The Philadelphis 76ers have been underwhelmed by the offers they’ve received for Ben Simmons, according to a new report from Kyle Neubeck of the PhillyVoice. While this isn’t surprising news (if they had a great offer a trade very well might already be done), but it warrants our attention because Neubeck specifically discusses the Sacramento Kings as one such underwhelming discussion:
The Sixers are uninterested in packages returning multiple role players and picks in exchange for Simmons, according to a source familiar with the situation. As one specific example, a source told PhillyVoice the Sixers would not even entertain a discussion with the Sacramento Kings save for the inclusion of guard De’Aaron Fox in a potential deal, which they view simply as a starting point for talks.
While this isn’t exactly surprising to hear coming from Philly, it does likely signal that the Kings won’t be in the mix for Simmons. The 76ers are trying to build Simmons trade value back up, and leaking “we won’t even start discussing what else you give us unless it starts with Fox” is trying to send a signal to the league that Philadelphia won’t be selling cheap.
While the report doesn’t specifically say how the Kings reacted, it seems a safe bet at this point that Sacramento stepped away from the table once Philly demanded that Fox be in the deal. There’s be no indication from anywhere that Fox or Tyrese Haliburton have been made available in any trade discussions.
If Kings are gonna think blockbuster, I’d rather chase Siakam with Fox and give Haliburton the reigns of the team.
You think the Kings should trade Fox to get Siakam, who just had labrum surgery?
I’m going to politely disagree with your strategy.
While I don’t care for his strategy, I’ve had surgery to repair a torn labrum in my left shoulder. It wasn’t that bad. I can’t imagine a torn labrum threatening a career even without repair.
Not suggesting a labrum is career-ending, but he’s going to miss a significant portion of this season and there’s a history of players taking a while to fully recover even after they’ve returned to play.
A torn labrum really prevents one from giving high-fives. And 4 out of 5 doctors say, ‘you should high five!’
For me Siakam is a good option specifically if you don’t want to trade Fox. Because of the contract and injury, he’s a high level player that fills the Kings needs well that you may be able to get without giving up Fox or Hali.
It’ll be really interesting to see what direction the Raptors go. They feel rebuild-y, but VanVleet/Flynn, Trent Jr., Anunoby, Siakam, Boucher isn’t a bad start by any means. If they get if their #4 performs, they could easily be back in the playoffs next season.
I’d like Siakam, but I can’t imagine a trade that works for both sides, without a third team. Why would they want anyone on the kings roster, with matching salary, not named Fox or Hali to rebuild around?
I would think, if they rebuild, the main attractions would be picks, with a little “hey, let’s see what Bagley might be able to do.” Not to mention, the 4 + 9 could be enough to move them up this draft a bit if they want to. Actually, I can see a number of combinations that could work if they’re rebuilding. Even if they’re doing a soft rebuild, they could consider something as simple as Barnes + Bagley (+ a future pick) to gain a little potential and/or future cap.
Again, it’s hard to say without knowing which direction they go. Ultimately, they’ll probably just pick Suggs, pick up some asset in a Lowry S&T, sign Holmes and go get a 5 seed with a Van Vleet, Suggs, Anunoby, Siakam (when he gets back)/Boucher, Holmes lineup.
Nice!
I don’t think Kings want at all to trade Fox. Not for Simmonds and not for Siakem.
and I don’t think Toronto is interested all that much in trading Siakem. They will get Suggs ( probably) and keep FVF and Anunoby ( we took J. Jackson over him) and have a fairly good base lineup. In addition, they ( or Hornets) may get Holmes. I would consider Barnes + Bagley + a future pick for Siakem.
I agree that Siakam should not require Fox to be traded. They’re looking a bit like they’re veering in opposite directions with Fox going up and Siakam having a pretty unimpressive year + injury. I like Siakam, just don’t think Fox should be the exchange.
If we were to trade for Siakam or someone of similar value, I’d say bagz + buddy/barnes + this year’s pick, and at most a pick swap in the future. Siakam is really good, but I think he showed that he isn’t a no 1 option kind of guy since Kawhi left
I suggest you do a news search on siakam and read the names being discussed in deals for him. They are at Fox level
I don’t care about names that people are pitching in hypothetical trades.
Siakam put up 21/7/4 last season and is 27 years old, and under contract for 3 more years. He’s also coming off a major surgery and will likely miss time to start this season.
Fox put up 25/3/7, is just 23 years old, and is under contract for 5 years.
Please explain why you think it would make any sense for the Kings to swap those players.
I did a quick search. The biggest name include that was from a Raptors redditor was Jerami Grant.
I’m not even saying they should. I’m saying I’d rather target a long, athletic big man than a point guard who can’t even play point guard in the NBA and seems to have some serious issues about his shot. As for Siakam, age 27 is prime time for an NBA player. You couldn’t even have sniffed a trade for Siakam a year ago. The only reason it’s possible is because of his off year and injury. I like Fox. I like him a lot. But he has not elevated the team around him like Trae or Ja Morant.
Good thinking. Should just skip over those wasteful 23-27 Fox years and get right to the meat and potatoes.
Unlike Siakam who elevated his team this year to the 7th position…in the lottery.
Way to cherry pick comments.
If by cherry picking you mean citing practically half your comment, then yes I cherry picked.
Guess I should have included the part where you bitch about Fox’s shot but Siakam shot 29% from three last year. That way I wouldn’t be cherry picking at least.
it makes no sense at all.
IMO, Kings are not ready to trade for “the one guy” just yet. Suns, for example, had a star ( Booker) and 2 emerging guys before they traded leftovers for a “washed up” CP3.
Get the third guy – Wagner- in this draft- and then think about it.
Big question is Holmes- cannot get him with early bird rights. Have to move Buddy or Barnes ( not Bagley) to get the space for that. I would not advocate giving away a #9 just to get rid of one of those 2. Think about that- give up a starter + a lottery pick just to keep Holmes. Nope.
I am not even sure if can do a sign and trade with Holmes without the cap space.
I know “kings Nation” does not like Buddy but out of 29 teams there is one who values his shooting. His current talent level and proven play is better than most anyone slated past the lottery. Buddy vs. Kispert, vs. Duarte, vs. Springer, vs. Butler. ??? Buddy is a proven scorer. Can’t play D but can score.
Siakam is nowhere close to Simmons’ level.
I think Siakam is a high end role player. At least at this point.
Fox for Siakam is laughable
Think about it. If it was the other way around, would the Raptors trade Fox for Siakam? I don’t think so.
Kings fans always overvalue their players.
Is that why we are trying to trade a 14/7 Bagley for beef jerky and taco bell hot sauce packets?
