my evals are posted on the rosters page

Posted by copernicus on 3/20/2020 7:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 3/20/2020 11:19:00 AM (view original):
Meh on Bob McAdoo. I would never draft him. Same with Hakeem. In my mind, the only major snub was Bradley Beal. A few other really good people but they were generally drafted super late when they were picked anyway.

interesting - he's a plus in most important categories - is it because he's a 50-50 guy?

I don’t think he is bad. But he isn’t elite at any thing so am paying such a premium for minutes. I can get 2-3 players with less minutes stacked together with the same stats for a lot less money. My general rule is to avoid really high minute players in this league unless they have a couple stats where they are real exceptional.

I don’t really understand bds9992’s 9.4 million rule though. Usage has a cost so you should be paying a lot for 2-3 positions and a lot less for the others.

Posted by copernicus on 3/20/2020 9:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 3/20/2020 7:26:00 PM (view original):
1) He's too pricey
2) He doesn't rebound well enough
3) Not enough usage or eFG%
4) we only got 9.4M for 48 minutes, and B. Mac costs exactly that

Easier to just get Boozer. Timeless classic.

4 pts usage 55% efg
def 70+
low TOs/TO%
low PF
I would call his rebounding position neutral or slightly plus - he's about as good if not better than what you're going with at you 4/5
can play 44+ minutes w/o significant fatigue
not sure what you're talking about minutes per $ wise but they could be worse spent

Boozer: defense is a factor I think - I think Bob's stats more closely align to Timmy's minus about 16 D rating points

Agree he is basically a JV Duncan with less defense, but also much less passing and two less points of usage for more money. Like I said, he is good. I’m not arguing he isn’t. I would never make fun of someone for drafting him. I just think it is suboptimal resource allocation for the way I build teams.

Posted by bds9992 on 3/17/2020 12:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 3/17/2020 12:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 3/16/2020 9:15:00 PM (view original):

Name	Position	Usg%	2pt%	3pt%	eFG%	OReb%	DReb%	Ast%	Stl%	Blk%
89-90 Magic Johnson	PG	24.8	50.9	38.3	52.6	4.8	13.8	35.8	1.9	0.6
09-10 Jason Kidd	PG	14.6	41.7	42.4	55.4	1.8	14.8	31.8	2.3	0.7
18-19 Paul George	SF	29.5	47.4	38.4	52.9	3.5	18.6	12.7	2.5	0.7
80-81 Robert Parish	C	27.1	54.1	0	54.5	12	23.3	6.9	1.4	5
18-19 Derrick Favors	PF	19.4	63	21.7	60	12.3	19.9	6	1.4	3.3
74-75 George T. Johnson	C	11.5	47.6	0	47.6	14	23.7	5	0.9	4.9
16-17 Kyle O'Quinn	PF	18.5	53.2	11.7	52.3	12.7	23.3	11.7	1.3	4.7

Magic
Kidd
PG
KOQ/GTJ
Favors/Parish

That’s a lot of fouls and turnovers.

Is it? Favors and PG are super clean
& who cares, look at all that D, eFG% & blocks

Parish coming off the bench is a big part of it, I think. I wouldn't have been cool with it if I didn't have a high D big man already.

I don’t really understand why you drafted so many assists in the first two rounds and then built a conventional team around them. My rule with assists is the same as most other stats: pay for what you need to get by or pay for so many that it dramatically effects your team. You did neither. Your shooting, fouls and turnovers aren’t great. George T Johnson and Robert Parish weren’t great picks; there were better fits out there. I love Favors at this cap. Everything else is pretty good and I love the positional flexibility. I think it’s a playoff contender.

Posted by copernicus on 3/20/2020 2:29:00 PM (view original):
Marques Johnson went undrafted I think - that's the one I was lamenting when I was scrapping together my SF in the 6th round - I could have made it work but only if I went with second best wilt (which if you're drafting wilt kind of defeats the purpose).

He’s good but I think you made a more cost conscious decision.

Posted by robusk on 3/21/2020 10:41:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 3/17/2020 12:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 3/17/2020 12:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bds9992 on 3/16/2020 9:15:00 PM (view original):

Name	Position	Usg%	2pt%	3pt%	eFG%	OReb%	DReb%	Ast%	Stl%	Blk%
89-90 Magic Johnson	PG	24.8	50.9	38.3	52.6	4.8	13.8	35.8	1.9	0.6
09-10 Jason Kidd	PG	14.6	41.7	42.4	55.4	1.8	14.8	31.8	2.3	0.7
18-19 Paul George	SF	29.5	47.4	38.4	52.9	3.5	18.6	12.7	2.5	0.7
80-81 Robert Parish	C	27.1	54.1	0	54.5	12	23.3	6.9	1.4	5
18-19 Derrick Favors	PF	19.4	63	21.7	60	12.3	19.9	6	1.4	3.3
74-75 George T. Johnson	C	11.5	47.6	0	47.6	14	23.7	5	0.9	4.9
16-17 Kyle O'Quinn	PF	18.5	53.2	11.7	52.3	12.7	23.3	11.7	1.3	4.7

Magic
Kidd
PG
KOQ/GTJ
Favors/Parish

That’s a lot of fouls and turnovers.

Is it? Favors and PG are super clean
& who cares, look at all that D, eFG% & blocks

Parish coming off the bench is a big part of it, I think. I wouldn't have been cool with it if I didn't have a high D big man already.

I don’t really understand why you drafted so many assists in the first two rounds and then built a conventional team around them. My rule with assists is the same as most other stats: pay for what you need to get by or pay for so many that it dramatically effects your team. You did neither. Your shooting, fouls and turnovers aren’t great. George T Johnson and Robert Parish weren’t great picks; there were better fits out there. I love Favors at this cap. Everything else is pretty good and I love the positional flexibility. I think it’s a playoff contender.

