FGA Restricted All-Time Fantasy Draft Playoffs WCR1: (3) OrlandoTill vs (6) BasketballFan7

ardee · Post #1 » by **ardee** » Sat Jun 3, 2017 10:14 am

OrlandoTill wrote:

1993 Hakeem Olajuwon
1983 Julius Erving
2008 Ray Allen
2012 James Harden
1996 Penny Hardaway
2011 Shawn Marion
2006 Theo Ratliff
2005 Greg Ostertag

BasketballFan7 wrote:

1967 Wilt Chamberlain
1990 Charles Barkley
1984 Sidney Moncrief
2009 Shane Battier
1994 Nate McMillan
2000 Bo Outlaw
1996 Gary Payton
1981 Marques Johnson

Contestants have until 4 PM EST on Sunday to submit their write-ups, that is exactly 48 hours. Then after that, hopefully judges can submit their votes in a further 48 hours.

ardee · Post #2 » by **ardee** » Sat Jun 3, 2017 10:15 am

Very interesting matchup. Two of the most talented starting line-ups in the league, both of them have a few issues with fit and spacing though.

BasketballFan7 · Post #3 » by **BasketballFan7** » Sat Jun 3, 2017 12:13 pm

Draft Strategy: after selecting Wilt and Barkley in the first two rounds, the priority became surrounding them with two way players. With Wilt and Barkley, we knew we had already set up a high offensive floor. Even in 1999, at age 35 and in Houston, Barkley was an elite impact player by NPI RAPM. Even in an all time league, Barkley and Wilt are consistent mismatches. Help has to come. One available route was to surround them with 3&D players. We have two of those on the bench who can start (we picked them early, and they will play significant minutes - they will each play roughly half the game), but I knew that those players would be highly valued by the other GMs. I decided to go with versatile, talented players who could pass and who could be selected in spots where they shouldn't have still been available based on talent alone. This also allowed me to select my "bench" players earlier than other GMs, and they are three impact monsters. In the end, the entire "starting" lineup is composed of athletic plus passers who are versatile and effective on both sides of the ball. Help will have to be sent to Charles and Wilt, and from there the ball will move. Players are to be be in constant motion off-ball, either cutting, setting screens, or navigating screens themselves. Playmaking, defense, rebounding, athleticism, and activity... these are our calling cards. Versatility. The end result is a team that is resilient both offensively and defensively to any opposing team.

We needed defenders who were resilient to any opposing lineup, and we got that defensive versatility in spades. This is, after all, a league with GOATs all over the court. We knew that our team would be at a huge disadvantage if we ran into a Magic, Jordan, or LeBron and we had a defensive sieve out there. At that point, it's almost game over before it even begins. However, we also wanted all of the players to be able to do the same thing to opposing teams; that is, exploit a poor opposing defenders who possess poor awareness or slow foot speed.

The result was taking a couple of extremely well rounded, athletic, and versatile wings from the 80s in Sidney Moncrief and Marques Johnson, at their peaks considered the best players at their positions in the league (or top 2), however briefly. They had careers cut short by injury, and it affected their draft value. Gary Payton was picked in the second to last round. Because of the plethora of playmaking between Moncrief, Johnson, Barkley, and Chamberlain, 1996 Payton is perfect for this team. A second DPOY guard to go with Moncrief who can do a lot of different things offensively without having the burden of all the ball handling on him. You can't hide a poor defender on anybody. As for the bench, we selected Shane Battier, Nate McMillan, and Bo Outlaw. Battier or McMillan could start over Johnson or Payton, respectively, depending on the matchup. All three players are highly, highly thought of by impact data. They improve their teammates. We prioritized the bench and took these players early.

Intangibles wise, we wanted to surround Wilt with guys who could get him riled up. Barkley and Payton are fierce competitors who talk trash with the best of them. This is an angry team behind them. Likewise, we wanted players with a defensive mentality with the hope that it would be contagious and have an effect on Barkley. As was, data show that he was good / average defensively in 1990. Now he has Glove urging him on and Squid locking people up for motivation. Barkley had a physical limitation (height), but with his athleticism, tenacity, and rebounding he was able to make a positive impact when committed.

Spoiler:

Every starter was All-NBA. We have four all-defensive players, including two defensive players of the year. If they had such awards in 1967, those numbers may have been 5 and 3 with the addition of Wilt.

This is actually a really interesting matchup. Actually, every matchup in this tournament is interesting. What I mean is that many of our players actually played against one another. Fortunately, this is a really favorable matchup for Nowhere to Hide.

The opposing lineup looks amazing based on name value but becomes less intimidating when looking at what versions of each player the opposition was forced to select due to the 90 FGA limit.

Player (Peak / Selected)
Allen (01 or 06 / 08)
Erving (76 / 83)
Marion (06 / 11)
Harden (17 / 12)
Ratliff (01 / 06)
Ostertag (99 / 05)

This is a big deal. Erving’s ’76 season is a top-15 peak of all time. By 1983 he was in clear decline. He had the worst postseason of his career to that point, in a long postseason run, and by far. He had a TS% of 49.6%, a PER of 16.0, etc. etc.

Marion was still The Matrix in 2006. He had been a nice shooter on the corner 3 and a monster defensively and in transition. By 2011, more than 90% of his shots came from inside of ten feet. He shot 15% from 3, his defensive rebounding rate was down to 19.2% (from 23.6%), his block percentage was down to 1.7% (from 2.9%), steal percentage down to 1.6% (from 2.5%), TS% down 4%. Massive difference.

Harden was a sixth man on OKC. He was a very good player. Just not close to MVP caliber.

Ratliff was a top-5 defensive player in 2001 and simply being a good defensive big in 2006.

Ostertag is unplayable here. He played less than 10 MPG in 2005 and retired after the following season. He is also the team’s third center and isn’t going to play with Hakeem getting 40 and Ratliff getting what is available behind Hakeem.

Thia is a 7-man roster (no Ostertag) with 5 players over age 30. 4 players 32 or older. Conversely, all of my selections were peak years, outside of Marques Johnson (he peaked two years prior, 1981 was his second-best season) or at least debatably their peak years.

Getting to the matchups… (age in parenthesis)

Penny Hardaway (24) vs. Gary Payton (27)
Ray Allen (32) vs. Sidney Moncrief (26)
Julius Erving (32) vs. Marques Johnson (24)
Shawn Marion (32) vs. Charles Barkley (26)
Hakeem Olajuwon (30) vs. Wilt Chamberlain (30)

Bench:
James Harden (22), Theo Ratliff (32), Greg Ostertag (31) vs.
Shane Battier (30), Nate McMillan (29), Bo Outlaw (28)

Individually:

Penny Hardaway (24) - All-NBA (1st team), 3rd in MVP voting, All-Star
Gary Payton (27) - Defensive Player of the Year, All-NBA (2nd team), 6th in MVP voting, All-Defensive (1st team), All-Star

Conveniently, this is ’96 Penny vs. ’96 Glove. Unfortunately, they only faced off twice during that season. For the sake of brevity, I will just post prime Penny (’95-’97) vs. Payton (6 games):

Penny: 15.6 PPG, 4.3 APG, 2.5 TOPG ; 30 / 77 (39%)
Glove: 23.8 PPG, 6.3 APG, 2.7 TOPG ; 56 / 104 (54%)

I am sure Nate McMillan was guarding Penny as well during these games.

It’s a small sample but it’s something. Penny’s shot attempts are a bit low because he only played 17 minutes in one of the games (shooting 1/4). Overall, it is a small sample but reflects positively upon Payton.

As far as the overall numbers go, Penny generally does better with regards to the box score. He is a better offensive anchor, that wasn’t Glove’s ideal role in 1996, and a more efficient scorer. Glove has a far better defensive reputation. Impact wise, they may be similar. 1997 NPI RAPM has them at #19 (Payton) and #21 (Penny) in the league. Regressed NPI RAPM has Penny at number 3 in the league in 1996 and Glove in the 20s. If we are to trust that data, it has Nate McMillan at #5 in the league for 1994.

This is a favorable matchup for Nowhere to Hide because Penny’s offense is absolutely essential to the other team’s offense as a whole. Disrupt Penny, disrupt the entire team's offense. On the other hand, Nowhere to Hide’s offense relies on team-wide playmaking. With this set of starters, there are five plus passers on the court. Early in the shot clock, it goes through Barkley and Chamberlain. 1996 Payton was more effective as a combo guard as opposed to a true point guard. He can give what is expected of him offensively while simultaneously limiting Penny and therefore the opposing offense as a whole. Payton is comfortable off-ball navigating screens and cutting to the basket, and he was a decent-to-good shooter from 3 in 1996. He was a 33% 3 point shooter during the regular season but a 41% shooter from 3 on high volume (almost 5 FGA/G) during his 21 game postseason.