Oh yeah, 76ers? Well I DEMAND FOX AND SIMMONS BOTH BE ON THE KINGS.
…I also demand Cash Considerations.
Give me all your Foxes!
/https://www.thespec.com/content/dam/thespec/news/world/2017/12/04/bank-robbery-etiquette-using-a-cheque-for-your-demand-note-will-get-you-busted/B823677262Z.1_20171204084458_000_GKR20ME2S.1_Gallery.jpg)
If that’s Ben Simmons behind the mask and shooting that gun, I ain’t worried.
That seems about right; if I’m Philly, Fox is the first name out of my mouth. I can’t blame them for that position, although I’m glad that McNair didn’t entertain it (barring additional details to which I’m not privy).
Simmons will start the season in Philadelphia, and if his struggles continue, some team will offer a reduced package before the deadline, and the Sixers may decide to cut bait and take it.
Yep. IF they were to make a deal (which I would give a roughly .01% chance of happening), Fox for Simmons is the most realistic one that makes most sense (for both sides IMO).
It really does. I agree with Sims that Philly will likely hang onto Simmons through the summer. That being said, if Hali takes another leap his sophomore season, I’d be more inclined to move Fox for Simmons.
What else are we bringing back in that deal? Is Simmons worth Fox straight up? Given the current circumstance in Philly, I’d say we’d have some draft picks coming to us. What’s Philly gonna do with 2-3 years worth of #25-30 picks?
No, Simmons is worth more than Fox.
It’s very questionable to me whether we’re a better team trading Fox for Simmons straight up. I would definitely not send any thing else back in that deal.
I think it’s fair to say it’s questionable, but as I’ve said before, I think a Haliburton, Hield, Barnes, Simmons base is a better, more complete one than Fox, Hali, Hield, Barnes. I think the gains in rebounding and defending more than make up for the loss in shooting when you still have 3 40% shooters in the lineup.
That said, I don’t think it matters because it isn’t going to happen. Regardless of whether or not Simmons is the better player, it would take impossibly large cajones for Monte to trade Fox for him right now.
I’d rather bet on the future with Fox, Hali, Moody, Barnes than Hali, Heild, Simmons, Barnes. Who breaks down the defense off the dribble? And anyway Hield just needs to go. To the bench probably unless Monte can swing something right away which I doubt, and I don’t feel the impetus to make a deal that seems so prevalent around here. I’ve been saying for a while signing Hield over Bogey has set the franchise back a year or two, because his contract is untradeable for the first couple seasons and we’re just gonna have to pay it down a bit before we can trade him without taking pennies on the dollar. If we have to wait until next season to get value for him then we have to wait. As his contract gets shorter his value will come back around just as Barnes’ did.
Fair enough. I don’t think that much of Moody, but he isn’t on the team anyway and I don’t see him as a meaningful part of the discussion. I can see your POV. I just disagree.
Yeah and I’m not sure Simmons isn’t worth Fox straight up but the line-up you created seems a bit floor bound. And without Fox the Kings aren’t that athletic. I know Simmons is an athlete but not so explosive as Fox.
Is that your idea in full, or are you willing to send sweeteners back to Philly with Fox?
Nobody there is below average athletically, Barnes is well above average and Simmons is elite. I mean, almost nobody is as explosive as Fox. But you also don’t necessarily need to be. And, of course, Hali, Barnes, Simmons and Turner all have excellent size, length and fluidity for their positions.
I like the idea. I’m just not ready to endorse it.
I think Moody as a likely candidate for pick #9 is meaningful if a bit hypothetical. If we keep the pick instead of shipping it out for Simmons it becomes a player. I really brought up Moody as an archetype. Your not interested in someone like Mitchell, don’t think much of Moody. Who do you like if we use the pick?
To be clear I like Moody because he fits the 3&D archetype so well. Also I feel like he is a near perfect match for this roster. I want to spell these reasons out.
He is a high volume deep range shooter who has been compared to Buddy Hield with better D. A lot Better.
His weakness as a scorer is near the basket which is a benefit for this roster because he has no tendency to clog the paint on offense.
He draws a lot of fouls and this can help fill a hole in the Kings offense in the half-court.
He’s a very good on-and-off-ball defender. A lot is being made of his lack of height at 6’4″ , but you don’t get stocks with your head in basketball it’s your reach and he has good standing reach and a long wing span. More importantly he has already shown himself to be capable of guarding much bigger players which he did at Arkansas regularly.
He’s a smallish three who would not squeeze out Woodard, whose more of a 3-4. He can slot right in at 3 as a starter and move Barnes to the 4 where he is better. He can play at the 2 in bigger line-ups, and could eventually replace Buddy, if they choose to go that way.
Obviously the intangibles, he’s young and looks like an NBA talent already with room to grow both in his game and physically.
He faded against Baylor when they keyed-in on him, but defenses wont be able to focus on him with Fox/Hali as first options and hopefully Holmes or someone putting pressure inside so he can concentrate on catch-and-shoot from deep and he sounds really really good, in theory.
Moody looks a bit like a young Ariza with that slender frame and his broad shoulders. Also some of the biggest hands at the combine. A sign he still has another growth spurt in him? Kawhi Leonard sized hands!
He has the potential to develop into a Mikal Bridges type. But with Mikal we had the opportunity to see that development begin to be realized before time started ticking on his rookie deal.
I rooted hard for Vlade to draft Bridges. I liked him a lot. I like Moody a lot more now than I ever liked Bridges. Other than Doncic, Moody is my biggest draft crush since Leonard. I, like I suspect most of you, have been a lot better at spotting talent than the Kings over the last decade or two. Not to brag, it’s not much of an accomplishment. but I’m sure hoping they either follow my advice this year, or I sure hope I’m wrong this time so Sac doesn’t waste the best years of Fox/Hali.
“Is that a dare, BHE? Sounds like you’re daring me to do it.”
Of Hali, Buddy, Barnes, Simmons, that’s 3 players who tend to defer, no Alphas, only 1 scorer, and Buddy isn’t the guy I want my all-star deferring to.
Also any future line-up including Buddy Hield is flawed for a multitude of reasons, beginning with, he doesn’t wanna be here.
Yeah, I’m not into the Alpha Idea. All of these guys have been the top players on their teams their entire lives. IMO, alpha is usually used to describe guys willing take a lot shitty shots. Nick Young was a total alpha.
We need to get ourselves an all-star before worrying about that part, though.
