Why hasn't Philly measurably improved post-Ben Simmons?

I was told Philadelphia would become measurably better once they replaced him with a guy who could shoot. I guess James Harden and the emergence of Tyrese Maxey weren't enough. We'll see how Paul George goes.

The 76ers were a winning team each of the four seasons Ben was there. This was despite a poor fit and roster/personnel decisions, and Joel constantly missing large chunks of the season. They were 35-7 with Joel and Ben in 2020-21 when they secured the #1 seed in the Eastern Conference.

[quote]With Ben:

2017-18: 52-30; 4.3 SRS (5th)
2018-19: 51-31; 2.25 SRS (11th)
2019-20: 43-30; 2.25 SRS (12th)
2020-21: 49-23; 5.28 SRS (5th)

Without Ben:

2021-22: 51-31; 2.57 SRS (9th)
2022-23: 54-28; 4.37 SRS (3rd)
2023-24: 47-35; 2.51 SRS (11th)[/quote]

People really overexaggerated the whole "playing 4-on-5 offense" thing. They acted as if the 76ers would immediately and dramatically improve once they found an adequate replacement who could shoot. But basketball is a bit more complicated than that.

Ben was a valuable player that impacted the game in a variety of ways. What they gained in shooting and spacing they lost in defense, size, rebounding, and transition play. There's always a tradeoff.

Simmons still has the strongest winning percentage of all Joel's sidekicks:

[quote]Regular season + playoffs:

Joel Embiid + Jimmy Butler: 34-17 (66.7%)
Joel Embiid + Ben Simmons: 160-77 (67.5%)
Joel Embiid + Tyrese Maxey: 152-74 (67.3%)
Joel Embiid + James Harden: 59-32 (64.8%)[/quote]

They lost more on defense than they gained on offense:

[img]https://i.ibb.co/yktxmZZ/s1UVFKF.png[/img]

The majority of NBA fans only see individual scoring. To them it's not what matters most, it is the only thing. Next.

I don't recall a lot of people saying Philly would get markedly better. The problem was that he is one of the most sensitive and unprofessional players in NBA history. He gave Philly no choice because he refused to play because his feelings were hurt. And playing scared in the playoffs didn't help either. Before Doc's answer to a question crushed his fragile soul he was useful in the regular season but these days he's not even good for that. May be the softest player of all time.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14932722]I don't recall a lot of people saying Philly would get markedly better. The problem was that he is one of the most sensitive and unprofessional players in NBA history. He gave Philly no choice because he refused to play because his feelings were hurt. And playing scared in the playoffs didn't help either. Before Doc's answer to a question crushed his fragile soul he was useful in the regular season but these days he's not even good for that. May be the softest player of all time.[/QUOTE]

You're being dishonest. You don't like Ben as a person and it's affecting your judgement.

The Warriors won a championship playing 3v5 on offense. Nobody had to guard Dray or Looney and Dray especially shot way worse than Ben Simmons.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14932723]You're being dishonest. You don't like Ben as a person and it's affecting your judgement.[/QUOTE]

The word "disjonest" means you are saying I'm lying. Please point out the lie. This is a stupid accusation.

A lot of the Ben Simmons hate is bogus and was a way to deflect blame from Embiid for shitting the bed vs the Raptors in 2019 when they [I]were one single lucky shot away [/I]from beating Toronto with Joel putting up 17 ppg on 37% FG as a 7 footer.

Which is beyond garbage for a player of his supposed caliber and we've seen this pattern repeat itself in the years that came after.


[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/0N5xSkLH/Screenshot-20240801-101529-Chrome.jpg[/IMG]

If you look at the splits, Jimmy Butler and Ben Simmons were the only ones with a positive differential. Everybody else was in the big time negative. JJ Reddick was about neutral.

So the media basically destroyed Ben's confidence by painting him as the scapegoat when it was really their Golden Child Embiid that cost Philly a possible title in 2019 with that stacked team.

Blaming the media for things like his pathetic series vs Atlanta world be pretty soft but as far as I know Simmons hasn't gone there yet.

Ben averaged 10/9/6 on 60%FG and 114 ORTG vs Atlanta in a close 7 game series. Far from a disastrous performance.

