sturt

Listen to the Locked On podcast maybe every couple of months, and happened to do that yesterday. Hearing blogger Glenn Willis and host Brad Rowland speak so conclusively that TLC will be the 15th man, having an appreciable leg up on Okafor, made me do the old Tim the Tool Man Taylor "huh?" Or come to think of it, even better, made me do the old Arnold Jackson... My opinion of the two players is fairly even, all things considered. And this or any time that's the case, from where I sit, the final decision is so much more about what the GM perceives to be the most glaring need, not the talent level of the players. And on that point, I'm unaware of any concerns that Schlenk has at wing, whereas he has outright said, weeks prior to either signing, he would be inclined to obtain a big because he perceived the roster was "light" on that side of things (ostensibly, b/c he has two 2-ways that are both guards). Therefore, I view TLC as Hunter/Huerter insurance. He has a chance to make the roster, but only if one of those is going to end up missing significant time. It's Okafor's to lose, failing that. But lose it, of course, he very well could... particularly if, as suggested in the post above, some better big becomes available at midnight before the season starts. I don't think I'm wrong on any of that. Am I?

With you partially... there should be a higher ethical culture among sports journalists than there is, which isn't actually any different than saying there should be a higher ethical culture among... journalists. Period. Can't go that far with you, though, to speak in terms of "rights." There are many things in our lives where we have, and should have the right to, for instance, say "f*** you." But there is a matter of maturity and decency and respectfulness that 99-ish% of the time ought to persuade any one of us to not.

From Simmons' own perspective, this is where it's just damning to be under contract to a team in a city that, where sports are concerned, is the antithesis of a city of brotherly love. (Well, come to think of it, are we talking about me and my brother as kids, or as adults... huge difference... hehe). Some cities, if not most, I think might just rally around the guy and show some optimism that the ATL series was a one-off. Or, at least, there would be a considerable faction who would take that perspective. But for whatever reason, Philly is that city known for its venom even for its own, and it's not weird in the least to me that Simmons is determined to never wear the Sixer uni ever again... to the point of pushing millions of dollars back to the other side of the table and saying, "nah, no thanks." He's already a wealthy man, or it would be some weird. But his bank account is healthy enough, and truth be told, he does have some leverage in the fact that no team would ever choose to have a 35,000,000 pound weight on their payroll w/o any return for the accommodation... so Morey in reality has no choice but to keep lowering the asking price until a deal would be struck.

You're welcome to your opinion, of course, that it's an "absurdity." My opinion, fwiw, is that I have no opinion unless/until, indeed, I would see him being asked to be a primary ball handler. And/but no, not just for one game. There's plenty of rookie PGs that come into the league with turnover problems. IIRC, Trae was one. Think Dennis, too. It would need to be a situation where Cam was being depended upon for that role for half a season. That's not happening, of course. So, I'll remain comfortable with the unknown, and also comfortable with your decision that you do know w/o empirical evidence. Not an important issue.

Shaq, open up and tell us what you really think please.

We would disagree on the handles part because I've seen workout videos prior to him being drafted that are pretty jaw-dropping. And I can't say either way about the vision part, though I get why that would be the natural conclusion, of course. He's just not been in anything resembling a primary ball handler role since HS, and Duke was stocked with PGs that Krzyzewski preferred. So, I grant that your inclination about court vision is more likely than not, but I'm not one to reach any conclusions without Reddish actually being put in that position. Indeed, he may not be probably isn't backup PG material, but he's also probably better suited than anyone ordinarily would think.

I'm sure most know this, but I'll mention it anyhow, that Cam had been considered a PG until he got to Duke. Fwiw.

Ya know, actually I recall Schlenk specifically said in the most recent (?) YouTube presser something like "ideally you'd like to have five 6-9 guys." I grinned slyly when I heard it.

Interesting. Big2O is tilting his head slightly, so I think he's technically taller by an inch or two, but then he's not functionally taller because both their shoulders appear to be about the same (probably Cam looks to have advantage because of how he's gripping the ball, imo).

If I could ask Travis Schlenk one question after his having ingested truth serum, it probably would be, "Travis, compare how you feel right now about this team with how you remember feeling preseason about the 2014-15 Warriors."

Did the same thing when Delon Wright got behind the mic.

1. More in the vein of reality, it wouldn't be a plane crash, but perhaps a career-ending injury (God forbid). 2. OH. So it's worse than I'd understood, then. You're saying that Cheeks, Moncrief and McGinnis would have made the HoF on the basis of their first four years (yes?) And therefore, so would Simmons... you're not even saying, then, what I thought you were saying, ie, that based on Simmons' trajectory being so similar to theirs... but that they would have made the HoF had any of them had a career ending injury after 4 yrs (yes?) And that Simmons has already equaled if not exceeded anything that Beaty, Haywood or King achieved (yes?) If I've got that right... then, like I said... different planets... if not different solar systems.

Diesel, repeating yourself doesn't somehow make your point valid... it's as-if you didn't even read the rest of the post, truly...

I need a subscription to Basketball Digest. Good to see Dave's finding some fulfillment in his retirement years.

Is it, though? Or is it, "in light of them missing Danny Green, and us missing Dre and Cam, and assuming Simmons' headcase fights within himself, I like our chances if both were 100%," Of what I've read, it's definitely the latter, and not what you said. But maybe I need to read more.