That sounds like a deal for the sake of making a deal. Re-arranging deck chairs…at best. Simmons has obviously been the more productive player so far in his career, but he hasn’t shown much improvement, at least with his shot, while Fox’s upward trajectory has him joining elite company. And we don’t have to discuss Fox. Hang up the phone, if they want to compete for a championship in the Embiid era, then it’s on them to call back. We’re not the ones on the clock.
What exactly is Fox’s upward trajectory? He’s not shooting from deep any better than he did the last season or before and his FT% is still at his career average of 71%. Yes, Fox is scoring more, but he also increased his usage and MPG.
I love Fox, but am terrified for him if he loses his first step or quickness due to injuries, especially if the Kings continue to ride him as they did last season. Like I’ve said in the past he is a leg injury away from being a good to average PG like Derrick Rose or John Wall.
I would say I saw improvements in the fact he was willing to shoot the 3 more, even if only 32%. 33% 3’s, same as 50% 2 point shooter. Yes the hope is he gets it up to 35-36%, but I think showing confidence in taking that shot is a big first step if he is going to become that type of player. He wasn’t afraid to shoot it, which he was the years prior at times.
He also shot 78%, from the line after the ASG over 25 or so games. He also was getting to the line at a higher rate during that timeframe. 8 times a game which is pretty elite.
You make a lot of good points, and volume is absolutely an indicator of future shooting ability, but this:
Is just fun with arbitrary end points. He finished the season pretty much right at his career average for FT. Beyond wanting to, there isn’t really any reason to believe that 78% was anything more than regression to the mean.
True it’s arbitrary choice, except that it was the last roughly 25 games he played. So if we are looking for improvement, it is a reasonable place to look at what happened most recently.
It may end up meaning nothing, but if you made me bet, I would drop a couple bucks he’s a 75% + FT shooter next year.
Fox shot 82% from the line the last dozen games of 19-20. Then turned around and shot 72% in 20-21.
I mean, this is kind of what he is. Career is 72%, 73%, 71%, 72%.
Yeah the shown improvement may not stick¦but it was an upward trajectory to end last season which I think was generally the question. If he can settle into mid 70s doesn’t seem problematic for team moving forward. High 60s like beginning of last year probably is when he shots so many.
Yeah but as I noted, he was even better down the stretch of the prior season and was back to normal this season.
If the Kings weren’t playing extended garbage time down the stretch, I’d put more weight into individual performance.
Luka is a 73% FT shooter and shot 60% FTs in the playoffs.
wHaT a bUm, aM I right?
You want to act like Fox has flatlined, “he is what he is”, all you are doing is beclowning yourself and being intellectually disinegenuous. Sorry Otis but you cannot disproportionately harp and hyper focus on the bad and ignore the overwhelming good and not lose expect to lose credibility.
Does this look like flatlining, here is Fox PPG over his 4 seasons:
12 PPG
17 PPG (+5)
21 PPG (+4)
25 PPG (+4)
Each season he gets better and stronger and more understanding of how and when to take over games including career high 56% TS% on career high usage of 31%. Abusing defenses has become easy for Fox.
If you were a Mavs fans, would you post Luka’s free throw numbers in every game thread?
Here’s something else: Fox is more talented as our dominant player than Booker, and his team just made the NBA Finals.
Booker is very good but not as talented as Fox. Fox is becoming the harder cover. While Booker is the better shooter, Fox is the better 3D scorer, facilitator and defender in the making. He has higher steal rate and assist rate while being equal in TO rate.
The Suns were terrible for 4 years with Booker playing predominant role, being their All-Star. What happened?
If you were a Suns fans, I can imagine you would have identified some perceived shortcoming in Booker as the basis of their chronic losing.
Just like Fox, Booker was always part of the solution, but a dominant player can only do so much.
I have discussed my Pivotal Role Player hypothesis in detail elsewhere and how it determines playoff series and seasons, as dominant players tends to neutralize the opposing dominant player, though it is not really a hypothesis but a proven concept with examples everywhere you look.
In Game 5, the pivotal game of the NBA Finals, Holiday and Middleton outplayed CP3 and Ayton by 60-40 points as Giannis and Booker fought to a virtual draw. It was the Bucks pivotal role players rising up at the most opportune moment that helped decide the series. Then in Game 6 Giannis had on one of the best Final games of all-time to seal the deal.
The Suns upgraded the pivotal role players around their best player, namely Ayton and CPs, with a secondary nod to Cam Johnson, Cam Payne, Crowder and Bridges, and they took off. Then Booker did not have to be dominant all the time and they could hang when he wasn’t. The variance in his performance could be absorbed with intermittent stars doing their part.
What happened in PHX is what needs to happen around Fox and we can experience similar success….because Fox is more talented than Booker.
What happened in SAC did not happen in PHX on a lesser level because two pivotal role players we needed, Bagley and Buddy, failed woefully. In fact Bagley never ever arose to the designation of pivotal role player but the mere “garden variety” type. i.e expendable.
If Buddy and Marvin played up to the expectations of their contract and draft status, respectively, wed have been the 8th or 7th seed with Fox leading the way. And Fox in the playoff would have been (and will be) a joy to behold. That is when all critics will be silenced.
And speaking of the World Champs, how problematic is Giannis as free throw shooter? He makes Fox look like Curry from the line.
Giannis made 16-17 FTs in the closeout game, making the extreme Bucks fan, “the Otis from Milwaukee”, if he exists, look rather silly. It is a flaw for within the context of a special player, and the same description can apply to our franchise player.
I am not saying Fox is as dominant as Giannis. I am saying Giannis can and will go down as one of the all-time greats, and that there is no such thing as a perfect player, but there is a gloriously imperfect player, and that is more enough.
Maybe. I mean, 75% is well within the error bars for a career 72% shooter. So I wouldn’t bet against it. I also would bet against 69%.
Fox’s upward trajectory absolutely could have him joining elite company, but:
Good points!
This is the unfortunate truth at this time. Most teams would value Simmons higher than Fox. This could easily change if Fox makes another leap and Simmons stays stagnant, but currently, this is the case
Nope. Just the better, more successful player.
I’m one of the blasphemous here that would rather keep Hali than Fox if we had to trade one. also Fox’s trade value may be higher now than it’ll ever be again.
I totally agree with you. A lot has to do with contract and age. Hali is 2.5 years younger and locked up cheap for years. He also shoots 40% from three while Fox still struggles from deep.
Simply put, Hali seems a better fit with Simmons than does Fox.
I’ve posted it a few times now, but I feel a Hali, Buddy, Simmons is a better three than Fox, Buddy, Simmons.
I agree, except Hali will tell you he’s a lot better because of Fox’s deadly first step, which Hali doesn’t have.
what If Fox takes the all star leap and, specifically, shoots more reliably, would you prefer to keep Haliburton and trade Fox or vice versa?
