The Best Team Money Can Buy?

[bullscubsbears]

Im in too

[MJallday59]

I'm down yo!! Good job Bryant and Echus

[Gremz]

Sign me up.

[SimonFish]

I wanna participate, when do we needa post the roster?

[VintaGe36]

I'm in.

[sterncohen]

I'm in. Thanks.

[ecuhus1981]

I wanna participate, when do we needa post the roster?

The rosters will be set one-by-one via draft. I put in some time on this project over the weekend, and hopefully come up with a draft schedule and scoring system. Again, ANYONE who has suggestions to improve this league, feel free to share.

[LeQuitterNotMVP]

Ok, you have me down for doing this right?

[ecuhus1981]

Yes, I do.

I suppose I should compile a list of participants. I will assume that everyone who has responded in this thread is willing to do it, including the ones who already completed a roster (even though it's won't count). Here goes:

-- bryant08
-- CellarDoor
-- MJallday59
-- VintaGe36
-- ecuhus1981 (myself)
-- LBJ4MVP23
-- IggyTheBEaST
-- dcash4
-- TMACFORMVP
-- klomp44
-- london sonic
-- bullscubsbears
-- Gremz
-- SimonFish
-- sterncohen

I hate to cut off the participation, but 15 sounds like a great number, not too small, not too large. If everyone drafts 15 players, that makes 225 total players, and that's probably as deep as you can go for useful contributors in today's NBA. So, unless someone needs to opt out of participation, I'll cconsider enrollment closed.

[CellarDoor]

Euchus, I would suggest a slight change with that many participants: change the salary restriction from salary cap to lux-tax threshold. I understand part of the point is to make it a little more different and difficult for people, but you're going to almost run out of start-quality players with fifteen people vying for them.

[ecuhus1981]

Argh...

Yeah, I thought about that, too. I'm not sure, though; I'd REALLY love for it to be a challenge, but I don't want everyone leaving well-paid All-Stars on the board at the end of the draft, just because they can't afford two of them. Keep in mind, though, that there AREN'T 225 starter-quality players in the NBA, so we will have some 9th men on our teams. And no one has to jockey rosters for who's playing on a given day. You just collect points for everyone on your team.

Speaking of, I wanted to talk about scoring. After a bit of thought and a bowl of chili, I believe it would be best to score the game based upon three distinct rankings:

-- Reina Value, since affordable players keep payrolls trim
-- Efficiency, since players with greater roles on their teams should warrant higher ranking
-- +/-, to mitigate the dominance of the efficiency stat, and reward winning and teamwork

So, who are these mythical players who cost less than they are worth, affect the outcome of a game in a number of ways AND win consistently? That's YOUR job to figure out! :p

OK, here's where it gets complicated. Let's say that Garnett is the 9th-best overall Reina Value player, the 1st in efficiency and the 4th in +/-. His total score would be 9+1+4, or 14. Each player will have a score, and the total is the team score. The lower your team score is, the better you are doing.

Finally, I feel that the amount that a team stays under the cap should count for something. For example, if two teams have the same team score, but one team is $4mil under the cap, and the other is only $500K under the cap, I think the person with the lower payroll should finish higher. So, at the end of the season, for every $10K a team is under the cap, the team score is reduced by one point. (The average team score will be 10,125 points, don't ask me to explain). The team that is $500K under the cap would shave 50 points off of their final score, while the team $mil under would cut 400 points. It's not exactly a game-changer, but I feel it is fair, and rewards more fiscally responsible teams.

I'm going to have to do some number-crunching this weekend with a simulated draft, to figure out if we will run into salary snags such as you suggest. But thanks for the heads-up, CellarDoor.

[dockingsched]

are rookie contracts out of the game?

[CellarDoor]

Argh...

Yeah, I thought about that, too. I'm not sure, though; I'd REALLY love for it to be a challenge, but I don't want everyone leaving well-paid All-Stars on the board at the end of the draft, just because they can't afford two of them. Keep in mind, though, that there AREN'T 225 starter-quality players in the NBA, so we will have some 9th men on our teams. And no one has to jockey rosters for who's playing on a given day. You just collect points for everyone on your team.

Speaking of, I wanted to talk about scoring. After a bit of thought and a bowl of chili, I believe it would be best to score the game based upon three distinct rankings:

-- Reina Value, since affordable players keep payrolls trim
-- Efficiency, since players with greater roles on their teams should warrant higher ranking
-- +/-, to mitigate the dominance of the efficiency stat, and reward winning and teamwork

So, who are these mythical players who cost less than they are worth, affect the outcome of a game in a number of ways AND win consistently? That's YOUR job to figure out! :p

OK, here's where it gets complicated. Let's say that Garnett is the 9th-best overall Reina Value player, the 1st in efficiency and the 4th in +/-. His total score would be 9+1+4, or 14. Each player will have a score, and the total is the team score. The lower your team score is, the better you are doing.

Finally, I feel that the amount that a team stays under the cap should count for something. For example, if two teams have the same team score, but one team is $4mil under the cap, and the other is only $500K under the cap, I think the person with the lower payroll should finish higher. So, at the end of the season, for every $10K a team is under the cap, the team score is reduced by one point. (The average team score will be 10,125 points, don't ask me to explain). The team that is $500K under the cap would shave 50 points off of their final score, while the team $mil under would cut 400 points. It's not exactly a game-changer, but I feel it is fair, and rewards more fiscally responsible teams.

I'm going to have to do some number-crunching this weekend with a simulated draft, to figure out if we will run into salary snags such as you suggest. But thanks for the heads-up, CellarDoor.

KG's got a great Reina value, but he also represents over 1/3 of your available cap-room.

[ecuhus1981]

KG's got a great Reina value, but he also represents over 1/3 of your available cap-room.

He actually had a -15 Reina value. He certainly "earned" a LOT of money, but according to the Reina value, he was paid even more. Sounds harsh, I know.

I do believe you can build a top-flight team with Garnett and other highly-paid HoF types, simply because their roles and +/- stats should push their value far beyond more modestly paid 2nd-tier stars.

are rookie contracts out of the game?

Well, they were in the original article from Christopher Reina. IDK, I think we can decide for ourselves, btu I would need input from more than just a few posters.

[sterncohen]

I'd encourage you not to count the stats of all 15 players equally. The task of an NBA GM isn't to find 15 guys who can play the same number of minutes - it's to get 240 minutes a night of quality play. If you've got five good starters and three or four good rotation players, the other six guys are essentially irrelevant, unless you hit serious injuries - they're not going to play.

[CellarDoor]

I'm not sure I'd be big on the idea of completely objectively dissecting the teams. That says nothing of their fit on a roster together, etc. I could end up with seven SFs with fantastic reina values and Josh Smith player at C and win the game.

[CellarDoor]

Looking over shamsports quickly it looks like there are about 40 starter quality players on rookie contracts, and over 10 players at 20m+. Even cutting the league in half, cutting 50 of a possible 150 starters is going to make these some pretty rough teams. That's not even taking into account the fact that it would be really hard for any team to have 3 12+m players on a single roster, so you can probably knock off more players yet.

[Gremz]

Hey guys i might remove my name from the hat. Problem i have is that i'm in AUS so the draft would take a ridiculous amount of time with me involved, i mean like 12 hours between picks ( i work 6 days a week) I just don't think it would be fair for me to hold it up so many times for such an extended period.

[ecuhus1981]

^

That's fair, and I'm glad to know now. You are more than welcome to participate in other processes of the league, e.g. end-of-the-year scoring, rule-making, suggestions etc.

[Gremz]

I'd love to take part in the scoring/ruling if you guys would have me do it.