Let's be clear. Simmons going number one

[footey]

There are definitely some warning flags with Simmons but I don't think any GM would be able to pass on him.  Most of his on court deficiencies relate to skill but physically, he has it all.  And it is not like his skills are horrible, they just aren't elite.

The off court issues that I am aware of don't scare me.  Worst case is the skills don't develop but even as is, he becomes a very good player.  More likely, the skills do continue to develop and he is great with an outside chance that he is all time great.

Physically he had a lot, but he's not perfect. He's got a below-average wingspan and standing reach.

How does his wingspan and standing reach compare to Larry Bird's??

[Future Celtics Owner]

Ingram will start at the 2-3, he can play the 4 but that is not his position and he is much more efficient at 2-3. People are stupid and say he is a 4/ next Anthony Davis......he's not, although he is a hybrid like AD is.

Posters are using the wrong measurements, everyone knows you take certain measurements with a grain of salt depending where they are taken(LSU).

Ingram is the better prospect and is 1 and 1/2 years younger than Simmons. He also may grow like GA did, they tend to do that when they are young.

He's a mix of T-Mac and Durant

But I hope we trade our pick for Cousins and etc and then sign Durant.

[Roy H.]

How does his wing span and standing reach compare to our all time favorite player, Larry Bird?

Google tells me that Larry's standing reach was a very respectable 9'1". (Compared to 8'7" for Simmons).

[mmmmm]

Ingram will start at the 2-3, he can play the 4 but that is not his position and he is much more efficient at 2-3. People are stupid and say he is a 4/ next Anthony Davis......he's not, although he is a hybrid like AD is.

Posters are using the wrong measurements, everyone knows you take certain measurements with a grain of salt depending where they are taken(LSU).

Ingram is the better prospect and is 1 and 1/2 years younger than Simmons. He also may grow like GA did, they tend to do that when they are young.

He's a mix of T-Mac and Durant

But I hope we trade our pick for Cousins and etc and then sign Durant.

Shouldn't we also take certain measurements with a grain of salt based on _when_ they were taken?

The Hoop Summit measurements were 6 full months prior to the LSU Combine.   These kids grow like crazy at that age.   No one blinks that Simmons was 2 inches taller at the Hoop Summit than at the Lebron Academy 6 months prior to that event, but he can't have grown in the next 6 months?

Ultimately, sure, we should take all these measurements with a grain of salt.  I don't think we should get too hung up over which player has 1 or 2 inches of reach or height because in the long run, that's not going to decide which is the better basketball player.

Personally I'd be thrilled if we ended up with either Ingram OR Simmons.   I just think some of the criticisms emerging about Simmons are bit tenuous.

Small clarification:  Simmons is 13 months older than Ingram.   Ingram is pretty crazy young, though.  I think Bender is the only guy in this draft who is younger (Chriss is just slightly older than Ingram).

[nickagneta]

We already have a guy who can do multiple things on offense but can't shoot. I'm not sure I want Smart and Simmons on the same team. Ingram is a better fit.

Ingram fits better for the Celts.   Simmons has a higher ceiling if he can ever learn to consistently shoot the 3.  He just has to make the open ones

I think Simmons ceiling even without a three point shot is extremely high. Wade and Lebron have shown you can be a dynamic scorer in this league without necessarily being a three point shooter. Simmons just needs to get a 16-20 foot jumper down to make everything else in his arsenal work to its optimum. A three point shot would just be a bonus, IMHO.

[rondohondo]

Does Simmons remind anyone else of Michael Beasley? He was a beast in college and a top 2 pick, similar athleticism . Simmons is a better play maker , but lacks a shot .

 We have seen Smart continue to struggle shooting in the NBA through 2 seasons , do we really want to use another top pick on a guy who can't shoot, adding him to an already below average shooting roster ?

I think I would go with Ingram.

Rather trade the pick for a Butler or Cousins and add Durant and go for it now . No one in the east could stop a roster of

IT
Butler
Durant
KO
Horford

or

IT
AB
Durant
KO
Cousins

[alldaboston]

I'm just not a fan of his attitude. Though to be fair, I can't tell whether his lack of effort and interest was due to LSU and its coach, no interest in wasting time in college, or anything else. I really want to see some FIRE in him. He reminds me of Rondo. All the talent in the world (except a jump shot), but no real drive to bring it every night.