Ray Allen (32) - All-Star
Sidney Moncrief (26) - Defensive Player of the Year, All-NBA (2nd team), eighth in MVP voting, All-Defensive (1st team), All-Star

Spoiler:

This is an even more beneficial matchup. Moncrief can limit Allen’s offense whereas the older Allen is going to have trouble providing opposition to Moncrief. Rightly known for his defense as the two-time Defensive Player of the Year, Moncrief in the early 1980s was consistently a 20 PPG / 60 TS% player who could do a variety of things offensively. He is younger, stronger, faster, and overall far more athletic than the 32 year old Allen. Moncrief is the better defender, rebounder, passer, and transition scorer. He is better nearly across the board. Moncrief will chase Allen around defensively and run off ball offensively. Late in the shot clock, a Moncrief vs. Allen matchup is an efficient look. I chose 1984 Moncrief over the 1983 version due to his superior postseason.

Julius Erving (32) - All-NBA (1st team), fifth In MVP voting, All-Star
Marques Johnson (24) - All-NBA (2nd team), sixth in MVP voting, All-Star

I won’t be as meticulous as I was with Payton / Hardaway, but these are two more players that actually faced off. They faced off more often than Payton / Hardaway, including in the postseasons of the seasons selected. During their careers, they played 28 regular season games against one another between 1977 and 1983. In those games, Erving averaged 22.6 PPG. Johnson averaged 21.2.

That bodes well for Nowhere to Hide. Erving’s primary (only?) advantage over Johnson was scoring. By the numbers, Johnson was the superior passer and rebounder, and he had a better reputation as a defender. If Erving isn’t scoring more than Johnson, Johnson likely had more impact. In 1980, there was a question as to which player was the best forward in the NBA.

Spoiler:

Fortunately, they have 1983 Erving and not 1976 or 1981 Erving. He had a wretchedly inefficient postseason (49 TS% overall, includes a series against the Bucks where he averaged 18 PPG). 1976 Erving would have been worth a high pick in the draft. Not 1983 Erving. On the other hand, Nowhere to Hide does have 1981 Johnson. Coincidentally, 1981 Johnson torched Dr. J and the 76ers in the playoffs despite having back issues during the series. Johnson had a PER of 27.7 in 7 games, averaging 25 / 9 / 5 (including 6 offensive rebounds per game!).

Shawn Marion (32) - no significant accolades
Charles Barkley (26) - Sporting News MVP, All-NBA (1st team), second in MVP voting, All-Star

I’ve liked all of Nowhere to Hide’s matchups to this point, but this one takes the cake as the most favorable. Shawn Marion was no longer The Matrix. By 2011, he had declined in all facets. I already went over this. His on-off was -9.6 after being positive the previous 7 years. NPI RAPM had him way down there at -2.42. Barkley was 26, in his physical prime, received the most first place votes for MVP, and was GOAT-level offensively and great on the glass. His defense was neutral, which is all we need from him. He has 40 pounds, more skills, and superior athleticism when compared with Marion. Hakeem is going to have to help Marion when Barkley gets positioning, and that is going to cause chaos with Wilt standing at the rim.

Barkley will obviously touch the ball on the wing, too, but Marion is definitely better suited to defending him there than he is in the post.

FWIW, Barkley is only a year younger than Hakeem and didn’t experience issues against him. Barkley averaged 22 / 12 / 5 / 1.5 SPG / 3.5 TO (14.8 FGA/G) in 28 career games versus Hakeem. Hakeem averaged 24 / 11 / 3 / 1.5 SPG / 3 BPG / 2.7 TOPG (18.9 FGA/G). Not a head to head matchup, but it adds some information.

Hakeem Olajuwon (30) - 1993 Defensive Player of the Year, All-NBA (1st team), 2nd in MVP voting, All-Defensive (1st team), All-Star
Wilt Chamberlain (30) - NBA MVP, Sporting News MVP, All-NBA (1st team), All-Star*
*All-Defensive teams weren’t created until 1969 and DPOY not until 1983

I will be brief again. Both players are stellar. Both will have impact. Both will “limit” the other. Wilt, according to the RealGM peaks project, had the 4th greatest peak of all time in 1967 (1964 also received votes). Hakeem had the 6th greatest peak in 1994 (1993 received votes, too). It’s splitting hairs. However, I still like the matchup. Like Glove v. Penny, Hakeem is essential to the opposing offense. They don’t have the tremendous spacing of the ‘90s Rockets, or at least not the same type of spacing. Erving and Marion are fine off-ball, but Hakeem excelled when he was surrounded with shooters. This team has decent shooting between Penny and Allen, but they are being covered by two DPOYs. Wilt is less essential to my offense. He is comfortable taking easy buckets, making crisp passes, playing stellar defense, and waiting on the pass when Hakeem goes to help. On the other side of things, they need Hakeem to score if they want to win. Even if Wilt limits him, Hakeem is going to score. But that won’t be enough to win without scoring assistance from the perimeter.

As far as the benches, Nowhere to Hide’s bench is clearly superior. Ostertag can’t be on the court. They have a 7-man roster. He was barely playing and on the verge of retirement. Ratliff was past his prime. Harden was very good.

McMillan was All-Defensive (2nd team), Battier was All-Defensive (2nd team), Outlaw was 8th in the league in NPI RAPM and led the league in DBPM. McMillan and Battier provide defense and McMillan was a good passer. His +/- numbers for 1994 are absurd and he set an NBA steal rate record (5.8 steals per 100 possessions). McMillan and Battier are good enough to start, and Outlaw is the quintessential energy player off of the bench. He could guard 3-5, protect the rim, blow up the pick and roll, was a plus passer, and was efficient when he did decide to shoot. Impact stats love all of these guys.

For instance:

Spoiler:

In summation, I think we have the better players and better matchups. Their offense needs Penny and Hakeem, and I have players who can limit them. On the other hand, Barkley can get buckets at will. Payton scored on Penny in real life, Moncrief is better than Allen, and Johnson scored on a younger and better Erving in real life. We have better rebounding at 4/5 positions (Penny > Glove), better playmaking at 4/5 positions (Penny > Glove), better defense at least 3/5 and maybe 5/5 positions, and more efficient, resilient offense. We are younger, more athletic and the bench is deeper. In other matchups, I will consider starting McMillan and / or Battier. They can pull away help defenders. McMillan may be a better defender than Payton and Battier is a better defender than Johnson. But these matchups are favorable for Payton and Johnson.

Offensively, off-ball movement and screen-setting is key. Spacing isn’t just from 3 point shooting (although, McMillan, Battier, and even Payton provide that, and Moncrief / Johnson were 'efficient' from the midrange). It can come from screening, the threat of offensive rebounding, and cutting. Barkley and Chamberlain will facilitate early in the shot clock. If the double doesn’t come, Barkley is going at Marion. He can do it by posting up and receiving the ball farther from the rim, facing up, or simply establishing position deep near the rim before receiving the entry pass. If Hakeem goes to send help, Barkley is a talented passer who will find Wilt or rely on him to get the uncontested offensive board. The key is that everybody can pass, and yet nobody is ball dominant. Attack towards the rim, make the defense react, and move the ball. Quotes on Moncrief and Johnson mention that they were good shooters, just not from 3. All of the starters are plus passers and all of them are good at moving off-ball. If help comes off or a switch happens to Johnson (3 ORB / G), Barkley (4.6), or Chamberlain (who knows how many), they are destroying the offensive glass more than they already do. Late in the shot clock, we can look for the mismatch. Moncrief v. Allen, Johnson v. Erving, and obviously Barkley v. Marion are all efficient looks. Payton v. Penny and Wilt v. Hakeem aren’t inefficient, either.

McMillan and Battier coming in provide a different type of spacing with 3 point shooting. They will both play 24+ MPG. I expect one of them to be in more often than not, they are just not nominal starters.

Defensively, we can do anything. We will probably stay with our assignments, but Payton, Moncrief, and Johnson can all switch onto opposing players. We won’t send much help at Hakeem, he is going to get his regardless, but we won’t avoid sending help entirely. Marion can’t punish us for sending help. We will stick to the perimeter players, which should be fine considering the matchups. Outlaw is a perfect foil to Barkley who can switch, blow up the pick and roll, block shots, steal the ball, and hustle all over if Barkley's defense becomes a huge issue. Which it shouldn't. He was good enough defensively in 1990 and is surrounded by stellar defenders.

As far as rebounding, we should own the glass. The opposition isn’t a strong rebounding team outside of Hakeem, and he was only decent on the offensive glass. When we are on offense, we will send back our DPOY guards whenever a shot goes up. Depending on the situation, Wilt, Charles, and Marques can attack the offensive glass.

Game flow: In the halfcourt, we are going to slow the pace and wait for somebody to come free. Their perimeter defenders are only decent, which in a league like this means that they are a weakness. We will be running off-ball and setting screens. Marion has to get help with Barkley. One way or another, we are getting a good shot. A body has to stay on our bigs or we are getting the board. We will run off of misses and off of steals (of which we should get plenty) and utilize our younger legs and better finishing ability. All of my guys can run in transition.

