Anfernee Simons trade destinations

[Natebishop3]

overall? Well, in 2020-21, Blazers won the equivalent of 48 games in an 82 game season. That lineup you listed would not have a chance at 48 wins. Of course, that team 4 years ago had Dame and his talent kind of unbalances any roster talent comparisons

Nobody on this team is anywhere near as talented as Dame, at least not yet.... I'm still holding out hope for Sharpe.

But we have no clue what this starting five is capable of. I'm not even sure if Simons/Grant can stay healthy. I've yet to see it.

 

[blazerkor]

Scoot is a better passer than Ant. But had a TS of 49%. That is horrendous, especially in the modern nba. Also, I don't think he was any better defensively, based on the eye test.

I like Scoot's potential, but the Blazers shouldn't be so quick to put all their eggs in the Scoot basket just because they drafted him at #3. Simons is a much better player right now, and it's not even close.

I've said this already. We shouldn't give Ant away. He is fantastic on offense, especially in the right situation. We should however be looking to trade him unless the front office and Chauncey are sure that he would accept a sixth man role and start looking to use his scoring prowess to also set teammates up. If it's Ant taking major minutes in which he offers very little opportunity for Scoot and Shaedon to grow because he's isoing and going 1 on 5 then he hurts what our team has stated they are trying to do (build around Scoot and Shaedon).

In a rebuild you don't have to look at trading Ant if it has a solid return of draft capital and/or young prospects as putting all of our eggs in the Scoot basket. It's just allowing Scoot to show us who he really is unimpeded by a guy who will set him up to fail on defense and will take opportunities away from him on offense.

If you don't get why Ant isn't a great fit here and should have more value on teams that need perimeter scoring to help them win now then I don't know what to tell you. That being said if there isn't a market for Ant right now then Chauncey has to tell him that his role has changed. We should not just give Ant away but it's mind boggling to me how other teams get the trades done that they need to, in order to have a roster with a direction that makes sense, while Joe can't seem to do it time after time after time.

 

[beast blazer]

Simons can't defend guards. He gotta go.

A lot of very talented offensive players are not good on defense: Lillard, Harden, Doncic...

 

[sheed30]

I've said this already. We shouldn't give Ant away. He is fantastic on offense, especially in the right situation. We should however be looking to trade him unless the front office and Chauncey are sure that he would accept a sixth man role and start looking to use his scoring prowess to also set teammates up. If it's Ant taking major minutes in which he offers very little opportunity for Scoot and Shaedon to grow because he's isoing and going 1 on 5 then he hurts what our team has stated they are trying to do (build around Scoot and Shaedon).

In a rebuild you don't have to look at trading Ant if it has a solid return of draft capital and/or young prospects as putting all of our eggs in the Scoot basket. It's just allowing Scoot to show us who he really is unimpeded by a guy who will set him up to fail on defense and will take opportunities away from him on offense.

If you don't get why Ant isn't a great fit here and should have more value on teams that need perimeter scoring to help them win now then I don't know what to tell you. That being said if there isn't a market for Ant right now then Chauncey has to tell him that his role has changed. We should not just give Ant away but it's mind boggling to me how other teams get the trades done that they need to, in order to have a roster with a direction that makes sense, while Joe can't seem to do it time after time after time.

Ant averaged 5.5 assists per game, while being our main offensive weapon.

You basically answered why we should keep Ant "should have more value on teams that need perimeter scoring"

Guess what, we need that, badly. Ant is only 25 guys! That still very young. Him and Grant our best 3 pointer shooters, and Ant averaged more attempts per game than Grant. Also Simon was in the top ten of 3's made per game.

If we can trade Ant for someone like Lauri Markkanen, I'm down for it. To trade Ant for what many have suggested here, the Orlando package and other crap, it's pointless.

 

[beast blazer]

I've said this already. We shouldn't give Ant away. He is fantastic on offense, especially in the right situation. We should however be looking to trade him unless the front office and Chauncey are sure that he would accept a sixth man role and start looking to use his scoring prowess to also set teammates up. If it's Ant taking major minutes in which he offers very little opportunity for Scoot and Shaedon to grow because he's isoing and going 1 on 5 then he hurts what our team has stated they are trying to do (build around Scoot and Shaedon).