[chambers]

Does Simmons remind anyone else of Michael Beasley? He was a beast in college and a top 2 pick, similar athleticism . Simmons is a better play maker , but lacks a shot .

 We have seen Smart continue to struggle shooting in the NBA through 2 seasons , do we really want to use another top pick on a guy who can't shoot, adding him to an already below average shooting roster ?

I think I would go with Ingram.

Rather trade the pick for a Butler or Cousins and add Durant and go for it now . No one in the east could stop a roster of

IT
Butler
Durant
KO
Horford

or

IT
AB
Durant
KO
Cousins

The reason Simmons is more of a 'sure thing' than Beasley is because he can play literally any position and dominate. Beasley couldn't run and finish in transition like Lebron, he also can't handle the rock like Simmons.
Simmons is the epitome of a modern positionless player. His glaring weakness is his jumpshot, but if you are willing to gamble on him becoming an average jumpshooter and above average free throw shooter (currently 67%) then his points in transition and getting to the line will be enormous.

Ingram may be a safer bet becoming an All Star caliber guy, but Simmons has top 100 all time player potential.

[crimson_stallion]

I completely agree with the OP on this - Simmons IMHO is the clear #1 right now.

People are talking about Simmon's weaknesses as if Ingram doesn't have any.

Ingram is an absolute stick figure to the point where he almost makes RJ Hunter look muscular.  How many twiggy guys have you seen come into the NBA in the past 10 years and develop into legit superstars? 

I can think of one, and that's Durant.  Yet Ingram is not even remotely in the same ballpark as Durant as far as talent/potential goes.  Ingram is averaging 18.0 points, 7.1 rebounds, 2.1 assists, 1.1 steals and 1.5 blocks Per 36 in College this year.  In his final year Durant averaged 25.8 points, 11.1 rebounds, 1.3 assists, 1.9 steals and 1.9 blocks Per 36.   

Durant absolutely dominated the college game and it looked obvious from day one that he had the talent to become an NBA superstar.  Ingram isn't dominating college nearly as much as Durant did - he's not dominating it at all really.  He's just been really good.  The numbers he's putting up do not look like the kind of numbers that project "future NBA superstar".

He obviously has talent, and he has a lot of potential (especially on the offensive end) but his lack of physical strength could be a major concern.  He'll likely get pushed around on both ends of the floor if he doesn't bulk up in a huge way.

There are also question marks about his attitude.  Does he have the personality of a go-to guy?  Does he have that "killer instinct"?  I guess we can make that same argument about Durant and he's done just fine, but as I said Durant was a whole other level of talented.

Ingram is IMHO a very high risk prospect.  He's an excellent shooter, but guys who shoot great in college don't always become great shooters in the NBA.  The things that do typically translate (like motor, rebounding, defence) Ingram isn't elite at. He could become a legit superstar, or he could just as easily become a major bust if his offensive game doesn't translate and he can't bulk up.

The big plus with Simmons is that he is a guy who has NBA ready skills right now.   At only 19 years of age he already has the physical tools (6'10", 240 points, good mobility, 40" vertical) to compete at the NBA level. 

He's already shown he can dominate the college game at multiple levels (19.8 points, 12.3 rebounds, 5 assists, 2 steals, 0.8 blocks, 56% FG).  Even without a consistent jumpshot, his basketball IQ and quickness should make allow him to be instantly effective on the offensive end as a P&R finisher.  He should also be an excellent rebounder in the NBA from the start, since that is a stat that almost always translates.  He should also be one of the best passing big men in the NBA the instant he takes to the court.

I look at Simmons and I basically see Blake Griffin, but a bit less athletic and with much better handles. 

The kid is almost certain to become AT LEAST a very good starter in the NBA given his athleticism combined with his ability to rebound, pass and finish in the P&R.  At the very least I see him becoming a 14 point, 10 rebound, 3 assist guy and that is pretty darn good as a worst case.  As a best case I can see him become a 20/12/5 guy, which is pretty close to Chris Webber territory.

