospect that you have to stop so they dont beat you.

You don't know basketball. Go google, "Ben Simmons best prospect since Lebron James" and tell me what you find. I try to be balanced and critical but the two aren't even remotely close as prospects.

 

[Funk]

You don't know basketball. Go google, "Ben Simmons best prospect since Lebron James" and tell me what you find. I try to be balanced and critical but the two aren't even remotely close as prospects.

Like I said, homer. You arent being balanced or critical in any way. You just want your guy to be better with no substance but google him to back you up. You think he's a better prospect coming out than Durant? I sure as hell dont, but hey, I dont know basketball. Every year there is this he's the best since LeBron hogwash, there was Durant, Wiggins was this all world prospect, there was Anthony Davis, Karl Anthony Towns. Simmons isnt a better prospect than any of those guys, and its not close. I watched Simmons all year at LSU, my point remains, he cant shoot, is poor in the half court, and got his buckets in either transition or by just being bigger and stronger than his guy. Thats not gonna work in the NBA. His passing will 100% translate, no doubt. The rest is a work in progress.

Fultz is the dream PG prospect, size, shot, passing, defense, half court ability, athleticism. He's a better overall prospect than Simmons because he has less question marks. He also plays the PG position better. So enjoy your Sixers colored glasses, I hope Simmons is all you think he is, but I dont think he will be.

 

[knowyourenemy]

Like I said, homer. You arent being balanced or critical in any way. You just want your guy to be better with no substance but google him to back you up. You think he's a better prospect coming out than Durant? I sure as hell dont, but hey, I dont know basketball. Every year there is this he's the best since LeBron hogwash, there was Durant, Wiggins was this all world prospect, there was Anthony Davis, Karl Anthony Towns. Simmons isnt a better prospect than any of those guys, and its not close. I watched Simmons all year at LSU, my point remains, he cant shoot, is poor in the half court, and got his buckets in either transition or by just being bigger and stronger than his guy. Thats not gonna work in the NBA. His passing will 100% translate, no doubt. The rest is a work in progress.

Fultz is the dream PG prospect, size, shot, passing, defense, half court ability, athleticism. He's a better overall prospect than Simmons because he has less question marks. He also plays the PG position better. So enjoy your Sixers colored glasses, I hope Simmons is all you think he is, but I dont think he will be.

I could be wrong but I think Simmons was and is regarded as having a higher ceiling than Fultz, even with all the questions surrounding Simmons. But Fultz definitely seems to have a higher floor -- and his ceiling may not be far from what Simmons' is. I'm not sure what makes you a better prospect. There are a lot of guys who have less questions but are not valued as such by front offices. Case in point, Frank Kaminsky had way fewer questions than Joel Embiid but every GM would likely take Embiid over Kaminsky.

 

[Rey]

The thing with Simmons is that he will be a match-up nightmare due to his size/vision/passing ability. His vision and passing ability are "elite" level stuff. Then you have the huge size advantage if/when we play him at Point ... a 6'10" 240 lb player who can drive to the cup as well as Simmons can will be very hard to contend with for Guards who are usually between 6'0" to 6'6". You then throw in his rebounding ability and he's easily going to lead all rookies next year in triple doubles if health isn't a concern. I think an elite athlete like Josh Jackson would feast on Offense playing next to Ben Simmons. Ditto Joel Embiid who will drain loads of open 15 footers when players collapse on Simmons to help Guards who can't stop him from going to the cup one on one.