|
MourningView posted:It seems like the best way to deal with the sample size issue would be to, ya know, use a larger sample. Like maybe the whole season! Over the course of which he improved.
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
Redgrendel2001 posted:Well they've said he's going to be their primary ballhandler so I guess we'll see. I think it prevented him from doing it in game situations. Like there's a difference between dribbling by yourself in an empty gym and against people trying to play defense. I know that they want him to be a point guard, I'm just really skeptical. He's an incredible passer but he was not very effective as the primary ball handler in the half court in college, especially late in the year when everyone figured out he couldn't and wouldn't shoot so they just backed way off and he had no idea what to do.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
MourningView posted:I think it prevented him from doing it in game situations. Like there's a difference between dribbling by yourself in an empty gym and against people trying to play defense. That's fair. I'm not 100% sold either which is why I'm on the fence about a PG at 3. At least he's 100% healthy at this point (he's been doing 5x5s since Aprilish iirc, but I might be wrong) and he'll have the whole offseason and summer league.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
Fox has good form, is a decent midrange shooter, and is good from the line. There's a theory that Fox's problem is that he's simply not strong enough to shoot 3's. Fox is a lanky dude so there maybe sone truth to that. Adding bulk is also a really easy fix if strength is the only issue. But thats one hell of a gamble to make
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
i don't understand the simmons is a primary ball handler argument. You need multiple ball handlers nowadays to be a contender. Yeah Simmons may be the primary but that does not mean you should draft a lesser player if you have the chance at someone better
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 00:48
|
|
|
Redgrendel2001 posted:Over the course of which he improved. jesus christ also i stand with metapod's comment as well. Jota fucked around with this message at 00:52 on May 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
Having multiple ball handlers who can play off of each other if what is important, not just ball handlers. Otherwise you get Tres Alphas
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:Having multiple ball handlers who can play off of each other if what is important, not just ball handlers. Otherwise you get Tres Alphas true
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
Metapod posted:i don't understand the simmons is a primary ball handler argument. You need multiple ball handlers nowadays to be a contender. Yeah Simmons may be the primary but that does not mean you should draft a lesser player if you have the chance at someone better Jota posted:jesus christ Way to ignore the context of everything else that I wrote? 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 01:11
|
|
|
i read the context you said that would be too much to give up for fultz when phili already has a primary ball handler. whether it is too much or is not is a different discussion entirely what I don't get is why Simmons being the primary ball handler would matter? especially since we don't know how good Simmons is .
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
Lonzo's gonna have to work on his busted rear end jumper right? Cause its hella slow and awkward
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
Metapod posted:i read the context you said that would be too much to give up for fultz when phili already has a primary ball handler. whether it is too much or is not is a different discussion entirely what I don't get is why Simmons being the primary ball handler would matter? especially since we don't know how good Simmons is . Eh I think his point was that he doesn't view Fultz as so far ahead of the other PGs that he'd trade multiple picks when they plan to have Simmons point godding it up, maybe I'm wrong though
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
Redgrendel2001 posted:Way to ignore the context of everything else that I wrote? You were literally talking about like a 20 shot sample size because it fit the narrative you wanted. I'm not even getting into what I think about him at the next level, just how you were using those numbers was bad.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
There isn't much that can really be done, Simmons wasn't cleared to play until April, but it's really too bad we didn't get to see him play any to know how realistic the idea of him playing PG like they claim they want to do is. Yes you want as many ballhandlers as possible but if all he can do is handle the ball and is as bad of a shooter as he was when we last saw him it limits Philly's ability to draft someone without a great jumper.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 01:54
|
|
|
Metapod posted:i read the context you said that would be too much to give up for fultz when phili already has a primary ball handler. whether it is too much or is not is a different discussion entirely what I don't get is why Simmons being the primary ball handler would matter? especially since we don't know how good Simmons is . I was referring to my comments re: Fox and the trade. It's not necessarily a separate discussion. I'm "on the fence" about a PG at 3. I agree with you about the need for multiple ballhandlers, but there's a lot of poo poo to consider. I said it might not be worth it to move up to get Fultz in the context of -shipping out the #3, Saric, and what'll probably be a top 5 or top 10 pick in what looks to be a good draft next year. -it being very good draft for other PGs in addition to Fultz -They drafted the guy the want to be their point guard with the #1 the previous year. That's going to have an effect on whether or not they're willing to give up a shitload of assets. I don't think that's a radical notion. tldr; If I'm nervous about Simmons and/or want a second ballhandler, I'd rather take Fox/Smith, at #3 keep Saric+Lakers 2018 1st. Now watch Colangelo throw a mountain of money at Lowry and make this whole thing a moot point. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
Jota posted:You were literally talking about like a 20 shot sample size because it fit the narrative you wanted. I'm not even getting into what I think about him at the next level, just how you were using those numbers was bad. You didn't read anything else did you? Cool Buff Man posted:Eh I think his point was that he doesn't view Fultz as so far ahead of the other PGs that he'd trade multiple picks when they plan to have Simmons point godding it up, maybe I'm wrong though Yes. Asset valuation basically. Also, if that Lakers pick pops into the top #3 next year, you could conceivably have Boston draft two guys like Porter and Bamba. Redgrendel2001 fucked around with this message at 02:13 on May 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
Lowry would be great ???