People criticise his lack of a jump shot and his personality.  Well think about Blake Griffin - he had no real jumper when he came into the NBA, and his personality is a question mark too.  But he's still a superstar at the NBA level, and Simmons most likely will be too.

Can you imagine how deadly a Thomas/Simmons pick and roll would be?  Or how dangerous Simmons could be in Boston's system (fast paced, lots of ball movement, lots of running in transition)?  If he ever develops a jump shot, he could be THE perfect for for this team at the PF spot - a spot where we are currently quite weak and in desperate need of an upgrade.

I'd be happy taking a chance on Ingram as well if Simmons is gone when we pick, but if we got lucky (i.e. got the #1 pick) and had a chance to pick either guy, I would go with Simmons 100%.

Hield is much like Ingram - high risk, high upside.  He could become a bust (Jordan Crawford) or he could become a stud (Bradley Beal) - it's very hard to pick which it will be at this point. 

Bender basically looks like Toni Kukoc minus the scoring ability.  He could be a nice fit on this team, but I'm not entirely sure how much upside there is.  He's got size and he has mobility, but he's extremely skinny and will need to put on weight.  He also hasn't played a lot of minutes in his Euro teams, so the small sample size makes it hard to gauge where his production should be.  He has the skills to be an excellent NBA defender, but he is a pretty mediocre rebound and isn't anything special as a scorer.  He might not have much (if any) more upside then Willie Cauley Stein....or he could surprise us and excel like Porzingis.  Another very high risk prospect.

Jaylen Brown reminds me a lot of Jimmy Butler, and I think he's a nice prospect and a pretty safe pick.  Not sure if he has the outright potential of a Simmons/Ingram/Hield, but he's a two-way player who can score, can shoot, has the athleticism to defend NBA guards, and has the strength and size to defend NBA small forwards.  Might even be able to spend brief amounts of time as a four in small ball linups here and there (as Crowder does now).  He could probably improve his basketball IQ and decision making a little, but aside from that I think he (along with Simmons) is one of the safest picks in the top 10, and should be a good NBA player.

Dunn should be a solid NBA player for years to come, but I don't think he has star potential.  I see him as maybe an Eric Gordon type at best - not a bad thing to have, and I wouldn't hate it if we landed a guy like him with a 5th or 6th pick, because I think he could contribute right away.  I just don't think he'll ever be more than a solid to good starter.

Murry is another guy who I feel should contribute in the NBA, but who I don't believe has potential to be more than a solid-to-good starter.  Maybe a slightly better version of Michael Carter Williams is probably a good comparison.

Poeltl doesn't show star potential either, but he could be a really nice starting big man - I'm thinking he has Omer Asik written all over him.

Ellenson pretty much looks like David Lee 2.0 - again, no real superstar potential there, but could be a nice player regardless. 

Demitrius Jackson could be a dark horse.  His size is a bit of a limitation (6'1") but he looks like a guy with very legitimate star talent.  Explosive athleticism, can score in a variety of ways, can pass the ball, high basketball IQ.  The size doesn't worry me too much mainly because guys like CP3 and IT4 have proven that you CAN be a star player without size.  Many teams will probably pass on him, but I think he is among the top talents in this draft and among the most likely guys to become a star.  He honestly looks NBA ready from the get-go though, and I'd be all over him if we didn't already have so many PG's.  He'll likely be a big steal for some team out there.

I don't think anybody else is (IMHO) worth that much of a mention really when it comes to the lottery.

[KGs Knee]

I'd take Ingram over Simmons. You probably can't go wrong either way, but to me, Ingram looks like the not only the safer pick, but the pick with more upside too.

[crimson_stallion]

Does Simmons remind anyone else of Michael Beasley? He was a beast in college and a top 2 pick, similar athleticism . Simmons is a better play maker , but lacks a shot .

 We have seen Smart continue to struggle shooting in the NBA through 2 seasons , do we really want to use another top pick on a guy who can't shoot, adding him to an already below average shooting roster ?

I think I would go with Ingram.

Rather trade the pick for a Butler or Cousins and add Durant and go for it now . No one in the east could stop a roster of

IT
Butler
Durant
KO
Horford

or

IT
AB
Durant
KO
Cousins

I think there is a very big difference between a 6'3" Combo Guard who doesn't have a jumper, and a 6'10" PF who doesn't have a jumper.

