OT - Sixers

[mall3013]

Who will the Sixers target if they trade Jah for the Celtics #3?

 

[old duke]

My guess would be Dunn, but I doubt they trade Jah to the Celts - just Bill Simmons wishing.

 

[WIZ]

No way I trade Jah. See what else you have first.

 

[Rey]

I know we're taking Simmons ... I just don't think he's the better option out of the two. I think due to Ingram's height/length/shooting & driving ability ... that he's what we need the most. Simmons' best attribute is his passing ability as a big man and he plays like a big Guard. For him to be effective he needs to play with guys that can shoot ... right now who do we have who can consistently hit the outside shot? Ingram on the other hand is only one inch shorter than Simmons with a 4" arm length advantage who can also take people off the dribble, but can "also" hit the outside shot. If Embiid is healthy (all signs are pointing to yes) then he can be plugged in as the rim protector. This allows Okafor to play the 4 and not hurt us too much if players take him off the dribble. Ingram and Okafor would give us the inside/outside we need on the Offensive End ... Embiid and Noel can concentrate on Defense. Next year we get our Guard(s) with 2 first rounders.

 

[old duke]

I don't think they can play Joel and Jah together. They're both centers, IMO.

 

[WIZ]

But you have to see if you have anything in Joel before you can move anyone.

 

[NDIrishGuy]

People really are ready to just write off Simmons aren't they? I'm not sure where the belief that Ingram has a higher ceiling than Simmons comes from. Simmons ceiling is being Lebron or Magic (doesn't mean he will get there, but that's his ceiling) he also has a higher floor than Ingram - seeing as how Simmons already has the athleticism and size to handle the rigors of the NBA. As for Ingram's shooting, yes, he did well in college, but free throw shooting percentage has been a better indication of NBA 3pt percentage than college 3pt shooting and Ingram's 68% there is a red flag. Simmons is the better player, and most people don't even think it is that close. Right now the Sixers don't have a superstar, you keep grabbing the best player in the hopes of getting one. Nerlens is a tremendous defensive talent, who does well offensively in the open court but provides little in a half court setting. Jahlil is a black hole who can score but provides nothing else to the point he finished 455 out of 462 players in Real Plus/Minus. He was a negative both offensively and defensively - he scores, but he doesn't set up teammates, doesn't rebound, doesn't defend, and turns the ball over. Embiid could be good, if he could get/stay healthy, but who knows. None of those players are someone I would build a team around, so I would grab Simmons and see if he is.

 

[WIZ]

You take Simmons. You will probably have two firsts next year. You will also then have clarity with your extra big.
Next year could really catapult this team into a contender.

 

[Rey]

Nobody is "writing off" Simmons ... I just think that Ingram is damn good as well and will be a two way scorer in the pro's as a shooter or off the dribble ... while Simmons still has a ways to go as a shooter. Ingram is also a very good passer in his own right, but wasn't given carte blanch with the ball in his offense as Simmons at LSU. Now, if we are able to move one of the bigs we have for either a Wing or a shooter then I'm perfectly fine with Simmons. Again, it's not that I don't like Simmons ... I think he's a heck of a talent at his size, but without shooters to compliment him I don't see him making the great impact on this team most would expect. Ingram on the other hand fits like a glove as an all around scorer to compliment the 4's and 5's we already have.

 

[SixthStreet]

You can find shooting in this league to surround Simmons with from the guard spots. Even if you can't develop it in house, there are usually some options in FA. For example, if Colangelo wanted to burn a bunch of cap space right now, you could sign Allen Crabbe and trade for Pat Beverley, both good shooters and excellent defenders to fill the 1 and 2 spots. Those two, Simmons, and two of Embiid, Okafor, Noel, and Saric would be a well balanced lineup both offensively and defensively.

And you can find guys like Crabbe and Beverley every offseason, especially with the amount of assets at the Sixers disposal right now.

An aside, I'm going HARD for Allen Crabbe no matter who they draft. He's an ideal fit here at the 2. Good size, very good on-ball defender, above average shooter (40% 3pt), thrived in Portland where he didn't handle the ball much. He's restricted and Portland wants him back, but they have to think about how much money they are going to have invested in their backcourt with Lillard and McCollum already there. He's going to get somewhere around 4/50 and I'd definitely do that. Plug and play at the 2.

 

[Rey]

Crabbe would be an excellent option if we could get him.

As far as Ingram ... I think he can develop into a top scorer in this league. I don't like him simply because he can shoot, I like him because he is a huge mismatch for most at the 3 due to his height and length. He also has excellent handle ... Simmons gets so much credit for his handle at 6'10, but Ingram does the same at 6'9".

 

[WIZ]

We can also get a couple shooters in the draft.

 

[eaglesnut]

People really are ready to just write off Simmons aren't they? I'm not sure where the belief that Ingram has a higher ceiling than Simmons comes from. Simmons ceiling is being Lebron or Magic (doesn't mean he will get there, but that's his ceiling) he also has a higher floor than Ingram - seeing as how Simmons already has the athleticism and size to handle the rigors of the NBA. As for Ingram's shooting, yes, he did well in college, but free throw shooting percentage has been a better indication of NBA 3pt percentage than college 3pt shooting and Ingram's 68% there is a red flag. Simmons is the better player, and most people don't even think it is that close. Right now the Sixers don't have a superstar, you keep grabbing the best player in the hopes of getting one. Nerlens is a tremendous defensive talent, who does well offensively in the open court but provides little in a half court setting. Jahlil is a black hole who can score but provides nothing else to the point he finished 455 out of 462 players in Real Plus/Minus. He was a negative both offensively and defensively - he scores, but he doesn't set up teammates, doesn't rebound, doesn't defend, and turns the ball over. Embiid could be good, if he could get/stay healthy, but who knows. None of those players are someone I would build a team around, so I would grab Simmons and see if he is.

