The Official 2015-2016 NBA Regular Season Thread

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by nol

Looking at the current lottery trying to figure out which teams would be the best/most fun fit for Simmons reminds me of why I thought Dragan Bender sneaking in as the top pick wouldn't be a totally shocking outcome.

What about in Boston with the Nets pick being moved up to #1 by the ping pong balls? Then they got that Mavs first also. Means they Could add Simmons @1 to play the 3/4 opposite of Crowder and then grab another 2 out of the Valentine/Beasley/Allen pile around that pick (Should be 14-18 range).

I think the Celtics are suppose to have a crazy low cap number next season (27 million minus 3 things). They got 17 million in non guaranteed options on Amir(1) and Jonas(2) which they will kill off. Evan Turner(3) is UFA (let him go) and Zeller/Sullinger are RFA. Plenty of room to throw money at Gasol, Horford, Drummond or Whiteside during free agency to add a big or play Warriors ball by signing Ryan Anderson for the 4.

I think I'd enjoy Simmons under Brad Stevens. He might learn something as opposed to playing for Johnny Jones.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

He might learn something as opposed to playing for Johnny Jones.

"Learning" may not be his strong suit, given his ineligibility for the Wooden Award. (which appears to be grades-related)

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

"Learning" may not be his strong suit, given his ineligibility for the Wooden Award. (which appears to be grades-related)

Come on now. There is no way he came to play school. It's just like Melo at Syracuse. He got through the first semester and didn't go to classes in the 2nd semester because he had no plans on ever coming back.

[nol]

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

What about in Boston with the Nets pick being moved up to #1 by the ping pong balls? Then they got that Mavs first also. Means they Could add Simmons @1 to play the 3/4 opposite of Crowder and then grab another 2 out of the Valentine/Beasley/Allen pile around that pick (Should be 14-18 range).

I think the Celtics are suppose to have a crazy low cap number next season (27 million minus 3 things). They got 17 million in non guaranteed options on Amir(1) and Jonas(2) which they will kill off. Evan Turner(3) is UFA (let him go) and Zeller/Sullinger are RFA. Plenty of room to throw money at Gasol, Horford, Drummond or Whiteside during free agency to add a big or play Warriors ball by signing Ryan Anderson for the 4.

I think I'd enjoy Simmons under Brad Stevens. He might learn something as opposed to playing for Johnny Jones.

Yeah, the top pick ending up on a playoff team is always a fun idea, especially when compared to the other options, but just as there don't appear to be many crappy teams Simmons would automatically upgrade to intriguing/must watch status, he's not the type of player who would immediately bump the Celtics up to being title contenders due to having anti-synergy on offense with a player like Thomas. Plus if the Celtics are in the market for a stretch 4, Ingram would have as much potential for that role as any player entering the league over the past few years.

Honestly without knowing who's going to be coaching each team next season, the next one on the list would probably be the 76ers just because they play fast and don't have an entrenched point guard who would have to play off the ball to accommodate Simmons.

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

Come on now. There is no way he came to play school. It's just like Melo at Syracuse. He got through the first semester and didn't go to classes in the 2nd semester because he had no plans on ever coming back.

That's at least some small cause for concern: the reason you haven't heard about it happening to anyone since Melo is that players now have to leave school in good academic standing or else it can affect their team's APR. If the dozens of one-and-done players since this rule came into effect have at least managed to show up to their joke classes enough for this to not be an issue, it begs the question of what makes Simmons' case unique.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by nol

That's at least some small cause for concern: the reason you haven't heard about it happening to anyone since Melo is that players now have to leave school in good academic standing or else it can affect their team's APR. If the dozens of one-and-done players since this rule came into effect have at least managed to show up to their joke classes enough for this to not be an issue, it begs the question of what makes Simmons' case unique.

Basically this. He feels like a guy that has a slowly growing number of maturity red flags.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by nol

Yeah, the top pick ending up on a playoff team is always a fun idea, especially when compared to the other options, but just as there don't appear to be many crappy teams Simmons would automatically upgrade to intriguing/must watch status, he's not the type of player who would immediately bump the Celtics up to being title contenders due to having anti-synergy on offense with a player like Thomas. Plus if the Celtics are in the market for a stretch 4, Ingram would have as much potential for that role as any player entering the league over the past few years.

Not sure how Simmons doesn't upgrade the Celtics. He plays on a college team that he is known as the only option yet leads the team in points, assists, rebounds, steals and blocks. He has more offensive rebounds this year than any other players has defensive rebounds on LSU. Think about that for a second. He's the only player subjected to double teams on offense and he still has more offensive rebounds than anyone has defensive rebounds on that same team.

I feel as if someone got in his ear and told him to just make sure he doesn't end up injured playing with a team of chumps. It why I feel the Celtics are probably the best option for him as he can see them as winners (especially if they spend to get a vet down low). Put this kid on the 76ers and he will sit there and be in the same position as he is with LSU. I'm not sure even putting him with AD is the answer as they have a team full of knuckleheads at the guard position. Winning is what Simmons needs to succeed right now and neither the Pelican or 76ers can give him that right now or even next season with him on the roster.

