Posted by pexetera on 4/26/2020 12:15:00 PM (view original):
Is the grad transfer pick for having less than 19,860 minutes mandatory or optional? and does it have to be the low minute player that's replaced, or can it be any player you choose to replace on your current roster as long as the grad transfer replacement player gets you over 19,860 minutes?

19860 -
I wouldn't think it was MANDATORY...
I'm not sure why a team would not want to have the min. amount of minutes,
so I guess it is optional.
If TANKING became an angle that teams aimed for (low minutes) then I assume we could shift it to be MANDATORY...
I suppose until further notice 19860 would be OPTIONAL

19860 - YES - it is for the low minute man - that is how I had it worded in the original draft of the league rules.

I didn't design that aspect of our rules as 'airtight' -
meaning - I really didn't address it as a point that need or required a ton of inspection in case it was to be manipulated.

I threw that in to enable a team to address an unexpected or to address an unwanted shortage of minutes

In the future - we could potentially kill the 19860 segment so as teams have to PLAN for their futures...

I do not have a problem enabling a GRAD TRANSFER pick this season.
?19860 seems to ensure we are able to address a minutes shortage.

thanks. I think I can make 19,527 minutes work without having to lose any games to fatigue or tanking. no grad transfer pick necessary as far as I'm concerned. The reason I asked was because the last few rounds have been slim pickings, and I've had to make a choice between drafting for the future or drafting for today... and I've made a few choices that gave me decent players in the future, but short minutes now.

Thanks for clarifying, Commish.

Only 2 more picks. Let's do this!

Trooper Washington

With the 288th and final pick of the CAP draft, Ithaca selects......

BREAKING NEWS: Future Hall of Famer Dwyane Wade is going to announce our pick.

https://youtu.be/AKaG0HXrNKQ

(it’s Mario Chalmers)

Since I'm relatively new here, and a lot of Hall of Famers are here, I'd now like to ask about draft strategy. My last pick, I chose Don Chaney at guard. It came down to him and Pete Maravich . I took Chaney for defense. I noticed no one picked Maravich and he's got what I would think are a few good seasons . Why do the veterans here consider passing up someone like Maravich.?

Posted by rickob11 on 4/26/2020 6:21:00 PM (view original):
Since I'm relatively new here, and a lot of Hall of Famers are here, I'd now like to ask about draft strategy. My last pick, I chose Don Chaney at guard. It came down to him and Pete Maravich . I took Chaney for defense. I noticed no one picked Maravich and he's got what I would think are a few good seasons . Why do the veterans here consider passing up someone like Maravich.?

Very, very inefficient. The less efficient you are, the more boards and assists you need compared to your opponent.

Posted by rickob11 on 4/26/2020 6:21:00 PM (view original):
Since I'm relatively new here, and a lot of Hall of Famers are here, I'd now like to ask about draft strategy. My last pick, I chose Don Chaney at guard. It came down to him and Pete Maravich . I took Chaney for defense. I noticed no one picked Maravich and he's got what I would think are a few good seasons . Why do the veterans here consider passing up someone like Maravich.?

He has a bad efg% at a high usg% which is a bad combo. He also doesn't really offer any supporting stat categories. He's mostly just a points guy but an inefficient one.

Posted by quaker128 on 4/26/2020 6:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rickob11 on 4/26/2020 6:21:00 PM (view original):
Since I'm relatively new here, and a lot of Hall of Famers are here, I'd now like to ask about draft strategy. My last pick, I chose Don Chaney at guard. It came down to him and Pete Maravich . I took Chaney for defense. I noticed no one picked Maravich and he's got what I would think are a few good seasons . Why do the veterans here consider passing up someone like Maravich.?

He has a bad efg% at a high usg% which is a bad combo. He also doesn't really offer any supporting stat categories. He's mostly just a points guy but an inefficient one.

This. Layman’s terms: he takes a lot of shots away from his teammates who all probably score at a higher eFG% than him. So he actually hurts your scoring.

There’s only one ball, having a guy who hogs it who also shoots a low % is a bad combo. Those guys can be good in the real NBA where the talent pool is thinner than here. The NBA is 30 teams, 1 era worth of players, but this league has 3 eras worth of players divided between only 24 teams, so some of the real-life high usage guys don’t make the cut in a big talent pool. Better to get a couple of offense-drivers early and then fill the spots around them with guys who can defend, rebound, pass, hit 3s, etc without taking possessions away from your high efficiency scorers. Hope that makes sense, it’s hard to phrase.

Thanks guys. Makes me wonder now how my team will. 32000 minutes. I think I have a decent balance in real life, but now I'm not as confident here in SIMland. Either way, I'm here for the long haul. I think this will be a lot of fun

Posted by rickob11 on 4/26/2020 7:46:00 PM (view original):
Thanks guys. Makes me wonder now how my team will. 32000 minutes. I think I have a decent balance in real life, but now I'm not as confident here in SIMland. Either way, I'm here for the long haul. I think this will be a lot of fun

Glad you’re here, it might be a challenge at first but you’ll get the hang of it! Feel free to any questions you might have.

Do we have a league #?

LEAGUE # 64290