But, wait. Your words were explicitly, "if he stopped playing today." You get that, right? Are you asserting that Cheeks, Moncrief, McGinnis would have been "possibly locks" (again, using your words) for the HOF on the basis of only their first 4 years??? Now c'mon. Not even you believe that. That's why you're saying that, but then actually using their entire careers and the trajectory of their first four to try to buttress your conclusion. Pardon the observation, but post after post after post, what you keep ignoring that I/we keep saying is that there is a very reasonable question right now as to whether Simmons has hit a speed bump in his career that ends up modifying his trajectory... and thus, modifying what his entire career looks like, ie, significantly less than your comparables. None of your responses except for one insofar as I've caught it have spoken to the possibility that this episode ends up sending his career on an appreciably less attractive trajectory... and of course, saying in effect at least as I interpreted it, "It's okay if BS isn't good enough to put us over the top--Schlenk will just draft more rookie-scale contract super talents in the back end of the draft to make up for it." *sigh*

We're on different planets. On my planet, he's not a lock, and he's not even "possibly" a lock. He's not even on the fence. From where I sit, I see the fence as being right in front of him. And he's at a place in his career that he's going to either (a) become the guy who infamously underperformed because of some psychological efficacy issues that became blatantly clear in 2021, and he remained on the wrong side of that fence for the balance of his career, or (b) the guy who famously overcame those issues. I'd bet on "b" if forced to bet... but it's too close to call for me to even be interested in making a bet if losing the bet means that the Schlenk is fiscally hog-tied for these upcoming critical years.

Don't care what you want to call it. Make up a new name if you'd like. At its core, just like Sax, it's a psychological efficacy thing if you want to get into some technicalities, but who really cares. The point made remains.

This was never the case for Shaq. It is the case for BS. And every post you've posted @Diesel has curiously ignored it, though it's been the theme of every post I've posted.

Not from me. Um. You'd have to show me some evidence that there is some similarity between Simmons' parting experiences in PHI and Shaq's parting experiences in ORL. There is no similarity that I recall. Everyone understood Shaq to be dominant. There would not have been a single team that wouldn't have moved heaven and earth to get him if they could. And most applicable... there was no Steve Sax syndrome concern. The concern is not merely free throw shooting for BS. The concern is more than that. It's that he checked out of games. He's begun to doubt his ability to affect a game offensively. That could reverse itself once he gets to a new place. I might even say it's likely. But because of the situation it puts ATL in if that didn't happen, and in view of the fact that it's not necessary for Schlenk to take that risk given the assets he has... it doesn't work for us. For some other team, sure. Not us. Some are. Not very many, actually, or it would be a seller's market for him. Word is that PHI might finally be coming to the realization that they're not getting what they thought they would get. Those that are, no doubt, see blood in the water, and think they can get a bargain basement discount. And they might be right. We'll see.

1. Actually, it's not for this season or next. 2. Um. That's my line. 3. Zooming out, what you spend practically all of your words about Simmons discussing, Dies, is the reward side... that "walking triple-double" thing. I'm not sure why, because most of us insofar as I've read any of this thread, have acknowledged the reward side. But that's not true. Really, I think I do know why... because you get it that the risk side is so toxic that you won't even let yourself go there as you think about the situation. And yet, you know as well as any of the rest of us, we make a deal for Simmons, and there's no even barely decent options on the other side of that. Your best offering was to suggest that Schlenk can draft such exceptional talent in the late 20s that we can survive a Steve Sax evolution of Simmons anyhow. C'mon. No. Clearly, you've sold yourself on this, though. I don't pretend to have said anything that would back you away from that cliff. But at least I have the self satisfaction that I tried.

So, your answer to "how do we deal with a monster bad contract if the player doesn't get us over the top"... is... draft more rookies??? What? Me, I subscribe to the idea that... ... so, no, the time is now. This team can't be dependent on grooming rookies at this stage as a strategy for winning a title.... and who's kidding whom that you're going to get superior talent drafting in the back end of the draft every year anyhow. At that salary, Simmons is simply too high of a Steve Sax syndrome risk for a team at our stage of evolution.

Me, I do wish he didn't have the contract he does because I do agree with @Diesel that the whole of the evidence suggests whoever obtains him will be getting a quality player. But at that number, for that number of years? No. I have to have a player who I have full confidence did not just have a Steve Sax moment, ie, one so psychologically devastating as to torture him for much, if not all, of the rest of his career. Look, Cam might never be better than Simmons. Dre might never be better. Kev might never be better. However, I can deal with that because I'm not locked in to a big-number-big-year contract with any of them anyhow. They will or won't prove their worth. I get to hold on to my options and make a judgment after this season, which many of us perceive as the franchise's best chance to go to the NBA Finals since Nique and Bird went 7 games. Whereas, if I invest in Simmons, it's the epitome of shoving all of the poker chips into the middle of the table. It's all or nothing, and if it doesn't go exceedingly well... not just good, but if it doesn't prove to put us over the top... then I'm stuck. I've got a humongously bad contract that will be a ball and chain with consequences like we haven't seen since Jon Koncak's contract in his era. Notice, I didn't even mention what we would give up.... even if we gave up nothing, it's a problem. It's made worse by the loss of whoever we would send to Philly. Just. Can't. Do it. Again, wish I could. I do see reason for believing it could work, as said, exceedingly well and he could prove to be the biggest bargain basement trade acquisition, not just for ATL, but for any team in the last several years. It would be general manager malpractice of the highest order, though, to take that degree of risk. Goodbye, BS thread. You are officially, for good, dead to me.