[nol]

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

Not sure how Simmons doesn't upgrade the Celtics. He plays on a college team that he is known as the only option yet leads the team in points, assists, rebounds, steals and blocks. He has more offensive rebounds this year than any other players has defensive rebounds on LSU. Think about that for a second. He's the only player subjected to double teams on offense and he still has more offensive rebounds than anyone has defensive rebounds on that same team.

I feel as if someone got in his ear and told him to just make sure he doesn't end up injured playing with a team of chumps. It why I feel the Celtics are probably the best option for him as he can see them as winners (especially if they spend to get a vet down low). Put this kid on the 76ers and he will sit there and be in the same position as he is with LSU. I'm not sure even putting him with AD is the answer as they have a team full of knuckleheads at the guard position. Winning is what Simmons needs to succeed right now and neither the Pelican or 76ers can give him that right now or even next season with him on the roster.

I mean, if you're trying to say it's a better situation for him to go to the Celtics than to a team that's drafting first overall by virtue of having a bad record, no shit. Bill Simmons and every other yokel has talked about that scenario enough for there to not be a whole lot to add from that angle. I was only illustrating that many of the bad/painful to watch teams in the league are currently in that situation due in large part to an issue that Ben Simmons would initially exacerbate rather than improve.

He doesn't immediately upgrade the Celtics because either Isaiah Thomas would have to be sharing lead ballhandler duties (ask Phoenix how that worked out for them) or Simmons would be relegated to garbageman duties while not spacing the floor. On the defensive end, it doesn't take a particularly astute basketball mind to see that replacing a veteran like Amir Johnson with a 20-year-old who hasn't really had to play defense in his life would be a downgrade.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by nol

I mean, if you're trying to say it's a better situation for him to go to the Celtics than to a team that's drafting first overall by virtue of having a bad record, no shit. Bill Simmons and every other yokel has talked about that scenario enough for there to not be a whole lot to add from that angle. I was only illustrating that many of the bad/painful to watch teams in the league are currently in that situation due in large part to an issue that Ben Simmons would initially exacerbate rather than improve.

He doesn't immediately upgrade the Celtics because either Isaiah Thomas would have to be sharing lead ballhandler duties (ask Phoenix how that worked out for them) or Simmons would be relegated to garbageman duties while not spacing the floor. On the defensive end, it doesn't take a particularly astute basketball mind to see that replacing a veteran like Amir Johnson with a 20-year-old who hasn't really had to play defense in his life would be a downgrade.

Has more to do with a bad culture versus a bad record. Phoenix looked much better record wise when they had 4 point guards and twins who had to dress together but that doesn't means it's a good culture. 76ers are a bad culture as is New Orleans.

[nol]

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

Has more to do with a bad culture versus a bad record. Phoenix looked much better record wise when they had 4 point guards and twins who had to dress together but that doesn't means it's a good culture. 76ers are a bad culture as is New Orleans.

How's Milwaukee's "culture?" It seemed pretty decent last year but worse this year when they got rid of a point guard who could shoot for one who couldn't, which made their team easier to defend. Are there any lottery teams with good "cultures?" If not, it just seems an awful lot like you're just pointing to every team with a bad W-L record and saying it has a bad culture, which is particularly funny in New Orleans's case because to me it looks mostly like a team that will win about 10-15 fewer games than last season while having 3 starters miss most, if not all, of the season due to injury.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by nol

How's Milwaukee's "culture?" It seemed pretty decent last year but worse this year when they got rid of a point guard who could shoot for one who couldn't, which made their team easier to defend. Are there any lottery teams with good "cultures?" If not, it just seems an awful lot like you're just pointing to every team with a bad W-L record and saying it has a bad culture, which is particularly funny in New Orleans's case because to me it looks mostly like a team that will win about 10-15 fewer games than last season while having 3 starters miss most, if not all, of the season due to injury.

You mean the Bucks team which had their coach trying to make a major deal behind the backs of the GM at the deadline this year? Toxic would be a nice way to describe it. Then again this is Jason kidd who I was shocked found a second job. There are winning teams that have a bad culture also. Wiggins would have died in Cleveland. They fired a 1st place coach and have 2 star players on allegedly asking for trades and a coach who said he can't control when James comes in and out of games. Players got rid of a coach that was too hard on them in Chicago and now they complain that they can't win because this one is too nice.

I would use an example of changing the culture resulting in positive change as the Pistons. Ownership believed in svg and backed him with his moves. They aren't winning yet but I believe he changed the culture there. Boston is obvious but I don't consider them the third best team in the east but a lot of people consider Stevens the best coach at running plays right now and that roster has a bunch of eh players on it. The Kings have way more talent than the Nuggets but the Nuggets have the old kings coach. Who do you think has the better culture right now? Boogie didn't want Malone fired and he was their best chance to win in the past decade.

There are places where the culture runs a team into the ground. Boogie listens to no one with the Kings. I would watch him shoot 24 ft shots for an hour before the game and wonder why no one would encourage him to work on the box when Smart was in charge. Kobe made it clear that he is going to start when he tells Byron he will start. Most think Phil has already given up in New York and is just waiting for his girlfriend to fire her brother. Yes, all these teams are losing but it is rare that a team would win with any of the three scenarios above. How many winning teams have a culture like above excluding the cavs?