Draymond Green averaged 6/8/6 on 33%FG and 12% from 3 when Golden State beat your vaunted Celtics in the 2022 NBA Finals and caught no heat, but Simmons performing signifigantly better than that in a close loss is somehow irredeemable?

Yea... you're a moron. :oldlol:

[QUOTE=tpols;14932748][B]Ben averaged 10/9/6 on 60%FG and 114 ORTG vs Atlanta in a close 7 game series. Far from a disastrous performance.[/B]

Draymond Green averaged 6/8/6 on 33%FG and 12% from 3 when Golden State beat your vaunted Celtics in the 2022 NBA Finals and caught no heat, but Simmons performing signifigantly better than that in a close loss is somehow irredeemable?

Yea... you're a moron. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

Bro do you [I]remember[/I] that series? :lol

Despite not being guarded, he attempted THREE total shots in 7 4th quarters. Two of them were in game 1. Didn't attempt a shot in the 4th in the final 4 games, 3 of which were Atlanta wins. He also shot 14-45 from line in the series.

It was an absolute disaster.

[QUOTE=tpols;14932748]Ben averaged 10/9/6 on 60%FG and 114 ORTG vs Atlanta in a close 7 game series. Far from a disastrous performance.

Draymond Green averaged 6/8/6 on 33%FG and 12% from 3 when Golden State beat your vaunted Celtics in the 2022 NBA Finals and caught no heat, but Simmons performing signifigantly better than that in a close loss is somehow irredeemable?

Yea... you're a moron. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

It takes a special kind of moron to post averages and not look at the individual games. Simmons had 4, 8, 6, and 5 point games. He did that when in the regular season he averaged 14 and was one of their most important offensive players, supposed to be an allstar. If you had any sense you would have looked that up and kept your foot out of your mouth but apparently you enjoy the taste.

I think the argument was IF Ben could shoot Philly would be measurably better. Not if they replaced him.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;14932754]Bro do you [I]remember[/I] that series? :lol

Despite not being guarded, he attempted THREE total shots in 7 4th quarters. Two of them were in game 1. Didn't attempt a shot in the 4th in the final 4 games, 3 of which were Atlanta wins. He also shot 14-45 from line in the series.

It was an absolute disaster.[/QUOTE]

Of course I remember.

Simmons wasn't shooting? Uh... why would you want him to? He was an elite passer, playmaker and defender. Rodman didn't shoot despite not being guarded. Nobody cared about that. Dray mostly didn't shoot without being guarded and when he reluctantly did it was a brick. Nobody cared about that. But Ben not shooting is some major problem?

Simmons as a 6'10 big man took on the challenge to guard Trae Young full time since Seth Curry couldn't, and he averaged almost double digit dimes. That's exactly what Dray does except Dray shot far worse [I]and[/I] averaged less points.

The double standards are funny.

[QUOTE=tpols;14932761]Of course I remember.

Simmons wasn't shooting? Uh... why would you want him to? He was an elite passer, playmaker and defender. Rodman didn't shoot despite not being guarded. Nobody cared about that. Dray mostly didn't shoot without being guarded and when he reluctantly did it was a brick. Nobody cared about that. But Ben not shooting is some major problem?

Simmons as a 6'10 big man took on the challenge to guard Trae Young full time since Seth Curry couldn't, and he averaged almost double digit dimes. That's exactly what Dray does except Dray shot far worse [I]and[/I] averaged less points.

The double standards are funny.[/QUOTE]
Dennis Rodman wasn't counted on to score. That's a stupid argument. Simmons had a role in their offense that involved getting some points. Dray Green took and takes shots because he knows the offense is better when he is a threat to score. If opponents know Simmons isn't going to shoot because he's turning down dunks because he's that scared it puts too much pressure on Embiid and everyone else. There are plenty of great players that were bad shooters. There are no great players that were scared shooters. Even Rodman would take an open three from time to time and he had no role as a scorer beyond finishing.

[QUOTE=tpols;14932761]Of course I remember.

Simmons wasn't shooting? Uh... why would you want him to? He was an elite passer, playmaker and defender. Rodman didn't shoot despite not being guarded. Nobody cared about that. Dray mostly didn't shoot without being guarded and when he reluctantly did it was a brick. Nobody cared about that. But Ben not shooting is some major problem?