I love how the whole paragraph is critical until you say it’s a contender. I’ll take it, though.

The assist bump hasn’t been tried that many times in this league. Sure, it’s easier than ever. I would’ve needed Jokic or Noah, but I also would’ve needed a high usage high efficiency scorer to go with them, and that didn’t exist in the 3rd. Not willing to see what happens with Grant Hill.

I think George’s eFG% will benefit from all the assists. Parish is too good at this cap (and I badly needed offensive rebounds). The reason I drafted two point guards early was so I wouldn’t have to worry about assists, rebounds or 3s. I’m sure this is one of those times where I’m exhibiting great hubris and everyone will laugh at me after I win 35 games but I love this team. Why shouldn’t I? Everyone thinks their team is good until it isn’t.

But why worry so much about assists and 3s?

Posted by NotoriousJ on 3/21/2020 10:28:00 PM (view original):
But why worry so much about assists and 3s?

Because things tend to go wrong more often without 65 Ast% and 400 3s. Not saying it's impossible (especially, as pexetera has proved, with blocks) but it's less likely

I think you want a team that mostly shoots paint perimeter because people dont spend a lot of time with the coaching dials so teams are mostly defending default/midrange and that there are some modifiers involved that work in your favor in such a case both in terms of +/- fg% and (if memory serves) in terms of rebounding advantage (maybe even?)

and +% assists create a +% on your shooting efficiency (state farm for instance but it starts lower than those teams)

going to suck to get smoked in a division of my own choosing.

Posted by NotoriousJ on 3/23/2020 10:41:00 AM (view original):
going to suck to get smoked in a division of my own choosing.

im starting to like your 32 win prediction more now that i see who you drafted in our division...brutal!

Yeah at least my excuse for drafting a tough division is that I picked last and couldn't do anything to keep from getting stuck with ben

Posted by robusk on 3/21/2020 10:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by copernicus on 3/20/2020 7:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 3/20/2020 11:19:00 AM (view original):
Meh on Bob McAdoo. I would never draft him. Same with Hakeem. In my mind, the only major snub was Bradley Beal. A few other really good people but they were generally drafted super late when they were picked anyway.

interesting - he's a plus in most important categories - is it because he's a 50-50 guy?

I don’t think he is bad. But he isn’t elite at any thing so am paying such a premium for minutes. I can get 2-3 players with less minutes stacked together with the same stats for a lot less money. My general rule is to avoid really high minute players in this league unless they have a couple stats where they are real exceptional.

I don’t really understand bds9992’s 9.4 million rule though. Usage has a cost so you should be paying a lot for 2-3 positions and a lot less for the others.

47 million / 5 = 9.4 million

That's for 48 minutes. There isn't a player who you would draft who costs $9.4M and plays 48 minutes.

You can go over $9.4M for less than 48 minutes, but that means you have to spend less than $9.4M on a position. With some of the cheapest guards in this format (say, Derek Harper, Jose Calderon, Ward) you only get up to 32 minutes or so. What about the other 16-19 minutes?

Everyone's going to have their own allotment of resources & that's fine, but think about the quality you get by spending less than $9.4M on a position. If it fills a need, great. The least I spent on a position was $8.5M. The most is $9.98M. But, I only bought 19041 minutes. Imagine if you bought more minutes AND spent more than $9.4M on a player. What are you giving up?

I feel like I have the most flexibility this way, but that's just me.

Posted by bds9992 on 3/23/2020 9:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 3/21/2020 10:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by copernicus on 3/20/2020 7:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 3/20/2020 11:19:00 AM (view original):
Meh on Bob McAdoo. I would never draft him. Same with Hakeem. In my mind, the only major snub was Bradley Beal. A few other really good people but they were generally drafted super late when they were picked anyway.

interesting - he's a plus in most important categories - is it because he's a 50-50 guy?

I don’t think he is bad. But he isn’t elite at any thing so am paying such a premium for minutes. I can get 2-3 players with less minutes stacked together with the same stats for a lot less money. My general rule is to avoid really high minute players in this league unless they have a couple stats where they are real exceptional.

I don’t really understand bds9992’s 9.4 million rule though. Usage has a cost so you should be paying a lot for 2-3 positions and a lot less for the others.

47 million / 5 = 9.4 million

That's for 48 minutes. There isn't a player who you would draft who costs $9.4M and plays 48 minutes.

You can go over $9.4M for less than 48 minutes, but that means you have to spend less than $9.4M on a position. With some of the cheapest guards in this format (say, Derek Harper, Jose Calderon, Ward) you only get up to 32 minutes or so. What about the other 16-19 minutes?

Everyone's going to have their own allotment of resources & that's fine, but think about the quality you get by spending less than $9.4M on a position. If it fills a need, great. The least I spent on a position was $8.5M. The most is $9.98M. But, I only bought 19041 minutes. Imagine if you bought more minutes AND spent more than $9.4M on a player. What are you giving up?

I feel like I have the most flexibility this way, but that's just me.

The point is that usage and efficiency cost money. You can pay well over 9.4 for the couple positions where you are going to get a bunch of scoring, and then load up on a bunch of cheaper specialists to fill out all the other minutes. If you are targeting paying around 9.4 +/- at every position then you are putting yourself in a box unnecessarily. Also, the further you go down the minutes curve, the cheaper players get since cost/minute doesn't grow linearly.

my crap SF rat king costs less than 8m for 51 minutes of meh - my not crap back court is going cost to somewhere in the neighborhood 18m for the two positions

aside from Wilt I dont have another player season above 6.1m