[Young Drachma]

Meh Simmons is an import who could've just hung out in Oz for a year in the ABL rather than bothering with college basketball. I don't think it has anything to do with ability to play, rather the farce of the one and done rule.

Plus it's not like he's not the first college freshman in history to have a rough first semester. I think the demands of travel, leading a new team, dealing with all of the adjustments of college life and a new country...even if he did finish HS here, is a lot to deal with.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Meh Simmons is an import who could've just hung out in Oz for a year in the ABL rather than bothering with college basketball. I don't think it has anything to do with ability to play, rather the farce of the one and done rule.

Plus it's not like he's not the first college freshman in history to have a rough first semester. I think the demands of travel, leading a new team, dealing with all of the adjustments of college life and a new country...even if he did finish HS here, is a lot to deal with.

He did go to HS for 3 years in the US and his dad is American so it's not like this is the same adjustment most other imports go through.

With that said, I don't think this is much of a red flag or anything to read too much into. The kid is here to get the best path to the NBA and because of the 1 and done rule it has nothing to do with going to class.

[Groundhog]

As an Aussie, I'm not worried in the slightest... TBH, I could care less if he attended a single class. Biggest mistake he made was picking LSU for family reasons rather than a program like Kentucky that would have prepared him better for the NBA.

[nol]

I don't know how many Clippers games I saw Joel Embiid at after Kansas was eliminated from the tournament in 2014, which is pretty good evidence of how little effort is required to be in good academic standing.

[JPhillips]

Lakers are back, baby!

[wustin]

By back do you mean they're going to tank the remaining games except for the last home game to make sure they don't lose their draft pick?

[MrBug708]

What have they been doing all year?

[miami_fan]

#TeamBosh pic.twitter.com/VhindAFSaS

— Chris Bosh (@chrisbosh) March 10, 2016

[Brian Swartz]

So ... Portland scores 61 in the first half against Golden State, and trails by 20! Am I reading that box score right? I am still on planet Earth, am I not?!?

[bronconick]

It's not NBA JAM?

[wustin]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

So ... Portland scores 61 in the first half against Golden State, and trails by 20! Am I reading that box score right? I am still on planet Earth, am I not?!?

Denver Nuggets at Phoenix Suns Box Score, November 10, 1990 | Basketball-Reference.com

[Julio Riddols]

Damn, Denver was bad defensively in the beginning of 1990. Gave up 135 or more to 16 of their first 23 opponents.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

Damn, Denver was bad defensively in the beginning of 1990. Gave up 135 or more to 16 of their first 23 opponents.

Early 80's were worse as they gave up an average of 124 points a game for 4 seasons. Still not 130 bad like 1990 but much worse for a longer period.

[Simbo Klice]

173 points on 0 made 3's. I'd love to hear an old school player defend the "tougher" defense of that era.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

Damn, Denver was bad defensively in the beginning of 1990. Gave up 135 or more to 16 of their first 23 opponents.

This was when Paul Westhead was coach after he had that run with Loyola Marymount in the NCAAs. Unfortunately for him, the track meet attack he developed didn't work in the NBA as the better trained and conditioned opponents ate Denver's lunch and then some.

[Julio Riddols]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

This was when Paul Westhead was coach after he had that run with Loyola Marymount in the NCAAs. Unfortunately for him, the track meet attack he developed didn't work in the NBA as the better trained and conditioned opponents ate Denver's lunch and then some.

I figured something like that had to have been the reason as they also led the league in scoring.. Interesting because I saw that 30 for 30 and thought it was a pretty innovative (if not all that sound) idea. It does look like they stopped trying it about 30 games into the season though.

Reminds me of a guy my aunt dated for a while.. He had a Playstation back when they first came out and he was playing NBA Live 97 I think it was.. And he had a rule for himself that he couldn't shoot until so much time had gone from the shot clock because otherwise he couldn't play with 12 minute quarters like he wanted to. He'd still end up scoring about 120 a game, but the effort he put into trying to score less and keep things realistic was interesting, bordering on comical to me. He still pretty much ended up with run and gun numbers. I think that was my introduction to the idea of house rules and the concept of realism in sports gaming.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

This was when Paul Westhead was coach after he had that run with Loyola Marymount in the NCAAs. Unfortunately for him, the track meet attack he developed didn't work in the NBA as the better trained and conditioned opponents ate Denver's lunch and then some.

Might have worked better if, as this article notes, his rotation hadn't included the likes of Joe Wolf, Blair Rasmussen and Todd Lichti. Other that Michael Adams & maybe an aging but rejuvenated Orlando Woolridge (since Abdul-Rauf reported so out of shape) there really wasn't much on the roster that was suited to what he wanted to do.

Before Mike D'Antoni and George Karl There Was... Paul Westhead - Hardwood Paroxysm

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Might have worked better if, as this article notes, his rotation hadn't included the likes of Joe Wolf, Blair Rasmussen and Todd Lichti. Other that Michael Adams & maybe an aging but rejuvenated Orlando Woolridge (since Abdul-Rauf reported so out of shape) there really wasn't much on the roster that was suited to what he wanted to do.

Before Mike D'Antoni and George Karl There Was... Paul Westhead - Hardwood Paroxysm

Very true, there wasn't a whole lot of talent on that team other than the underrated Michael Adams, Woolridge, and Abdul-Rauf.