Simmons as a 6'10 big man took on the challenge to guard Trae Young full time since Seth Curry couldn't, and he averaged almost double digit dimes. That's exactly what Dray does except Dray shot far worse [I]and[/I] averaged less points.

The double standards are funny.[/QUOTE]

I watched every second of every game in that series very intently and was thanking god that Ben Simmons was doing what he did. They counted on him and he absolutely did not deliver like he should have.

Not only was he not shooting, but because he was so putrid from the line he wasn't attacking in any way at all. Dude was passing up layups if anyone was near him because he was scared of getting fouled. This was particularly apparent in 4th quarters, as I've already mentioned. He was a complete liability and a big reason why the Hawks won.

[QUOTE=iamgine;14932757]I think the argument was IF Ben could shoot Philly would be measurably better. Not if they replaced him.[/QUOTE]

If Ben Simmons could shoot and had confidence he'd be the clear cut league MVP. If's are jerkoffs when it comes to the characteristics of athletes.

[QUOTE=tpols;14932724]The Warriors won a championship playing 3v5 on offense. Nobody had to guard Dray or Looney and Dray especially shot way worse than Ben Simmons.[/QUOTE]

You can't realistically think that Ben is better at sticking to a role than Draymond, can you? Draymond categorically fit into the scheme of what the Warriors wanted to do. Simmons on the other hand drove a wedge in everything the 76ers wanted to do with Embiid in the high post, instead turning him into a 3PT shooter.

Aside from this Draymond provided leadership while Simmons was an outcast who got along with very few of his teammates.

[QUOTE=Wardell Curry;14932771]If Ben Simmons could shoot and had confidence [B]he'd be the clear cut league MVP[/B]. If's are jerkoffs when it comes to the characteristics of athletes.[/QUOTE]

I don't think so. We're not talking JJ Redick level shooting. Maybe more Bruce Brown level.

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;14932769]I watched every second of every game in that series very intently and was thanking god that Ben Simmons was doing what he did. They counted on him and he absolutely did not deliver like he should have.

Not only was he not shooting, but because he was so putrid from the line he wasn't attacking in any way at all. Dude was passing up layups if anyone was near him because he was scared of getting fouled. This was particularly apparent in 4th quarters, as I've already mentioned. He was a complete liability and a big reason why the Hawks won.[/QUOTE]

It makes sense that he was avoiding the foul line shooting only 30% from it. Despite that he had a 114 ORTG which was the highest on the team outside Curry. Mostly because of his passing and playmaking. 60 dimes and 16 TOVs as full time point guard. Embiid had 27 assist and 33 TOVs... a putrid negative differential compared to Ben.

And again this was with him expending energy guarding by far the best player on the opposing team [B]as a 6'10 big man.[/B] Trae only shot 43%. That's insane defensive versatility.

In Game 7, Embiid had 3 dimes and 8 TOVs. Simmons had 13 assists and 2 TOVs while having the ball in his hands even more. He was doing what he had to do and they barely lost the series.

It's just hypocritical because a guy like Dray can win the championship and get praise for his 6 ppg on 33% shooting but Simmons gets roasted and blackballed for 10 ppg on 60% shooting. Neither player is guarded. I watch defenders sag 15 feet off Dray and leave him wide open all the time. We all do in fact.

[QUOTE=tpols;14932775]It makes sense that he was avoiding the foul line shooting only 30% from it. Despite that he had a 114 ORTG which was the highest on the team outside Curry. Mostly because of his passing and playmaking. 60 dimes and 16 TOVs as full time point guard. Embiid had 27 assist and 33 TOVs... a putrid negative differential compared to Ben.

And again this was with him expending energy guarding by far the best player on the opposing team [B]as a 6'10 big man.[/B] Trae only shot 43%. That's insane defensive versatility.

In Game 7, Embiid had 3 dimes and 8 TOVs. Simmons had 13 assists and 2 TOVs while having the ball in his hands even more. He was doing what he had to do and they barely lost the series.

