I wouldn't consider it holding us back by keeping our own #1 pick - a player that they say is one every 10 years type of player.
They are saying Fultz could be a one in 10 years type of player, but to be fair people said that same thing about Simmons too. They even said it about Wiggins - and as capable a scorer as he is, he's been quite a dissapointment IMHO.
We drafted Brown last year at #3 - he's been buried behind Crowder on the bench and only played 17 MPG (in which he averaged 6.6 points, 2.8 reb, 0.8 assists). We have seen that he has talent, and I think we can all safely conclude that if he played on a team that gave him starters minutes, he'd be up there in ROY voting right now and would almost certainly be on an All-Rookie 1st team.
At the guard spots we are even deeper then we are at SF, so the risk is even higher. Instead of playing behind Crowder (a guy who only this season got promoted from 6th man to permanent starter) Fultz would be playing behind an All-Star (Thomas) and a two-way guard who also happens to be the longest tenured player on this team (Bradley). Smart is a young prospect who had a huge impact in the playoffs and is a coach and fan favourite - trading him to free up minutes for an unproven rookie seems like a big call. Rozier has been buried on the bench for years and has shown potential, he deserves minutes - so maybe they trade Rozier to another team where he can hopefully get more opportunity. Even if that's the case, all that does is free up Rozier's 17 MPG for Fultz.
If Fultz plays 17 MPG then he's in the same boat as Brown. He could be one of the few #1 picks to come in to the NBA, be healthy, and still not make an All Rookie Team, due purely to lack of opportunity.
I'm genuinely concerned about this team potentially drafting Fultz with the #1 pick, only to have him struggle to earn more then 20 MPG off the bench, leading to restricted development.
I'm also seriously concerned that they might go the opposite route and trade a proven contributor like Bradley or Smart in order to gift Fultz a role, only to find that it takes him 2-3 seasons to get to the point where he can actually help us win games.
If we traded him for Simmons, then our desperate need for a PF guarantees we'd never need to worry about that. He would absolutely get starters minutes - and if nothing else, he's almost certainly assist us with our rebounding issues from day one.
Philly was pretty good at times last year. Consider if they play with a healthy Embid and their other pieces if we gave them a future superstar point guard. All they lose is a guy that hasn't yet played due to injury.
I love how you describe Fultz as a "one in 10 years type player", but describe Simmons as just "a guy that hasn't played yet due to injury".
Fultz hasn't played a game in the NBA yet either, so Philly could argue all we are losing is "a guy who hasn't played a game outside of college yet". At least Simmons has played in Summer League and has practised and been around NBA games, has had access to NBA trainers, etc for the past season.
Fultz will be coming in fresh from college with no NBA experience whatsoever.
Simmons, even if it's for that reason alone, is far more likely to be playing in ROY form this year then Fultz is. Not saying it's a given, but top shelf prospects who missed their first year due to injury often end up coming back with a vengeance the following year. Blake Griffin for example misses his first year, then came back in his second season averaging 22/12/4 - and Griffin is a very, very similar player to Simmons (if anything Simmons is more versatile and has a higher upside).
Simmons and Fultz both have the potential to be "once in 10 year" type players, so by doing this trade the 76ers would be giving that up just like us. Both teams take risk here. If Simmons ends up a star and Fultz ends up dissapointing, then the Sixers look like idiots. If the opposite happens, Boston looks like idiots.
It's an equal risk for both teams.
First, I am not sold on Simmons as a PF. So you think he can hold his own with the likes of Anthony Davis or Kevin Durant? He would be crushed. And as far as I can remember Simmons can't shoot.
Why wouldn't Simmons be able to hold his own against AD or KD? He's just as tall as those guys, he's stronger then either of them, and he's arguably more athletic then either of them. He gives up length against them sure, but he certainly has the size, stength and athleticism to compete against them.
Also, I'm not sure why you would raise his shooting/scoring ability as a concern. Lets look at the college stats:
* Simmons averaged 19.2 points, 11.8 rebounds, 4.8 assists, 2.0 steals, 0.8 blocks in 35 minutes as a 19 year old freshman
* Fultz averaged 23.2 points, 5.7 rebounds, 5.9 assists, 1.6 steals, 1.2 blocks in 36 minutes as an 18 year old freshman
Simmons averaged 19 PPG as a freshman in college DESPITE the fact that he's a pass-first player who doesn't have a consistent jumper. Even with those limitations, he STILL dominated on offence.
Fultz is already a developed scorer in all aspects, and he's a ball dominate shoot-first PG, yet he didn't really average THAT much more then Simmons did.
My concern here wouldn't be the fact that Simmons isn't a consistent shooter. My concern here would be how utterly devastating Simmons could be if he ever DOES become a consistent shooter.
There is also the other question - what can Fultz offer his team when his shot is not falling? He has the same issues as Simmons on defence (high upside, inconsistent effort) and while he's a skilled passer and rebounder, he's not dominant in either of those two areas.
The greatest stars in this league are usually the guys who will always make an impact on the game, even if/when their shot is not falling. In addition to his scoring potential, Simmons is an elite rebounder and passer at the PF spot - so when his shot isn't falling he can still contribute on the boards and by create shots for others.
In addition to that, Simmons has unbelievable versatility. He might be only the 3rd player in NBA history (along with Magic and Lebron) who has the legitimate ability to play all 5 positions on the court.
At 6'10" / 240 lbs / 7' wingspan Simmons has the physical measurements of Al Horford, combined with the athletic ability of Jaylen Brown, the rebounding ability of Kevin Love, and the passing ability of Lebron James. Defensively he has the ability to switch on to ANY position - you cannot begin to describe how valuable that is.
The biggest thing people criticise Simmons for are his lack of a jumpshot, and his questionable effort on defence. People had those exact same criticisms of Lebron, and those weaknesses have stuck with Lebron his entire career - he's still an inconsistent shooter, and he still frequently takes plays off on defence.
Yet those flaws have little impact on James' success because although he's never developed a deadly jumper, he can still make you pay (in a big way) if you sag off him. And as much as his defensive effort is questionable, what he gives up in effort is nothing compared to the positive impact his teams gain from his ability to switch and defend all five positions.
On the other hand Fultz looks like he's going to be an amazing player - I have incredibly high hopes for him, and I feel like he's almost certain to become a perennial All-Star. But what I'm not certain about is whether he will be a one trick pony.
* Is he ever going to develop into the defensive player he has the POTENTIAL to become? Because he's not a great defender right now.
* Is he ever going to develop into a game changing passer? Because right now he's more Derek Rose then Chris Paul in that regard.
* When teams find a way to take him out of the game offensively, is he going to be able to find other ways to help his team?
Maybe he will. He certainly has a lot of POTENTIAL in areas beyond scoring - rebounding, passing, defence, etc. But while he has potential and ability in those areas, he's not elite at them, so you still have to ask if he will ever be.
Simmons on the other hand is already elite as a rebounder and a passer, and he's unstoppable in transition, so if his jumper isn't falling you know he's going to be able to help the team in other ways.
Absolutely not. This is not a win-win. It would be a killing by Philly.
Sorry, not buying it.
Fair enough. Though I disagree, you do have the right to your opinion!