BasketballFan7 · Post #4 » by **BasketballFan7** » Mon Jun 5, 2017 3:10 am

Bump.

Statlanta · Post #5 » by **Statlanta** » Mon Jun 5, 2017 9:05 am

Soul in the Hole

95-96 Anfernee Hardaway
07-08 Ray Allen
82-83 Julius Erving
92-93 Hakeem Olajuwon
11-12 James Harden
10-11 Shawn Marion
05-06 Theo Ratliff
04-05 Greg Ostertag

Rotation
PG Hardaway(38)/Harden(10)
SG Allen(36)/Harden(12)
SF Erving(39)/Marion(9)
PF Marion(24)/Ratliff(24)
C Olajuwon(42)/Ostertag(6)

Alright time to do right by my opponent and the judges. I'm sorry for the delay as I will see to the write-up for my team.

General writeup
I really feel this team is a modern take of 83 Sixers. Here I have Dr. J, Julius Erving, in all is glory as the only remnant from the team but he will work well in his scoring role from such team. I have my all-time great C in Hakeem Olajuwon doing his own take on the Moses role with upgraded defensive consistency. I have Andrew Toney-like explosive scorers in Harden and Penny Hardaway who will rise to the occasion next to Doc in case he gets the tough assignments. I have glue guys like Marion and Ratliff who will do much of the defensive dirty work much like Cheeks and Jones. And to fulfill the modernization of such a lineup I have one of the greatest modern shooters in Ray Allen and a rim protector in Greg Ostertag.

Matchup specific
The Center matchup
Both C's in this matchup all all-time great and it is extremely likely that neither will stop the other. That said if there is any C in NBA history that could matchup with this version of Wilt I would believe it is Hakeem. Wilt in his chosen season is the consummate post hub where he routinely found teammates for an effective offense and strayed away from his older role of volume scoring. However against the greatest on-ball C thief in recorded NBA history this strategy might not be ideal. Statistician Dean Oliver on pg 287 in his book Basketball on Paper: Rules and Tools for Performance Analysis predicted based on multiple stats that Wilt could be estimated to have had about 5.5 turnovers in his selected season to achieve the offensive rating he did.

https://books.google.com/books?id=hDUK-rAVwbQC&lpg=PA287&ots=UxgKz49ayT&dq=WILT%20TURNOVERS%201967&pg=PA261#v=onepage&q=WILT%20TURNOVERS%201967&f=false

Against Hakeem who is top 10 career-wise in steals out of all NBA players I think it is something we can exploit. While it is not unusual for a individual to get such high volume turnovers numbers with a high playmaking load(see 2017 Harden/Westbrook) I believe for this specific matchup it may offer us some supplement possessions against a staunch defense.

Defense
We are facing perhaps the greatest defense in the entire tournament. However, there are things my team can exploit on the defensive end as well. We have exceptional length at every position. What we don't have in multiple stoppers we make up in length with Ray Allen being perhaps the shortest guy in the lineups and even he likely has a height advantage against his matchup. Considering our opponent has similar if not worse spacing compared to our lineup I believe we can contest their shots even with unfavorable matchups.

By drafting Barkley and rolling with Battier and Johnson as our opponents' frontcourt our starters can switch anything 1-4 with his lineups and only give the weight advantage to Barkley in which he would be posting up in a Wilt/Hakeem paint. A frontcourt of Marion, Dr. J and Hakeem will prove to be a wiry situation for my opponent to deal with at their respective positions.

BasketballFan7 · Post #6 » by **BasketballFan7** » Mon Jun 5, 2017 10:23 am

Quick rebuttal:

Really neat stuff about Wilt from Dean Oliver. That's really cool, even if it isn't the precise number. Two points:
- That number was referring to Warriors wilt ('62 version), and not '67 76ers Wilt. '62 Wilt had otherworldly usage and was a lesser player than the '67 version.
- 5.5 turnovers per 48.5 minutes (because that is what he was playing in '62) comes out to 4.1 turnovers per 36 minutes. That's not nearly as egregious.
- Miller gave raw per minute averages. As we know, the teams then played at a faster pace. The number is therefore going to be exaggerated.
- Hakeem was a master thief. That said, so was Bill Russell.
- I like other matchups more than I like Wilt vs. Hakeem. Wilt will get his touches and will score, but I will lean more on him in pretty much any other matchup.

Best of luck

I love your players, particularly the starters, the fit is awesome. Penny / Allen / Dr. J / Marion / Hakeem is drool-worthy. IMO 2006 Marion / 1976 Dr. J would have made huge differences, but obviously that's a lot of FGA.

Post #7 » by **penbeast0** » Mon Jun 5, 2017 3:15 pm

BasketballFan7's writeup is a killer. The point about peak seasons is the key to me; peak seasons, I would lean to OrlandoTill's Soul in the Hole squad but too often, these ain't them. Unless I get a reason to change my mind,

VOTE BasketballFan7

ElGee · Post #8 » by **ElGee** » Mon Jun 5, 2017 4:10 pm

This is one where I have a hard time buying what the coaches are selling. Does that mean the teams still wouldn't play with the organic chemistry that I perceive them to have? Hard to say.

For BF7, I see Barkley as being a guy that a lot funnels through offensively (see MVP season in PHO, Dream Team) while still being a great passer/offensive anchor. But 67 Wilt is also a hub player -- usually in the mid-post actually. Even Marques is a guy who did damage as more of a "point forward" role. And then there's Gary Payton, who loves to pound the ball. When he says there'll be screens and slow developments, I imagine Payton dribbling for a while. They all feel like they can kind of add Global Value with each other, but it's hard to see the pieces meshing right now. My assumption is the spacers could help this situation a lot.

With Till, I loved him drafting Penny, one of the all-time offensive peaks who always goes under the radar. Penny was a basketball savant. Throw him out there and great things are happening, so I assume that would kick in here. But then he likens the team to the 83 Sixers, which I don't see at all. I see a devastating combo of Harden (even in 2012, who showed all the signs of being an offensive juggernaut) and Penny with a relentless combo attack. Penny off the ball is an excellent shooter, cutter and passer.

Finally, I find the argument about peak seasons to be a bit overstated. 12 Harden was a monster. Is 17 Harden noticeably improved? Absolutely. But 12 and 13 Harden are nearly identical. (i.e. this is an all-nba level player.) Next is Allen, who for all intents and purposes was prime Ray Allen, barely removed from peak form. Hakeem and Penny are peak seasons. Erving is clearly a later version, but how many superstars does Till need? I do agree that his bench is quite weak given the age of the players -- perhaps 11 Marion is solid defensively, but not nabbing an earlier version of Ratliff hurts.

BasketballFan7 · Post #9 » by **BasketballFan7** » Mon Jun 5, 2017 4:48 pm

ElGee wrote:This is one where I have a hard time buying what the coaches are selling. Does that mean the teams still wouldn't play with the organic chemistry that I perceive them to have? Hard to say.

For BF7, I see Barkley as being a guy that a lot funnels through offensively (see MVP season in PHO, Dream Team) while still being a great passer/offensive anchor. But 67 Wilt is also a hub player -- usually in the mid-post actually. Even Marques is a guy who did damage as more of a "point forward" role. And then there's Gary Payton, who loves to pound the ball. When he says there'll be screens and slow developments, I imagine Payton dribbling for a while. They all feel like they can kind of add Global Value with each other, but it's hard to see the pieces meshing right now. My assumption is the spacers could help this situation a lot.

With Till, I loved him drafting Penny, one of the all-time offensive peaks who always goes under the radar. Penny was a basketball savant. Throw him out there and great things are happening, so I assume that would kick in here. But then he likens the team to the 83 Sixers, which I don't see at all. I see a devastating combo of Harden (even in 2012, who showed all the signs of being an offensive juggernaut) and Penny with a relentless combo attack. Penny off the ball is an excellent shooter, cutter and passer.

Finally, I find the argument about peak seasons to be a bit overstated. 12 Harden was a monster. Is 17 Harden noticeably improved? Absolutely. But 12 and 13 Harden are nearly identical. (i.e. this is an all-nba level player.) Next is Allen, who for all intents and purposes was prime Ray Allen, barely removed from peak form. Hakeem and Penny are peak seasons. Erving is clearly a later version, but how many superstars does Till need? I do agree that his bench is quite weak given the age of the players -- perhaps 11 Marion is solid defensively, but not nabbing an earlier version of Ratliff hurts.

I know my starting lineup isn't quite up your alley. I understand the concerns about redundancy, but there were sacrifices to be made to accomplish what I was aiming for. Ie universal defense, playmaking, rebounding, general versatility, and overall talent. We wanted wrongly undervalued players.

In other matchups, Glove / Johnson may not start. I assume that you would like this lineup a lot more:

McMillan
Moncrief
Battier
Barkley
Wilt

Actually, I think even just subbing Johnson with Battier probably makes you feel better. Johnson has the makings of a stellar sixth man, and Battier is a wonderful glue guy.

