The 2016 draft may not be rife with talent, but it does provide a rare occasion for a legitimate #1 overall debate. I am not certain which player is truly the correct pick, as having access to interviews, feedback from coaches, workouts, etc. would be helpful information toward discerning the correct pick.
Brandon Ingram is the straightforward prospect, who offers height, length, shooting, youth, and no discernibly debilitating weakness in his game. Given that he will only be 18 on draft night, there is some non-zero (albeit exceptionally small) chance that his game develops well enough such that he becomes a Kevin Durant doppelgänger. On the downside, he isn’t an exceptional athlete or skilled enough such that it’s guaranteed that he becomes a star, and he is more likely t0 approximate Marvin Williams than Durant. But he becomes an all-star or fringe all-star a significant frequently enough to be a comfortable pick at #1 overall, albeit a below average #1 overall. This is aided by the fact that his shooting and defensive versatility make him a comfortable fit in any NBA lineup.
Ben Simmons is the enigmatic prospect of the duo, as he has the talent to be as good as LeBron James but the red flags to be as disappointing as Michael Beasley. He is 6’10” with elite speed, athleticism, ball skills, rebounding, and touch near the rim. The only skill that separates him from LeBron is shooting, which is something that he is not hopeless to acquire given his youth.
His glaring concerns are his lack of competitive drive and defense, which are difficult to quantify from afar. But a quick look at LSU’s bottom line is not encouraging. In 2013-14 with freshmen Jordan Mickey and Jarrell Martin, LSU was the #58 kenpom team in the country. In 2014-15 they were the #44 team before losing both to the NBA draft and replacing them with Ben Simmons and Antonio Blakeney.
Simmons vs. Martin and Mickey
It may be natural to think that Martin and Mickey are NBA players and Blakeney is not, so some level of decline should be expected. But the summation of Simmons (11.6) and Blakeney’s (1.6) BPMs exceed that of Mickey (5.5) and Martin (5.3), and with other returning players progressing it is easy to argue that LSU should have taken a leap forward. Pre-season projections tended to agree, as they were projected #30 by SI.com, #32 team rankings, and #49 kenpom. Yet the Tigers instead fell off a cliff finishing #92 in spite of Simmons exceeding expectations statistically.
This does not necessarily prove that Simmons’ statistics are empty, as key wing Keith Hornsby missed 13 games, and Simmons was playing out of position at center where he is not a rim protector like Mickey. But LSU’s defensive 2P% in conference play was 14th out of 14 at an abysmal 54.7%, far behind #13 Missouri (52.4%) and 12th Auburn (49.0%).
It’s fair to expect a decline from their #4 ranking (44.7%) the prior year after losing Mickey, but plummeting like that bodes ill for Simmons’ defensive performance. And even if you want to shift the blame to his teammates, coach, and Mickey’s goodness– it doesn’t explain why the offense barely improved from #77 and #84 in the prior two years to #69 with their center now having superstar PG skills.
Where does this leave us?
It leaves us with a 6’10” player that anchored an awful defense and couldn’t even compensate by leading a particularly good offense even though PG skills are a key selling point on his prospect profile. At best he is a serious risk to land in the dreaded intersection of poor defense and poor shooting, and at worst he is simply not hardwired to make winning basketball plays.
I did not watch enough LSU basketball to have a strong opinion on the matter, but when statistical trends align with behind the scenes narratives it is easy to hop on the skepticism train. If he does not have great competitive drive, do you really want to gamble that he learns to shoot and/or defend? And if he proves to be poor in both of those areas, how good can he truly be since his PG skills more conducive to producing highlights than efficient offense.
I cannot say with certainty that he will not be great. He is clearly the most talented player in the draft, and perhaps both statistics and narratives overstate concerns about his NBA future. This is a thinly sliced argument, after all. But if I were an NBA executive immersed in the evaluation process, I *suspect* the conclusions I would arrive at are:
- Brandon Ingram is a better prospect than Ben Simmons
- I would rather roll the dice on Dragan Bender at #2 overall (to add an even more thinly sliced prospect to the equation!) than gamble on Simmons’ talent overcoming his warts.
I do not believe there is a 3rd prospect who merits consideration about Simmons, but my gut feeling is that he is an underdog to become a clearly positive NBA player. Again, this is all thin analysis from afar and it could be wrong, but it’s my foggy perspective and I am in the mood to share it.
Dean On Draft 
Simmons is clearly the better prospect than Ingram. My hot take is that I wouldn’t have Ingram in my top 5 prospects. He is getting this KD comparison, which I think he probably will never live up to. I’m getting Wiggins vibes all over again with him. Ingram will probably be an average wing in the NBA. Simmons could be Beasley or Lebron but I think you have to take the best prospect available no matter what. Beasley should have been the number 1 pick over Rose. This draft reminds me of that 2008 draft in that Beasley is the obvious number 1 while the overrated pick in Rose gets the number 1 pick. This draft is full of good big prospects. I disagree with you but I like your takes on the draft.