Hey 76ers, Buddy Hield would gladly take all of those shots Ben Simmons passed up. He also would shoot great free-throws and three-pointers.
Buddy Hield is the guy you want.
Fox has free-throw deficiencies. You don’t want him.
You also don’t want Haliburton. He’s too young and didn’t win Rookie Of The Year.
Finally, someone is making some damn sense.
Fox is the only player on the kings whose salary matches Simmons’, unless you build a package of lesser players, which unsurprisingly, they’re not interested in. Haliburton’s salary is a pittance, and there is no other premium talent on the roster.
It may not be a bad way to rebuild around Haliburton, Simmons, and a third star player yet to be announced, as long as Philly is now sending us a package of young players and first rounders
Damn. I was hoping the 76ers had dummies and closeted Kings fans running the franchise.
McHale’d!
…we just need the 76ers to hire Chris Webber as GM.
C’mon, Sixers, hire one of your former players as GM to get this deal done!
We’ll clean ’em out!
Philly doesn’t have us much leverage as they think they do unless Morey has smoothed things over between Simmons and his head coach/star player, who trashed him to the media.
I think this is salient to the discussion.
(Looking up what “salient” means)….. Agreed!
“Salient Green is people!”
It’s Visine!
A Grand Canyon-sized gulf between declining to give a player a vote of confidence, and “trashing him.”
You’re right, its very common for a head coach and star player to go to the media to publicly blame one of their players/teammates after a playoff loss. Nothing to see here.
Common or not, words have meaning, and Doc Rivers didn’t trash Ben Simmons.
Never from career politicians or agents !
Seems like Philly’s best bet is to hold onto Simmons and rebuild his value with better play. If he plays as he did in the playoffs, his value isn’t decreasing anyways.
The Embiid and Simmons duo doesn’t fit, teams know that and will only offer so much because eventually Philly will have to move him.
I think Simmons has to have a team built around hia strengths and where he has the keys to the offense. That’s not happening in Philly with Embiid.
If he his better play includes some improved shooting and assertiveness (Which are the areas people want improvement), there isn’t much reason to trade him though. Which is fine for the Sixers
This dynamic loses steam as soon as multiple teams want him. Which they will.
True, it loses some steam, but they don’t have a lot of options, and these deals are hard to finalize. And of course, this deal is holding up a log-jam of smaller deals which will inevitably follow in it’s wake. We’re much more likely to be a part of that wake as our trade pieces are smaller. Our first priority deal is getting rid of Bagley’s contract and clear some cap-space for Holmes, that’s most immediate. Next is trading Hield, because the right deal involving him could free up significant cap-space. Third priority trade involves Barnes, but we are looking for assets back for him rather than a salary dump so we can take our time and be more picky with Barnes as an asset.
Of course if we could trade Luke Walton for Nate McMillan none of this may be necessary.
Those may be your priorities. I generally work under the principle that until you have your star(s) in place, everything you do should be working towards finding/acquiring them. I don’t think getting rid of Bagley and/or retaining Holmes is especially vital in the big picture unless they are part of a MUCH bigger plan.
That sounds grandiose. Like putting the cart before the horse, It kinda sounds like Vivek. I say build slow, build strong and you’ll attract the star(s) in time, just like the Suns did with Chris Paul. No star(s) are gonna come to Sac and wait for you to build around them. Memphis, Atlanta drew free agents after they got Young. Cleveland drew Lebron after building through the draft! Houston, where Monte is from, starts with stars and works backward, and they’ve had a lot of success doing it, and with their obvious failings they’re still on another level from the Kings, but I wouldn’t try to emulate that success in Sac. That truly would take some cajones to pull off!
And probably a lot more money than Vivek wants to spend.
Teams have been built all kinds of ways. Some started with their stars then packed the depth around them. Others built the framework then added the player to put them over the top. All valid approaches.
Probably. Ask for the moon, if you don’t get it, keep Simmons.
Yeah, I believe that is what they’re thinking.
Agreed
Simmons has plenty of value. Everyone knows the sample size and what they would be getting by trading for him. There’s no need to rebuild it.
OT: If the Pacers are willing to move Myles Turner I feel the Kings can and SHOULD offer a better package than what the Warriors can. If the Dubs land Turner they could be scary good once again.
https://twitter.com/TheNBACentral/status/1418652476501340160
Like I’ve said before:
Fox for Simmons
#9 and parts for Turner.
It’s crazy and would never happen, but a Hali/Hield/Barnes/Simmons/Turner lineup literally checks every box. With a passable bench that’s a lineup capable of putting up a top 5-10 offense and defense.
Hell no to that. Just, yeah, oh hell no.
I’m curious why.
I will NEVER bet on Ben Simmons to be a centerpiece. Ever. For any reason. Fox isn’t there yet, and not even all that close too much of the time for my liking. But, I will never bet on a guy who has a mental block and can’t shoot the ball anywhere outside of 5 feet consistently. Yes Simmons does other things, but you’re just choosing his strengths over Fox’s. And I will never bet that it’s more valuable given what you’re building. You’re just switching out pieces and creating new problems. You switch to a team with little defense to little offense. Shot creation would be a huge problem for that team. And you still need to score more points than the other guy to win, right?
Now, Myles Turner depending on what you give up makes more sense. But that also provides you think Turner can play in an uptempo system. And can still play the defense you need while rim running.
One last point. Kings had a 112.7 ORtg overall on the season (and a 116.7. DRtg). Until Fox was out, those numbers were 113.4 ORtg and a 117.9 DRtg. After Fox is out, they drop to 109.4 ORtg and a 110.2 DRtg. Those numbers are inflated from playing OKC thrice, too.
My point here is you keep going after value everywhere and however you can. But you don’t turn your roster over to do so. I really generally disagree on your view of Fox and believe in him more than you do.
We shall see. As always.
That’s all fair. I personally don’t think that team would have little offense or struggle to create shots. It would certainly change from a heliocentric offense built on one guy dribble penetrating to more of a movement and PnR based offense. But I prefer that anyway, so I’m good.
As for Fox, I think he’s a good player. I think if he keeps improving he can potentially become a top 20ish player. I get the impression some people see that as a slight.
If you think Fox is in the 20s range, where is Simmons?
No, I think Fox “can potentially become a top 20ish player.” I think he’s currently more in the 30-40ish range. Whereas I think Simmons in somewhere in the 20-ish range.
Ah, okay. Yeah, we disagree there. I’m willing to bet that Fox can be better than what Simmons has gotten to. And I’m not willing to bet on a Simmons growth curve in shooting.