But the above lineup allows Payton to pick on bench guards and Johnson to take a bit of Barkley's playmaking role when he is sitting. I wouldn't classify Johnson as a point forward as much as I would a talented passer at the foreword position. He doesn't have to have the ball, and he wasn't comfortable truly orchestrating an offense.

That said, they start here because they played their counterparts in real life and did well in the process. They're still just nominal starters - McMillan and Battier are going to play big minutes, though not always together.

I don't envision Barkley and Wilt having fit problems. They don't act as hubs simultaneously. '67 Wilt was clearly willing to do what was required to win. He can move lower in the post when Barkley is the hub, and that's when he isn't screening (Bill Russell praised his screening). And it isn't as if he isn't touching the ball, so he isn't going to become disengaged.I don't think it's controversial to have him doing things a bit differently than he was. That was his mentality in 1967, and he became an even lower usage superstar with the Lakers. Wilt was also enamored with efficiency, so I can see him buying into, when not acting as the hub or setting screens, becoming a lob target and put back machine when Hakeem moves to assist elsewhere.

Also, even if you don't buy into the ball movement that I suggest I will have with 5 plus passers sharing the court, it's not really necessary. When those five share the court, they can find a mismatch. All five can attack, and even without the constant off ball action it's quite obvious all of these guys are adept at making the pass when help comes off. Rinse and repeat until there is a shot.

Which I know you probably don't like :lol:

it's seemingly not your style of basketball. However, it's intentional. Defenses are too stingy in a league like this. There isn't always going to be a great shot available. Every team here is like the Warriors on offense but their opponents aren't the Cavaliers defensively. We put together a host of great passers because ball movement is essential. We have players who have to be doubled, so there will be that ball movement. But we can also find the weakest defender and iso him if there is nothing going.

I don't think I overstated the effect the years selected would have. Erving, Marion, Ratliff, and Ostertag are all far worse than their name values suggest. Allen and Harden are both fine, but all I said was that they weren't their peak selves.

At the very least, that starting five isn't going to be sharing the court together a ton. And I expect that alleviates your concerns. Battier and McMillan are superior defenders and floor spacers, and Outlaw was a big impact guy. None of them need to take shots to add impact.

Also, even with offensive halfcourt redundancy still a point of contention, we are nevertheless still deeper, more athletic, younger and better in transition, on the glass, and defensively.

ElGee · Post #10 » by **ElGee** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 12:10 am

BasketballFan7 wrote:
ElGee wrote:This is one where I have a hard time buying what the coaches are selling. Does that mean the teams still wouldn't play with the organic chemistry that I perceive them to have? Hard to say.

For BF7, I see Barkley as being a guy that a lot funnels through offensively (see MVP season in PHO, Dream Team) while still being a great passer/offensive anchor. But 67 Wilt is also a hub player -- usually in the mid-post actually. Even Marques is a guy who did damage as more of a "point forward" role. And then there's Gary Payton, who loves to pound the ball. When he says there'll be screens and slow developments, I imagine Payton dribbling for a while. They all feel like they can kind of add Global Value with each other, but it's hard to see the pieces meshing right now. My assumption is the spacers could help this situation a lot.

With Till, I loved him drafting Penny, one of the all-time offensive peaks who always goes under the radar. Penny was a basketball savant. Throw him out there and great things are happening, so I assume that would kick in here. But then he likens the team to the 83 Sixers, which I don't see at all. I see a devastating combo of Harden (even in 2012, who showed all the signs of being an offensive juggernaut) and Penny with a relentless combo attack. Penny off the ball is an excellent shooter, cutter and passer.

Finally, I find the argument about peak seasons to be a bit overstated. 12 Harden was a monster. Is 17 Harden noticeably improved? Absolutely. But 12 and 13 Harden are nearly identical. (i.e. this is an all-nba level player.) Next is Allen, who for all intents and purposes was prime Ray Allen, barely removed from peak form. Hakeem and Penny are peak seasons. Erving is clearly a later version, but how many superstars does Till need? I do agree that his bench is quite weak given the age of the players -- perhaps 11 Marion is solid defensively, but not nabbing an earlier version of Ratliff hurts.

I know my starting lineup isn't quite up your alley. I understand the concerns about redundancy, but there were sacrifices to be made to accomplish what I was aiming for. Ie universal defense, playmaking, rebounding, general versatility, and overall talent. We wanted wrongly undervalued players.

In other matchups, Glove / Johnson may not start. I assume that you would like this lineup a lot more:

McMillan
Moncrief
Battier
Barkley
Wilt

Actually, I think even just subbing Johnson with Battier probably makes you feel better. Johnson has the makings of a stellar sixth man, and Battier is a wonderful glue guy.

But the above lineup allows Payton to pick on bench guards and Johnson to take a bit of Barkley's playmaking role when he is sitting. I wouldn't classify Johnson as a point forward as much as I would a talented passer at the foreword position. He doesn't have to have the ball, and he wasn't comfortable truly orchestrating an offense.

That said, they start here because they played their counterparts in real life and did well in the process. They're still just nominal starters - McMillan and Battier are going to play big minutes, though not always together.

I don't envision Barkley and Wilt having fit problems. They don't act as hubs simultaneously. '67 Wilt was clearly willing to do what was required to win. He can move lower in the post when Barkley is the hub, and that's when he isn't screening (Bill Russell praised his screening). And it isn't as if he isn't touching the ball, so he isn't going to become disengaged.I don't think it's controversial to have him doing things a bit differently than he was. That was his mentality in 1967, and he became an even lower usage superstar with the Lakers. Wilt was also enamored with efficiency, so I can see him buying into, when not acting as the hub or setting screens, becoming a lob target and put back machine when Hakeem moves to assist elsewhere.

Also, even if you don't buy into the ball movement that I suggest I will have with 5 plus passers sharing the court, it's not really necessary. When those five share the court, they can find a mismatch. All five can attack, and even without the constant off ball action it's quite obvious all of these guys are adept at making the pass when help comes off. Rinse and repeat until there is a shot.

Which I know you probably don't like it's seemingly not your style of basketball. However, it's intentional. Defenses are too stingy in a league like this. There isn't always going to be a great shot available. Every team here is like the Warriors on offense but their opponents aren't the Cavaliers defensively. We put together a host of great passers because ball movement is essential. We have players who have to be doubled, so there will be that ball movement. But we can also find the weakest defender and iso him if there is nothing going.

I don't think I overstated the effect the years selected would have. Erving, Marion, Ratliff, and Ostertag are all far worse than their name values suggest. Allen and Harden are both fine, but all I said was that they weren't their peak selves.

At the very least, that starting five isn't going to be sharing the court together a ton. And I expect that alleviates your concerns. Battier and McMillan are superior defenders and floor spacers, and Outlaw was a big impact guy. None of them need to take shots to add impact.

Also, even with offensive halfcourt redundancy still a point of contention, we are nevertheless still deeper, more athletic, younger and better in transition, on the glass, and defensively.

All very good points. I do like that lineup better in a vacuum.

Please understand, it's not an aesthetic thing, it's what yields the highest ceiling. I disagree about stingy defense -- if you're playing a juggernaut offense -- a Warriors Level Offense -- even elite defenses aren't going to bring that down to earth; there's a resiliency to the style we've seen time and time again. Now, if you're playing a team that CAN be marginalized with good defense, then you can get away with the more resilient, but lower-ceiling game of isolation (that's where iso has good value). Obviously you don't have to do this all the time, but passing and shooting (and especially 3-point shooting) are going to take offenses to new heights (a la Nash's Suns, Warriors) and if you lack this there's only so much we can expect. That's the rub. Of course, not saying you built an iso-ridden team, just clarifying this point.

I think the next issue is ego and this concept of coach ability. Wilt is so strange, even in 67, that I have a hard time just accepting that because he's picked in an ATL from this year that he's going to display optimal decision-making. I don't knock that as much as much as someone like Doc MJ might, but I don't think it's a given he just has some perfect fit with these guys, especially if he's not the center of attention. Similarly, I think it's hard to expect 96 Payton to come off the bench and think things will be hunky-dory. (Is he coming off the bench for Nate? :lol:

)

So you say to Wilt, play your "Russell role," but then what does that do to Barkley's value given how he likes to play? I think you've constructed an excellent defense around Barkley, but I'm not sold on how these two guys fit together. And before you say "well that doesn't mean my offense will struggle" -- especially if you float that lineup that I like more -- it's more of a question of how good the offense can be and how redundancies can muck stuff up. This is where the uncertainty of Wilt comes into play to me. Is he a super-upgraded 2016 Andrew Bogut, killing it on D (I can buy that) with good passing on offense, better O-rebounding, better finishing and better on the occasional iso post possession? Or do you tell him to play in mid-post and have these guys that weren't really "cutters" go cutting and screening everywhere like the 67 Sixers? It's not obvious to me.

Enjoyed your last response so will consider how you answers these before voting.