It's just hypocritical because a guy like Dray can win the championship and get praise for his 6 ppg on 33% shooting but Simmons gets roasted and blackballed for 10 ppg on 60% shooting. Neither player is guarded. I watch defenders sag 15 feet off Dray and leave him wide open all the time. We all do in fact.[/QUOTE]

How is it hypocritical? You're missing a lot of nuance by only using the numbers and completely disregarding their particular circumstances. Dray, while having an off-shooting series, was still Dray. He played like Dray and brought the same level of intensity always. Basically he always played his role and if he's going to miss some open 3's then whatever. It's a small sample and he still did what he was supposed to do.

Ben Simmons[I] played[/I] differently in the second half of that series against the Hawks, and it completely discombobulated the team. His timidness in general was palpable and allowed the Hawks to gain the upper hand mentally as well. That on top of him being no leader off the court is what led to where he is now.

I’ll say the same thing I said then. He just gets replaced by somebody who can shoot and the team is almost certain to lose anyway and people just find a new individual reason it’s happening. Some guard or wing with a broke jumper or generally not scoring is easy to scapegoat. People love to feel smart, acting like they know why teams lose. Most teams are gonna lose all the time. All but one great team is going to lose every year. There is never one reason. But a bad shooter is often the easiest for a casual fan to point to as the problem.

[QUOTE=iamgine;14932757]I think the argument was IF Ben could shoot Philly would be measurably better. Not if they replaced him.[/QUOTE]

I do remember plenty of people suggesting that they'd be way better if they could replace him with a high-level perimeter creator who could shoot. And they got two of them (Harden + Maxey) and they didn't get measurably better.

[QUOTE=tpols;14932761]Of course I remember.

Simmons wasn't shooting? Uh... why would you want him to? He was an elite passer, playmaker and defender. Rodman didn't shoot despite not being guarded. Nobody cared about that. Dray mostly didn't shoot without being guarded and when he reluctantly did it was a brick. Nobody cared about that. But Ben not shooting is some major problem?

Simmons as a 6'10 big man took on the challenge to guard Trae Young full time since Seth Curry couldn't, and he averaged almost double digit dimes. That's exactly what Dray does except Dray shot far worse [I]and[/I] averaged less points.

The double standards are funny.[/QUOTE]

It does seem strange to grade Simmons so heavily on scoring when scoring has never been his strength. He was a 6'10", 240-pound young Jason Kidd with even worse shooting. Not someone I'm expecting to rely on as a scorer.

The criticism wasn't that Ben was a bad shooter it was that he wouldn't try. If Ben shot 3s and hit them at even like 33% he would have been way better.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14932843]The criticism wasn't that Ben was a bad shooter it was that he wouldn't try. If Ben shot 3s and hit them at even like 33% he would have been way better.[/QUOTE]

What about if he hit them at 12.5% like Dray did in the 2022 Finals?

:lol

You'd think a Kobe fan would appreciate trying to shoot rather than refusing to do so

It's just dumb to even suggest. Would you want westbrook jacking more 3s too? 33% is a pipe dream. Even wide open. He played to his strengths and got blackballed for it.

At a certain point, you have to accept and evaluate a player for what they are, not what you want them to be. At five years in from getting drafted, I think it was safe to say he wasn't becoming a shooter. And that's absolutely fine. Because Ben was still a very impactful player.

His potential wasn't the next LeBron or Magic. It was a 6'10", 240-pound young Jason Kidd with worse shooting but better finishing in the paint due to his size. And that's a great talent.

On a team more built/optimal for his game he could've done some impressive stuff. And he was a 3x All-Star, two-time All-Defense 1st team, one-time All-NBA third team, DPOY runner-up guy in Philly. In his first four years in the NBA.

Ben putting up Charles Barkley numbers from three wouldn't have made a difference. Would've only hurt his team.