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Lowry would be great ??? I'm coming around to the idea.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
Redgrendel2001 posted:You didn't read anything else did you? It isn't like this is the first time you've tried using a small sample like that, but we can pretend I totally misinterpreted everything if it makes you feel better.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:21
|
|
|
You can slowly see Sixers fans becoming the new Blazers fans. We've even got the injuries to our highly drafted players. Plus we we even had Sergio Rodriguez. It's like when there's a reboot of a movie series and Johnny Depp shows up in a scene with Channing Tatum as a knudge/wink to the fans.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
The last two months on low volume he was average from the college 3! Draft him !
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
Jota posted:It isn't like this is the first time you've tried using a small sample like that, but we can pretend I totally misinterpreted everything if it makes you feel better. I don't have to pretend you ignoring any context, but continue being truculent if it makes you feel better.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
The Simmons as full time point guard seemed at least partially a matter of circumstance too. They had an absurd logjam in the front court and no point guards so it was easy to argue that was the best option. If they could draft a really good point guard prospect they could always reverse course there and play him at the 4. It's slightly less crowded now with Noel gone.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
It'd sure be a lot easier to hide him on defense at the 4, well, until teams go small.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
Redgrendel2001 posted:I'm coming around to the idea. Not at 40 million a year
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
Rick posted:There isn't much that can really be done, Simmons wasn't cleared to play until April, but it's really too bad we didn't get to see him play any to know how realistic the idea of him playing PG like they claim they want to do is. Yes you want as many ballhandlers as possible but if all he can do is handle the ball and is as bad of a shooter as he was when we last saw him it limits Philly's ability to draft someone without a great jumper. Yeah, its the difference between a Lamar Odom or LeBron or Magic Johnson. They were all great ball handlers for PF sized dudes, but only Magic actually truly played PG
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Rick posted:It'd sure be a lot easier to hide him on defense at the 4, well, until teams go small. It's exactly the same knock on Fultz too - great defensive tools, but rarely used them and had inconsistent effort defensively. That both were on lovely teams that were clearly going nowhere is not a coincidence. Also Simmons was a really excellent rebounder in college. If you play him guarding 1s on the perimeter you lose some of that. tanglewood1420 fucked around with this message at 03:43 on May 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
Jota posted:You can slowly see Sixers fans becoming the new Blazers fans. We've even got the injuries to our highly drafted players. Embiid is a fine Channing Tatum equivalent. Struggling to see how Ben Simmons is Jonah Hill
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
New York or Minnesota please take this man look at that stroke https://twitter.com/DraftExpress/status/869318062788554752 jumpers that cause the net to get tangled are extremely my poo poo
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
tanglewood1420 posted:All the analysis of Simmons prior to the draft was that he has the athleticism, agility and instinct to potentially be a very good defender of 3s and 4s. It was his lack of effort that was concerning, not his lack of ability or game intelligence. Obviously some players never improve in that regard and are lazy defenders throughout their career, but he would hardly be the first player in the world who didn't give a crap defensively in college (on a lovely team no less) that ends up being a solid NBA defender. Yeah agree on the last part. The passing was the flashiest thing about his game but I think his rebounding is his most NBA ready skill