That’s fair and I’m not sure I totally disagree with you. Part of my general feeling, and sorry for those that have heard this too much, is that Simmons has a higher floor (since their floor is basically where they are now, IMO) and a ceiling as high as anyone in the league. If Fox reaches his absolute ceiling, IMO he’s a fringe All-NBA player. IF (That’s as big an IF as I know how to write here) Simmons just gets to Fox’s current mediocre level as a shooter, he’s a serious MVP candidate. Obviously, the relative likelihood of those two things happening is entirely subjective.
I don’t disagree with the premise of their ceilings. I would just contend that one player (Fox) has shown improvements and ability to build on their game. At least made those attempts, especially regarding shooting and assertiveness. Still improvements to be made.
The other has almost eerily identical statistics both basic and advanced throughout his 4 years (Simmons). If one likes Simmons better as an overall player right now, then so be it. But it really takes some squinting to see how Simmons is going to reach “his ceiling” and that being the reason to take the gamble. It could be done…but not a lot of evidence to point to some upward trajectory.
Unless social media scarring was an advanced metric : )
This is exactly what I’m getting at.
Weird how y’all only talk about the offensive end of the floor.
This “ceiling” you are talking about for Simmons is simply his shooting, but he’s been a plus team player at the offensive end of the floor for Philly for a long time. Even if he never learns how to shoot, he adds value at that end.
The ceiling for Fox to be a multi-positional, elite defensive player in the NBA is not achievable. Period.
Is Ben Simmons coming with Joel Embiid? Asking for a friend.
I’m not ignoring anything, though. I think Simmons issues are a bigger issue than Fox’s at this point to build around. And Fox is under contract for longer and younger.
The age and contract terms are trivial IMO – they are both young and signed longterm.
You can talk about Embiid, but I’d counter with “every bad basketball team needs a leading scorer”.
One of these two has made a few All-NBA and All-Star teams in their first four seasons and the other is on a team that performed better when he wasn’t on the floor. I’ll let you figure out which is which.
Embiid is also the only MVP caliber player of the three, too. Was the argument here that Ben Simmons is not talented?
You’ve been making this point about Fox for months now. I know what Ben Simmons accomplishments are. Yet, I feel very comfortable of the opinion do you NOT trade Fox for Simmons under any circumstances. That’s at best a lateral move, probably a step back sadly.
Fox + Simmons should be the goal. If the conversation is swapping one for the other, you’re swapping one set of issues for another. Unless of course you think this roster would have to be upgraded around Simmons to actually compete. In which case I ask: If you’re going to upgrade the roster around Simmons, why wouldn’t you do that with Fox?
Fox plus Simmons would be…ok. But Hali plus Simmons would be better.
And again, you’re ignoring defense. The roster right now needs serious upgrades around Fox to shore up that end of the floor.
The idea is to also keep Hali. Fox + Hali + Simmons.
I’ll start acknowledging defense actually exists when you acknowledge the benefit Simmons has had playing with Embiid.
The roster needs upgrades that would improve both ends of the court. It’s not like this is an elite offensive team, either.
Of course Simmons benefits from playing with Embiid. That’s a silly question to even ask. And Embiid benefits from playing with Simmons.
It’s a non sequitur.
Every good basketball team needs a leading scorer too. Who is our leading scorer if we trade Fox?
I dunno, Buddy Hield? Maybe a guy that isn’t on the roster yet?
As I noted, whether we have Fox or Simmons on the roster to start shouldn’t be the end. Neither of those guys is the best player on a championship team.
Bouknight.
I’m not only considering offense. He’s already all league defender so his areas to improve really are shooting. Fox shooting (less so) and defense.
My point is one guy is the exact same player he was 4 years ago. Maybe that player is better than Fox ever will be. But BHE was making a point about Simmons ceiling being MVP caliber and that would be a reason to make deal. Higher ceiling.
To reach that ceiling that would take shooting which we have no evidence of and actually he’s getting worse. One player has shown at least some ability to improve and work on their deficiencies and the other hasn’t. Doesn’t mean Fox is better than Simmons necessarily.
I think this idea that Fox is working harder on his game than Simmons is specious, and I think if Fox had significantly improved, his team wouldn’t be getting worse over time.
I have no idea if he is working HARDER, just that he has shown some development and Simmons has not. Just about every Simmons metric is exactly the same as it was 4 years ago. He is remarkably consistent each year. Now he came in at a very high level, so maybe that’s enough to make him better than Fox always, without any improvement. If one believes that, I don’t think it ridiculous.
I mean these things don’t work in a vacuum about his team getting worse. The fact the Kings have stagnated/regressed the past two years could be Fox related. It also might have something to do with Buddy’s regression which also might be related to the larger fact that a certain dolt is the head coach now instead of Joerger.
Honestly, until I see Fox play with a top ten player in the league like Simmons has and see what the results are, it’s kind of moot to really have the comparison since they are so different as players.
I think Fox improved from season 1 to season 2. Since then, it’s been marginal. Certainly hasn’t been at the defensive end of the floor (there’s that word again).
I don’t completely disagree with your last paragraph – but there are ways to look at Fox via team stats while he’s on the floor and see that he’s not a true impact player in the league. He likely needs to be a #3, not a #2. I’m not certain that’s the case with Simmons.
There is plenty of proof Fox’s team has been getting worse over time … and it’s got nothing to do with Fox.
Basketball is a team sport with five players on the court. It takes more than Fox. But Fox is improving.
It’s a team sport, but it’s the one team sport where the best player on the floor has a disproportionate impact on the team’s performance.
The team’s numbers with Fox on the floor, whether you want to talk about win/loss or general NetRating, have not been impressive.
What is Ben Simmons numbers when he has to be the number 1 option? We don’t know…
I much prefer Fox to Simmonds. Successful teams need a PG. ( there are exceptions- LAC, LAL, Denver but they have guys with PG skills) Philly has had marginal success without a PG. Simmonds is a secondary guy.
Simmonds has reached his zenith and hit the ceiling and is falling fast.
You just said successful teams need a PG, then named 4 teams that have been extremely successful without a high level PG.
Also, only one NBA championship team over the last 30+ years was led by a prototypical PG and that was the Warriors. The last before that was the Isiah Thomas Pistons.
History is not on the side of teams with a PG as their best player.
History also not on the side of a 15 Ppg scorer being your best player on a championship team.
I think all our comments are probably summed up best that if Ben Simmons or Fox are the best player on your team, seems unlikely you are winning a title. Now if they are the second best¦more discussion.
Championship? Neither of these guys is the best player on a championship team, but Simmons is a better piece in that direction.
