What does white have to do with it? Chase Budinger, Pat Connaughton have some of the highest verticals recorded. Doesn’t mean they’re going to be good just because they’re athletic.
His numbers have been on a steady decline and he’s been nagged by numerous injuries. Those are usually obvious signs of someone in their 30’s being on the decline, but you can make your own determination. You’re forgetting that he was mediocre last year too, even when GS was still loaded. Age and size matters because Simmons is going to be at his athletic peak for a while, whereas Draymond was always undersized. Draymond’s game was never dependent upon his athleticism, but whenever your body starts giving out on and you’re undersized, it’s tough to play against 4/5’s the way he does. His game isn’t going to age well. That much is obvious, IMO. But if you had a younger, taller and more athletic version of the semi-point forward that Draymond was at his peak I think that could really help this team. Ideal? No, given what you’re paying him, but there’s room for improvement, and the longer this Harden stalemate goes on the worse the offers will be. Simmons is still the best option, IMO.
I didn't say athleticism guarantees you a chance at stardom. You guys need better reading comprehension.
His size has everything to do with why he's good. I'm confident if Luka is 5'2, he probably wouldnt be putting up the same number.
You did say genetics played a part and that there have been no 6’5 white guys who have been stars. You kinda are saying if you’re a white dude you won’t be a star. Also, athleticism is more than fine for the NBA with Herro. Very similar to Simmons. Little slower but nothing out of the norm.
because being 5'2 and 6'8 is pretty significant. no idea what that has to do with anything the better logic would be if you're being consistent here is saying luka wouldn't be as good as he is if he was 6'5 instead of 6'8. Sounds stupid right. But that's exactly what you;re saying. and you're getting the benefit of doubt here because luka is actually listed as 6'7 but it just speaks to more how stupid your logic has gotten
When you are 6'10 with a 7 foot winspan, you can reach a hellua lot higher than someone 6'5 with a 6'4 wingspan with the same vertical.
Not sure if you understand difference between standing vert and MAX VERTICAL. - Simmons has a 41.5-inch maximum vertical, the best of any player 6-foot-9 or taller in shoes. - Simmons ran the three-quarter-court sprint in 2.9 seconds, the fastest of any player 6-foot-8 or taller in shoes. - Simmons has a 12-foot-6 maximum vertical reach, the highest reach of any player. Max vertical allows for a running start. Ben Simmons max vert is ELITE (almost 42") as well as his quickness/speed/agility are as good or better than athletic guards like Russ Westbrook. https://lakeshowlife.com/2016/06/01...-wingspan-vertical-chad-ford-lakers-prospect/ And FYI, Ben Simmons compares very favorably with Grant Hill coming out of college except Simmons averaged more points, more rebounds and more assists. And of course, Simmons is much taller and longer. https://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/120282/who-will-ben-simmons-be-in-the-nba
Except that it sounds like you want a Harden replication.... Simmons isn't a scorer but he can score, he's much better at helping those around him score.
Unfortunately we don’t have a lot of options. I like Simmons just not his offensive game and salary. I think the Nets option is intriguing if they throw in Allen or Harris and kyrie may be on the table later. I like Dinwiddie’s game and Lavert is an intriguing player. We will be a very balanced team with some of these pieces. Again I haven’t looked at numbers and contracts although I believe dinwiddie is a free agent after this season. I think it is difficult to fit Simmons anywhere without at least 2 Bonofide scorers. Again just a matter of opinion.
No my logic is that size, athleticism and WINGSPAN are important. You're the one out here saying its not. I used 5'2 as an example so even someone like you would have to agreed that yes genetics is important.
you used it as the means why herro won't be good. Which again just pure dumb You used 5'2 because 6'5 isn't consistent with your agenda. And if you used 6'5 it would look dumb as hell, hence why you didn't use it
No. I like Dinwiddie. I like Lavert and those guys can bring balance to this team. But if we can get a star (kyrie) etc then why not shoot for those types of players. The salary doesn’t fit is what I’m saying. What we need is a bonofide number 1. Simmons ain’t it. But makes it money. Call me crazy but I really think Portland is the best fit for harden. They have all the pieces for him to take them to the chip. Big man, shooters, Roco. Harden is better than Dame Dolla and again in a fantasy world if I were Portland’s GM I would pull the trigger. All opinion and observations.
You still havent answered my question. How many white 6'5 guard with a trex arm playing 2 guard managed to become allstars in the past 20 years? I'm not saying he can't be, but the odds are against him. There aren't too many examples.
I just gave you two examples of guys whose crazy genetics were off the charts that are stars. Then you replied with they're not white and not sg's. ignorant i know. you're stuck in a box that you can't get out of. that's a you problem