BasketballFan7 · Post #11 » by **BasketballFan7** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 1:31 am

ElGee wrote:
BasketballFan7 wrote:
ElGee wrote:This is one where I have a hard time buying what the coaches are selling. Does that mean the teams still wouldn't play with the organic chemistry that I perceive them to have? Hard to say.

For BF7, I see Barkley as being a guy that a lot funnels through offensively (see MVP season in PHO, Dream Team) while still being a great passer/offensive anchor. But 67 Wilt is also a hub player -- usually in the mid-post actually. Even Marques is a guy who did damage as more of a "point forward" role. And then there's Gary Payton, who loves to pound the ball. When he says there'll be screens and slow developments, I imagine Payton dribbling for a while. They all feel like they can kind of add Global Value with each other, but it's hard to see the pieces meshing right now. My assumption is the spacers could help this situation a lot.

With Till, I loved him drafting Penny, one of the all-time offensive peaks who always goes under the radar. Penny was a basketball savant. Throw him out there and great things are happening, so I assume that would kick in here. But then he likens the team to the 83 Sixers, which I don't see at all. I see a devastating combo of Harden (even in 2012, who showed all the signs of being an offensive juggernaut) and Penny with a relentless combo attack. Penny off the ball is an excellent shooter, cutter and passer.

Finally, I find the argument about peak seasons to be a bit overstated. 12 Harden was a monster. Is 17 Harden noticeably improved? Absolutely. But 12 and 13 Harden are nearly identical. (i.e. this is an all-nba level player.) Next is Allen, who for all intents and purposes was prime Ray Allen, barely removed from peak form. Hakeem and Penny are peak seasons. Erving is clearly a later version, but how many superstars does Till need? I do agree that his bench is quite weak given the age of the players -- perhaps 11 Marion is solid defensively, but not nabbing an earlier version of Ratliff hurts.

I know my starting lineup isn't quite up your alley. I understand the concerns about redundancy, but there were sacrifices to be made to accomplish what I was aiming for. Ie universal defense, playmaking, rebounding, general versatility, and overall talent. We wanted wrongly undervalued players.

In other matchups, Glove / Johnson may not start. I assume that you would like this lineup a lot more:

McMillan
Moncrief
Battier
Barkley
Wilt

Actually, I think even just subbing Johnson with Battier probably makes you feel better. Johnson has the makings of a stellar sixth man, and Battier is a wonderful glue guy.

But the above lineup allows Payton to pick on bench guards and Johnson to take a bit of Barkley's playmaking role when he is sitting. I wouldn't classify Johnson as a point forward as much as I would a talented passer at the foreword position. He doesn't have to have the ball, and he wasn't comfortable truly orchestrating an offense.

That said, they start here because they played their counterparts in real life and did well in the process. They're still just nominal starters - McMillan and Battier are going to play big minutes, though not always together.

I don't envision Barkley and Wilt having fit problems. They don't act as hubs simultaneously. '67 Wilt was clearly willing to do what was required to win. He can move lower in the post when Barkley is the hub, and that's when he isn't screening (Bill Russell praised his screening). And it isn't as if he isn't touching the ball, so he isn't going to become disengaged.I don't think it's controversial to have him doing things a bit differently than he was. That was his mentality in 1967, and he became an even lower usage superstar with the Lakers. Wilt was also enamored with efficiency, so I can see him buying into, when not acting as the hub or setting screens, becoming a lob target and put back machine when Hakeem moves to assist elsewhere.

Also, even if you don't buy into the ball movement that I suggest I will have with 5 plus passers sharing the court, it's not really necessary. When those five share the court, they can find a mismatch. All five can attack, and even without the constant off ball action it's quite obvious all of these guys are adept at making the pass when help comes off. Rinse and repeat until there is a shot.

Which I know you probably don't like it's seemingly not your style of basketball. However, it's intentional. Defenses are too stingy in a league like this. There isn't always going to be a great shot available. Every team here is like the Warriors on offense but their opponents aren't the Cavaliers defensively. We put together a host of great passers because ball movement is essential. We have players who have to be doubled, so there will be that ball movement. But we can also find the weakest defender and iso him if there is nothing going.

I don't think I overstated the effect the years selected would have. Erving, Marion, Ratliff, and Ostertag are all far worse than their name values suggest. Allen and Harden are both fine, but all I said was that they weren't their peak selves.

At the very least, that starting five isn't going to be sharing the court together a ton. And I expect that alleviates your concerns. Battier and McMillan are superior defenders and floor spacers, and Outlaw was a big impact guy. None of them need to take shots to add impact.

Also, even with offensive halfcourt redundancy still a point of contention, we are nevertheless still deeper, more athletic, younger and better in transition, on the glass, and defensively.[/spoiler]

All very good points. I do like that lineup better in a vacuum.

Please understand, it's not an aesthetic thing, it's what yields the highest ceiling. I disagree about stingy defense -- if you're playing a juggernaut offense -- a Warriors Level Offense -- even elite defenses aren't going to bring that down to earth; there's a resiliency to the style we've seen time and time again.

Have those offenses encountered a similar level of defensive talent? Genuine question.
Those offenses are perfect storms. It's tough to imagine upgrading the Warriors much at all. Has that happened on the defensive side of the ball? 2008 Boston, for example, was obviously stellar. But it's not tough to imagine how they could have been an even better defense.

Now, if you're playing a team that CAN be marginalized with good defense, then you can get away with the more resilient, but lower-ceiling game of isolation (that's where iso has good value). Obviously you don't have to do this all the time, but passing and shooting (and especially 3-point shooting) are going to take offenses to new heights (a la Nash's Suns, Warriors) and if you lack this there's only so much we can expect. That's the rub. Of course, not saying you built an iso-ridden team, just clarifying this point.

Right, iso isn't the plan, although we do want that threat. Attacking is the plan. But in this league a team is seldom going to have more than one weak defender on the court at a time. In order to get the defense scrambling, I need to make them send help. I need to compromise their defense. Hitting the weak link is the easiest way to make them send help, and when GP / Moncrief / Johnson / Charles / Wilt are on the court, we can make that happen. Subbing Battier in for Johnson helps in some very obvious ways, and at the same time it allows Kyle Korver (for instance) to get away with standing in the corner and out of the action defensively. If a team has an outstanding help defender at the 3, Battier can come in and drag him back away from the action.

I think the next issue is ego and this concept of coach ability. Wilt is so strange, even in 67, that I have a hard time just accepting that because he's picked in an ATL from this year that he's going to display optimal decision-making. I don't knock that as much as much as someone like Doc MJ might, but I don't think it's a given he just has some perfect fit with these guys, especially if he's not the center of attention. Similarly, I think it's hard to expect 96 Payton to come off the bench and think things will be hunky-dory. (Is he coming off the bench for Nate? )No arguments here. It's difficult for me as well. I responded in one matchup about the same topic. Is Alonzo Mourning really going to shift into DeAndre Jordan for the sake of the team? Is it really that simple? But Wilt is still the best player on the team. He wasn't shooting a ton in '67. 11 attempts per 36 minutes, and when adjusted for pace that number has to be roughly 9 attempts per 36 minutes in today's game (quick estimate). That's Marcin Gortat territory.

GP is the nominal starter. I don't truly know how to answer the ego question. The boundaries of this alternate universe weren't really laid out too precisely :lol

So you say to Wilt, play your "Russell role," but then what does that do to Barkley's value given how he likes to play? I think you've constructed an excellent defense around Barkley, but I'm not sold on how these two guys fit together. And before you say "well that doesn't mean my offense will struggle" -- especially if you float that lineup that I like more -- it's more of a question of how good the offense can be and how redundancies can muck stuff up. This is where the uncertainty of Wilt comes into play to me. Is he a super-upgraded 2016 Andrew Bogut, killing it on D (I can buy that) with good passing on offense, better O-rebounding, better finishing and better on the occasional iso post possession? Or do you tell him to play in mid-post and have these guys that weren't really "cutters" go cutting and screening everywhere like the 67 Sixers? It's not obvious to me.

Barkley is definitely the anchor offensively. He is one of the greatest offensive anchors there have ever been, and with the selection of Barkley I knew I almost instantaneously had a quality offensive ceiling and needed to place defenders and two way players around him. In other matchups, Wilt may equal Barkley in primacy, but I think I made it clear in my opening argument that I'm excited about the prospect of Barkley being defended by the 32 year old Marion. Do I expect Wilt to have time as the offensive hub and use his threat of scoring (was still the third leading scorer in the NBA despite low FGA, and had higher volume in '66) to hit his teammates? Clearly, because this isn't a video game and Barkley can only command the offense so much of the time. But it's definitely Barkley's offense to run first and foremost if that question has to be answered. But, again, universal playmaking is key here because I don't have great spacing in the traditional sense in that original starting lineup. If you can't shoot 3s, you better be able to make plays passing.

