Trade Suggestion: Fox for Simmons + #28
- Thread starter kb02
- Start date
Yeah, my vision with Simmons is with Fox, Hali, and Mitchell. I think that core has a extremely special dynamic. Especially with the way the game is played now and the makeup of the best teams out west. Simmons, Fox, and Haliburton would be special too, but obviously not as special with what I’m expecting from Mitchell fairly quickly.
Morey may still be in a state of denial. I don’t mind if the Kings sweeten the pot as far as draft picks go but an explosive scorer like Buddy who would benefit next to Embiid and Harris. He would probably have a season as good if not better than he did in the 2018-2019 season with the Kings where he was a borderline all star, Bagley who still has loads of potential but is at worst a heavy rotation player. Maybe Ramsey and some picks. That’s a good deal for Simmons at this stage.
Portland with CJ, a rotation player, and future could probably out bid the Kings. Maybe Cleveland with Sexton and other prospects could outbid but Simmons reportedly doesn’t want to go to either of those places.
It’s funny how I’ve read sportswriters on other sites are saying that the Clippers and even Lakers(because Simmons couldn’t have possibly been including the kings when he said “3 California teams”) could make a deal work merely because they have enough interchangeable overpaid veteran players to match salaries while writing off the Kings because they refuse to touch their core pieces but otherwise are offering good, relatively young win now players that would fit in good on the Sixers and future assets.
Morey may still be in a state of denial. I don’t mind if the Kings sweeten the pot as far as draft picks go but an explosive scorer like Buddy who would benefit next to Embiid and Harris. He would probably have a season as good if not better than he did in the 2018-2019 season with the Kings where he was a borderline all star, Bagley who still has loads of potential but is at worst a heavy rotation player. Maybe Ramsey and some picks. That’s a good deal for Simmons at this stage.
Portland with CJ, a rotation player, and future could probably out bid the Kings. Maybe Cleveland with Sexton and other prospects could outbid but Simmons reportedly doesn’t want to go to either of those places.
It’s funny how I’ve read sportswriters on other sites are saying that the Clippers and even Lakers(because Simmons couldn’t have possibly been including the kings when he said “3 California teams”) could make a deal work merely because they have enough interchangeable overpaid veteran players to match salaries while writing off the Kings because they refuse to touch their core pieces but otherwise are offering good, relatively young win now players that would fit in good on the Sixers and future assets.
It's not just about that. It's the winning culture I think Mitchell brings. The same kind of impact Iman had. Non quantitative impact/culture change.
And what I understand from Ben is that he has worth ethic issues, the polar opposite of Mitchell.
We need Mitchell if we want to win again, this team needs to get tougher, that's why I'm so excited about Mitchell.
I'd trade Fox over Mitchell, straight up, and I think Fox is great
And what I understand from Ben is that he has worth ethic issues, the polar opposite of Mitchell.
We need Mitchell if we want to win again, this team needs to get tougher, that's why I'm so excited about Mitchell.
I'd trade Fox over Mitchell, straight up, and I think Fox is great
I didn't hear anything about CJ being on the trading block. I don't think
I think that's a bit of a stretch. Realistically speaking, the Kings have missed the playoffs 16 years straight. Davion hasn't even stepped foot on a NBA floor yet. Hypothetically speaking, trading a 9th pick that is completely unproven for a two time All Star that can guard all 5 positions is a no brainer. Simmons, Fox, Haliburton just for a Davion/Buddy and a First is a hell of a deal. I loved what Davion brought to Summer League. He is an awesome prospect and I have real faith in him being not just a culture changer, but a real contributor. Realistically though, Simmons coming back in a trade without giving up Hali or Fox is easy for Monte
I think that's a bit of a stretch. Realistically speaking, the Kings have missed the playoffs 16 years straight. Davion hasn't even stepped foot on a NBA floor yet. Hypothetically speaking, trading a 9th pick that is completely unproven for a two time All Star that can guard all 5 positions is a no brainer. Simmons, Fox, Haliburton just for a Davion/Buddy and a First is a hell of a deal. I loved what Davion brought to Summer League. He is an awesome prospect and I have real faith in him being not just a culture changer, but a real contributor. Realistically though, Simmons coming back in a trade without giving up Hali or Fox is easy for Monte
You mean the guy who averaged 25 and 7 and has improved on his stats every year was slid in because he didn’t make the playoffs or wasnt chosen an all-star and to emphasize your point you added Wiseman and Cojo and Lamelo because of reasons.