It's an interesting roster to look back at though. Marcus Liberty is considered one of the best High School players ever. 24 year old Anthony Mason. 25 year old Avery Johnson. 24 year old Tim Legler. Reggie Williams was the top ranked recruit in his high school class and was expected to be a NBA star. A couple of guys (Wolf and Rasussen) that were drafted when the NBA had an obsession with white 7 footers.

[Atocep]

I didn't realize Brandon Ingram was 15 months younger than Ben Simmons. That's significant enough to make you think about who to take at #1.

[nol]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I didn't realize Brandon Ingram was 15 months younger than Ben Simmons. That's significant enough to make you think about who to take at #1.

Right, and when we bring up the other freshmen who put up big stats while playing for not-great NCAA teams, Kevin Durant was also very young to the point that there have been only 2-3 younger players to debut in the NBA since the one and done rule came into effect.

[JPhillips]

If I'm Philly and they get the #1 I'm more worried about Simmons' current lack of a 3 pt shot. They don't need another PF and I don't think a no 3 SF works at all in today's NBA.

[whomario]

Point-Giannis: 11 games, 20.4/9.3/8.6 and 4 combined Steals/Blocks per game.

Turns out having him handle the ball instead of standing in a corner or cut to the basket waiting for Carter-Williams make up his mind is a good thing. Who ever knew ...

I maintain that even his outside shot looks good. Good form, good arc ... If he gets that to drop at even near league-average, he´s going to be devastating. Without, he could still become a cross between Amare and Kirilenko with better passing.

[nol]

Originally Posted by whomario

Point-Giannis: 11 games, 20.4/9.3/8.6 and 4 combined Steals/Blocks per game.

Turns out having him handle the ball instead of standing in a corner or cut to the basket waiting for Carter-Williams make up his mind is a good thing. Who ever knew ...

I maintain that even his outside shot looks good. Good form, good arc ... If he gets that to drop at even near league-average, he´s going to be devastating. Without, he could still become a cross between Amare and Kirilenko with better passing.

That's the kind of player I was saying at the beginning of the season that Giannis would have to be for the Bucks to maintain or exceed last season's level of success given the solid veterans they ditched for one-dimensional players. I think I said as early as his rookie season that if you could play the game entirely in transition, he'd be All-NBA.

However, Milwaukee hasn't been playing the toughest slate of opponents lately and there's a long way for his jumper to go from where it is to league average; even the perimeter shots he's made over this run are pretty slow and tentative. His increase in scoring isn't due to his stroke looking better but to being put in position where he has more time to plan his drives (he hasn't made a 3 in March and has only shot 3 in 7 games, but he's certainly gotten to the line more often lately), which as you said is somewhat questionable as to how much of his current success is due to bringing him along slowly versus something that could've been happening from the beginning of the season. It will be interesting to see what will happen against opponents who have recently scouted the Bucks considering how the Bulls turned him into an offensive liability in last year's playoffs and also kept him in check last week.

Tying it together with the last few posts, Giannis was actually the youngest player to debut in the NBA since the one-and-done rule and is closer in age to Ben Simmons than Simmons is to Dragan Bender. If people sincerely believe Simmons is at minimum a multiple-time All-Star and likely to turn around a franchise singlehandedly, Giannis and LeBron are the two players currently pushing against the limits of what a non-shooting perimeter player can accomplish in the league, and those two are (and were before they got into the league) on an entirely different level than Simmons athletically.

[Logan]

The Vertical just put out a lengthy article on Simmons.

Why Ben Simmons isn't the top prospect in the 2016 NBA draft - Yahoo Sports

[Groundhog]

Chad Ford too - I imagine lots of negative articles will start to pop up now, with LSU fizzling out of the NCAA and then electing not to go to the NIT. Definitely wasn't a good finish to the year, but I still say the biggest mistake Simmons made was attending LSU over a better school. Imagine how much better his stock would be after a year at Kentucky.

[nol]

Originally Posted by nol

I'm enjoying it the right amount by already knowing Ben Simmons is excellent in transition and can drive to the hoop all day if you try to match up on him with a marginal 6'7-6'8 power forward while knowing he has quite a ways to develop in a more structured environment. Therefore, I don't have to be disappointed when he has an off night against teams that make sure to get back on defense and muck up the game a little more.

Originally Posted by Vertical article

The report on defending Simmons in the half-court is well known and has been utilized effectively in recent weeks. Teams are putting smaller players on Simmons, backing off him and daring him to shoot. Simmons seems to have zero confidence in his outside shot and becomes passive when guarded this way.

Well, how about that? And I'm certainly not as down on Simmons as Woj/his agent sources are because I don't care too much one way or another that Simmons signed with Rich Paul/LeBron without considering anyone else because Simmons clearly looks up to and tries to emulate LeBron and also because the agency hired his sister last year.

From a more global perpective, Simmons' stock has been 'possible number one pick if only due to lack of better options' all year; people just got carried away because of his unique stat lines against bad out of conference opponents.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Chad Ford too - I imagine lots of negative articles will start to pop up now, with LSU fizzling out of the NCAA and then electing not to go to the NIT. Definitely wasn't a good finish to the year, but I still say the biggest mistake Simmons made was attending LSU over a better school. Imagine how much better his stock would be after a year at Kentucky.