So, yes, Wilt could be called a super-upgraded Andrew Bogut here. Not as low volume as Bogut was, obviously. Still, like I said, his FGA/possession in '67 was low. He doesn't need to fill it up. But there is obviously room for a role for him that has him making decisions in the offense. When not doing that, we need the insane defense, screen-setting, opportunistic passing, rebounding, and a threat on the alley-oop. He isn't going to be hanging out in the mid-post with the ball as much as he is going to be doing these other things, as Barkley will more often occupy that spot on the floor.

"Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play."

-- Bill Russell, Great Moments in Pro Basketball, (by Sam Goldaper) p.24

Enjoyed your last response so will consider how you answers these before voting.

ElGee · Post #12 » by **ElGee** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 1:45 am

What's going on with the formatting? Am I the only having this issue?

BasketballFan7 · Post #13 » by **BasketballFan7** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 1:49 am

No, I am as well. I believe only in this thread.

BasketballFan7 · Post #14 » by **BasketballFan7** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 1:55 pm

Bump for formatting assistance.

drza · Post #15 » by **drza** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 2:21 pm

I'm pretty sure the formatting issue is from ElGee's post #10, and I think it has to do with misplaced spoiler tags. It's something that either he, or maybe a mod, would have to fix.

drza · Post #16 » by **drza** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 3:16 pm

As to the match-up, it's really interesting. BasketballFan7 did a great 1-on-1 breakdown that, as Penbeast said, was killer. But, I tend to look at things more as units, their identities and how they would function. And I'm not sure I agree with the 1-on-1s...maybe I will. Let's explore.

Basketballfan's squad, to me, has a lot of individual talent but I'm not sure how well they synergize on offense. ElGee talked about redundancy, and I see that,b and spacing is also an issue. As is the style of creation. All star teams, of which this league is full, often rely heavily on having a point guard that is adept at running a quick-decision offense where the correct piece gets the ball at the right location, and/or is a shooter that can play off the ball so that talented playmakers at other positions can run the show. I don't see that here. Payton was more of a ball-pounder that created his own shot in the midrange or post, kind of the opposite of that fit. Seems like this team needs a Mark Price type, more than Payton. In fact, none of Moncrief, Battier, McMillan or Johnson have the kind of perimeter skills that seem like they would play best off an offense run through Barkley and/or Wilt. On the other side of the ball, though, Wilt gives a strong defensive anchor with a slew of excellent defensive wings and perimeter players, so they should be killer on that side of the ball.

OrlandoTill's team, to me, seems to have a very clear offensive identity. Like ElGee, I'm one that loves Harden on this squad and thinks he, in his Ginobili phase, gives them a dynamic playmaker and shooter that rounds out their stellar perimeter scorers. Dr. J was my favorite player in childhood, but I'm not sure that I don't play a lot of Penny/Harden/Ray line-ups as that gives you dynamism, mismatches and killer shooting around Hakeem. Throw in Marion as a 3&D D PF, a bit like mid-90s Horry (though of course shorter), and this does to me feel like a super upgraded version of the 94 Rockets shooters-around-Hakeem offense. Dr. J is still the starter, of course, and at that point in his career he had some similarities with '95 Drexler, that also worked fine next to Hakeem. On defense, OrlandoTill's squad is extremely reliant on Olajuwon. Marion is undersized at PF and had trouble with long guys like Odom...I'm not as clear on how he did versus wider guys like Barkley would be. They do have some length and athleticism on the perimeter, and considering Basketballfan's lack of volume perimeter shooters/spacing, it could be argued that Hakeem could be disruptive to a lot of what they want to do. But there isn't a lot of help for him, with a small-ball power forward starter and aged bigs on the bench.

Ultimately, I feel like BasketballFan's squad may have better 1-on-1 match-ups, but that OrlandoTill's team units may be better and able to win with overall units. OrlandoTill's squad has weaknesses, for sure, but I'm not sure BasketballFan's team is set to exploit them. At the moment, leaning OrlandoTill

ElGee · Post #17 » by **ElGee** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 3:42 pm

I removed the spoiler tags from post #10 -- it did fix that post -- but the problems seems to be bumped downstream.

BasketballFan, try removing the spoiler tags from the subsequent post you quoted me in.

BasketballFan7 · Post #18 » by **BasketballFan7** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 4:26 pm

drza wrote:As to the match-up, it's really interesting. BasketballFan7 did a great 1-on-1 breakdown that, as Penbeast said, was killer. But, I tend to look at things more as units, their identities and how they would function. And I'm not sure I agree with the 1-on-1s...maybe I will. Let's explore.

Basketballfan's squad, to me, has a lot of individual talent but I'm not sure how well they synergize on offense. ElGee talked about redundancy, and I see that,b and spacing is also an issue. As is the style of creation. All star teams, of which this league is full, often rely heavily on having a point guard that is adept at running a quick-decision offense where the correct piece gets the ball at the right location, and/or is a shooter that can play off the ball so that talented playmakers at other positions can run the show. I don't see that here. Payton was more of a ball-pounder that created his own shot in the midrange or post, kind of the opposite of that fit. Seems like this team needs a Mark Price type, more than Payton. In fact, none of Moncrief, Battier, McMillan or Johnson have the kind of perimeter skills that seem like they would play best off an offense run through Barkley and/or Wilt. On the other side of the ball, though, Wilt gives a strong defensive anchor with a slew of excellent defensive wings and perimeter players, so they should be killer on that side of the ball.
Spoiler:
I didn't see the need for a quick decision guard to lead the offense. The initiation of the offense is going through Barkley and Wilt. I definitely disagree about a Mark Price type being superior to Payton here. Defensive liabilities in this league are going to be targeted, and that i would be begging my opponents to spam 1-4 pick and roll to target Price and Barkley. Much more important was a player to disrupt opposing offenses because so many teams in this league rely on the type of point guard you mentioned, and preferably one who could switch onto wings. To me, allowing a pace and space based offense little defensive opposition at the initiating position of point guard... sounds like a disaster in this league. Also, with the current league trends - forcing the switch by using a pick and roll piring that makes that the default best option (often a wing / PG pick and roll)- means a guy like Payton becomes even more valuable.

He also isn't a bad shooter. Or he wasn't in 1996. Better than 35% cumulative from 3 on the year means he at the least can't be given open looks. You mentioned in another matchup how McGrady should get and shoot set jumpers in this league than he did in 2003, so his percentages should hypothetically go up. I don't see how that wouldn't apply here with Payton being the defenses last concern. He was an ill fitted first option in 1996. The context of his efficieny is important.

Past that, McMillan is a 3&D point with insane impact who should gel most of your fit concerns with Payton. As I mentioned in the write up, I drafted him early intentionally and he is going to be in for half of the game.

OrlandoTill's team, to me, seems to have a very clear offensive identity. Like ElGee, I'm one that loves Harden on this squad and thinks he, in his Ginobili phase, gives them a dynamic playmaker and shooter that rounds out their stellar perimeter scorers. Dr. J was my favorite player in childhood, but I'm not sure that I don't play a lot of Penny/Harden/Ray line-ups as that gives you dynamism, mismatches and killer shooting around Hakeem. Throw in Marion as a 3&D D PF, a bit like mid-90s Horry (though of course shorter), and this does to me feel like a super upgraded version of the 94 Rockets shooters-around-Hakeem offense. Dr. J is still the starter, of course, and at that point in his career he had some similarities with '95 Drexler, that also worked fine next to Hakeem. On defense, OrlandoTill's squad is extremely reliant on Olajuwon. Marion is undersized at PF and had trouble with long guys like Odom...I'm not as clear on how he did versus wider guys like Barkley would be. They do have some length and athleticism on the perimeter, and considering Basketballfan's lack of volume perimeter shooters/spacing, it could be argued that Hakeem could be disruptive to a lot of what they want to do. But there isn't a lot of help for him, with a small-ball power forward starter and aged bigs on the bench.
Spoiler:
How is Marion in any way a 3&D power forward? He shot 15% from 3 on .4 attempts per game. 4% of his attempts came from 3. 5% of his attempts came from 16 feet to the 3 point line, shooting 38.6% there. 12% of his shots came from 10-16 feet and he shot 32% from there. But my guys can't space the floor? There are quotes on Moncrief and Johnson being good shooters from the midrange, and shot tracking data has pretty much the rest of my whole roster as superior to Marion in that facet *shrug* I'm not really sure what to say

Ultimately, I feel like BasketballFan's squad may have better 1-on-1 match-ups, but that OrlandoTill's team units may be better and able to win with overall units. OrlandoTill's squad has weaknesses, for sure, but I'm not sure BasketballFan's team is set to exploit them. At the moment, leaning OrlandoTill

Spoiler:
I still don't see how any of transition offense, rebounding, transition defense, halfcourt defense, foul drawing, depth and athleticism can be argued as anything other than advantages -most of which by large margins- for my team. I showed that his players struggled in individual matchups. Etc etc. If concerns about redundancy in the half court from the nominal starting lineup override all of those advantages for you, I still respect your opinion.

