Young NBA Cores

[Gray Mule]

14 hours ago, sillent said:

Onyeka Okongwu isn't even on the list and I believe he's only 20 as well.

Ah, well.  Our newly drafted PG is in this age group.  We aren't going to be the oldest NBA team for a while yet.

[Diesel]

On 8/25/2021 at 4:49 PM, JayBirdHawk said:

 

No, The article specifically states in the 2nd paragraph:

This discussion is all about the Association's youth—more specifically, only players who are under the age of 25 and still will be as of the regular season's opening night (Oct. 19).

That's a meaningless discussion. 

If you want to know who has the best young Under 25 talent, look at who had the most lottery picks over the last 5. 

or who had the most players in the rookies vs. Sophomore game. 

However, don't call that a team.. or even Core players.   

looking at the average age or even the average age of the starters is better. 

[Diesel]

On 8/25/2021 at 4:54 PM, sillent said:

Name Philly's players under 25.

Simmons, Maxie, Milton, Thybulle, Korkmaz and Embiid is only 27. 

 

[sillent]

3 hours ago, Diesel said:

Simmons, Maxie, Milton, Thybulle, Korkmaz and Embiid is only 27. 

 

Embiid obviously doesn't meet the age requirements. On top of that are there any you would trade our young core for. 

I'm sure I'm asking the wrong "gm" but humor me.

[Diesel]

4 hours ago, sillent said:

Embiid obviously doesn't meet the age requirements. On top of that are there any you would trade our young core for. 

I'm sure I'm asking the wrong "gm" but humor me.

I would trade any of ours (save Trae) for Simmons. 

 

[sillent]

4 hours ago, Diesel said:

I would trade any of ours (save Trae) for Simmons. 

 

You might need to be on Simmons Squawk Just saying....

 

We Dribble, Pass and Shoot over here & that's just the basics. 

Edited August 27, 2021 by sillent

[RandomFan]

10 minutes ago, sillent said:

You might need to be on Simmons Squawk Just saying....

Or, this is one of the times Diesel is correct. Focusing on what Simmons can't do has warped some minds on how much he actually can do. He would easily be our 2nd best player behind Trae, even ahead of Hunter. And that's if his shooting woes never improved, which it's hard to imagine his shot and confidence remaining as bad as there were in the playoffs.  

[kg01]

27 minutes ago, RandomFan said:

Or, this is one of the times Diesel is correct. Focusing on what Simmons can't do has warped some minds on how much he actually can do. He would easily be our 2nd best player behind Trae, even ahead of Hunter. And that's if his shooting woes never improved, which it's hard to imagine his shot and confidence remaining as bad as there were in the playoffs.  

You're both right .. or is it that you're both ... wrong? 

Simmons isn't the trash he's being portrayed to be.  But, in order for him to actually contribute, it's gonna take a lot of reprogramming.  First, he  is  not  a  point  guard .... 

If he refuses to accept his fact, then no he would not be a good add.  If he does, and he embraces the new role (including not being afraid to shoot), he could be a tremendous add.

But that first step can't be ignored when assessing his value.

[Spud2nique]

2 minutes ago, kg01 said:

You're both right .. or is it that you're both ... wrong? 

Simmons isn't the trash he's being portrayed to be.  But, in order for him to actually contribute, it's gonna take a lot of reprogramming.  First, he  is  not  a  point  guard .... 

If he refuses to accept his fact, then no he would not be a good add.  If he does, and he embraces the new role (including not being afraid to shoot), he could be a tremendous add.

But that first step can't be ignored when assessing his value.

Spurs and Kings need to get involved, agree with Gramps Sixers send him west but for his sake, small market small town otherwise he’s choking again.

[kg01]

1 minute ago, Spud2nique said:

Spurs and Kings need to get involved, agree with Gramps Sixers send him west but for his sake, small market small town otherwise he’s choking again.

Honestly, I think he could thrive wherever.  But he has to accept a different role/position and get over the not-shooting thing.

[macdaddy]

28 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Honestly, I think he could thrive wherever.  But he has to accept a different role/position and get over the not-shooting thing.

What teams can really afford to pay him max money for 4 years with those flaws though.   I'm sure Warriors, Portland, or someone would be fine paying the bucks but have no good way to acquire him right?

[sillent]

7 hours ago, RandomFan said:

Or, this is one of the times Diesel is correct. Focusing on what Simmons can't do has warped some minds on how much he actually can do. He would easily be our 2nd best player behind Trae, even ahead of Hunter. And that's if his shooting woes never improved, which it's hard to imagine his shot and confidence remaining as bad as there were in the playoffs.  

I'm not underestimating Simmons believe me. I do think some of our young players especially Cam are being underestimated but that's cool.

All I'm saying is GM's build their teams based on philosophy. Dribble, Pass, Shoot is Travis basic GM philosophy. It keeps the floor spread, makes us versatile and dangerous at 4-5 spots on the court.

Not even saying Simmons won't eventually shoot but from the current evidence the same liability we have made Simmons others will follow that blue print. Even if he's on our team.

[sillent]

7 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

Spurs and Kings need to get involved, agree with Gramps Sixers send him west but for his sake, small market small town otherwise he’s choking again.

I consider myself a team builder and I wouldn't even mind seeing the Wolves and Blazers get involved.

Simmons with CJ McCollum would be a great combo especially with additional shooters like Snell, Covington and more... It would automatically balance out the Blazers and give them some height in the backcourt to go along with a ridiculous scorer in CJ.

The Wolves can somehow move, Russell  Beasley, some 1st round picks and Patrick Beverly and maybe another player Philly would like via an extra team. An Ant Edwards, Ben Simmons, KAT squad with an emerging Nathan Knight, Jaden McDaniels and Taurean Prince as a gunner might be able to help change their fortunes.

Not saying that this will be their lineup but their team would have more defense and a squad more capable of making some noise.

[Diesel]

7 hours ago, kg01 said:

You're both right .. or is it that you're both ... wrong? 

Simmons isn't the trash he's being portrayed to be.  But, in order for him to actually contribute, it's gonna take a lot of reprogramming.  First, he  is  not  a  point  guard .... 

If he refuses to accept his fact, then no he would not be a good add.  If he does, and he embraces the new role (including not being afraid to shoot), he could be a tremendous add.

But that first step can't be ignored when assessing his value.

I don't think I ever said he was a Point Guard.  I would not bring him in to play beside Trae if that were the case.   I see him as a scorer.  Not a three point shooter....  A scorer. A defender (lockdown).  A guy who can pass at an above average level.   You think that first team all defense was for nothing?

 

 

[Diesel]

15 minutes ago, sillent said:

I'm not underestimating Simmons believe me. I do think some of our young players especially Cam are being underestimated but that's cool.

All I'm saying is GM's build their teams based on philosophy. Dribble, Pass, Shoot is Travis basic GM philosophy. It keeps the floor spread, makes us versatile and dangerous at 4-5 spots on the court.

Not even saying Simmons won't eventually shoot but from the current evidence the same liability we have made Simmons others will follow that blue print. Even if he's on our team.

Shaq couldn't shoot the three ball or hit free throws either.   You find a players strength and you build on that.  I'm not worried about a Hack-a-Simmons because the game will be so far out of reach, there will be no need. 

 

[RandomFan]

20 minutes ago, sillent said:

I'm not underestimating Simmons believe me. I do think some of our young players especially Cam are being underestimated but that's cool.

All I'm saying is GM's build their teams based on philosophy. Dribble, Pass, Shoot is Travis basic GM philosophy. It keeps the floor spread, makes us versatile and dangerous at 4-5 spots on the court.

Not even saying Simmons won't eventually shoot but from the current evidence the same liability we have made Simmons others will follow that blue print. Even if he's on our team.

According to Supes the Hawks were in the offering for Simmons in the trade discussions. Ask yourself why that might be, and what you might be missing in light of that news.  

[Spud2nique]

20 minutes ago, sillent said:

with an emerging Nathan Knight,

love it.

[sillent]

2 minutes ago, Diesel said:

I don't think I ever said he was a Point Guard.  I would not bring him in to play beside Trae if that were the case.   I see him as a scorer.  Not a three point shooter....  A scorer. A defender (lockdown).  A guy who can pass at an above average level.   You think that first team all defense was for nothing?

 

 

I think the 1st team defense is because 1 he's a good defender but the most important factor is he's 6'10 dominating point guards for the most part.

If his position changes so will some of that dominance. If he has to go at Cam and Dre on a regular on both ends he ain't gone look his best. Even Huerter might give him some problems or Trae will have free reign.

If he has to go against power forwards on a regular JC will eat his lunch. I'm almost sure JC will come back with those handles he was supposed to showcase last year.

All I'm saying is in theory it sounds good but most players are who they are. Once they get in the league they just work on being a better version of themselves.

Simmons has been in the league 6yrs already. Yes he can gain a shot he actually had one (a little) before the league. Can he change his position and all the adjustments required to be the player people expect on a new team maybe.

We are better positioned in our maybe's as currently constructed. Bringing a player that cost more than most if not all of our young players for a maybe fit is not the move.

We're a team that's used to floor spacing, running it thru Trae with the starters and etc which means we would need Simmons to be more versatile than he currently projects.

JC and company shooting corner 3's and other intangibles keeping the floor spaced for Trae to do his thing. Simmons is used to the ball in his hands as much as Trae. Trae isn't Curry he's not an offball player on a regular. It's just not his game (neither was Nash although he could shoot too).

On paper and theory Simmons may sound good but paper and theory is not what wins championships. We're on a great course now and it would be foolish to change it for a maybe it would work. Literally our team and Simmons would have to adjust everything they currently do and that's not easy.

 

[sillent]

20 minutes ago, RandomFan said:

According to Supes the Hawks were in the offering for Simmons in the trade discussions. Ask yourself why that might be, and what you might be missing in light of that news.  

Yeah and ask yourself why it didn't go down. Cam and a 1st round. Both GM's weren't willing to complete the move.

Thankfully for us because I can almost bet that Cam will ultimately be the better player when it's all said and done.

Morey's reputation is going to keep taking hits but I understand because right now Cam is a maybe for them. With Joel's window they can't afford maybe's.

In Travis case it would be just adding that 3rd known star but patience may show Dre and Cam are that in the near future.

In the nba would've scenarios are always something to talk about. What actually happens is what matters. I heard we would've got RJ Barrett if we could've moved up to that 3rd pick instead of 4th for Hunter. To me that would've been a horrible move and in hindsight I think you'd agree.

 

Edited August 28, 2021 by sillent

[RandomFan]

2 minutes ago, sillent said:

In Travis case it would be just adding that 3rd known star but patience may show Dre and Cam are that in the near future.

 

Wait a minute, "3rd" known star? And unless I misunderstand you then you seem to think Dre nor Cam are the 2nd star? Exactly who do you think our 2nd star is? Because Dre is our 2nd best player, sooo.