I get it, you don’t like Fox. I mean your response is silly. Next thing is going to be Fox’s stats are empty stats.
I get it, you don’t like Fox. I mean your response is silly. Next thing is going to be Fox’s stats are empty stats.
16th in the league in points/game on 48% shooting; 12th in assists/game; 16th in steals - and top-10 in ability to carry his team offensively, singlehandedly, for long stretches.
I'll say it again - superstars are made in the playoffs. De'Aaron isn't a superstar until/unless he can help the King make waves in the postseason.
But is he an all-star-caliber player? At least in the ballpark of Conley, LaVine, Mitchell, Booker, Brown... all of whom were on the 2021 ASG rosters?
C'mon now.
I'll say it again - superstars are made in the playoffs. De'Aaron isn't a superstar until/unless he can help the King make waves in the postseason.
But is he an all-star-caliber player? At least in the ballpark of Conley, LaVine, Mitchell, Booker, Brown... all of whom were on the 2021 ASG rosters?
C'mon now.
All the above according to YOU. Saying it again and again doesn’t make it true. It’s subjective opinion. Nothing more.
Subjective opinion that I suspect isn’t the mainstream view of the majority of folks that follow De’Aaron Fox‘s career on a regular basis.
First of all, you’re qualification that a player can’t be a superstar unless postseason is involved is beyond silly. Basketball is a TEAM sport. It’s not singles tennis. No matter how good ONE player may be, the team can only be as good as the sum of the parts.
And that extends beyond just the players on the court and on the bench. Coaching matters. Front office matters. Ownership matters. We KINGS fans should understand that better than anyone.
What the hell is a superstar anyway? What defines it? I suspect most here will differ on how they define it and how they apply it.
Regardless whether De’Aaron Fox meets your or anybody else’s criteria for being a super star — postseason play isn’t the only way to determine it.
Wilt Chamberlain is arguably the most dominant player that ever lived. He’s widely listed among the top 3-5. And his teams didn’t enjoy the same postseason accomplishments as many inferior players teams did.
There’s a lot more to it than that.
Subjective opinion that I suspect isn’t the mainstream view of the majority of folks that follow De’Aaron Fox‘s career on a regular basis.
First of all, you’re qualification that a player can’t be a superstar unless postseason is involved is beyond silly. Basketball is a TEAM sport. It’s not singles tennis. No matter how good ONE player may be, the team can only be as good as the sum of the parts.
And that extends beyond just the players on the court and on the bench. Coaching matters. Front office matters. Ownership matters. We KINGS fans should understand that better than anyone.
What the hell is a superstar anyway? What defines it? I suspect most here will differ on how they define it and how they apply it.
Regardless whether De’Aaron Fox meets your or anybody else’s criteria for being a super star — postseason play isn’t the only way to determine it.
Wilt Chamberlain is arguably the most dominant player that ever lived. He’s widely listed among the top 3-5. And his teams didn’t enjoy the same postseason accomplishments as many inferior players teams did.
There’s a lot more to it than that.
Dude, if you seriously believe Fox can be added to that original list of 15 players without a second thought your blind homerism might know no bounds. "Improved on his stats every year" - you don't frikin say? What so a guy just has to go from averaging 10 points his rookie season to being the leading scorer on a sub 40 win team that plays zero defense and looks to push the pace, and you can lump them with perennial MVP contenders?
Not sure how you are defining empty stats, but if you mean stats that haven't translated to team record then yes Fox's stats are pretty empty the same way many people think KAT and Wiggin's stats are empty.
I don't dislike Fox. I dislike how fans like you blindly overvalue him.