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Fox has good form, is a decent midrange shooter, and is good from the line. There's a theory that Fox's problem is that he's simply not strong enough to shoot 3's. Fox is a lanky dude so there maybe sone truth to that. Adding bulk is also a really easy fix if strength is the only issue. It's a gamble, but outside of Fultz, every player has a weakness that you're gambling on being fixable. It comes down to either how fixable you think that weakness is, or how useful that player will be if you can't fix the weakness. The weird thing with Fox is that, like you're saying, he's got all of the secondary things you'd look for. The form, the mid-range jumper, the FT%. The sample size on the 3's really is a pretty low. He only attempted 69 3P shots in his NCAA career. He attempted 502 in his HS career, and hit 34% of those. That's not elite or anything but it shows some ability. I'm not going to pretend I'm any kind of scout, but the video I've seen of some of his NCAA shots, you can clearly see him hesitate or give up open shots, and he's totally out of rhythm. If it's obvious to me, it's got to be pretty bad.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 12:43
|
|
|
I've seen so much random analysis of all the potential top 10 picks at this point that I feel like all we can hope for as fans is that your coaching staff does great job analyzing and feeling out the candidates during the workouts and gets a realistic idea of what they actually can fix. I'm feeling optimistic of the Sixers coaching staff's ability to do this, though Okafor's lack of development should probably give me some pause. Summer League is going to be really interesting.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
iamsosmrt posted:I've seen so much random analysis of all the potential top 10 picks at this point that I feel like all we can hope for as fans is that your coaching staff does great job analyzing and feeling out the candidates during the workouts and gets a realistic idea of what they actually can fix. I'm feeling optimistic of the Sixers coaching staff's ability to do this, though Okafor's lack of development should probably give me some pause. Summer League is going to be really interesting. Okafor got a bit more efficient, passed more, and turned the ball over less while adjusting to an entirely different role (that never stabilized) from his first to his 2nd year. Skill wise he definitely progressed, but when you get jerked in and out of lineups it hurts you. The fact that he mostly kept his numbers where they were is a good sign.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
This is going to be a fun draft to look back on in five or six years, because it feels like to me that the top 12 picks are going to breakdown into 4 all-stars, 3 mid to low end starters, 3 useful rotation guys and 2 total busts - but I have no idea really which players will end up in which category.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
tanglewood1420 posted:This is going to be a fun draft to look back on in five or six years, because it feels like to me that the top 12 picks are going to breakdown into 4 all-stars, 3 mid to low end starters, 3 useful rotation guys and 2 total busts - but I have no idea really which players will end up in which category. I feel like it'd be fairly surprising if Fultz wasn't at least a solid rotation guy, but I otherwise agree.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
Okafor also got better on defense. He was playing hurt all year too apparently .
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
tanglewood1420 posted:All the analysis of Simmons prior to the draft was that he has the athleticism, agility and instinct to potentially be a very good defender of 3s and 4s. It was his lack of effort that was concerning, not his lack of ability or game intelligence. Obviously some players never improve in that regard and are lazy defenders throughout their career, but he would hardly be the first player in the world who didn't give a crap defensively in college (on a lovely team no less) that ends up being a solid NBA defender. I watched both quite a bit and Fultz is a bad defender now, but good compared to how bad Simmons is. I don't really consider it an effort thing, Simmons just legit doesn't (didn't?) know what to do on that end of the floor. Both definitely have tools to be better though. WhyteRyce posted:New York or Minnesota please take this man look at that stroke I think so many teams are going to be mad they skipped him, especially if they do it because of defense and then proceed to field teams that don't play defense anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Simmons played defense in summer league so I'm putting it down on he did t care at lsu. And he was right. He went number 1.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
Rick posted:I watched both quite a bit and Fultz is a bad defender now, but good compared to how bad Simmons is. I don't really consider it an effort thing, Simmons just legit doesn't (didn't?) know what to do on that end of the floor. He's one player that I want to fall so badly and I'm crying right now because I know he won't.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
What's this about nobody playing defense in college ball? Shaking my head.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 22:42
|
|