Ford will just change his opinion 3 years later when no one is looking like he has with every other draft ranking he has altered.

But to be honest, the LSU games I've watched this year had me questioning if he was all that good(thought he looked average against Arkansas twice and we couldn't stop anyone). When I look at his high scoring games he almost seems to James Harden-like in getting to the foul line a lot. I know that he should be playing with a better surrounding cast but I'm just not sure that will be the case when he gets to the NBA with some of these teams.

I know Ingram doesn't weight that much but you would have to think he fits the 76ers or Lakers better than Simmons but neither team has the balls to pass up on Simmons. I'm not sure Simmons can play the 3 in the NBA with the way teams played him defensively late in the SEC season.

[nol]

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

But to be honest, the LSU games I've watched this year had me questioning if he was all that good(thought he looked average against Arkansas twice and we couldn't stop anyone). When I look at his high scoring games he almost seems to James Harden-like in getting to the foul line a lot. I know that he should be playing with a better surrounding cast but I'm just not sure that will be the case when he gets to the NBA with some of these teams.

I know Ingram doesn't weight that much but you would have to think he fits the 76ers or Lakers better than Simmons but neither team has the balls to pass up on Simmons. I'm not sure Simmons can play the 3 in the NBA with the way teams played him defensively late in the SEC season.

Not that good, but last page you were saying he'd absolutely make a 50-win team in the Celtics better! Oh well, I guess someone with a bigger name than me said it so it's easier to accept now.

Mock drafts like DraftExpress are more focused on accurately predicting who teams will pick than editorializing as to who they think the best players are (or at least it takes some reading between the lines to get that out of them), so the fact that Ingram is being placed ahead of Simmons suggests that a growing number of front office office personnel across the league would in fact be comfortable making that call.

[Atocep]

Ingram isn't without questions though. He's a 68% free throw shooter which suggests that he won't shoot 3's as well at the next level.

What Ingram has going for him is the fact that he wasn't anointed the number one pick in the draft more than 2 years ago.

[murrayyyyy]

Originally Posted by nol

Not that good, but last page you were saying he'd absolutely make a 50-win team in the Celtics better! Oh well, I guess someone with a bigger name than me said it so it's easier to accept now.

Mock drafts like DraftExpress are more focused on accurately predicting who teams will pick than editorializing as to who they think the best players are (or at least it takes some reading between the lines to get that out of them), so the fact that Ingram is being placed ahead of Simmons suggests that a growing number of front office office personnel across the league would in fact be comfortable making that call.

True but I was also the same guy who years ago felt (and posted here that) the Cavs had to draft Bennett #1 because they needed a SF... which they did and probably regret to this day. And I did say his game resembled James Harden's ability to get fouled a ton. I just don't think he's LeBron like draftexpress or nbadraft.net has said he is all season. I think his assist total for the season is really good and he shoots a high percentage but he doesn't seem to shoot a lot (which can be good or bad I guess). He really seemed content to shoot it 10-12 times on a team that had no really talent. He also had a high amount of SEC games with 4-5 fouls this season. Maybe it's him helping too often on defense but I didn't notice that this season.

And I will stick to that theory of he will be better with actual talent around him (like in Boston) compared to Philly (but we know how we disagree on the talent level in Philly) or LA (Byron Scott will kill his career just like Johnny Jones has). He would make any team (Boston, Cleveland, hell even Golden State) better but I think you have to question if he will allow himself to be coached by the likes of Brad Stevens or will he be the next Boogie (million dollar talent, 10 cent brain/attitude).

[Groundhog]

I watched maybe 70% of LSU's games this year, and although I'm biased, my own report would be:

1) LSU's halfcourt offense was terrible, and didn't seem to generate a lot of scoring opportunities for any player on the court, let alone Simmons. Too many possessions where Simmons either did not get a touch, or was handling it outside the three point line, and far too many possessions that wasted 20 seconds of shot clock only to have a guard drive into traffic or attempt a contested jumper. He doesn't have much of a back to the basket game outside of basic baseline spins, etc. but has pretty good touch on awkward looks around the basket, and I don't think LSU did enough to play him outside of the post, using him more as wing or guard on most possessions, especially as a screener rather than target... the way team's defended LSU most nights, he just wasn't going to get the ball in space inside the key.

2) LSU's transition offense was very good. Unfortunately their defense was not good enough to generate a lot of it, but in the open court Simmons' strengths shine through (mainly his handling and vision), and I think that will translate well to the NBA game.

3) Simmons deserves some knock on his individual defense, in particular his effort. His body language wasn't always great on either end, and he really seemed to check out of sections of games on both sides. This seemed to be a symptom of a bigger issue IMO. Simmons just didn't look very happy after the first month of the season, and seemed to get frustrated by his teammates - I'm basing that more on how he would approach possessions after a couple of trips down the court where his teammates take bad shots or he doesn't see a touch, than any signs of him actually reacting to teammates.

4) Simmons confidence more than stroke is the issue with his J. Potentially not a big deal, depending on question marks over his work ethic, because that's really the only way to fix it - hard work in the gym outside of regular training hours.