There have been a number of big men who have been able to become very good NBA players despite not having a reliable jumper when they entered the league.  Greg Monroe, Andre Drummond, Dwight Howard, Deandre Jordan, Josh Smith (could have been a star if he had a better attitude), Blake Griffin, Joakhim Noah,  Andrew Bogut, etc. 

For a big man in today's NBA having a reliable jump shot is a very valuable, but it's not a necessity.  Amir Johnson's jumper has been pretty much non-existent for us this year, and yet I would argue he's been one of our most valuable players when he has been on the court.

Hell even a bunch of perimeter guys have been successful despite having a poor jumper when they entered the league.  Lebron, Wade, Wall, Rose - just to name a few.  It didn't matter because those guys were so good at scoring at the basket and in transition, they they could still dominate without a jumper. 

I can't see any reason why a guy who is as talented as Simmons would fail based simply on the fact that he doesn't have a great jumper.  It's not like he has NO jumper (e.g. Nerlens Noel, Drummond).  He just doesn't have a good / consistent one. 

At the end of the day, Simmons is basically a slightly less athletic, 6'10" version of Lebron James.  I don't know if the NBA has ever seen a 6'10", 240 pound guy who can handle the ball, pass the ball, and run the floor the way Simmons can. 

He's a genuine freak of nature, and I see no reason why he wouldn't have the potential to become AT LEAST as good as Blake Griffin.

[suitednzooted]

I completely agree with the OP on this - Simmons IMHO is the clear #1 right now.

People are talking about Simmon's weaknesses as if Ingram doesn't have any.

Ingram is an absolute stick figure to the point where he almost makes RJ Hunter look muscular.  How many twiggy guys have you seen come into the NBA in the past 10 years and develop into legit superstars? 

I can think of one, and that's Durant.  Yet Ingram is not even remotely in the same ballpark as Durant as far as talent/potential goes.  Ingram is averaging 18.0 points, 7.1 rebounds, 2.1 assists, 1.1 steals and 1.5 blocks Per 36 in College this year.  In his final year Durant averaged 25.8 points, 11.1 rebounds, 1.3 assists, 1.9 steals and 1.9 blocks Per 36.   

Durant absolutely dominated the college game and it looked obvious from day one that he had the talent to become an NBA superstar.  Ingram isn't dominating college nearly as much as Durant did - he's not dominating it at all really.  He's just been really good.  The numbers he's putting up do not look like the kind of numbers that project "future NBA superstar".

He obviously has talent, and he has a lot of potential (especially on the offensive end) but his lack of physical strength could be a major concern.  He'll likely get pushed around on both ends of the floor if he doesn't bulk up in a huge way.

There are also question marks about his attitude.  Does he have the personality of a go-to guy?  Does he have that "killer instinct"?  I guess we can make that same argument about Durant and he's done just fine, but as I said Durant was a whole other level of talented.

Ingram is IMHO a very high risk prospect.  He's an excellent shooter, but guys who shoot great in college don't always become great shooters in the NBA.  The things that do typically translate (like motor, rebounding, defence) Ingram isn't elite at. He could become a legit superstar, or he could just as easily become a major bust if his offensive game doesn't translate and he can't bulk up.

The big plus with Simmons is that he is a guy who has NBA ready skills right now.   At only 19 years of age he already has the physical tools (6'10", 240 points, good mobility, 40" vertical) to compete at the NBA level. 

He's already shown he can dominate the college game at multiple levels (19.8 points, 12.3 rebounds, 5 assists, 2 steals, 0.8 blocks, 56% FG).  Even without a consistent jumpshot, his basketball IQ and quickness should make allow him to be instantly effective on the offensive end as a P&R finisher.  He should also be an excellent rebounder in the NBA from the start, since that is a stat that almost always translates.  He should also be one of the best passing big men in the NBA the instant he takes to the court.

I look at Simmons and I basically see Blake Griffin, but a bit less athletic and with much better handles. 

The kid is almost certain to become AT LEAST a very good starter in the NBA given his athleticism combined with his ability to rebound, pass and finish in the P&R.  At the very least I see him becoming a 14 point, 10 rebound, 3 assist guy and that is pretty darn good as a worst case.  As a best case I can see him become a 20/12/5 guy, which is pretty close to Chris Webber territory.