Not sure how you are defining empty stats, but if you mean stats that haven't translated to team record then yes Fox's stats are pretty empty the same way many people think KAT and Wiggin's stats are empty.
I don't dislike Fox. I dislike how fans like you blindly overvalue him.
And none of whom were in that list of top 15 players ...
See if you understand this logic:
- Those top 15 (Tatum debatable) are 100% better than Simmons. Nobody would argue otherwise.
- The "argument" made was that Fox, Beal, Young are also clearly better than Simmons, which implies they are in a similar tier as the top 15, or at least a tier above Simmons
- I think nobody would argue otherwise in the case of Beal. In the case of Young, he just led the Hawks to the ECF and has been an all star, so it wouldn't be hard to find a large group who would accept the premise that he's without debate better than Simmons
- Which leaves Fox, who has not made the playoffs or an all star team. Now you are saying that he is at least in the ballpark of Conley, Lavine, Mitchell, Booker, Brown. Which begs the question - are all those guys clearly better than Simmons? I dont think you'd find a reasonable group who would accept that premise without question.
So the tiering identified is:
1. top 15 list
2. Beal/Young
3. Conley, Lavine, Mitchell, Booker, Brown
So why is it that Simmons is at best tier 3 here, while Fox is at worst tier 3, and in fact lumped closer to tier 1 and 2 by dude12?
But instead of saying it's an argument, you and others just wash it off just cos Fox > everyone, and call anyone who dares question your logic a hater.
See if you understand this logic:
- Those top 15 (Tatum debatable) are 100% better than Simmons. Nobody would argue otherwise.
- The "argument" made was that Fox, Beal, Young are also clearly better than Simmons, which implies they are in a similar tier as the top 15, or at least a tier above Simmons
- I think nobody would argue otherwise in the case of Beal. In the case of Young, he just led the Hawks to the ECF and has been an all star, so it wouldn't be hard to find a large group who would accept the premise that he's without debate better than Simmons
- Which leaves Fox, who has not made the playoffs or an all star team. Now you are saying that he is at least in the ballpark of Conley, Lavine, Mitchell, Booker, Brown. Which begs the question - are all those guys clearly better than Simmons? I dont think you'd find a reasonable group who would accept that premise without question.
So the tiering identified is:
1. top 15 list
2. Beal/Young
3. Conley, Lavine, Mitchell, Booker, Brown
So why is it that Simmons is at best tier 3 here, while Fox is at worst tier 3, and in fact lumped closer to tier 1 and 2 by dude12?
But instead of saying it's an argument, you and others just wash it off just cos Fox > everyone, and call anyone who dares question your logic a hater.
I believe Fox to be a borderline superstar, for lack of opportunity to showcase it in the playoffs. Even I dont think he can make the list of top 15 players, at least not right now. With that being said, Im not sure I understand the need to boil the league down to the top 15 players. Why 15? Is there a major difference between the 10th and 25th best players? Seems too arbitrary a number to be stumbling over. Simmons is a nice player, but he is a comically bad shooter. He makes Tyreke Evans look like Larry Bird from distance. Fox's 3pt shot can't be left wide open, and he gets to the basket almost as well as Simmons. I dont see the value for the Kings if we are including Fox in a trade for Simmons.
If Fox were in the East or maybe a playoff team in the West he'd be an all-star and get more respect from officials. I agree with you that Top X is somewhat meaningless. He's good. Really good. Takeover and win you games good. Simmons absolutely has the tools but he is struggling to use them. If he were traded for a fan fave like Fox he's going to have the same issues Bagley does in what is otherwise an easy market if he struggles and Fox becomes an all-star just by virtue of joining a winner. It's kind of why Buddy/Bagley makes sense. Philly absolutely still has a chance to win that deal, you give two highly drafted guys who are sputtering the change of scenery they need plus Philly gets a lights out shooter.
Yes, of course the definition of "superstar" is subjective. AND 90% of the iconic achievements in the NBA, certainly the overwhelming majority of iconic NBA *moments,* are drawn from the playoffs.