In a rebuild you don't have to look at trading Ant if it has a solid return of draft capital and/or young prospects as putting all of our eggs in the Scoot basket. It's just allowing Scoot to show us who he really is unimpeded by a guy who will set him up to fail on defense and will take opportunities away from him on offense.

If you don't get why Ant isn't a great fit here and should have more value on teams that need perimeter scoring to help them win now then I don't know what to tell you. That being said if there isn't a market for Ant right now then Chauncey has to tell him that his role has changed. We should not just give Ant away but it's mind boggling to me how other teams get the trades done that they need to, in order to have a roster with a direction that makes sense, while Joe can't seem to do it time after time after time.

If you do a 3 man rotation at guard with Sharpe/Scoot/Simons, Scoot can play PG 32 minutes per game, and Ant 16 minutes per game, and let Ant play SG when he's on the court with Scoot.

It won't hurt Scoot's development, he'll still have plenty of time. He seemed to relax and play better coming off the bench, with less pressure.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

it would give us a better chance in the long run, IF we actually hit on picks we get say next year and the year after.

There is also a very high chance one of those picks or both can flop and we continue to waste years.

I don't think you understand what the meaning of "chance" is.

 

[BIG Q]

I would think the Lakers are loaded in the front court, but not so much in the backcourt. They should be looking to get Ant, not Grant. Ant and Reeves would be a good backcourt for them.

 

[sheed30]

I don't think you understand what the meaning of "chance" is.

I understand, but you act like anyone we draft is going to be a star and it doesn't quite workout like that..

Each year in the draft there is many in the top 5-10 that don't pan out. Having a chance still comes with a risk.

 

[Phatguysrule]

A lot of very talented offensive players are not good on defense: Lillard, Harden, Doncic...

Lillard is a far better (less bad?) defender than Ant. Either way, how many titles do those guys have between them?

We already suck. Let's take this opportunity and build for championships.

 

[BassPlaya]

Ant averaged 5.5 assists per game, while being our main offensive weapon.

You basically answered why we should keep Ant "should have more value on teams that need perimeter scoring"

Guess what, we need that, badly. Ant is only 25 guys! That still very young. Him and Grant our best 3 pointer shooters, and Ant averaged more attempts per game than Grant. Also Simon was in the top ten of 3's made per game.

If we can trade Ant for someone like Lauri Markkanen, I'm down for it. To trade Ant for what many have suggested here, the Orlando package and other crap, it's pointless.

Funny, isn't it? If a player does not reach the expectations of a writer/fan/fantasy person....they must be traded. Doesn't matter that they are the most deadly shooter on the team.
I try to never blame players for their level of play that is different than the expectation that was created by anyone other than themselves. When a kid comes out of college and emphatically states they are going to be "all that", then I might criticize...regardless of where they were taken or the contract they were given. In my eyes, it really began with Shaquille O'Neil. Even Jordan was given time to rise before he was crowned. Shaqfu could only achieve what was expected of him, He could never exceed. Sad really.

 

[sheed30]

Funny, isn't it? If a player does not reach the expectations of a writer/fan/fantasy person....they must be traded. Doesn't matter that they are the most deadly shooter on the team.
I try to never blame players for their level of play that is different than the expectation that was created by anyone other than themselves. When a kid comes out of college and emphatically states they are going to be "all that", then I might criticize...regardless of where they were taken or the contract they were given. In my eyes, it really began with Shaquille O'Neil. Even Jordan was given time to rise before he was crowned. Shaqfu could only achieve what was expected of him, He could never exceed. Sad really.

Ya, it all depends on what expectations one puts on a player. We spent years developing Ant, he is still 25. Yes I get that we have Scoot and Sharpe, but Scoot is far from ready and we haven't really seen what all 3 can do together for long stretches.

Once again, my thoughts about moving Ant, is I'm fine with it if we get equal return for him. But basically all suggestions here about getting rid of Ant is crap to me, you guys act like Ant is a vet that we should trade away. If you can spin a trade for Lauri Markkanen, I'm more than fine with it.

 

[Tince]

How many teams won with only one superstar and that superstar is a short guard? Maybe the Warriors if you don't count Klay as a superstar? That team was perfectly built around Steph. Something Neil could never do with Dame.

But let's say we don't make any moves, when is the last time we had a starting lineup that's as talented overall as Simons/Sharpe/Avdija/Grant/Ayton?

Two years ago: Dame/CJ/Hart/Grant/Nurk was more talented than Simons/Sharpe/Avdija/Grant/Ayton. Could the second line up end up being better? Sure. Will they? Who knows.

Again, I do like optimistic Nate, so I'm trying to not crap on your party too much.

 

[sheed30]

A lot of very talented offensive players are not good on defense: Lillard, Harden, Doncic...

Ill add many more, Fox from the King, Sabonis from the Kings, Haliburton, Jokic from Denver. Booker from PHX, Brunson, Tray Young, Curry. Dame...

Yes I put in some big's too, but the point is, you can mask poor defense with what you put around them and team defense.

 

[Natebishop3]

Two years ago: Dame/CJ/Hart/Grant/Nurk was more talented than Simons/Sharpe/Avdija/Grant/Ayton. Could the second line up end up being better? Sure. Will they? Who knows.

Again, I do like optimistic Nate, so I'm trying to not crap on your party too much.

One problem with your post.

CJ was traded for Hart.

 

[wizenheimer]

A lot of very talented offensive players are not good on defense: Lillard, Harden, Doncic...

let's go ahead and add Curry and make it a foursome, then add Ant for comparison (CJ too)...

career BPM:

Doncic +7.8
Harden +6.5
Curry +6.5
Dame +4.7

CJ +1.4
Simons -1.5

career net rating:

Harden +11
Curry +10
Dame +6
Doncic +5

CJ -1
Simons -10


Simons

yeah, there are other guards who are bad at defense, but they are so elite at offense that they dramatically off-set their defensive weaknesses

Ant is not in the same zip-code on offense as those other guys, The reality is Ant is a net negative on a basketball floor. He doesn't do offense well enough to off-set his terrible defense. CJ has been good enough on offense to offset his defense; it helps that as bad as CJ has been on defense, he has still been better than Ant

 

[Tince]

One problem with your post.

CJ was traded for Hart.

Look... Let's not let the facts get in the way of my point.

Sub in Ant for CJ

 

[MickZagger]

Ant averaged 5.5 assists per game, while being our main offensive weapon.

You basically answered why we should keep Ant "should have more value on teams that need perimeter scoring"

Guess what, we need that, badly. Ant is only 25 guys! That still very young. Him and Grant our best 3 pointer shooters, and Ant averaged more attempts per game than Grant. Also Simon was in the top ten of 3's made per game.

If we can trade Ant for someone like Lauri Markkanen, I'm down for it. To trade Ant for what many have suggested here, the Orlando package and other crap, it's pointless.

Simons averaged those 5.5 assists because he was basically the sole focus of other teams defenses most the time. Leaving more wide open looks.

 

[blazerkor]

The idea that we NEED Ant for his outside shooting is just nuts. We don't NEED anyone for anything right now. We just NEED to be able to evaluate and develop the talent that we have and accumulate more assets, in the form of draft picks and prospects. Both draft picks and prospects can be used later to consolidate and acquire talent that fits needs that haven't materialized from used draft picks and current or acquired players. However that's what we do when we think winning has become the immediate priority over development and asset acquisition.

We are in a rebuild and I'm not saying that none of the players on the roster will be a part of future playoff wins, I'm saying how that plays out doesn't need to be our current concern. Again, I've said this a lot but win now players in theory should be worth more to teams who are trying to win big now and future assets (prospects not ready to contribute to wins now and draft picks) should have more value to us.

Ant isn't too old to be with our team long term so there is no rush but if any team who views themselves as close to contending needs a perimeter offensive weapon then we would likely be able to get more value from them for Ant in terms of what we need as a rebuilding team than Ant currently provides to the rebuild.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Ya, it all depends on what expectations one puts on a player. We spent years developing Ant, he is still 25. Yes I get that we have Scoot and Sharpe, but Scoot is far from ready and we haven't really seen what all 3 can do together for long stretches.

Once again, my thoughts about moving Ant, is I'm fine with it if we get equal return for him. But basically all suggestions here about getting rid of Ant is crap to me, you guys act like Ant is a vet that we should trade away. If you can spin a trade for Lauri Markkanen, I'm more than fine with it.

I don't think anybody in the league would trade Lauri Markkanen for Ant.

He's bigger, scores just as well, is a far better rebounder, and a far better defender.

That's just unrealistic.

 

[cheesehoff]

The difference between Dame, CJ and Ant's D is effort. CJ expended energy trying to defend. I can't say the same thing for the other two. If you could get the truth out of Dame, I'd bet he'd tell you he conserved energy on D so he could give max effort scoring. It's easier to accept when you're at that level offensively. But, Ant isn't at Dame's level. It makes Ant's efficiency numbers look much worse.
Scoot is already a better defender than the other three regardless of what the stats look like. In a couple years, with good coaching, Scoot will be a good defender. Probably above average because of his physical makeup and his mentality. I think he knows he can't just outscore his opponent. I don't think the other three cared if they got scored on.
If Ant is the plan as a long term starter, it would almost qualify Cronin as insane. Why would a terrible defensive, ball dominate, shoot first (and second) PG have more success now when it didn't work before, twice?
The best thing a coach could do for the team (and for Ant) is run more set plays to make Ant pass the ball and hold him responsible for his defensive lapses. Something Stotts never did. Plus, teams just don't run offensive sets anymore. My college team had 90+ calls in about 10 different sets to get a specific look for our personnel. I guarantee no NBA teams do. It's all pick and roll and it's often the guy that gets the defensive rebound since most teams don't immediately get the ball to their PG after a miss.
I remember the Detroit game at home toward the end of the year where the offense for most of the second half and OT was iso to Grant on the right side. They didn't even switch up what side he was on! It was hard to watch. Meanwhile, Det was making enough adjustments on both ends to win a game they had no business winning.

 

[Natebishop3]

Look... Let's not let the facts get in the way of my point.

 

[beast blazer]

let's go ahead and add Curry and make it a foursome, then add Ant for comparison (CJ too)...

career BPM:

Doncic +7.8
Harden +6.5
Curry +6.5
Dame +4.7

CJ +1.4
Simons -1.5

career net rating:

Harden +11
Curry +10
Dame +6
Doncic +5

CJ -1
Simons -10


Simons

yeah, there are other guards who are bad at defense, but they are so elite at offense that they dramatically off-set their defensive weaknesses

Ant is not in the same zip-code on offense as those other guys, The reality is Ant is a net negative on a basketball floor. He doesn't do offense well enough to off-set his terrible defense. CJ has been good enough on offense to offset his defense; it helps that as bad as CJ has been on defense, he has still been better than Ant

I don't know how much stock to put in those defensive stats. Offensive metrics are explicit, you know who shot the ball, but you can't look at stats and know who is responsible for an opposing player scoring.

 

[KingSpeed]

Ill add many more, Fox from the King, Sabonis from the Kings, Haliburton, Jokic from Denver. Booker from PHX, Brunson, Tray Young, Curry. Dame...

Yes I put in some big's too, but the point is, you can mask poor defense with what you put around them and team defense.

Jokic and Doncic are excellent defenders.

 

[sheed30]

I don't think anybody in the league would trade Lauri Markkanen for Ant.

He's bigger, scores just as well, is a far better rebounder, and a far better defender.

That's just unrealistic.

So wrong on that. Markkanen is a a far better defender? Lmao

better rebounder ya but 1. His rebounding isn’t that impressive and 2.he should be a better rebounded being 7foot and playing PF/SF.

That’s like me saying Ant is a better passer, well no shit.

Go look at Markkanen stats prior to joining the Jazz, his number aren’t mind blowing and his stats for the last two seasons aren’t either.

 

[sheed30]

Jokic and Doncic are excellent defenders.

I really hope you’re trying to be sarcastic

 

[sheed30]

I don't know how much stock to put in those defensive stats. Offensive metrics are explicit, you know who shot the ball, but you can't look at stats and know who is responsible for an opposing player scoring.

Don’t put anything into those kinds stats.

It’s pointless, and those stats are so faulty, depending on who is on the court with them at the same time can alert those stats overall.

 

[Phatguysrule]

So wrong on that. Markkanen is a a far better defender? Lmao

better rebounder ya but 1. His rebounding isn’t that impressive and 2.he should be a better rebounded being 7foot and playing PF/SF.

That’s like me saying Ant is a better passer, well no shit.

Go look at Markkanen stats prior to joining the Jazz, his number aren’t mind blowing and his stats for the last two seasons aren’t either.

None of that matters in this comparison. He's 7 ft tall. He's far more valuable than Ant.

There is not a single team in the league who would make that trade straight up. You're vastly overvaluing Ant.

 

[sheed30]

None of that matters in this comparison. He's 7 ft tall. He's far more valuable than Ant.

There is not a single team in the league who would make that trade straight up. You're vastly overvaluing Ant.

none of that matters? I just debunked what you said and now it doesn’t matter?

I guess Bo-Bo is someone everyone in the league is dying to get on their roster huh?

it doesn’t have to be Ant for him straight up, I never said that.

Jazz are shopping him. Did you see what Hawks got back in return for Murray the other day?

To say no team would make that trade straight up regardless is silly. Bad trades happen all the time and if you swapped both of them, it would hardly be a bad deal from what else we have seen before.

 

[Phatguysrule]

none of that matters? I just debunked what you said and now it doesn’t matter?

I guess Bo-Bo is someone everyone in the league is dying to get on their roster huh?

it doesn’t have to be Ant for him straight up, I never said that.

Jazz are shopping him. Did you see what Hawks got back in return for Murray the other day?

To say no team would make that trade straight up regardless is silly. Bad trades happen all the time and if you swapped both of them, it would hardly be a bad deal from what else we have seen before.

No. In this comparison none of that matters because Lauri Markkanen is far more productive than Ant.

And if you're not talking straight up then I don't know what to say. We don't need Lauri Markkanen either. He'll only hurt our chances at getting a better pick the next couple years even more than Ant will, because he's better. I definitely wouldn't want to throw more assets in to make that trade.

We really need to send Ant out for draft capital because nobody who has good young players is going to want to trade them for Ant. I guess we could get lucky and someone gifts us something but I certainly wouldn't count on it.

I'd think the Lakers would be interested in Ant...

 

[sheed30]

The idea that we NEED Ant for his outside shooting is just nuts. We don't NEED anyone for anything right now. We just NEED to be able to evaluate and develop the talent that we have and accumulate more assets, in the form of draft picks and prospects. Both draft picks and prospects can be used later to consolidate and acquire talent that fits needs that haven't materialized from used draft picks and current or acquired players. However that's what we do when we think winning has become the immediate priority over development and asset acquisition.

We are in a rebuild and I'm not saying that none of the players on the roster will be a part of future playoff wins, I'm saying how that plays out doesn't need to be our current concern. Again, I've said this a lot but win now players in theory should be worth more to teams who are trying to win big now and future assets (prospects not ready to contribute to wins now and draft picks) should have more value to us.

Ant isn't too old to be with our team long term so there is no rush but if any team who views themselves as close to contending needs a perimeter offensive weapon then we would likely be able to get more value from them for Ant in terms of what we need as a rebuilding team than Ant currently provides to the rebuild.

We need outside shooting and better scoring, period

You want to know how many points per game we averaged as a team last season without Ant? In the 36 games Ant didnt play, we averaged 102.4 PPG as a team. That's good for LAST in the NBA. With Ant we scored 109.4 PPG.

If you want Scoot to actually thrive, its best to surround him with shooters. Scoot wont be able to excel as much if teams are just sagging off him daring him to shoot 3's. He won't be able to do what he does best at the moment which is use his speed and athleticism to blow by defenders.