People criticise his lack of a jump shot and his personality.  Well think about Blake Griffin - he had no real jumper when he came into the NBA, and his personality is a question mark too.  But he's still a superstar at the NBA level, and Simmons most likely will be too.

Can you imagine how deadly a Thomas/Simmons pick and roll would be?  Or how dangerous Simmons could be in Boston's system (fast paced, lots of ball movement, lots of running in transition)?  If he ever develops a jump shot, he could be THE perfect for for this team at the PF spot - a spot where we are currently quite weak and in desperate need of an upgrade.

I'd be happy taking a chance on Ingram as well if Simmons is gone when we pick, but if we got lucky (i.e. got the #1 pick) and had a chance to pick either guy, I would go with Simmons 100%.

Hield is much like Ingram - high risk, high upside.  He could become a bust (Jordan Crawford) or he could become a stud (Bradley Beal) - it's very hard to pick which it will be at this point. 

Bender basically looks like Toni Kukoc minus the scoring ability.  He could be a nice fit on this team, but I'm not entirely sure how much upside there is.  He's got size and he has mobility, but he's extremely skinny and will need to put on weight.  He also hasn't played a lot of minutes in his Euro teams, so the small sample size makes it hard to gauge where his production should be.  He has the skills to be an excellent NBA defender, but he is a pretty mediocre rebound and isn't anything special as a scorer.  He might not have much (if any) more upside then Willie Cauley Stein....or he could surprise us and excel like Porzingis.  Another very high risk prospect.

Jaylen Brown reminds me a lot of Jimmy Butler, and I think he's a nice prospect and a pretty safe pick.  Not sure if he has the outright potential of a Simmons/Ingram/Hield, but he's a two-way player who can score, can shoot, has the athleticism to defend NBA guards, and has the strength and size to defend NBA small forwards.  Might even be able to spend brief amounts of time as a four in small ball linups here and there (as Crowder does now).  He could probably improve his basketball IQ and decision making a little, but aside from that I think he (along with Simmons) is one of the safest picks in the top 10, and should be a good NBA player.

Dunn should be a solid NBA player for years to come, but I don't think he has star potential.  I see him as maybe an Eric Gordon type at best - not a bad thing to have, and I wouldn't hate it if we landed a guy like him with a 5th or 6th pick, because I think he could contribute right away.  I just don't think he'll ever be more than a solid to good starter.

Murry is another guy who I feel should contribute in the NBA, but who I don't believe has potential to be more than a solid-to-good starter.  Maybe a slightly better version of Michael Carter Williams is probably a good comparison.

Poeltl doesn't show star potential either, but he could be a really nice starting big man - I'm thinking he has Omer Asik written all over him.

Ellenson pretty much looks like David Lee 2.0 - again, no real superstar potential there, but could be a nice player regardless. 

Demitrius Jackson could be a dark horse.  His size is a bit of a limitation (6'1") but he looks like a guy with very legitimate star talent.  Explosive athleticism, can score in a variety of ways, can pass the ball, high basketball IQ.  The size doesn't worry me too much mainly because guys like CP3 and IT4 have proven that you CAN be a star player without size.  Many teams will probably pass on him, but I think he is among the top talents in this draft and among the most likely guys to become a star.  He honestly looks NBA ready from the get-go though, and I'd be all over him if we didn't already have so many PG's.  He'll likely be a big steal for some team out there.

I don't think anybody else is (IMHO) worth that much of a mention really when it comes to the lottery.

TP for your rationale, but I disagree about Dunn, Murray, and Ingram. Kris Dunn and Murray seem to have that "fire" and motor a player needs to sustain greatness in the NBA. Dunns athleticism  imo will translate more quickly to the next level but IMO Murray is a superb shooter and has good bball IQ. I see superstar potential in Dunn(Westbrook) and I see all star potential in Murray(Tony Parker).
As far as Brandon Ingram idk why people doubt that he has a high ceiling. He could absolutely be the next kevin durant. Ive been watching him since high school and all ive seen him do is improve. He shined in the NCAA tourney under the bright lights, has better handles imo than simmons, and has the tools to become a great scorer in the league. Main concern is his weight which will undoubtedly increase after getting nba paychecks for a year. Even Jordan had to bulk up before he was ready to win championships. Ive liked Ben.simmons since HS too and I believe he has a great skill set as a PF but I truly think Ingram has a higher upside. Not sure if Simmons will be able to dominate the ball or rebound at a high level in the NBA and will he be able to defend the blake griffins,lamarcus aldridges and zach randolphs of the NBA? Even.though I see him being Draymond Greens physical kryptonite on defense.for some reason lol.