[QUOTE=tpols;14932848]It's just dumb to even suggest. Would you want westbrook jacking more 3s too? 33% is a pipe dream. Even wide open. He played to his strengths and got blackballed for it.[/QUOTE]
Difference between jacking them and taking the occasional open 3. Ben never even tried how do you know how good or bad he would have been? People wanted to see him try lol. Ben was a good player but you'd like to see a guy at least try shooting 3s

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14932839]I’ll say the same thing I said then. He just gets replaced by somebody who can shoot and the team is almost certain to lose anyway and people just find a new individual reason it’s happening. Some guard or wing with a broke jumper or generally not scoring is easy to scapegoat. People love to feel smart, acting like they know why teams lose. Most teams are gonna lose all the time. All but one great team is going to lose every year. There is never one reason. But a bad shooter is often the easiest for a casual fan to point to as the problem.[/QUOTE]

The bad shooting wasn’t the problem.

I’m willing to admit that maybe the expectation was what caused the downfall but that was the series we realized he wasn’t what we thought we was overall. And more importantly he wasn’t what the sixers thought he was. He clammed up and it got weird.

Still could have been a valuable player but he was built up to be something else.

The Sixers will tangibly improve when Joel Embiid can translate his regular season dominance to the playoffs.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14932859]The Sixers will tangibly improve when Joel Embiid can translate his regular season dominance to the playoffs.[/QUOTE]

I'm not even focused solely on playoff results. The Post-Simmons 76ers haven't performed any better in the regular season either. I would've expected a [i]measurable[/i], [i]observable[/i] improvement in SRS and W/L %. But that hasn't been the case. And this goes against the narrative many were pushing back in 2021 and 2022 when Ben was scapegoated and his non-shooting was made out to be a bigger issue than it really was.

And those who acted as if Ben and his non-shooting were a super-critical issue sure as hell don't want to admit that they were wrong now. And they were wrong, because they replaced him with a great shooter and perimeter creator in Harden and lucked into Tyrese Maxey, another great shooter and perimeter creator.

From 23rd in three-point makes, 26th in attempts, and 11th in percentage in 2020-21 to 12th in makes, 16th in attempts, and 1st in percentage in 2022-23.

Different team strengths, same results. Tradeoffs. Was the '23 team better than the '21 team? Maybe. Maybe not. Sure as hell wasn't obvious. They weren't measurably better.

And don't even bother mentioning injuries because they had them in the Ben Simmons era too.

Well as you said earlier, there were some trade-offs with what Simmons did and didn't do vs what a post 2021 James Harden was giving you. I'm not convinced that Joel is more than a monster stats guy though, without much material impact in creating a winning culture. I guess when PG13 comes on board, if you can get at least 65-70 games from him, Embiid and Maxey you'll have your answer as to what it translates to in the W/L column.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14932863]Well as you said earlier, there were some trade-offs with what Simmons did and didn't do vs what a post 2021 James Harden was giving you. I'm not convinced that Joel isn't more than a monster stats guy though, without much material impact in creating a winning environment. I guess when PG13 comes on board, if you can get at least 65-70 games from him, Embiid and Maxey you'll have your answer.[/QUOTE]
I don't think "just a stats guy" should apply to anyone who plays good defense. Embiid is a playoff dropper and is constantly injured but he's extremely impactful overall, generally even when he shoots badly.

Harden wasn’t an improvement because he cost them on the defensive end. He was a good trade for them overall however because been Simmons had stopped playing basketball. Harden didn't do them much good but he at least gave them another season and then traded him for a few more assets. Simmons has been worthless to any team since he quit on Philly.

Now that he is in a contract year on a team that is built to lose he may even get his numbers again because he's got no pressure and likely wants a new contract. If he does he's just further incriminating himself. I've never said anything like this before but I almost hope it really has been a terrible back because if not that says some awful things about his character.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14932864]I don't think "just a stats guy" should apply to anyone who plays good defense. Embiid is a playoff dropper and is constantly injured but he's extremely impactful overall, generally even when he shoots badly.[/QUOTE]

That goes back to my point about his regular season dominance translating to the playoffs, but OP isn't expressly talking about playoff wins nor should injuries be brought up per prior comments, sooooo I don't know.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14932865]Harden wasn’t an improvement because he cost them on the defensive end. He was a good trade for them overall however because been Simmons had stopped playing basketball. Harden didn't do them much good but he at least gave them another season and then traded him for a few more assets. Simmons has been worthless to any team since he quit on Philly.