Think that’s pretty much what I just said¦better piece is somewhat debatable ( I get you don’t think it is) depending on the team you are creating or players you already have on the team.
Ah, sorry. Just read the first paragraph and replied.
Simmonds is the second best on his team and they are still not close.
I don’t love Simmons and not sure he can be your second best player on a title team…but two 7 game 2nd round playoff exits and had best record in East last year.
We have different definitions of “not close”. Aka see Kings
My point was successful teams have a solid PG who plays like a PG. I did not say he had to be the best player on the team. Right now Fox is the best player on the Kings and that does not mean that he will reprise the Isiah Thomas role- he will not. But to trade him for a guy who supposedly plays PG- Simmonds but who can’t shoot, does not penetrate and has to be taken out of games because he can’t shoot free throws, is a step backwards. The Kings would then be looking for a PG because Simmonds is not one.
Why is Simmonds even in this discussion? Because Philly does not have a PG who plays like one.
The team that just won the title has a guy that doesn’t play a “traditional” point guard role. He did get up in many people’s business defensively during the playoffs though.
Did you just say Simmons (it’s not Simmonds) doesn’t penetrate?
3 actually out of 16 who made playoffs.
and the 3- all have wings who functioned as PG- Jamal Murray, PG3 and KL in LAC and LeBron at LAL. A successful team needs a guy who can handle it and shoot it- Simmonds was the PG on Philly and in part, because he was not good at PG, they lost.
That’s betting all-in on Haliburton as a starting point guard, which he’s never been. I could see that line-up struggling offensively as well, but they could also be really good. Don’t know if I’d make that bet but it’s a very creative, and intriguing idea.
Get that complimentary guard for Hali separately. That shouldn’t be difficult for a decent GM.
Can you name one team that has sustainable success without a dominate scorer? Portland has Dame, Dallas has Luka, Nets have Durant/Harden/Kyrie, Bucks have Giannis, Suns have Booker, Warriors have Steph, Hawks have Young, Lakers have Lebron/AD, Utah has Michell, Clippers have George/Leonard, Denver has Jokic/Murray, Knicks have Randle, Celtics have Tatum…
The best we are hoping for is a first round exit without a dominate scorer. Who is going to score for this team in the half court when you need buckets? Who is going to break down the defense? The only way this works well is if Hali turned out to be an elite scorer. I also disagree that we have 3 40% shooter. I think it is questionable if Hield can get back to shooting 40%. Imo, he should be the one that is traded.
probably last team without a consistent dominant scorer was Pistons and that was a while ago. Kings don’t have that but at least they have a PG.
Yes to have a quality team in this league you need two scorers. Again, this is why Simmons is getting shipped. He’s a spectacular #3 piece, glue guy, defense, dirty work … but Philly knows they are dead in the water if you have to count on him to score buckets.
And this is why it makes sense for us to have Fox, Hali, Simmons. Without Fox, we don’t even have one elite scorer, let alone two. Hali and Simmons makes no sense unless people think he will turn into an elite scorer.
It makes sense if you like those two better as building blocks for the future.
Again, all this focus on scoring, and ignoring that pesky other end of the floor.
Can you name one team that has sustainable success with the 30th ranked defense in the league?
Whether it’s Simmons or Fox on your roster, you need more. That’s not in question.
It is easier to get a 3 and D guy than an elite scorer averaging 25 and 7. You can even draft a 3 and D guy to improve defense. Can you draft a 25 and 7 guy just like that? Who can the Kings trade to get an elite scorer? I am not saying you are wrong, I just think with Simmons, you are betting on Hali a lot.
Hell yes. I’d love that lineup, the problem is that likely Barnes or Buddy would need to be apart of that Turner trade. I’m not sure they’d bite at #9, Bagley and Wright.
It’s always hard to know, but the suggestions I’ve been seeing aren’t far off of the #9’s value.
Then maybe the $9 and Bagley OR Wright gets it done?
I’d trade Bagley, Metu/Jones and Ramsey/Woodard for Turner. I would not include the 9th pick.
Really? I guess I feel Tuner is worth at least the #9 in this draft.
I guess I would include a future pick, but only lottery protected. Think the JJ Hickson deal. Kings can’t afford to give away assets and you’re giving away an asset to get Turner. That’s exactly the kind of move Vlade Divac would do.
I feel giving up future assets, like next year’s lottery protected first is more hamstringing. That would make any future possible trades of picks very hard for the next few years.
I guess it would come down to who is there at #9. If it’s players like Wagner, Moody, Sengun, etc, then I’d prefer Turner. A bird in hand…
I’m not worried about trading future picks because if you are that bad you’ve been in the same place you’ve been in for a decade and half. And if you give the pick up you might get something of tangible value if the Pacers, in this case, choose wisely. At this point, I include the pick because I know Bagley, Metu and Woodard aren’t enough in exchange for Turner despite the savings.
Monte McNair is under no obligation to kowtow to the rest of the league to make deals. In fact, I’d recommend not doing so.
I mean, they aren’t giving away assets. They are trading assets for a 25-year-old elite defender that can stretch the floor a bit at a position of need.
You don’t give up a 9th pick for a non core player which I consider Turner to be.
You don’t make 25 cent on the dollar trades and hope they pan out. That screams desperation, which would work out well for the Indiana Pacers…. but we’re interested in the Kings improving here.
You give up the 9th pick for Ben Simmons, not Myles Turner. If you can’t make that deal, you can’t make that deal. There are other deals.
Then why are the Warriors looking at giving up one their lottery picks to get him?
Different team, different position. Also, are we certain the Dubs are giving up their pick to get Turner? And if so why does this matter since the Dubs have a better offer than the Kings do?
Because the reports I’ve read is they’d likely have to attach Wiggins to make numbers work.
Something like Wiggins and #7 for Turner and Lamb.
Wiggins is a pricey weight attached to the #7. IMO, the Kings #9 and Buddy or Barnes is more palatable for Indy. Now, if the Kings could get Indy to give back the #13, I’m all on board.
yes, that might work since there will be(could be) value at 13.
Because they are desperate to get that old feeling of importance again. They are willing to jettison the future for the “next immediate”. They believe that they are still a threat. and they will have to give up salary to match Turner.
and different team, different trajectory.
Turner is probably better than anyone right now at #9 but this is the wrong time to get a big salary . Get a lesser guy on a rookie deal at #9 and then next year, shoot for the “one guy”.
So in other words, they are trying to win and realize Turner can help them do that?
Turner is also not a “big salary.” at $18M a year for the next two years, that is a very good deal. That is likely what Holmes is going to make and Turner has a more complete game. He’s a legit stretch big who can protect the rim. He is everything the Kings are lacking.