Responses in spoilers

drza · Post #19 » by **drza** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 6:03 pm

BasketballFan7 wrote:
drza wrote:As to the match-up, it's really interesting. BasketballFan7 did a great 1-on-1 breakdown that, as Penbeast said, was killer. But, I tend to look at things more as units, their identities and how they would function. And I'm not sure I agree with the 1-on-1s...maybe I will. Let's explore.

Basketballfan's squad, to me, has a lot of individual talent but I'm not sure how well they synergize on offense. ElGee talked about redundancy, and I see that,b and spacing is also an issue. As is the style of creation. All star teams, of which this league is full, often rely heavily on having a point guard that is adept at running a quick-decision offense where the correct piece gets the ball at the right location, and/or is a shooter that can play off the ball so that talented playmakers at other positions can run the show. I don't see that here. Payton was more of a ball-pounder that created his own shot in the midrange or post, kind of the opposite of that fit. Seems like this team needs a Mark Price type, more than Payton. In fact, none of Moncrief, Battier, McMillan or Johnson have the kind of perimeter skills that seem like they would play best off an offense run through Barkley and/or Wilt. On the other side of the ball, though, Wilt gives a strong defensive anchor with a slew of excellent defensive wings and perimeter players, so they should be killer on that side of the ball.
Spoiler:
I didn't see the need for a quick decision guard to lead the offense. The initiation of the offense is going through Barkley and Wilt. I definitely disagree about a Mark Price type being superior to Payton here. Defensive liabilities in this league are going to be targeted, and that i would be begging my opponents to spam 1-4 pick and roll to target Price and Barkley. Much more important was a player to disrupt opposing offenses because so many teams in this league rely on the type of point guard you mentioned, and preferably one who could switch onto wings. To me, allowing a pace and space based offense little defensive opposition at the initiating position of point guard... sounds like a disaster in this league. Also, with the current league trends - forcing the switch by using a pick and roll piring that makes that the default best option (often a wing / PG pick and roll)- means a guy like Payton becomes even more valuable.

He also isn't a bad shooter. Or he wasn't in 1996. Better than 35% cumulative from 3 on the year means he at the least can't be given open looks. You mentioned in another matchup how McGrady should get and shoot set jumpers in this league than he did in 2003, so his percentages should hypothetically go up. I don't see how that wouldn't apply here with Payton being the defenses last concern. He was an ill fitted first option in 1996. The context of his efficieny is important.

Past that, McMillan is a 3&D point with insane impact who should gel most of your fit concerns with Payton. As I mentioned in the write up, I drafted him early intentionally and he is going to be in for half of the game.

OrlandoTill's team, to me, seems to have a very clear offensive identity. Like ElGee, I'm one that loves Harden on this squad and thinks he, in his Ginobili phase, gives them a dynamic playmaker and shooter that rounds out their stellar perimeter scorers. Dr. J was my favorite player in childhood, but I'm not sure that I don't play a lot of Penny/Harden/Ray line-ups as that gives you dynamism, mismatches and killer shooting around Hakeem. Throw in Marion as a 3&D D PF, a bit like mid-90s Horry (though of course shorter), and this does to me feel like a super upgraded version of the 94 Rockets shooters-around-Hakeem offense. Dr. J is still the starter, of course, and at that point in his career he had some similarities with '95 Drexler, that also worked fine next to Hakeem. On defense, OrlandoTill's squad is extremely reliant on Olajuwon. Marion is undersized at PF and had trouble with long guys like Odom...I'm not as clear on how he did versus wider guys like Barkley would be. They do have some length and athleticism on the perimeter, and considering Basketballfan's lack of volume perimeter shooters/spacing, it could be argued that Hakeem could be disruptive to a lot of what they want to do. But there isn't a lot of help for him, with a small-ball power forward starter and aged bigs on the bench.
Spoiler:
How is Marion in any way a 3&D power forward? He shot 15% from 3 on .4 attempts per game. 4% of his attempts came from 3. 5% of his attempts came from 16 feet to the 3 point line, shooting 38.6% there. 12% of his shots came from 10-16 feet and he shot 32% from there. But my guys can't space the floor? There are quotes on Moncrief and Johnson being good shooters from the midrange, and shot tracking data has pretty much the rest of my whole roster as superior to Marion in that facet *shrug* I'm not really sure what to say

Ultimately, I feel like BasketballFan's squad may have better 1-on-1 match-ups, but that OrlandoTill's team units may be better and able to win with overall units. OrlandoTill's squad has weaknesses, for sure, but I'm not sure BasketballFan's team is set to exploit them. At the moment, leaning OrlandoTill

Spoiler:
I still don't see how any of transition offense, rebounding, transition defense, halfcourt defense, foul drawing, depth and athleticism can be argued as anything other than advantages -most of which by large margins- for my team. I showed that his players struggled in individual matchups. Etc etc. If concerns about redundancy in the half court from the nominal starting lineup override all of those advantages for you, I still respect your opinion.

Responses in spoilers

Nice rebuttals. Especially the one about Marion's 3-point shooting. It raises a question I've asked in other threads...how married is this project to the actual production of a player in a given year vs his capabilities, if he were in a different role? Because Marion showed, in Phoenix, that he could shoot the 3 at decent volume and decent efficiency. His role in Miami and Dallas, though, didn't call for him to be a stretch 4...in Dallas, especially, he was playing more 3 and not really shooting from outside hardly at all. But, it's not like he forgot how to shoot, and on this team he'd be playing that role, so...not sure how to handle that.

You also make a good point as far as Payton's defense vs Price's. When I mentioned price, I meant specifically on offense. But when you describe your 1-on-1 defenders, and they are strong, I default to a mindset similar to what I believe it was ElGee was pointing out before...that when you've got really good offensive players, in a smart scheme, it's hard for me to picture a lot of 1-on-1 defenders taking that away. Because the offense wouldn't have to play 1-on-1 ball. Penny wouldn't have to come down and take Payton off the dribble every possession...if they're playing that mid-90s Hakeem+shooters offense, everything is going to be playing off Hakeem. In that time window, we saw Hakeem destroy some of the great defensive big men of all-time, including David Robinson and Patrick Ewing, when they tried to cover him 1-on-1. Wilt's a monster, but do I really see him having all that much more success than Robinson, Ewing and Shaq on an island against Dream? I don't see it. Which means that your defensive scheme is going to have to help off their guys onto Hakeem. And your PF, Barkley, isn't able to pick up the help D slack, which means that your perimeter guys are going to have to be doing a lot of helping down. Only, the guys they're helping off of aren't Kenny Smith, Sam Cassell and Mario Elie...instead its Ray Allen, Penny Hardaway, Dr. J and/or James Harden. Yes, you've got outstanding defensive perimeter defenders, but if they're in any way off-balanced by the offensive scheme (which I think they would be), he has enough shooting and dynamic scorers to make your D pay. In my opinion.

And then, when you're on offense...what's it look like? Say that Barkley is the main offensive hub. My memories of him in that role in Phoenix were of him splitting his time between facing up on the perimeter and attacking the defense off the dribble, and setting up in the post. OK...but what is the team doing at that time? If Barkley's on the face-up on the perimeter, that is where Marion would be able to have the most success as he's comfortable there. Wilt is down low with Hakeem on him, there aren't any major perimeter shooters on your team to create big space. Payton and Johnson can't really post up unless Wilt comes out, and even if they do, there's not a lot of upside in that offense. It just seems like you have a team full of guys that all create with the ball, all operate in that similar mid-post area, none are particularly proven as volume off-ball threats or shooters. Battier and McMillan are 3-and-D guys, when they're on the court, but I wouldn't exactly call either of them floor spacers. And again, as I mentioned in a different thread, these criticisms are all with the knowledge that these are all-star teams playing...the problems wouldn't be nearly as exploitable against a real-life team.

And again, this is just how I'm seeing it now. I'm still reading any rebuttals and/or other opinions from other analysts

BasketballFan7 · Post #20 » by **BasketballFan7** » Tue Jun 6, 2017 7:16 pm

drza wrote:
BasketballFan7 wrote:
drza wrote:As to the match-up, it's really interesting. BasketballFan7 did a great 1-on-1 breakdown that, as Penbeast said, was killer. But, I tend to look at things more as units, their identities and how they would function. And I'm not sure I agree with the 1-on-1s...maybe I will. Let's explore.