Now that he is in a contract year on a team that is built to lose he may even get his numbers again because he's got no pressure and likely wants a new contract. If he does he's just further incriminating himself. I've never said anything like this before but I almost hope it really has been a terrible back because if not that says some awful things about his character.[/QUOTE]
This is probably what Simmons has: [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yips[/url]

How was Simmons going to be a 6'10 Jason Kidd if he reached his potential?

Kidd was one of the best passes of my lifetime. Simmons was an excellent passer but Kidd was an era defining passer. Getting 10-11 dimes in the slow down defensive era he played his prime in is legendary. He also has one of the highest 3pt shots made in NBA history. Top 20 all time ahead of Dirk.

Ben Simmons has made 5 threes in his 360 something game career.

This comparison makes no sense to me. Kidd would shoot it and make it enough that you gotta respect it in his era. Simmons is a complete disregard out there.

[QUOTE=Carbine;14932868]How was Simmons going to be a 6'10 Jason Kidd if he reached his potential?

Kidd was one of the best passes of my lifetime. Simmons was an excellent passer but Kidd was an era defining passer. Getting 10-11 dimes in the slow down defensive era he played his prime in is legendary. He also has one of the highest 3pt shots made in NBA history. Top 20 all time ahead of Dirk.

Ben Simmons has made 5 threes in his 360 something game career.

This comparison makes no sense to me. Kidd would shoot it and make it enough that you gotta respect it in his era. Simmons is a complete disregard out there.[/QUOTE]

You're doing too much as usual. The comp was [I]a 6'10", 240-pound worse-shooting Young Jason Kidd[/I]. Very versatile on defense, can switch and defend multiple positions, in the post, on the perimeter, off-ball, on-ball, strong closeouts. Active hands in the passing lanes, racking up deflections and assists. Great at grabbing a defensive board and pushing the tempo to create fast break opportunities. Both great passers, particularly at finding shooters, cutters, and bigs in the paint. Can bully smaller players in the post. Great passers out of the post.

The major differences are the size, athleticism relative to position, and shooting ability. And the era they played in, which influences shot selection and what's tolerated.

There's a difference between Young Kidd and the one you remember. Young Kidd was a terrible shooter from the field and a below-average one from the free-throw line. Ben? He's clearly worse than that to the point he doesn't even take them. And it's a good thing he doesn't. Young Kidd was like 35-37% on mid-range shots and 28-32% on threes. Unguarded. 68-70% on FTs.

If Young Kidd played today his shooting wouldn't be tolerated beyond wide-open catch-and-shoot/set-shot threes. And even those would be a problem that people would continually bring up. Like Giddey.

But worse than that? No point shooting it. And that's the level where Ben is at. Maybe [i]non-shooting[/i] is a better phrasing than worse-shooting.

What's a better high-end comp? A non-shooting Lamar Odom with more of a playmaking license? A non-shooting, more athletic Magic Johnson with elite defense and zero dawg in him? A taller Young LeBron without any jump shot and worse free-throw shooting? How granular do you want to get? A bigger, non-shooting Grant Hill with DPOY-level defense?

There's no perfect direct comparison for a player as unique as Simmons. But he's got that Jason Kidd thing about him where he's just as likely to have a game scoring 5 points as he is 25. High variance. And the 5-point game may be as impactful as ones where he scores three or four times as much. He had a 0-point game for Brooklyn and he was the best player for the Nets that night.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14932865]Harden wasn’t an improvement because he cost them on the defensive end. He was a good trade for them overall however because been Simmons had stopped playing basketball. Harden didn't do them much good but he at least gave them another season and then traded him for a few more assets. Simmons has been worthless to any team since he quit on Philly.

Now that he is in a contract year on a team that is built to lose he may even get his numbers again because he's got no pressure and likely wants a new contract. If he does he's just further incriminating himself. I've never said anything like this before but I almost hope it really has been a terrible back because if not that says some awful things about his character.[/QUOTE]

Did Harden cost them on defense? Or did losing Ben cost them on defense?

With hindsight, obviously trading Ben was the right move to make. But that's not the point being addressed in this thread. The OP was simply about 2018-2021 Philly with Simmons vs. 2022-2024 Philly without Simmons, contextualized by the dominant narratives at the time of fallout and subsequent trade circa mid-2021 to early-2022.