[crimson_stallion]

TP for your rationale, but I disagree about Dunn, Murray, and Ingram. Kris Dunn and Murray seem to have that "fire" and motor a player needs to sustain greatness in the NBA. Dunns athleticism  imo will translate more quickly to the next level but IMO Murray is a superb shooter and has good bball IQ. I see superstar potential in Dunn(Westbrook) and I see all star potential in Murray(Tony Parker).
As far as Brandon Ingram idk why people doubt that he has a high ceiling. He could absolutely be the next kevin durant. Ive been watching him since high school and all ive seen him do is improve. He shined in the NCAA tourney under the bright lights, has better handles imo than simmons, and has the tools to become a great scorer in the league. Main concern is his weight which will undoubtedly increase after getting nba paychecks for a year. Even Jordan had to bulk up before he was ready to win championships. Ive liked Ben.simmons since HS too and I believe he has a great skill set as a PF but I truly think Ingram has a higher upside. Not sure if Simmons will be able to dominate the ball or rebound at a high level in the NBA and will he be able to defend the blake griffins,lamarcus aldridges and zach randolphs of the NBA? Even.though I see him being Draymond Greens physical kryptonite on defense.for some reason lol.

I don't see Simmons having any more trouble on defense then say, Blake Griffin.  He doesn't exactly posess drool worthy size, but he's not horribly undersized either.  At 6'10" / 240 pounds with a 6'11" - 7'0" wingspan Simmons is about the same size as guys like Al Horford, Kevin Love, Blake Griffin, etc.  Those guys have all done quite well for themselves in the league despite not being elite defensive players, so I'm honestly not concerned. I think Simmons will be just fine.

If he was 6'8" with a 6'10" wingspan, then I would be more concerned. At his size he is unlikely to ever be an outstanding defensive player, but he should be able to hold his own.

[gift]

Demitrius Jackson could be a dark horse.  His size is a bit of a limitation (6'1") but he looks like a guy with very legitimate star talent.  Explosive athleticism, can score in a variety of ways, can pass the ball, high basketball IQ.  The size doesn't worry me too much mainly because guys like CP3 and IT4 have proven that you CAN be a star player without size.  Many teams will probably pass on him, but I think he is among the top talents in this draft and among the most likely guys to become a star.  He honestly looks NBA ready from the get-go though, and I'd be all over him if we didn't already have so many PG's.  He'll likely be a big steal for some team out there.

I think Demetrius Jackson is going to be better than a lot of guys picked before him. I like him, like you, not for the Celtics though given our guard situation.

[loco_91]

Demitrius Jackson could be a dark horse.  His size is a bit of a limitation (6'1") but he looks like a guy with very legitimate star talent.  Explosive athleticism, can score in a variety of ways, can pass the ball, high basketball IQ.  The size doesn't worry me too much mainly because guys like CP3 and IT4 have proven that you CAN be a star player without size.  Many teams will probably pass on him, but I think he is among the top talents in this draft and among the most likely guys to become a star.  He honestly looks NBA ready from the get-go though, and I'd be all over him if we didn't already have so many PG's.  He'll likely be a big steal for some team out there.

I think Demetrius Jackson is going to be better than a lot of guys picked before him. I like him, like you, not for the Celtics though given our guard situation.

I really like him too. He is the most athletic player to enter the draft since Wiggins + Lavine, he's a better shooter than either of those guys, and he has tons of potential on D. Super precise footwork + great lateral quicks, though he's behind the curve on team defense concepts. I don't think he has that much star potential, as he hasn't really broken out and dominated college the way you'd expect from a future all-star in his 3rd year of college, but he could be an awesome fit for pace + space.