RealGM

Fadeaway_J wrote:

Snakebites wrote:

Fadeaway_J wrote:Actually not as deep as I thought - might require adding players who played for him as well.

That adds 3 MVP level guys and a decent swath of role players.

He made the playoffs a lot but there wasn’t a lot of variation in his teams.

Could add his time as an assistant too, though that feels off for the theme.

It adds three All-NBA players as well.

I'll dig into it further, but my feeling is that would be enough for 10-12 people which seems to be our ceiling nowadays.

Yeah. It’s mostly Western conference guys (most of them face pop at some point), plus you get the Heatles, 00s Pistons, plus the Lebron 2006 Cavs and early 00s Nets- two teams that don’t add much to the pool.

Snakebites wrote:

Fadeaway_J wrote:

Snakebites wrote:That adds 3 MVP level guys and a decent swath of role players.

He made the playoffs a lot but there wasn’t a lot of variation in his teams.

Could add his time as an assistant too, though that feels off for the theme.

It adds three All-NBA players as well.

I'll dig into it further, but my feeling is that would be enough for 10-12 people which seems to be our ceiling nowadays.

Yeah. It’s mostly Western conference guys (most of them face pop at some point), plus you get the Heatles, 00s Pistons, plus the Lebron 2006 Cavs and early 00s Nets- two teams that don’t add much to the pool.

What about Pat Riley? Spend more eras if you include him as an executive as well as coach.

Fadeaway_J wrote:Actually not as deep as I thought - might require adding players who played for him as well.

Examining the pool, yeah it seemed too shallow to me for ten participants, even including the Spurs guys.

durantbird wrote:

Fadeaway_J wrote:Actually not as deep as I thought - might require adding players who played for him as well.

Examining the pool, yeah it seemed too shallow to me for ten participants, even including the Spurs guys.

The alternative could be to just allow any season for players who meet the criteria. That brings in prime versions of guys like T-Mac, Payton, Vince, Dame, Penny, etc.

''All about offense'' draft. Cannot select players who have made the all-defensive teams.

flaco wrote:''All about offense'' draft. Cannot select players who have made the all-defensive teams.

That feels like something we've done at least a couple of times.

Frenimies Draft. Lakers and Celtics only. I think there's at least 10 representative first round picks. No dominant figure like Mike or prime LeBron.

LeBron
AD
Kobe
West
Magic
Shaq
Kareem
Russell
Bird
Tatum

Laimbeer wrote:Frenimies Draft. Lakers and Celtics only. I think there's at least 10 representative first round picks. No dominant figure like Mike or prime LeBron.

LeBron
AD
Kobe
West
Magic
Shaq
Kareem
Russell
Bird
Tatum

+Wilt, KG

If we allow any season we also get Nash, Karl Malone, Bill Walton.

Laimbeer wrote:Frenimies Draft. Lakers and Celtics only. I think there's at least 10 representative first round picks. No dominant figure like Mike or prime LeBron.

LeBron
AD
Kobe
West
Magic
Shaq
Kareem
Russell
Bird
Tatum

How about allowing all non all-stars?

flaco wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:Frenimies Draft. Lakers and Celtics only. I think there's at least 10 representative first round picks. No dominant figure like Mike or prime LeBron.

LeBron
AD
Kobe
West
Magic
Shaq
Kareem
Russell
Bird
Tatum

+Wilt, KG

If we allow any season we also get Nash, Karl Malone, Bill Walton.

Tbh, I think that's the only way this idea is viable.

Fadeaway_J wrote:

flaco wrote:

Laimbeer wrote:Frenimies Draft. Lakers and Celtics only. I think there's at least 10 representative first round picks. No dominant figure like Mike or prime LeBron.

LeBron
AD
Kobe
West
Magic
Shaq
Kareem
Russell
Bird
Tatum

+Wilt, KG

If we allow any season we also get Nash, Karl Malone, Bill Walton.

Tbh, I think that's the only way this idea is viable.

Yeah I think people are getting mislead by the number of all time greats the Lakers (and to a lesser extent Celtics) have. 2 franchises simply doesn’t leave you with enough role players to fill in the gaps if it’s only those specific seasons. At least IMO.

Snakebites wrote:

Fadeaway_J wrote:

flaco wrote:+Wilt, KG

If we allow any season we also get Nash, Karl Malone, Bill Walton.

Tbh, I think that's the only way this idea is viable.

Yeah I think people are getting mislead by the number of all time greats the Lakers (and to a lesser extent Celtics) have. 2 franchises simply doesn’t leave you with enough role players to fill in the gaps if it’s only those specific seasons. At least IMO.

Not just the role players, but the supporting stars are nowhere near sufficient if you limit it to just Lakers and Celtics seasons.

Fadeaway_J wrote:

Snakebites wrote:

Fadeaway_J wrote:Tbh, I think that's the only way this idea is viable.

Yeah I think people are getting mislead by the number of all time greats the Lakers (and to a lesser extent Celtics) have. 2 franchises simply doesn’t leave you with enough role players to fill in the gaps if it’s only those specific seasons. At least IMO.