A Myles Turner level player would be an outlier level outcome for a #9 pick.
Or a 11th pick. Or a 15th pick. But I’m not arguing ultimate outcome here either. This isn’t a known quantity like a Fox or Simmons. Or Turner for that matter.
It’s a longshot that the 9th pick in this draft will be a better NBA player than Turner.
I’m not assuming the 9th pick will be better than Myles Turner. Keeping the 9th pick instead of trading it for Turner is not about outcome. It’s about appropriate valuation of an asset.
You value the 9th pick in exchange for Myles Turner and I don’t. And there we go.
Kinda with this. Maybe diff reason. Turner obviously an immediate upgrade and improvement for maaaayyybbeee the 8th seed?
We’ve gone through a dozen draft profiles and in there are a chunk of commenters who feel the need to swing big at potential with the pick. Maybe that’s how the Kings are able to break the cycle. You nail a Kuminga, Z Williams, Bouknight, Sengun and find a star. That’s probably the way the Kings get a star for a sustained time.
I know what Myles Turner is probably…a solid player, who I’d love to get without using the pick. But I don’t think that’s taking the Kings anywhere really.
The 9th pick could take you somewhere for a long period of time if you get lucky. Even if it’s only a 15-20% shot, it provides more opportunity for long term success than Myles Turner.
I also recognize there is an 80% chance this leads you back to the lottery next year and probably longer if you whiff.
I agree- this is about value and value over time. Turner is better right now than any #9. And #9 may never be as good as Turner but getting Turner requires giving up an asset( like Buddy ) + the #9- a future asset on a low contract for an 18 million guy for two years.
And since Holmes is gone, Turner replaces Holmes, Kings lose Buddy ( or somebody ) + lose the value of #9. and probably still don’t make playoffs. So get Turner ( better than 9) to replace what we are going to lose and in addition lose 2 more assets.
The long term value is not there.
yes he is. But not at this time. Kings need to build under Fox’s age, not over it.
Turner is 18 months older than Fox. He fits Fox’s timeline as much as anyone.
Have I mentioned how I think fans can often get addicted to the rebuild/future window cycle?
yes you have.
and trading assets for a pretty good player repeats another type of cycle.
I believe that teams get good by getting solid hits in the draft ( at least 3) in a short window, adding a few vets around that, becoming successful and then shooting for the last one guy. i.e. Suns, Hawks, Bucks, duds, and sort of Portland, Denver and Utah.
duds got 3 guys in tight draft window, traded Monte Ellis for Bogut, added a couple of key FA’s. Then got KD.
LAC, LAL and Nets were built differently – Kings cannot do that.
So the plan is to do nothing until you hit on at least 3 draft picks in a tight window?
I bet most GMs agree.
Barnes and #9 for Turner and the 13th would probably get it done. If the Sixers are willing to trade Simmons for Fox and probably a 2022/2023 pick swap then I think Monte should pull the trigger on that one.
Haliburton
Hield
Free Agent/ ZW (13th pick)
Simmons
Turner
I think in that scenario I’d take Kispert or Jalen Johnson at #13. Their shooting would be ideal with a Simmons and Turner frontcourt.
Jalen Johnson is a 63% FT shooter and made 8 (of 18) 3’s last season. Pretty small sample size to be betting he is a shooter to spread the floor for Simmons. Kispert, fine.
I wouldn’t expect Jalen to be that kind of shooter.
I’d be fine with Jalen Johnson. Long, versatile wing who can switch and guard from 1-5.
Kispert? not so much especially if you’re picking in the lottery. For me, you can easily get guys in the late first to early 2nd round with Kispert’s skillset + the defense. Trey Muprhy, Kessler Edwards, JT Thor comes to mind.
Yeah, I agree about not spending a high pick on Kispert. I don’t think the functional difference between Kispert and, say, Wieskamp justifies the pick difference and opportunity cost.
I guess I’m a little higher on Kispert. I think he’ll be Bojan Bogdanovic type guy that makes the right play at the right time and can be lethal from deep.
Wally Scerbiak
Doug McDermott
It seems like people are forgetting that not only has Buddy not wanted to be in Sacramento for at least as long as Luke Walton has been coach, his production and especially his efficiency have taken a corresponding dive.
Buddy being part of any trade is not a problem.
He would be my ideal inclusion, it just wasn’t apart of BHE’s proposal.
I could totally get behind Fox, Hali, Barnes, Tuner core, but think the #9 and Buddy is too much to pay for Turner. It would have to be Buddy OR the #9 anc change.
I don’t know, I would be OK with Buddy and the #9 for Turner. Gets the Kings cap space and defensive presence, and Turner’s deal is 1 year less than Buddy.
I’d like Indy’s #13 included to make that deal.
Buddy and #9 for Turner and the #13
Ideally, yes, but I don’t think Indiana does that.
It depends on what Indy is looking for. IMO, Barnes fits their needs more than Buddy does, unless they plan to start Brogdon, LeVert, Warren and Buddy together.
Right, but I would be good with Turner for either:
The value Barnes brings to the team is considerably more than Buddy, especially off the court.
This means give up 2 assets for one. And the one is redundant with Holmes who may be lost anyway.
I don’t think Kings are ready for the trade for “the one guy”-need more assets.
Like #9
I would, however, trade Buddy to NOP- they need shooters to keep 4 guys from guarding Zion for #10 and Adams who they want to get rid of.
Adams replaces Holmes who is leaving.
A #10 will not be as good as Buddy despite the hater view. Moody, however, can play better defense and shoot a little.
Seems like duds want Beal first and maybe Turner second. They have reached the “ego-arrogant” level where they think they can just shop by pointing-“I want that one !”
I doubt Washington lets Beal go cheaply. Turner is more likely – he is redundant with Pacers and with other offers, they can drive a tough deal. It is not so simple as a duds proclamation of “I want that one, the tall one !” as they have to give up equal money. They cannot just give up any combination of #7 + #14 + Wiseman, they have to give up players- with salaries- the best and probably only option is Wiggins. If they give up Wiggins they will want to keep at least the #14 to get ( ?Kispert) as replacement.
They want shooters and get to the basket creators since they were 26th in league with at basket shots. I suspect they pull this trigger if Kuminga falls to #7. Then Pacers get some value back. If they could keep #14, then they may go Mitchell if he is still there.
This reminds me a great deal of the Jimmy Butler situation in Minnesota. Difference is, Butler isn’t Ben Simmons and he had better leverage than Simmons does.
This screams to me that Philly isn’t really angling to move Simmons, and won’t do so because of frustration and bad optics.
