OT - Sixers

[LegoDoom]

While checking his numbers I noticed he is not a good free throw shooter. Which seemed odd to me considering he has a good three point shot....at least for college standards. The NBA three point shot is 3 feet longer.

Yes, his relatively low FT% is a bit puzzling, but if you're implying that he doesn't have NBA 3-point range, then I think you're mistaken.

 

[LegoDoom]

To run the pick and roll? I'd say so.

Isn't the PnR run outside of the 3-point arc these days?

 

[LegoDoom]

It seems the rumors are that the Lakers have told Josh Jackson that he will be their pick if he's there at #2. If that's the case, then I would take Ball at #3. I have always been tempted by a trade for #5 and #10, but I think that Ball is good enough to forego a 5/10 trade especially because the team has multiple 1sts upcoming and needs to cash in on talent when it's available. I am much less concerned with Ball's downsides than Jackson and Fox (both good players).

 

[knowyourenemy]

Isn't the PnR run outside of the 3-point arc these days?

Look at all the good PGs in the league. They all are able to knock down 2pt jumpers off the pnr

 

[LegoDoom]

Look at all the good PGs in the league. They all are able to knock down 2pt jumpers off the pnr

Even if they can, you don't take a 20 foot jumper at a ~40% rate when you shoot ~35% from 3-point range. Even if a player shoots 50% from 20 feet and 35% from 3-point range, then you always take the 3-point shot as long as the shot is the same.

 

[Rey]

I go back and forth on Ball. There is a lot to like ... the kid's ball IQ is top notch and despite the weird form he has tremendous range on his shot along with a high percentage; he always knows where to go with the ball to put his team mates in position for good shots, but that's what Simmons does well also. It's a bit of overkill in that you can't have two "primary" ball handlers and Simmons isn't an outside shooter. I guess having two guys who can flat out create for others isn't a bad thing as it can certainly lead to a lot of easy buckets for guys like Embiid, Holmes and Saric ... but if you reduce Simmons' ball handling you're taking away the thing that makes him the most unique. I continue to think Josh Jackson is the best pick for this team ... I'll be crossing my fingers that the Lakers are bluffing on possibly selecting him at 2.

 

[old duke]

Jackson or Fox. Not Ball or Tatum. As far as I'm concerned.

 

[LegoDoom]

I go back and forth on Ball. There is a lot to like ... the kid's ball IQ is top notch and despite the weird form he has tremendous range on his shot along with a high percentage; he always knows where to go with the ball to put his team mates in position for good shots, but that's what Simmons does well also. It's a bit of overkill in that you can't have two "primary" ball handlers and Simmons isn't an outside shooter. I guess having two guys who can flat out create for others isn't a bad thing as it can certainly lead to a lot of easy buckets for guys like Embiid, Holmes and Saric ... but if you reduce Simmons' ball handling you're taking away the thing that makes him the most unique. I continue to think Josh Jackson is the best pick for this team ... I'll be crossing my fingers that the Lakers are bluffing on possibly selecting him at 2.

I've long viewed Fultz and Ball as 1a and 1b, so I may value Ball more than you. However... I don't disagree too much with your assessment, but think that Fox may be a better fit than Jackson because of position. I think that Embiid, Saric, Simmons, Covington, and Fox would be better than a lineup with Jackson unless you're bringing in a FA and keeping Saric/Covington as your 6th man.

I wouldn't be upset with any of them, but I'd personally take Ball. I think a 5 and 10 trade may be the way to go because of the strength of the top 10 of this draft, but Ball being available may make me turn that down.

 

[knowyourenemy]

Jackson or Fox. Not Ball or Tatum. As far as I'm concerned.

Looking at things more, I really don't like Ball. Fultz, Jackson, Fox, Monk, Tatum, Isaac. But please, god, not Ball.

 

[Rey]

Man, after watching these Finals it's become obvious that you won't win in today's NBA unless you can sink 3's. I worry that having Fox and Simmons both as main cogs will severely impede our ability from outside. I think Fox's shot will improve as he has good form ... but I think that improvement will primarily be off the dribble as opposed to 3 point land. I think either Ball or Jackson can better develop that 3 point shot and thus provide us with that 3 point threat needed off of Simmons' assists. I still like Fox a lot ... but think his best spot is where he can be the main ball handler on a team he doesn't necessarily need to be counted on from long range. Both Simmons and Embiid need a running mate who can at least be counted on from 3 point land for 35% or better. So right now "for me" it's either Jackson or Ball at 3.