You can’t say that re: Rose vs Beasley considering Rose went earlier based on intangibles and then went on to progress at an exponential rate while Beasley regressed until flaming out.
Interesting take. I think Simmons is the best prospect in the draft, but he’s an awful fit on the Sixers. He would have to play a lot of SF, where his lack of shooting is a major problem, and he would never get to play with either four competent shooters or three good shooters, which would minimize the value of his distributing. Moreover, his attitude issues might be more serious on a losing team lacking locker room leadership. If they do draft Simmons, the Sixers badly need to make some trades to provide a better developmental situation for him.
That’s part of the reason why he is overrated…there are just so many fit and intangible issues that can drag him down and prevent him from being useful.
I agree with your take and I thank you for writing again. Simmons has the higher upside, but the Michael Beasley downside and the fit downside scare me away as well. Simmons has all the hallmark red flags of a bust player. Unsure what position/undersized for ideal position, can’t shoot, poor defender, questionable work ethic and competitiveness, and yet the talent is obviously there. If I’m taking Simmons #1 it’s to play him as a PG on offense.
My number one overall player in the draft is Zhou Qi. Have you seen him play? 7’2″ tall, 7’6″ wingspan, and extremely skilled. I see him as having Kirilenko’s skill in Porzingis’ body. The only knocks on him are that he’s skinny and he reminds teams of Yi Jianlan. So comical to me that teams would be scared by a skinny prospect because that’s the easiest thing to change about someone. I would much rather try add muscle to Qi’s frame then skill and instincts to a lesser prospect. He’s like a wealthy man’s Porzingis and he’s being mocked as a fringe first rounder. It’s insane. Layne Vashro’s model’s loved him and he pops off the screen when you watch him. Layne works for Denver now and I would bet anything they come away with Qi on draft night with one of their three picks.
The other guy I love in this draft is Denzel Valentine. The only concerns are defense and his age which are both complete nonsense. He is an incredible rebounder and stealer so I don’t buy any “defense” concerns. I also don’t understand why teams are scared away by his age. Draymond Green dominated at Michigan State and left after his senior year and every team regrets not drafting him, but now Denzel Valentine is only a mid first rounder? Denzel has everything I look for in a prospect in spades and I bet he is one of the steals of the draft.
Any thoughts on Qi and Valentine?
I know little about Qi, but based on available information he certainly seems undervalued.
I do think you glaze over his weakness of being thin a bit– he isn’t thin like Clint Capela or Chris Bosh, he is rail thin to the point that he will always be the weakest center in the NBA in all likelihood. I am a firm believer in skinny center but I believe his case deserves a bit more concern than normal because it is so extreme. Also whatever sample Vashro used of his is likely not reliable enough to invest heavily in, so there isn’t any certainty that he is a good basketball player.
That said being 7’2 with a 7’6 wingspan is a nice start and if he has any semblance of smarts and skills that makes him an intriguing gamble. Can’t see how he’s expected to slide all the way to late 1st– somebody with a polarized profile like him is much more likely to be great than a Buddy Hield who has one strength and a bunch of OK-ish traits.
Valentine I like too. Wouldn’t compare him to Green who was perceived to be awful on D due to lack of burst/quicks and turned out to be an elite versatile defensive player, but rebounding + passing + shooting is a nifty intersection of strengths. I am hesitant to get too high on a prospect who is a poor defensive player, but he could become a nice NBA piece nevertheless. I like him in the mid-1st.
Zhou would be a top-5 talent and a top-10 pick in this draft if there weren’t such big concerns about his age. His listed as 20, but is likely at least 22 and as old as 24. If he’s 24, he’s no longer a viable draft and stash candidate and will likely never put on the requisite muscle needed to man the 5
Link to rumors regarding his age?
Even if his age is 1/3 each to be 20 v 22 v 24 he still seems undervalued as a fringe 1st in a draft where Buddy Hield is a top 10 pick
If you dig, you’ll find a bit more on it. My understanding is that it is a very real possibility.
By the way, I completely agree that he seems undervalued. Even with the age questions, I’d happily take a flyer on him in the late lottery/teens if his interviews go alright
I used Bealsey as a comparison to Simmons because of their prospective value entering the draft. Rose is an average guard and one of the most overrated players last decade. Rose also took a MVP trophy away from Lebron because of voter fatigue. Rose was a better prospect than Ingram though.
Rose was obviously not deserving of MVP, but he was also obviously one of the top 10 most valuable players which makes him way above average. Of course he is awful now that he has been ravaged by injuries but with better luck he’d be looking like a strong return on that #1 overall.