Fox is 23 years old, improves annually, and already averages 25 points per game. The Kings cannot acquire a player of his caliber in a trade. Build around Fox, trade everyone and everything else.
“We have to include Fox in the deal? No problem! We send you Fox, MB3, and Buddy. You send us Simmons and Fox.”
yes !!!
THIS IS FRICKIN GENIUS LEVEL!
Is it a surprise that a player of Simmons won’t be acquired by our spare parts to those who know basketball
those posing Hield/Bagley/picks don’t even know buddy has negative and Marvin neutral value
Simmons will be acquired with Fox and/or Hali and assets (hopefully Fox if that’s either/or)
I would trade Fox for Simmons
there is no signal Fox would be included in discussions?
there wouldn’t be. Monte will deal from a position of strength and you absolutely wouldn’t let out Fox is on the table to deject him from wanting to be here. If Monte wants to trade Fox for Simmons it will be covert and last minute (best offer is last minute)
Fox might be what it takes to get something big done. Just don’t know if the kangz have the stomach to do what the warriors did back in the day. I can see some similarities between fox and hali and tough choices like what the warriors did with curry and Ellis.
Fox is much better than Ellis. And Hali is no Curry. If Hali is Curry. If Fox was on another team, who can you trade on the Kings to get him?
Fox is much the same as Ellis actually and Hali is not curry and won’t ever be curry and another curry I might not see in my lifetime.
It wasn’t a literal reference for those two being interchangeable.
Just that the kings are in a similar situation with a fan base that overvalues their best player that if a trade came along to get a better player it’s going to take Fox.
Warriors fans were pissed at the time they didn’t trade the bum ankle curry kid instead of Ellis.
Yeah, although I think Fox is a bit better player than Monta at the same point in their careers, this is a good situational comparison.
I am fine with including Fox and Haliburton in the trade if the Sixers include Embiid with Simmons.
still need a PG who does not get FT yips in 4th quarter
That is fine, we just have Simmons who is a great FT shooter…oh wait.
If Philly didn’t want to sell cheap on Ben Simmons, maybe their best player and coach shouldn’t have thrown him under the bus. Just a thought.
Philly’s response to that is “But he is a 3x All Star and was in contention for best defensive player of the year”.
The Sixers are just hurting themselves the longer they keep Simmons. Front office and coaching staff already lost faith in him, and it’s ridiculous to think they want a “All Star caliber” player for him. If Simmons is not traded by the end of next year, and his performance on court stays the same as it was in the playoffs, the Sixers will even be lucky to even get an average player back due to his salary. Fox had maybe his best year of his career so far and his future looks bright. Meanwhile Simmons is on a slump and has not shown any improvement, and he is coached by one of the best NBA coaching staff.
Yep, I’d hang the phone up on Philly too. Simmons has already failed as the #2 option on a contender. It’s why that team trashed him and he is on the trade block.
Fox is a #2 option on a contender. I’m not trading #2 for a #3, good luck in that locker room Philly.
“Fox is a #2 option on a contender” might be my favorite post in this entire thread.
Well it IS a make-believe thread Otis. ð
I just hope that at some point in my remaining life, the Kings are able to “fail” to the tune to 4 straight playoff appearances and two trips to the conference semis on the backs of two young All-NBA players.
…while completely rejuvenating the fan base and placing them at the front of the national stage.
If only the Kings had another interesting trade asset, maybe one of the Bogdanovics. All that salary cap flexibility with not having a Bogdanovic on the cap is huge for a player or 2 to fill out the end of the roster.
I demand Philly go deeper into the playoffs after the whole¦. trust the progress garbage.
If only we had as high standards for our own team and players as we do for other teams and their players.
And this is not new, going back to the StR days – a significant percentage of fans were always scared of efforts to acquire higher end talent (well, what if our guy gets to that level, what about the big contract clogging up the cap, what if they don’t want to stay??)
I think it was Jimmy Butler a few years back. Lots of people were like “nah, we’re good”…really??
Look at it this way. If Fox was on another team, and you offer Bagley, Hield, and the 9th for Fox, would the other team bite? I am not sure they would. So if you view Simmons as higher than Fox, then that obviously isn’t going to get it done.
When Vlade and Petey were GMs, the fans were mostly advocating for better moves than the front office. That has changed. Good lord some of these takes are rough. A shift, I actually trust the Kings’ FO more than its fans. That hasn’t happened in a while!
Yes, that’s an incredibly low bar, but hey, that’s where we’ve been!
I bet we had similar comments in the first year of Vlade’s tenure, and definitely in Pete’s.
So, it’s hard to know if “that has changed”. We’ll see.
This is the trade, McNair’s chance to put his stamp on the team.
To transform it from one that can’t satisfy the offensive and defensive demands of the current NBA, but scores a lot of points for the highlight reel, to one that can defend and move the basketball. To destroy Vlade’s project by bringing in an elite player that guards multiple positions and distribute the ball at a high level, improving everyone around him. To have more and more of his players, players that will perform in the way that he thinks an NBA team should perform.
But it won’t happen. McNair is going to continue to incrementally nibble around the edges of what Vlade left him, and we will continue to have plenty of time to watch other teams in the NBA playoffs.
Ben Simmons has never proven he is an elite player that distribute the ball at a high level as the first option. He average the same assists as Fox and has less points. He is much better defender though.
Simmons’ career assist rate: 34.5%
Fox’s career assist rate: 31.4%
Try again.
It would be really interesting to see what Simmons’ numbers would look like if he didn’t share the floor with a couple high usage ISO scorers.
He didn’t play any games without Embiid and Harris this year. Looks like in 2018-29, he went 19/10/7 in 17 games without Embiid. In 19-20, we went 20/8/7 in 16 games without Embiid.
I would not even trade Fox for Simmons straight up. Philly is a joke. Fox will be a huge star and Simmons is a tall guy who cannot shoot. I love Lillard also, but Fox plus multiple 1’s? Lol. GTFOOH
Lol I wouldn’t even trade Fox for Simmons straight up. Fox = younger, insane work ethic, Simmons = older, no work ethic. Pass.
Simmons > Fox
No way. Simmons is not worth Fox by himself, let alone picks.
Everything on the table except Hailburton. I think Simmons is worth it. Is this a franchise that can afford/attract a centerpiece that could take the Kings to the promised land?
To borrow from Moneyball, we can’t get Lebron but we try to build Lebron in the aggregate. We’re the island of misfit toys. Simmons is a misfit toy.
With all due respect, have we forgotten how Webber got here? Did the Kings give up junk and spare parts, or a All-Star/HOF to get Webber?
Maybe one has to give up something to get something…
Badge Legend