 

[Funk]

Man, after watching these Finals it's become obvious that you won't win in today's NBA unless you can sink 3's. I worry that having Fox and Simmons both as main cogs will severely impede our ability from outside. I think Fox's shot will improve as he has good form ... but I think that improvement will primarily be off the dribble as opposed to 3 point land. I think either Ball or Jackson can better develop that 3 point shot and thus provide us with that 3 point threat needed off of Simmons' assists. I still like Fox a lot ... but think his best spot is where he can be the main ball handler on a team he doesn't necessarily need to be counted on from long range. Both Simmons and Embiid need a running mate who can at least be counted on from 3 point land for 35% or better. So right now "for me" it's either Jackson or Ball at 3.

Monk. Feel like everyone here kind of dismisses this kid, not sure why. He'd be lethal with Simmons, I'm not sure you could pick a better type of player for Simmons really, lights out shooter, monster in transition. No he's not a PG, but thats gonna be Simmons role on offense, then you have McConnell. Monk just fits better than anyone not named Fultz.

 

[knowyourenemy]

Monk. Feel like everyone here kind of dismisses this kid, not sure why. He'd be lethal with Simmons, I'm not sure you could pick a better type of player for Simmons really, lights out shooter, monster in transition. No he's not a PG, but thats gonna be Simmons role on offense, then you have McConnell. Monk just fits better than anyone not named Fultz.

I'd be happy with Monk. Can shoot from anywhere and can run the pick and roll. And great in transition. All he needs is to step up his defense -- but even if he doesn't, he's an awesome piece on day 1.

 

[Rey]

I like Monk ... I even said earlier that I can see Philly seriously looking at him due to being a great fit with both Simmons and Embiid. Biggest worry with him though is D and height. Not really a guy with pro PG handle either in regards to breaking down a D. Like has been said though, he can develop into a sniper from outside and is explosive as far as finishing above the rim in transition. If we trade down to 5 I'd be ok with Monk; I just wouldn't take him ahead of Jackson or Ball though as I see them offering much more all around.

 

[old duke]

No Ball for me, and I think Tatum will be average. If we stay at #3, I go with Jackson or Fox, but I hear that Magic promised Jackson that he's their guy. So, either trade up for Fultz, take Fox @ 3, or trade back for Monk @ 5, and maybe Justin Jackson @ #10, or Smith.

 

[Rey]

Check out the vid below to see the kind of range Ball has ... better 3 point percentage than Monk and shot many of his 3's from 3-5 feet "behind" the 3 point line. Just as explosive jumping as Monk, better handle than Monk, 3+ inches taller, better rebounder and worlds better as a passer. I personally can't stand his dad ... and that's spilled over on my opinion of him a bit, but there's no doubt he brings a lot to the team that drafts him.

 

[old duke]

Good stuff Rey. I don't know. We'll see.

 

[Rey]

I think Ball may be able to transition nicely next to Simmons as a "2" Guard. While Ball has good handle, he isn't a guy who's game is taking people off the dribble as much as just being able to create opportunities for others and shooting the long range 3's. When I look at Ball as more of a 2 Guard in our scheme I like the fit much better ... he can jump into the Point role when Simmons heads to the bench. I would still want Josh Jackson as my #2 guy in this draft, but I have moved Ball ahead of Fox on my Sixer wish list.

 

[LegoDoom]

While I understand that if Simmons is running the offense that you don't want to bring in a true PG, but this isn't 20-30 years ago where the PG will bring the ball up court and pass to someone who shoots. Having two guys that can create with the ball in their hands shouldn't be a negative thing. Especially not if at least one of them can shoot. Ball and Monk fit that role. Even moreso when you factor in that both play well without the ball in their hands. Fox does, but isn't as good of a shooter as I'd like. His defense and basketball/athletic ability is impressive, though.

 

[eaglesnut]

We have 4 picks over the next 2 years to add shooters. At #3 we have to get a guy that is an explosive athlete with length. If we build the best defense in the league we can beat anybody.

 

[Iggloo]

Rumors picking up steam that the Lakers will pass on Ball, and that he may slide to 5. That would be interesting for sure.