"The Shot" by Michael Jordan over Craig Ehlo to propel the Bulls into the 2nd round of the 1989 playoffs.
Lillard's 37-footer against Paul George in the 1st round of the 2019 playoffs.
Dirk's game-winning layup against the Heat in Game 2 of the 2011 playoffs.
Why? Because that's when the stakes and the pressure are highest, when defenses are most intense. The players who thrive in those moments, under *that* kind of pressure, are the ones we generally recognize as superstars.
Playoff basketball is different than regular-season basketball. Ben Simmons will have a great regular season this year (if he plays); I don't doubt that for a second. But he can't redeem his 2021 performance against Atlanta until/unless the playoffs roll around for him again.
Dunno why you're bringing up Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt made the playoffs every year of his career. I'm clearly NOT saying that players need to win championships, or even have wild team success in the postseason, to be superstars. I'm saying that, win or lose, you gotta kick a$$ in the playoffs to be considered a superstar. Even in the loss to the Bucks, KD burnished his superstar credentials in the 2021 playoffs.
Until/unless Fox does something along those lines, in the playoffs, it's unlikely that he'll be widely considered among that upper-echelon.
Feel free to disagree!
"The Shot" by Michael Jordan over Craig Ehlo to propel the Bulls into the 2nd round of the 1989 playoffs.
Lillard's 37-footer against Paul George in the 1st round of the 2019 playoffs.
Dirk's game-winning layup against the Heat in Game 2 of the 2011 playoffs.
Why? Because that's when the stakes and the pressure are highest, when defenses are most intense. The players who thrive in those moments, under *that* kind of pressure, are the ones we generally recognize as superstars.
Playoff basketball is different than regular-season basketball. Ben Simmons will have a great regular season this year (if he plays); I don't doubt that for a second. But he can't redeem his 2021 performance against Atlanta until/unless the playoffs roll around for him again.
Dunno why you're bringing up Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt made the playoffs every year of his career. I'm clearly NOT saying that players need to win championships, or even have wild team success in the postseason, to be superstars. I'm saying that, win or lose, you gotta kick a$$ in the playoffs to be considered a superstar. Even in the loss to the Bucks, KD burnished his superstar credentials in the 2021 playoffs.
Until/unless Fox does something along those lines, in the playoffs, it's unlikely that he'll be widely considered among that upper-echelon.
Feel free to disagree!
I don’t recall putting anyone in tiers but you are all over the place cause a nerve got hit? Whatever. I am right though in that someone would bring up empty stats, I missed on someone bringing up Fox’s numbers were a result of pace and of course, I should have known that I’m a homer.
I’ve been consistent though in saying that if Fox was on the 76ers instead of Simmons they would be much better.
I’ve been consistent though in saying that if Fox was on the 76ers instead of Simmons they would be much better.
You're mixing different points made by different posters. Good luck finding the post where I called you, or anyone at any time, a hater.
Here're MY two relevant points.
Here're MY two relevant points.
- As a player, Fox is in the ballpark of Conley, LaVine, Mitchell, Booker, Brown, all of whom are all-stars. The main thing those guys have over Fox is that their teams have made the playoffs. I think LaVine is the only exception. If you think Fox is worse than that set of guys we disagree.
- Simmons is a very good regular season player. But once we get to the playoffs I'd prefer ANY of them to Simmons. In the playoffs the stakes become much bigger, opponents prepare much more seriously, effort level ratchets up, and player and schematic weaknesses are probed without mercy. Simmons' weaknesses, both mechanical and, it seems, psychological, are WHOPPERS.
But how do you know how Fox will do in the playoffs, when he hasn't even got there? I'm not saying that you're wrong, but it can't be treated as a foregone conclusion. Maybe it's a bit like how the value of a draft pick is typically higher than once the pick has been made?
FWIW, Simmons' career playoff stats are pretty close to his regular season averages, just a few points shy.
FWIW, Simmons' career playoff stats are pretty close to his regular season averages, just a few points shy.
Last edited: