Noel on Sixers having three centers: "It doesn't make any sense."

[walker834]

The question to me is more whether Noel is the guy.  Even if there is some supposed next big thing next year there are other options where there could be  someone solid who is better than noel.  But it is mostly a pg heavy draft at the top and giles.  jonathon isaac isn't it either.   The next draft in 18 is bigger at the top.  Big men can be found but most of the really great ones are high draft picks. There are always exceptions.

I'm not sold on Noel as the guy here.  If I were though he probably wouldnt be up for trade for next years pick.

[walker834]

Every draft there is some guy who is supposedly the next kevin durant though it seems like nowadays.  We took jaylen brown.  It was wiggins.  It was ingram.  It will be isaac next year. 

jaylen brown wasn't the next durant and we took him.  He actually could be good though.

I'm honestly not that concerned about that.  When Durant was in college it was pretty obvious. Same with LEbron. 

Some of these young guys and drafts are really a lot of hype now where they get more hype than they actually are.

Shaq didnt need hype.  He was that good and created it. Wiggins was hype. Good player but the hype that guy got was absurd. Same with some of these other guys the last few drafts.

Duncan, Bird, Magic etc.

Kobe was totally under the radar too.  So was paul george.

The game has changed somewhat that way.

[walker834]

Name me one guy next year that is the next kevin durant or lebron.  If you have to think about it he isn't it.

[celticsclay]

Name me one guy next year that is the next kevin durant or lebron.  If you have to think about it he isn't it.

I like to see these guys in college for a reason. With the rules the way they are we get to see them play 35 games, many of them against other good college teams. I would rather have simmons or ingram than noel (especially for 4 cheap years). I would rather have Dangelo Russel, Porzingas, Towns or towns for 4 years under cost control than noel. I would rather have Parker, Wiggins or a healthy embiid than Noel for 4 years under cost control. I would rather have Anthony Davis or Lillard than noel. You can go through any draft except for the disaster of 2013 and you would rather have the top picks at cost controlled than Noel at max money. You can see in some of these cases (Towns, Davis, Porzginas, Lillard) trading them for a max money Noel would have set back the franchise for a half a decade or more.

Many think Dennis Smith, Josh Jackson, Hengry giles have future superstar potential. Noel does not have superstar potential (probably not even his family eyes) at this point. I repeat again, this is silly.

[Moranis]

Name me one guy next year that is the next kevin durant or lebron.  If you have to think about it he isn't it.

The problem with your analysis is Noel isn't one of those guys so it really makes no difference if one of the high school kids is one of those guys.  Noel isn't Shaq.  At best he is a shorter Dikembe, which is a very good player, but not better than the vast majority of the #1 picks or even vast majority of the #3 picks.  I mean in a vacuum you wouldn't trade any of the top 4 picks from the Towns draft for Noel (i.e. Towns, Russell, Okafor, Porzingis).  I'm not even sure if redrafted 2013 Noel even ends up in the top 3 (Giannis and Gobert are pretty clearly 1 and 2 - Noel might be 3).  Heck, Boston didn't even trade the 3rd pick this past summer i.e. Brown for Noel, Covington, and some late 1sts.  The 2017 Brooklyn pick has far more value than the #3 pick in a two player draft.  That is the ultimate rub of your analysis. 

Now the 2018 Brooklyn is a different animal because Brooklyn could look like a vastly different team in the 17/18 season so there is no real way to project where that pick ends up, but there is no way Boston will trade the most valuable non-player asset in all of basketball for Nerlens Noel.  None at all.

[walker834]

I'd rather guys like paul george, paul pierce and players like that.  I like our team of underrated guys too. I would have taken jaylen and value him more than some of the guys you mentioned.  Would you take Carmelo? I wouldn't. A lot of those teams that have those guys aren't very good either not surprisingly.  I do like some of those guys mentioned but I wouldnt take every one of those guys over some of our players who aren't perennial allstars. They are better basketball players though who get overlooked.

There are very few guys like kevin garnett out there.

I wouldn't trade jaylen for carmelo i know that.  A lot of the players you mentioned are good playerss and are going to put up numbers but whether they are winning basketball players a lot of them get overhyped and are not conducent to winning basketbal because they don't have the mindset how they were molded or whatever.

I'm not saying Noel is that either.  But I think people overrate players as well.

[walker834]

Not everyone of those guys is michael jordan is all i'm saying.  Some of those guys will be good others will be players who put up numbers.  Reminds me of guys like jim jackson and mashburn in ways with kidd in dallas. They were all high draft picks. Kidd was really the only one who went on to much more than being a high rated prospect.

[celticsclay]

Name me one guy next year that is the next kevin durant or lebron.  If you have to think about it he isn't it.

The problem with your analysis is Noel isn't one of those guys so it really makes no difference if one of the high school kids is one of those guys.  Noel isn't Shaq.  At best he is a shorter Dikembe, which is a very good player, but not better than the vast majority of the #1 picks or even vast majority of the #3 picks.  I mean in a vacuum you wouldn't trade any of the top 4 picks from the Towns draft for Noel (i.e. Towns, Russell, Okafor, Porzingis).  I'm not even sure if redrafted 2013 Noel even ends up in the top 3 (Giannis and Gobert are pretty clearly 1 and 2 - Noel might be 3).  Heck, Boston didn't even trade the 3rd pick this past summer i.e. Brown for Noel, Covington, and some late 1sts.  The 2017 Brooklyn pick has far more value than the #3 pick in a two player draft.  That is the ultimate rub of your analysis. 

Now the 2018 Brooklyn is a different animal because Brooklyn could look like a vastly different team in the 17/18 season so there is no real way to project where that pick ends up, but there is no way Boston will trade the most valuable non-player asset in all of basketball for Nerlens Noel.  None at all.

totally agreeing with Moranis on this.

[walker834]

We also didnt need covington and more first round draft picks. we also liked brown. I wouldnt have done that trade either. I  also like towns and guys like that.  Parker, Wiggins.  Somewhat overhyped.  I agree they are better prospects than noel.  I wouldn't have traded brown for noel straight up. 

I think people are overvaluing next years draft to us though.  Dennis Smith is a solid pick.  Giles has some questions.  josh jackson who knows.

To me its more whether or not noel is worth it.

[walker834]

If Karl Anthony Towns was in next years draft I'd be saying that but to my knowledge he isn't. Neither is wiggins for that matter who was overhyped for what he actually is. He isn't the next lebron. He's a good player though.

We could possibly still pick someone better than noel.  I'm not 100 percent sure he is worth it. WE could also trade for someone better than him but until i see that noel is possibly available and we dont even know that.

Next years draft is a pg heavy draft at the top.  We also drafted brown who i like so what do we need jackson for.

We'd probably end up taking someone underrated like we did with brown.  Or trade the pick or just take dennis smith and we'd have a clusterf of guards. That's not really a great situation either.

[jpotter33]

They don't need to do anything.  Plenty of minutes to go around.  It's not ideal, but who cares.  That team isn't threatening for a championship this year.

Imagine a scenario where Thomas and Bradley keep playing excellent basketball.  Pretend Marcus Smart actually makes his leap and looks like a starter.  Now let's also pretend that Terry Rozier's Summer League was legit and he's everything we hope he can be.  Let's say Terry Rozier looks like a legit starting PG in the handful of minutes he gets.  How's he getting starting guard minutes on a team with Thomas, Bradley and Smart all playing excellent ball? 

Now, because Rozier's minutes are limited and teams know Boston is desperate to move one of their PGs, should Boston trade him for a early 2nd rounder just for the sake of trading him?  No, of course not.  That doesn't help the team.  Better off just having Rozier play his 5-10 minutes per night at PG than give him away for pennies on the dollar.   In that scenario, Boston just hangs onto him until someone makes a legit offer or they figure out a way to get equal value for Thomas or Smart. 

Once you understand that, you'll understand why 99% of this board his no idea what they are talking about in regards to Philly's big man situation.   They'll probably trade one of those guys eventually, but it makes the most sense to play out the season and see if someone's trade value increases to the point that someone makes them an acceptable offer.

Perhaps that's because Smart, Rozier, and Bradley can all effectively play two (or even three in Smart's case) positions, and Okafor, Noel, and Embiid are all pure 5's that can neither play the 4 nor play together.

Combine that with the fact that both Saric and Simmons are clearly 4's that simply can't play the 3 (though Simmons could play small-ball 5), let alone Covington that will also have time at the small-ball 4, and, no, there simply isn't enough minutes to go around, and keeping all of them is going to do nothing but start locker room issues (as we're seeing play out before our eyes) and lower their trade value even more by them either not getting sufficient minutes or having to play out of position with a poor fitting frontcourt mate.

Ah, that Sam Hinkie team-building logic, though!

Hinkie collected assets.  It remains to be seen how it fits together.  They have time to figure it out.  Embiid might be able to play PF.  Simmons might be able to play PG or SF.  They'll figure it out eventually.

This is a good lesson for us all.  This whole thing started because LarBrd had to take a contrarian viewpoint to prove how smart he is.  It's now wound up with him saying stuff that makes it seem like he doesn't understand basketball in the slightest.

Mike

Sounds like you don't trust the process

If it makes people say things like "Simmons might play PG" when he didn't even play it in college and could barely defend against college bigs, no one should trust it.

Could Philly wind up running a lot of their offense through Simmons?  Sure, much like the Kings did through Chris Webber back in the day.  If anyone at the Kings had suggested playing Webber at point, however, they would have been shot out of a cannon into the Pacific Ocean.

Mike

Nobody panics when a team has too many bad players at a position ... for instance, our many irrelevant shooting guards.  It only becomes a "problem" when you have too many good players at a position.  Philly is on record with saying they will not make a trade for the sake of making a trade.  They are obviously open to a move, but it needs to be what they consider a fair offer.  They see their log jam as a luxury and in a way, they are right.  The reason why we see so many articles about this is because it's acknowledged throughout the league that if Philly decides to move one of their prize bigs, that player automatically becomes one of the best available trade chips in the league.  Hence why we see so many articles about Noel.  Fans are fawning over the dream of snagging him from Philly.  We're guilty of that almost daily.  I'd love to have Noel in Boston.  Unfortunately, Philly is the gate keeper.

As for the Simmons thing... pretty much every article I read on him suggests the plan is for him to play Point Guard.

This is simply a misunderstanding of NBA basketball. He might handle the ball usually, but that does not make him the point guard.

He's a 6-10 Rondo that can guard 6 positions.

If you're meaning he's volatile, can't shoot, and generally doesn't play defense, then I agree.

[LarBrd33]

They don't need to do anything.  Plenty of minutes to go around.  It's not ideal, but who cares.  That team isn't threatening for a championship this year.

Imagine a scenario where Thomas and Bradley keep playing excellent basketball.  Pretend Marcus Smart actually makes his leap and looks like a starter.  Now let's also pretend that Terry Rozier's Summer League was legit and he's everything we hope he can be.  Let's say Terry Rozier looks like a legit starting PG in the handful of minutes he gets.  How's he getting starting guard minutes on a team with Thomas, Bradley and Smart all playing excellent ball? 

Now, because Rozier's minutes are limited and teams know Boston is desperate to move one of their PGs, should Boston trade him for a early 2nd rounder just for the sake of trading him?  No, of course not.  That doesn't help the team.  Better off just having Rozier play his 5-10 minutes per night at PG than give him away for pennies on the dollar.   In that scenario, Boston just hangs onto him until someone makes a legit offer or they figure out a way to get equal value for Thomas or Smart. 

Once you understand that, you'll understand why 99% of this board his no idea what they are talking about in regards to Philly's big man situation.   They'll probably trade one of those guys eventually, but it makes the most sense to play out the season and see if someone's trade value increases to the point that someone makes them an acceptable offer.

Perhaps that's because Smart, Rozier, and Bradley can all effectively play two (or even three in Smart's case) positions, and Okafor, Noel, and Embiid are all pure 5's that can neither play the 4 nor play together.

Combine that with the fact that both Saric and Simmons are clearly 4's that simply can't play the 3 (though Simmons could play small-ball 5), let alone Covington that will also have time at the small-ball 4, and, no, there simply isn't enough minutes to go around, and keeping all of them is going to do nothing but start locker room issues (as we're seeing play out before our eyes) and lower their trade value even more by them either not getting sufficient minutes or having to play out of position with a poor fitting frontcourt mate.

Ah, that Sam Hinkie team-building logic, though!

Hinkie collected assets.  It remains to be seen how it fits together.  They have time to figure it out.  Embiid might be able to play PF.  Simmons might be able to play PG or SF.  They'll figure it out eventually.

This is a good lesson for us all.  This whole thing started because LarBrd had to take a contrarian viewpoint to prove how smart he is.  It's now wound up with him saying stuff that makes it seem like he doesn't understand basketball in the slightest.

Mike

Sounds like you don't trust the process

If it makes people say things like "Simmons might play PG" when he didn't even play it in college and could barely defend against college bigs, no one should trust it.

Could Philly wind up running a lot of their offense through Simmons?  Sure, much like the Kings did through Chris Webber back in the day.  If anyone at the Kings had suggested playing Webber at point, however, they would have been shot out of a cannon into the Pacific Ocean.

Mike

Nobody panics when a team has too many bad players at a position ... for instance, our many irrelevant shooting guards.  It only becomes a "problem" when you have too many good players at a position.  Philly is on record with saying they will not make a trade for the sake of making a trade.  They are obviously open to a move, but it needs to be what they consider a fair offer.  They see their log jam as a luxury and in a way, they are right.  The reason why we see so many articles about this is because it's acknowledged throughout the league that if Philly decides to move one of their prize bigs, that player automatically becomes one of the best available trade chips in the league.  Hence why we see so many articles about Noel.  Fans are fawning over the dream of snagging him from Philly.  We're guilty of that almost daily.  I'd love to have Noel in Boston.  Unfortunately, Philly is the gate keeper.

As for the Simmons thing... pretty much every article I read on him suggests the plan is for him to play Point Guard.

This is simply a misunderstanding of NBA basketball. He might handle the ball usually, but that does not make him the point guard.

He's a 6-10 Rondo that can guard 6 positions.

If you're meaning he's volatile, can't shoot, and generally doesn't play defense, then I agree.

SImmons has literally never played an NBA game.  I don't think he'd appreciate being defined by what he isn't.

[jpotter33]

Name me one guy next year that is the next kevin durant or lebron.  If you have to think about it he isn't it.

The problem with your analysis is Noel isn't one of those guys so it really makes no difference if one of the high school kids is one of those guys.  Noel isn't Shaq.  At best he is a shorter Dikembe, which is a very good player, but not better than the vast majority of the #1 picks or even vast majority of the #3 picks.  I mean in a vacuum you wouldn't trade any of the top 4 picks from the Towns draft for Noel (i.e. Towns, Russell, Okafor, Porzingis).  I'm not even sure if redrafted 2013 Noel even ends up in the top 3 (Giannis and Gobert are pretty clearly 1 and 2 - Noel might be 3).  Heck, Boston didn't even trade the 3rd pick this past summer i.e. Brown for Noel, Covington, and some late 1sts.  The 2017 Brooklyn pick has far more value than the #3 pick in a two player draft.  That is the ultimate rub of your analysis. 

Now the 2018 Brooklyn is a different animal because Brooklyn could look like a vastly different team in the 17/18 season so there is no real way to project where that pick ends up, but there is no way Boston will trade the most valuable non-player asset in all of basketball for Nerlens Noel.  None at all.

totally agreeing with Moranis on this.

Same here. I'm one of the biggest Noel fans on here, but there's simply no way the 2017 trade swap is used.

Hell, due to the context in Philly, his almost outright trade request, and his contract situation, I probably wouldn't even do the 2018 pick for him. I think something like Rozier, Young, and the Memphis pick is fair value for him given all the details surrounding trading for him.

[green_bballers13]

If Karl Anthony Towns was in next years draft I'd be saying that but to my knowledge he isn't. Neither is wiggins for that matter who was overhyped for what he actually is. He isn't the next lebron. He's a good player though.

We could possibly still pick someone better than noel.  I'm not 100 percent sure he is worth it. WE could also trade for someone better than him but until i see that noel is possibly available and we dont even know that.

Next years draft is a pg heavy draft at the top.  We also drafted brown who i like so what do we need jackson for.

We'd probably end up taking someone underrated like we did with brown.  Or trade the pick or just take dennis smith and we'd have a clusterf of guards. That's not really a great situation either.

Harry Giles and Josh Jackson are both expected to be very good players and neither are pgs. I don't really care too much about what 18 year olds are overhyped before they hit a shot in college. If this hype mattered, Skal or Dragan would be playing for the Celtics this year. By draft time, I'm sure there will be well developed tiers and we will most likely have a chance to fill any position that we need filled with the Brooklyn pick.

I have no interest in paying Nerlens Noel north of 20m per year. Will he sign a 5-6 year deal worth around 40m? If so, I'm interested.

[jpotter33]

They don't need to do anything.  Plenty of minutes to go around.  It's not ideal, but who cares.  That team isn't threatening for a championship this year.

Imagine a scenario where Thomas and Bradley keep playing excellent basketball.  Pretend Marcus Smart actually makes his leap and looks like a starter.  Now let's also pretend that Terry Rozier's Summer League was legit and he's everything we hope he can be.  Let's say Terry Rozier looks like a legit starting PG in the handful of minutes he gets.  How's he getting starting guard minutes on a team with Thomas, Bradley and Smart all playing excellent ball? 

Now, because Rozier's minutes are limited and teams know Boston is desperate to move one of their PGs, should Boston trade him for a early 2nd rounder just for the sake of trading him?  No, of course not.  That doesn't help the team.  Better off just having Rozier play his 5-10 minutes per night at PG than give him away for pennies on the dollar.   In that scenario, Boston just hangs onto him until someone makes a legit offer or they figure out a way to get equal value for Thomas or Smart. 

Once you understand that, you'll understand why 99% of this board his no idea what they are talking about in regards to Philly's big man situation.   They'll probably trade one of those guys eventually, but it makes the most sense to play out the season and see if someone's trade value increases to the point that someone makes them an acceptable offer.

Perhaps that's because Smart, Rozier, and Bradley can all effectively play two (or even three in Smart's case) positions, and Okafor, Noel, and Embiid are all pure 5's that can neither play the 4 nor play together.

Combine that with the fact that both Saric and Simmons are clearly 4's that simply can't play the 3 (though Simmons could play small-ball 5), let alone Covington that will also have time at the small-ball 4, and, no, there simply isn't enough minutes to go around, and keeping all of them is going to do nothing but start locker room issues (as we're seeing play out before our eyes) and lower their trade value even more by them either not getting sufficient minutes or having to play out of position with a poor fitting frontcourt mate.

Ah, that Sam Hinkie team-building logic, though!

Hinkie collected assets.  It remains to be seen how it fits together.  They have time to figure it out.  Embiid might be able to play PF.  Simmons might be able to play PG or SF.  They'll figure it out eventually.

This is a good lesson for us all.  This whole thing started because LarBrd had to take a contrarian viewpoint to prove how smart he is.  It's now wound up with him saying stuff that makes it seem like he doesn't understand basketball in the slightest.

Mike

Sounds like you don't trust the process

If it makes people say things like "Simmons might play PG" when he didn't even play it in college and could barely defend against college bigs, no one should trust it.

Could Philly wind up running a lot of their offense through Simmons?  Sure, much like the Kings did through Chris Webber back in the day.  If anyone at the Kings had suggested playing Webber at point, however, they would have been shot out of a cannon into the Pacific Ocean.

Mike

Nobody panics when a team has too many bad players at a position ... for instance, our many irrelevant shooting guards.  It only becomes a "problem" when you have too many good players at a position.  Philly is on record with saying they will not make a trade for the sake of making a trade.  They are obviously open to a move, but it needs to be what they consider a fair offer.  They see their log jam as a luxury and in a way, they are right.  The reason why we see so many articles about this is because it's acknowledged throughout the league that if Philly decides to move one of their prize bigs, that player automatically becomes one of the best available trade chips in the league.  Hence why we see so many articles about Noel.  Fans are fawning over the dream of snagging him from Philly.  We're guilty of that almost daily.  I'd love to have Noel in Boston.  Unfortunately, Philly is the gate keeper.

As for the Simmons thing... pretty much every article I read on him suggests the plan is for him to play Point Guard.

This is simply a misunderstanding of NBA basketball. He might handle the ball usually, but that does not make him the point guard.

He's a 6-10 Rondo that can guard 6 positions.

If you're meaning he's volatile, can't shoot, and generally doesn't play defense, then I agree.

SImmons has literally never played an NBA game.  I don't think he'd appreciate being defined by what he isn't.

Naw, I think all three of those pretty much fit the bill in describing him.