Simmons has such an outlier combination of explosiveness/fluidity/passing that I really think he’ll be a positive-impact player even in a worst-case scenario. He’s going to be able to get to the rim, he’s going to get rebounds, he’s going to get assists, he’s going to get steals, and as a result, he’s likely to rate well in BPM in the NBA too. I realize BPM isn’t necessarily the same thing as true impact, but he’s also a college freshman, and age is on his side to get his head straight.
I suppose hindsight is 20/20 but I’d argue Beasley’s game had more severe translation concerns where he was a physically dominant inside PF at the college level but had to play more on the perimeter in the NBA due to his size which made him way less efficient. Simmons’ role at LSU seems more similar to what he’ll be in the NBA, because the 76ers will likely give him the keys to the offense. I think a better attitude would’ve made Beasley a decent role player, not turned him into a superstar, whereas I think Simmons is a superstar and attitude concerns would only drop him into a pretty good player.
Overall, I think all the issues you raise (fit, attitude, team impact) are pretty secondary concerns to his overall talent level. Not to say that they aren’t important (team impact is the only important thing when it comes down to it) but I think they’re pretty hard to accurately ascertain, especially this early in a player’s development. I suppose it’s possible that he’s fooling college BPM, but I think one could easily make the reverse argument. BPM takes into account team strength, and also team environment to an extent (i.e., scoring threshold above Team TS%), and Simmons still rated really well for a college freshman. Maybe if he’d played for a better-coached team with more 3-point shooting, his BPM would’ve been even better.
I definitely agree that Simmons has some key advantages over Beasley and that he also might have drastically better intangibles. So it’s not directly analogous, just a semi-relevant horror story to caution his downside.
Simmons is definitely fooling college BPM. His teammates largely regressed from 14-15 to 15-16. He definitely was not as good defensively as his stats suggest, and he didn’t help the offense a ton either as a supposedly great passer and scorer playing as a small 5.
I should probably write more on Simmons. The best comparison might be “tall Rondo”– if he is engaged defensively and making good decisions he can be an absolute stud, but if not he could just be a harmful statwhore.
Dean,
I swear I said “tall rondo” watching his scouting videos and highlights on youtube…6’10 Rondo might be the next Magic…Simmons is such a better prospect than Ingram. Ingram is fool’s gold I think but then again I could be wrong. The draft is a coin flip. If i’m gambling, I would draft Simmons as a guard.
You’re right that 6’10” good rondo would be awesome, but 6’10” bad rondo is still bad. I just have a hunch that Simmons’ personality has more bad rondo than good, but of course I may be wrong and he may be the obvious #1 pick in retrospect.
Ingram isn’t really fool’s gold…more like real silver. There’s nothing confusing or deceptive about him. He’s just not that amazing.
Pingback: 2016 Big Board | Dean On Draft
I’ll have to disagree. Are you the same deanondraft that had Embiid over Wiggins despite injury concerns? Simmons could be a favorite (over 50% likely) to be Beasley and still be the right pick.
The fact that Ingram is a fringe all star a decent percentage of the time doesn’t matter at all. Getting Lebron James does. I remember reading an article (forget where though, wish I had the link) which concludes the best player in the nba wins the championship something like 30% of the time while the last all star wins it about as much as random chance: 1/30. Drafting the last all star doesn’t move your title chances that much. Drafting the best player does.
Your “statistics” look very cherry-picked to me. Every statistical model I’ve seen projects Simmons significantly over Ingram. These statistical models have been trained on years of data, and I imagine they are much more valuable than ‘dean finds some statistics that support his narrative’. Have you studied how these team performance numbers correlate to NBA performance? Is there really a signal here or is this just confirmation bias? I can’t help but think that the statistical models take precedence and they say Simmons is more likely to be a star than Ingram.
The case for Simmons is simple:
-stat models like him better
-scouts think he is more talented
-there are character concerns, but it is much much worse to pass on a great player for an all star than it is to pass an all star for a bust. You’d have to be absolutely certain that Simmons will bust to not take him.
You don’t need to be certain that Simmons is a bust to not take him. You need to believe that Ingram is more likely to be a star.
Simmons obviously has more talent, but Ingram obviously has much better intangibles. Frankly I’m just guessing as to who belongs #1. I could be totally wrong about Ingram vs Simmons.
But I wasn’t wrong about Embiid– he would have been a super stud if he was healthy. If he was a prospect in this draft (and hadn’t just missed 2 seasons w/ injury) I’d take him over Simmons and Ingram too.
Even now I’m not sure I’d trade Embiid for Wiggins, who has been significantly worse than consensus projections. Meanwhile Embiid is now 7’3 and just huge, so if he manages to stay healthy his odds of superstardom are quite high.