I think Ingram is likely to step in and win rookie of the year, but Simmons has the higher ceiling. I think being in the right situation is more important to Simmons than Ingram - ie. I could see Simmons really struggling in a place like Philly, but imagine him in the hands of a Brad Stevens.....

[nol]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Ingram isn't without questions though. He's a 68% free throw shooter which suggests that he won't shoot 3's as well at the next level.

What Ingram has going for him is the fact that he wasn't anointed the number one pick in the draft more than 2 years ago.

That's basically the same as saying he's younger; 2 years ago the relative age effect was even more pronounced for Ingram than it would be now so he wouldn't have been as hyped when discussing who the top high school sophomores/juniors were. If he doesn't immediately shoot 41.3% on NBA threes, that still leaves a lot of room to be a very competent shooter (also I wouldn't put as much into the free throw percentage considering he doesn't shoot as many of them per game). What he has going for him is that between his shooting and the fact that he sticks his nose in there and rebounds and blocks shots despite being so young and skinny, he can be a legitimate combo forward when many of the players in the NBA who are labeled as such tend to be tall shooters who guard PFs because they're not quick enough to stay with wings or more versatile players who can step out and make an unguarded 3 but not so well that you really have to gameplan for their shooting ability. That doesn't make him Kevin Durant because the fact of the matter is that there's not always a clear-cut amazing player in every draft, but the things Ingram has to improve on to become a very good NBA player are much more easily remedied than Simmons' issues.

Originally Posted by murrayyyyy

I just don't think he's LeBron like draftexpress or nbadraft.net has said he is all season.

DraftExpress certainly wasn't ever hyping Ben Simmons to that degree:

Brandon Ingram showing why it's foolish to definitively decide who the #1 pick might be in November. There's no LeBron in this draft...

— Jonathan Givony (@DraftExpress) December 19, 2015

Originally Posted by Groundhog

I watched maybe 70% of LSU's games this year, and although I'm biased, my own report would be:

1) LSU's halfcourt offense was terrible, and didn't seem to generate a lot of scoring opportunities for any player on the court, let alone Simmons. Too many possessions where Simmons either did not get a touch, or was handling it outside the three point line, and far too many possessions that wasted 20 seconds of shot clock only to have a guard drive into traffic or attempt a contested jumper. He doesn't have much of a back to the basket game outside of basic baseline spins, etc. but has pretty good touch on awkward looks around the basket, and I don't think LSU did enough to play him outside of the post, using him more as wing or guard on most possessions, especially as a screener rather than target... the way team's defended LSU most nights, he just wasn't going to get the ball in space inside the key.

That's why Rondo was mentioned in the article. You can tell "will this pass get me an assist?" factors in more than "will this pass put my team's offense in a better position to score?" a lot of the time for him, and that's where you get some ugly possessions of Simmons holding the ball, passing up a wide open jumper, trying to drive and not really drawing much help because everyone's already sagged in against him, and then dumping it off to a teammate for a contested last-second look. Stuff like that is not entirely on Xs and Os or the surrounding talent.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by nol

That's why Rondo was mentioned in the article. You can tell "will this pass get me an assist?" factors in more than "will this pass put my team's offense in a better position to score?" a lot of the time for him, and that's where you get some ugly possessions of Simmons holding the ball, passing up a wide open jumper, trying to drive and not really drawing much help because everyone's already sagged in against him, and then dumping it off to a teammate for a contested last-second look. Stuff like that is not entirely on Xs and Os or the surrounding talent.

This is the kind of stuff that I think is overblown thanks to LSU's performance, as opposed to the cause of LSU's performance this year. That's not really what I saw, especially the first 2/3rds of the season, with the problem more being Simmons being passive as opposed to trying to be 'Rondo' and get assists over everything else.

It just didn't fit with what I saw in the games I watched. He could be accused of looking to force some home-run passes at times, yes, but if anything I thought it was more a result of his pass-first mentality than any desire to lead the nation in assists.

[Brian Swartz]

It's like the Pistons are allergic to success or something. They get a whiff of it, then it's like 'uh-oh, might make the playoffs at this rate. Let's get blown out by 40 against a struggling team to restore the status quo.'

Really hard to root for them right now.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

It's like the Pistons are allergic to success or something. They get a whiff of it, then it's like 'uh-oh, might make the playoffs at this rate. Let's get blown out by 40 against a struggling team to restore the status quo.'

Really hard to root for them right now.

Saw some of that game at dinner. My son asked "is it Opposites Day or something?"

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by nol

That's basically the same as saying he's younger; 2 years ago the relative age effect was even more pronounced for Ingram than it would be now so he wouldn't have been as hyped when discussing who the top high school sophomores/juniors were. If he doesn't immediately shoot 41.3% on NBA threes, that still leaves a lot of room to be a very competent shooter (also I wouldn't put as much into the free throw percentage considering he doesn't shoot as many of them per game). What he has going for him is that between his shooting and the fact that he sticks his nose in there and rebounds and blocks shots despite being so young and skinny, he can be a legitimate combo forward when many of the players in the NBA who are labeled as such tend to be tall shooters who guard PFs because they're not quick enough to stay with wings or more versatile players who can step out and make an unguarded 3 but not so well that you really have to gameplan for their shooting ability. That doesn't make him Kevin Durant because the fact of the matter is that there's not always a clear-cut amazing player in every draft, but the things Ingram has to improve on to become a very good NBA player are much more easily remedied than Simmons' issues.