Okafor was a rookie playing in an abysmal lineup. Do you not afford him the chance to develop?

 

[SixthStreet]

Okafor was much more efficient after Ish came and he didn't have to create his own shots as much. I'm in the minority, but I think Okafor is going to put up monster offensive numbers on very high efficiency with Simmons, who in a strange way is a rich mans super sized Ish Smith (at least on offense).

Still not too sure on Okafor defensively, but I lean towards thinking it's just defensive recognition that's the problem, rather than physical limitations. When defending on-ball, he was pretty good both in the post and on the perimeter, even on switches with guards. The main problems I saw were effort, defensive rotations, closeouts, and confusion when put in the PnR. Those I see as all correctable with coaching and getting in better shape. He will never have the quickness and defensive instincts of Noel, but I see a path to getting credible.

If it was me, I'd keep all the bigs at least through this year and then see which out of Okafor, Noel, and Saric you want to deal. You get to assess fit, and whether Embiid can survive his first full season intact.

I'd be curious to see what a lineup like Stauskas, Crabbe (a little bit wishful thinking here), Simmons, Okafor, and Embiid can do. I like the balance of the lineup, Stauskas' D notwithstanding. Stauskas is actually exactly the type of guy you'd want to play at the point with Simmons. Good shooter, good secondary ballhandler and creator in the halfcourt, but also effective off the ball (screening, cutting, shooting). It's just that he's so putrid on D he's really not a long term fit.

 

[mannyz]

Okafor was a rookie playing in an abysmal lineup. Do you not afford him the chance to develop?

I don't get why people would want to get rid of a guy this talented so soon.

 

[NDIrishGuy]

Okafor was a rookie playing in an abysmal lineup. Do you not afford him the chance to develop?

Sure, he can develop, but superstar players usually show some sign of it their rookie year. They are not usually listed in among the worst players to play that current season. I have read a ton of people crapping all over Nerlens for not "improving" when he is significantly better for team basketball than Jahlil was. 1v1 Jah can probably beat Nerlens. 5v5 though with the other 8 being equal and I will take Nerlens' team - and he's not going to be a superstar either. The biggest reason I don't think he will improve is a majority of rebounding and defense is effort - there is some definite skill to get that last 10% - but just being big and giving effort would make you average or better and Jah was definitely not even average in either of those areas. If you can sell high on him now I would (say for Boston's 1st rounder and another player), same way I thought the MCW trade was brilliant at the time. If Okafor is lucky he will be ZBo and I think that's his ceiling at this point.

 

[eaglesnut]

Sure, he can develop, but superstar players usually show some sign of it their rookie year. They are not usually listed in among the worst players to play that current season. I have read a ton of people crapping all over Nerlens for not "improving" when he is significantly better for team basketball than Jahlil was. 1v1 Jah can probably beat Nerlens. 5v5 though with the other 8 being equal and I will take Nerlens' team - and he's not going to be a superstar either. The biggest reason I don't think he will improve is a majority of rebounding and defense is effort - there is some definite skill to get that last 10% - but just being big and giving effort would make you average or better and Jah was definitely not even average in either of those areas. If you can sell high on him now I would (say for Boston's 1st rounder and another player), same way I thought the MCW trade was brilliant at the time. If Okafor is lucky he will be ZBo and I think that's his ceiling at this point.

Okafor bitched Towns when they faced off. How is that not showing "some sign of it?"

 

[NDIrishGuy]

Okafor bitched Towns when they faced off. How is that not showing "some sign of it?"

He went for 25-12 in the first game and 10-3 in the second game, and finished with the second worst +/- for the Sixers in both games. The Sixers were a bad team, but they were outscored worse with Okafor on the floor than when he wasn't. For example one of the most common Sixer lineups was Okafor, Nerlens, Ish Smith, Stauskas, and Covington - that lineup was outscored by 3.2 points per game (in ~9 min per game). Replace Okafor with Jerami Grant and the lineup actually outscored opponents by .5 points per game (in ~7 minutes). In another grouping Okafor, Nerlens, TJ McConnell, Grant, and Stauskas it was outscored by 3.9 points per game (8.6 min per game together). Replace Okafor with either Richaun Holmes, Covington, Hollis Thompson, or Canaan and all the lineups saw improvements. I get it, looking at his counting stats he looks awesome, but when you leave everyone else the same and replace Okafor, the Sixers are a better team. A potential superstar doesn't have that happen.

(all these stats are on NBA.com)

 

[WIZ]

Maybe when Okafor came out teams took their better players out (and were likely winning) so we played a little better.

 

[eaglesnut]

He went for 25-12 in the first game and 10-3 in the second game, and finished with the second worst +/- for the Sixers in both games. The Sixers were a bad team, but they were outscored worse with Okafor on the floor than when he wasn't. For example one of the most common Sixer lineups was Okafor, Nerlens, Ish Smith, Stauskas, and Covington - that lineup was outscored by 3.2 points per game (in ~9 min per game). Replace Okafor with Jerami Grant and the lineup actually outscored opponents by .5 points per game (in ~7 minutes). In another grouping Okafor, Nerlens, TJ McConnell, Grant, and Stauskas it was outscored by 3.9 points per game (8.6 min per game together). Replace Okafor with either Richaun Holmes, Covington, Hollis Thompson, or Canaan and all the lineups saw improvements. I get it, looking at his counting stats he looks awesome, but when you leave everyone else the same and replace Okafor, the Sixers are a better team. A potential superstar doesn't have that happen.

(all these stats are on NBA.com)

Where is your data on his development over the next few years?