Not just the role players, but the supporting stars are nowhere near sufficient if you limit it to just Lakers and Celtics seasons.

A few other notable names, albeit not 1st-round talents:
Gary Payton, Billups, Pierce, Ray Allen, Eddie Jones, Dennis Rodman, Mitch Richmond, Derrick White, Jrue, Horford, Porzingis, Sheed, Marc, Pau, Dwight, Parish, McHale, Artis Gimore

modern unpopular stars:
Westbrook, Kyrie, Carmelo

old-school stars that hardly ever feature in our games:
Elgin Baylor, Bob McAdoo (the original stretch 4), James Worthy, Tiny Archibald (only player to lead the league in both points and assists the same season), Havlicek (60s/70s Manu Ginobili), Dominique, Pistol Pete (imo, the most overrated star ever), to name a few.

Role players:
Michael Cooper, Caruso, Smart, Danny Green, Doug Christie, KCP, Bowen, Posey, Ariza, Crowder, Sam Perkins, Horry, Grant Williams, Pat Beverley, Derek Fisher, Austin Reaves, Rick Fox, Ron Harper, DeAndre Jordan, Timelord, JaVale McGee, Wes Matthews

I think it's a viable pool.

flaco wrote:

Fadeaway_J wrote:

Snakebites wrote:Yeah I think people are getting mislead by the number of all time greats the Lakers (and to a lesser extent Celtics) have. 2 franchises simply doesn’t leave you with enough role players to fill in the gaps if it’s only those specific seasons. At least IMO.

Not just the role players, but the supporting stars are nowhere near sufficient if you limit it to just Lakers and Celtics seasons.

A few other notable names, albeit not 1st-round talents:
Gary Payton, Billups, Pierce, Ray Allen, Eddie Jones, Dennis Rodman, Mitch Richmond, Derrick White, Jrue, Horford, Porzingis, Sheed, Marc, Pau, Dwight, Parish, McHale, Artis Gimore

modern unpopular stars:
Westbrook, Kyrie, Carmelo

old-school stars that hardly ever feature in our games:
Elgin Baylor, Bob McAdoo (the original stretch 4), James Worthy, Tiny Archibald (only player to lead the league in both points and assists the same season), Havlicek (60s/70s Manu Ginobili), Dominique, Pistol Pete (imo, the most overrated star ever), to name a few.

Role players:
Michael Cooper, Caruso, Smart, Danny Green, Doug Christie, KCP, Bowen, Posey, Ariza, Crowder, Sam Perkins, Horry, Grant Williams, Derek Fisher, Austin Reaves, Rick Fox, Ron Harper, DeAndre Jordan, Timelord, Javale McGee, Wes Matthews

I think it's a viable pool.

Like I said, it's definitely viable with your version, but not with what Laimbeer seemed to be proposing which is only using Lakers and Celtics seasons.

Any version of Lakers/Boston players sounds interesting

If we go with just BOS/LAL seasons there are enough players to build at least above average NBA teams. My thought was pushing us outside the box on all types of players - second stars and role players as well. We wouldn't have our cookie cutter 7 fga 3/D players but we'd be competing equally and maybe getting a bit creative.

One idea might be to increase the fga's. We might get reasonable substitues for the usual suspects, but they are likely to cost more.

Laimbeer wrote:If we go with just BOS/LAL seasons there are enough players to build at least above average NBA teams. My thought was pushing us outside the box on all types of players - second stars and role players as well. We wouldn't have our cookie cutter 7 fga 3/D players but we'd be competing equally and maybe getting a bit creative.

One idea might be to increase the fga's. We might get reasonable substitues for the usual suspects, but they are likely to cost more.

I'm not seeing that at all tbh. Stars are one thing, but the majority of your supporting stars/solid starters/role players are realistically going to come from the 80s onwards, and you need about 50-60 of those for a typical draft these days. No way do I buy two franchises providing that volume of usable players. Based on my preliminary research, you're just about getting there with the looser rules. In any case, flaco's version would still bring in a lot of players that aren't usually picked.

If Fade is saying a pool isn’t deep enough, believe him.

He hates drafts that are too deep.

Flaco's would bring in some new faces - I'm fine with it. I guess we are taking a dive into the 60s and 70s unless we want to do some kind of carve-out for Wilt, Russ and West - i.e. players from those decades must have a ranking of 15 or higher on the RealGM 2023 top 100. Or do we need those decades for depth?

Laimbeer wrote:Flaco's would bring in some new faces - I'm fine with it. I guess we are taking a dive into the 60s and 70s unless we want to do some kind of carve-out for Wilt, Russ and West - i.e. players from those decades must have a ranking of 15 or higher on the RealGM 2023 top 100. Or do we need those decades for depth?

I think for this draft we have to leave them all in. Most of the ones selected would probably be guys like Wilt, Russell, West, Havlicek, etc. who are already seen as legit options even in modern drafts.