Free throw percentage is one of the best, if not the best, indicator for future 3 point development. Free throw shooting also doesn't fluctuate much, although guys do tend to improve over their college careers. 68% from the free throw line and over 40% from 3 just doesn't happen often.

I would argue that Ben Simmons doesn't need to be a good 3 point shooter to be a good NBA player because he handles the ball, passes very well, rebounds well, and has a very good steal rate. His development as a shooter will determine whether he's merely a good player or a great player. Ingram has to knock down 3s at a solid rate just to be a good player at the next level.

I honestly don't know who I would take #1 overall between these two. Both have red flags and both have high ceilings. Right now I'd likely go with Simmons because I think he has a higher floor and higher ceiling as a player. That doesn't mean Ingram has no shot at being the better player, I just don't think he's the safer pick between the two and the likelihood of Simmons being a below average player is pretty slim IMO. Ingram is tempting, but I just don't trust his outside shooting translating at this point.

[Groundhog]

From the Ford insider article:

Said one scout to me last week about all the criticism Simmons is getting: "It's ridiculous. He's one of the most gifted players at his age that I have ever seen.
"Yeah, he's not a shooter. Yeah, he could be more animated. Yeah, he could do this more or this less. But I can say a lot more critical things about every other draft prospect in this draft, too.

"He's 19. He has the chance to be a triple-double machine. He's one of the best passing big men I've ever seen. He has holes in his game. But he's stuck on an immature team. He isn't used the right way. His team isn't very good. I'd get frustrated, too. He's going to be fine."

Will he? He could have helped us answer that question with a strong, dominating performance in the SEC tournament followed by a surprising LSU run in the NCAA tournament. Instead, he'll probably have to settle for redemption in individual workouts with teams. The size and skill are there for Simmons to be an NBA superstar. Is the heart? That's the question that will have to be answered.

[nol]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

This is the kind of stuff that I think is overblown thanks to LSU's performance, as opposed to the cause of LSU's performance this year. That's not really what I saw, especially the first 2/3rds of the season, with the problem more being Simmons being passive as opposed to trying to be 'Rondo' and get assists over everything else.

It just didn't fit with what I saw in the games I watched. He could be accused of looking to force some home-run passes at times, yes, but if anything I thought it was more a result of his pass-first mentality than any desire to lead the nation in assists.

I wouldn't call it overblown because I certainly hadn't heard it discussed as much as the idea that Simmons is entirely without blame because he led the team in a bunch of statistical categories or that if he'd gone to Duke/Kansas/UNC/Kentucky he'd have been able to show his "true potential" as a Magic/LeBron hybrid. I don't even care all that much about his going to LSU considering that he probably wanted to try something new after playing for a stacked high school team that recruited players from all over the world, but it's silly to automatically assume that some big name coach would have gotten him to play with more intensity on defense or that Simmons would have bought into a reduced role on offense. LSU was pretty close to a net zero for his stock or whatever you'd like to call it: he's criticized now for the lack of team success, but the individual stats he put up by virtue of playing heavy minutes against poor opponents while not having to defer to better teammates helped to build him up first. Contrast that with players like Davis and Towns, who clearly weren't utilized in a way that maximized their talents or raw statistical output while at Kentucky and as a result didn't get widespread hype as the best player to come into the league since _______.

When I point out that Simmons has some Rondo moments, I'm not even trying to read into his mental state, I'm just pointing out instances where how he plays mitigates his raw statistical output. If he passes up a wide-open 12-15 foot shot earlier in the shot clock and as a result has to dish it off to a teammate who misses a more contested look, it doesn't matter much to me why it happened. Maybe he was trying to pad his assist totals or keep his field goal percentage looking good. Maybe he's actually a good shooter but has no confidence in his jump shot. Maybe he's actually a terrible shooter and is making the right play given his limitations as a player. Either way, it's the kind of play that looks efficient on a surface level (no missed field goal for Simmons, not much chance of a turnover, and every once in a while it leads to an assist) but really makes him and his team much easier to guard.

Additionally, seeing enough of those types of plays slightly undermines the idea that LSU runs a significantly worse halfcourt offense than what you'd see from most NCAA teams; if I can run a play that with little to no effort generates a completely uncontested 10-15 foot shot for my leading scorer pretty much every time, I wouldn't be overly concerned with what the 2nd and 3rd options are. The 2nd/3rd options are what's being covered up in order for the opponent to put out a big neon sign that says "we dare you to shoot!"

Now, could LSU have gotten more creative in terms of using Simmons as an off-ball cutter or a screener in a pick-and-roll if he had a smaller player on him (assuming that he'd try to set tough screens, which there isn't much video evidence of)? Sure, but as a Cavs fan, you should be familiar with the idea that you can run an extremely simple offense and still do okay if you have a player who's head and shoulders above the competition making all the decisions, so I'm less concerned with intangibles (I'm sure this year will be a learning experience and he'll try harder and blah blah blah) than I am with the fact that he doesn't look like that explosive of an athlete who can create something out of nothing (most of his highlights are in transition of course, but even the ones in halfcourt tend to feature him backing his dribble way out and getting a head of steam going against a college PF who likely has little/no experience guarding players on the perimeter) and that he doesn't seem to be incredibly instinctive with defensive rotations, which isn't something that gets magically fixed with more effort or a better defensive scheme. Again, all the Magic/LeBron, "this guy's one of the most gifted players at his age I've ever seen" stuff does not jibe with how many qualifications there are about how he needs to be in the perfect environment.

Originally Posted by Atocep

Free throw percentage is one of the best, if not the best, indicator for future 3 point development. Free throw shooting also doesn't fluctuate much, although guys do tend to improve over their college careers. 68% from the free throw line and over 40% from 3 just doesn't happen often.

I would argue that Ben Simmons doesn't need to be a good 3 point shooter to be a good NBA player because he handles the ball, passes very well, rebounds well, and has a very good steal rate. His development as a shooter will determine whether he's merely a good player or a great player. Ingram has to knock down 3s at a solid rate just to be a good player at the next level.

I honestly don't know who I would take #1 overall between these two. Both have red flags and both have high ceilings. Right now I'd likely go with Simmons because I think he has a higher floor and higher ceiling as a player. That doesn't mean Ingram has no shot at being the better player, I just don't think he's the safer pick between the two and the likelihood of Simmons being a below average player is pretty slim IMO. Ingram is tempting, but I just don't trust his outside shooting translating at this point.

I've looked at the same models you've looked at (and then some) and am saying that being a slightly below-average free throw shooter would not result in a player who shoots threes more frequently and at a higher percentage than Ryan Anderson did in college being projected below league average. There are certainly not too many players in the league who can both rebound and shoot threes at even an average level, and then when you add in what Ingram has shown defensively and as a ball handler that list becomes even shorter.

I didn't trust his outside shooting to translate before the season began because it wouldn't have been the first time a tall, athletic wing player struggled with three point shooting against tougher competition (hence why I anticipated Bender to be in the mix for number one overall after underwhelming seasons by all the top freshmen), but there's quite a bit of evidence at this point even before going into safe assumptions such as "an 18 year old has more room to improve than the average player going into the NBA" and "a 6'10 player with a 7'3 wingspan isn't going to struggle too much with regards to getting shots off" that I'd probably be as comfortable assuming that Ingram can shoot as I am that Ben Simmons can rebound, for example.

As for what I'd do with 1(1), I'd try my damnedest to figure out which teams employ scouts who still talk about triple doubles as if they're an awesome thing on their own and trade them the pick.

[wustin]

Philly was planning to tank and trade the 2016 1st pick all along!

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by nol

Additionally, seeing enough of those types of plays slightly undermines the idea that LSU runs a significantly worse halfcourt offense than what you'd see from most NCAA teams: if I can run a play that with little to no effort generates a completely uncontested 10-15 foot shot for my leading scorer pretty much every time, I wouldn't be overly concerned with what the 2nd and 3rd options are

Unless your leading scorer is not a guy who takes 10-15 feet jumpshots? It's not LSU's amazing offense that is getting Simmons space in the midrange - it's the fact that the defense is giving him those shots. You've got your opinions and you're welcome to them, but I don't think there's a person in the country who could watch more than a handful of LSU games and think that Simmons was the problem in their halfcourt offense. I would sit there and count the amount of plays in a row that LSU did not seem to even run a set play - it was like watching youth league basketball, swing the ball a few times, then someone iso.

Simmons obviously needs to get at least a FT-line jumper if he is going to be a combo 3/4 in the NBA as you would imagine he projects to be. It's not like his shooting stroke is broken - he's not MKG. It's just repetition. That would be the least concerning aspect of his flaws if I were an NBA GM.

As a Cavs fan, you should be familiar with the idea that you can run an extremely simple offense and still do okay if you have a player who's head and shoulders above the competition making all the decisions, so I'm less concerned with intangibles (I'm sure this year will be a learning experience and he'll try harder and blah blah blah) than I am with the fact that he doesn't look like that explosive of an athlete who can create something out of nothing (most of his highlights are in transition of course, but even the ones in halfcourt tend to feature him backing his dribble way out and getting a head of steam going against a college PF who likely has little/no experience guarding players on the perimeter) and that he doesn't seem to be incredibly instinctive with defensive rotations, which isn't something that gets magically fixed with more effort or a better defensive scheme.

Sure you can, if you're lead player is the best in the world at the time..... Simmons is not LeBron James, and he wouldn't have been at Duke or Kentucky. I'm not saying Simmons deserves no blame or whatever because he clearly had some bad games and showed a lack of effort, as I said. But that doesn't change the fact that LSU's offense was completely unimaginative (to be kind) and did not put him in a position to succeed.

There's a lot of guys who just don't perform as expected in college and have games better suited for the pros. Maybe Simmons is one of those guys, and maybe he's not. The skills he does have right now certainly seem to favour the up-tempo NBA game with better spacing inside the arc than they do the college game. I could be wrong. So could you. There's guys out there earning a lot of money who know a lot more about it than either of us, and one of them will pull the trigger on Simmons early.