Basketballfan's squad, to me, has a lot of individual talent but I'm not sure how well they synergize on offense. ElGee talked about redundancy, and I see that,b and spacing is also an issue. As is the style of creation. All star teams, of which this league is full, often rely heavily on having a point guard that is adept at running a quick-decision offense where the correct piece gets the ball at the right location, and/or is a shooter that can play off the ball so that talented playmakers at other positions can run the show. I don't see that here. Payton was more of a ball-pounder that created his own shot in the midrange or post, kind of the opposite of that fit. Seems like this team needs a Mark Price type, more than Payton. In fact, none of Moncrief, Battier, McMillan or Johnson have the kind of perimeter skills that seem like they would play best off an offense run through Barkley and/or Wilt. On the other side of the ball, though, Wilt gives a strong defensive anchor with a slew of excellent defensive wings and perimeter players, so they should be killer on that side of the ball.
Spoiler:
I didn't see the need for a quick decision guard to lead the offense. The initiation of the offense is going through Barkley and Wilt. I definitely disagree about a Mark Price type being superior to Payton here. Defensive liabilities in this league are going to be targeted, and that i would be begging my opponents to spam 1-4 pick and roll to target Price and Barkley. Much more important was a player to disrupt opposing offenses because so many teams in this league rely on the type of point guard you mentioned, and preferably one who could switch onto wings. To me, allowing a pace and space based offense little defensive opposition at the initiating position of point guard... sounds like a disaster in this league. Also, with the current league trends - forcing the switch by using a pick and roll piring that makes that the default best option (often a wing / PG pick and roll)- means a guy like Payton becomes even more valuable.

He also isn't a bad shooter. Or he wasn't in 1996. Better than 35% cumulative from 3 on the year means he at the least can't be given open looks. You mentioned in another matchup how McGrady should get and shoot set jumpers in this league than he did in 2003, so his percentages should hypothetically go up. I don't see how that wouldn't apply here with Payton being the defenses last concern. He was an ill fitted first option in 1996. The context of his efficieny is important.

Past that, McMillan is a 3&D point with insane impact who should gel most of your fit concerns with Payton. As I mentioned in the write up, I drafted him early intentionally and he is going to be in for half of the game.

OrlandoTill's team, to me, seems to have a very clear offensive identity. Like ElGee, I'm one that loves Harden on this squad and thinks he, in his Ginobili phase, gives them a dynamic playmaker and shooter that rounds out their stellar perimeter scorers. Dr. J was my favorite player in childhood, but I'm not sure that I don't play a lot of Penny/Harden/Ray line-ups as that gives you dynamism, mismatches and killer shooting around Hakeem. Throw in Marion as a 3&D D PF, a bit like mid-90s Horry (though of course shorter), and this does to me feel like a super upgraded version of the 94 Rockets shooters-around-Hakeem offense. Dr. J is still the starter, of course, and at that point in his career he had some similarities with '95 Drexler, that also worked fine next to Hakeem. On defense, OrlandoTill's squad is extremely reliant on Olajuwon. Marion is undersized at PF and had trouble with long guys like Odom...I'm not as clear on how he did versus wider guys like Barkley would be. They do have some length and athleticism on the perimeter, and considering Basketballfan's lack of volume perimeter shooters/spacing, it could be argued that Hakeem could be disruptive to a lot of what they want to do. But there isn't a lot of help for him, with a small-ball power forward starter and aged bigs on the bench.
Spoiler:
How is Marion in any way a 3&D power forward? He shot 15% from 3 on .4 attempts per game. 4% of his attempts came from 3. 5% of his attempts came from 16 feet to the 3 point line, shooting 38.6% there. 12% of his shots came from 10-16 feet and he shot 32% from there. But my guys can't space the floor? There are quotes on Moncrief and Johnson being good shooters from the midrange, and shot tracking data has pretty much the rest of my whole roster as superior to Marion in that facet *shrug* I'm not really sure what to say

Ultimately, I feel like BasketballFan's squad may have better 1-on-1 match-ups, but that OrlandoTill's team units may be better and able to win with overall units. OrlandoTill's squad has weaknesses, for sure, but I'm not sure BasketballFan's team is set to exploit them. At the moment, leaning OrlandoTill

Spoiler:
I still don't see how any of transition offense, rebounding, transition defense, halfcourt defense, foul drawing, depth and athleticism can be argued as anything other than advantages -most of which by large margins- for my team. I showed that his players struggled in individual matchups. Etc etc. If concerns about redundancy in the half court from the nominal starting lineup override all of those advantages for you, I still respect your opinion.

Responses in spoilers

Nice rebuttals. Especially the one about Marion's 3-point shooting. It raises a question I've asked in other threads...how married is this project to the actual production of a player in a given year vs his capabilities, if he were in a different role? Because Marion showed, in Phoenix, that he could shoot the 3 at decent volume and decent efficiency. His role in Miami and Dallas, though, didn't call for him to be a stretch 4...in Dallas, especially, he was playing more 3 and not really shooting from outside hardly at all. But, it's not like he forgot how to shoot, and on this team he'd be playing that role, so...not sure how to handle that.

Spoiler:
Playing with Nash and getting great looks, Marion never cracked 34% from 3. Post 08, he was at 30% on north of 600 attempts. I think it is safe to say, a Marion 3 isn't a problematic shot to give up defensively. He is a non-factor offensively who was an on-court negative by NPI RAPM (south of -2) and raw +\- (-9). His name value and reputation is warping your opinion of his actual ability to contribute.

You also make a good point as far as Payton's defense vs Price's. When I mentioned price, I meant specifically on offense. But when you describe your 1-on-1 defenders, and they are strong, I default to a mindset similar to what I believe it was ElGee was pointing out before...that when you've got really good offensive players, in a smart scheme, it's hard for me to picture a lot of 1-on-1 defenders taking that away. Because the offense wouldn't have to play 1-on-1 ball. Penny wouldn't have to come down and take Payton off the dribble every possession...if they're playing that mid-90s Hakeem+shooters offense, everything is going to be playing off Hakeem.
Spoiler:
Of course not. What it does is make initiating the offense more problematic. It makes the ball handler use more time on the shot clock getting up the floor and setting the table finding the entry pass. That gives less time to find the look desired, perhaps leading to one less possible resetting of a pick or one less repost by Hakeem. It makes the team send less help. And, if you want to get into intangibles, it changes the flow and attitude of the game as a whole. That's all in addition to straight up man defense. Individual defense and team defense aren't separated by some invisible boundary, there is no white and black.

In that time window, we saw Hakeem destroy some of the great defensive big men of all-time, including David Robinson and Patrick Ewing, when they tried to cover him 1-on-1. Wilt's a monster, but do I really see him having all that much more success than Robinson, Ewing and Shaq on an island against Dream? I don't see it.

Spoiler:
Who is getting worked harder here, Wilt by Hakeem or Marion by Barkley? I'm not seeing motivation to send overwhelming help when I can instead make Hakeem play 1v1 ball with two DPOY guards on their premier spacers. I don't even want Battier and Johnson letting off of Erving too much. Barkley can help opportunistically. He had quick enough hands and Marion is a non-threat. I'll cut off the help and realize that I have advantages pretty much everywhere else. Yes, Wilt is going to get worked at times. I don't see that number Hakeem puts up being nearly enough. And, again, halfcourt offense is really all that has been discussed. We get more steals, more rebounds on both ends, more putbacks, more transition opportunities,and have the better defense.

Also, reputation is getting in the way again I think, Barkley was a neutral defender by +/- in 1990. Shawn Marion had a .1 NPI DRAPM in 2011 (along with a massively negative -2.5 NPI ORAPM). Marion's not so spectacular defense is even less effective when he has to he reluctant to leave Barkley. Barkley is an average defender who doesn't have that worry. I would expect a positively efficient Wilt when he goes at Hakeem, the size discrepancy is real. That said, Wilt isn't going to force the issue and should be able to conserve his energy for defense. I've already stated that Wilt was a low FGA player and we aren't going to have him pound it repeatedly. If Hakeem is going to go off on a rested, committed Wilt to the extent that it supercedes all of the other advantages we have working in our direction? Not possible in my mind, but I respect your opinion.

Which means that your defensive scheme is going to have to help off their guys onto Hakeem. And your PF, Barkley, isn't able to pick up the help D slack, which means that your perimeter guys are going to have to be doing a lot of helping down. Only, the guys they're helping off of aren't Kenny Smith, Sam Cassell and Mario Elie...instead its Ray Allen, Penny Hardaway, Dr. J and/or James Harden. Yes, you've got outstanding defensive perimeter defenders, but if they're in any way off-balanced by the offensive scheme (which I think they would be), he has enough shooting and dynamic scorers to make your D pay. In my opinion.

And then, when you're on offense...what's it look like? Say that Barkley is the main offensive hub. My memories of him in that role in Phoenix were of him splitting his time between facing up on the perimeter and attacking the defense off the dribble, and setting up in the post. OK...but what is the team doing at that time? If Barkley's on the face-up on the perimeter, that is where Marion would be able to have the most success as he's comfortable there. Wilt is down low with Hakeem on him, there aren't any major perimeter shooters on your team to create big space. Payton and Johnson can't really post up unless Wilt comes out, and even if they do, there's not a lot of upside in that offense. It just seems like you have a team full of guys that all create with the ball, all operate in that similar mid-post area, none are particularly proven as volume off-ball threats or shooters.

Spoiler:
I don't have to imagine where they will be. Moncrief and Johnson played together. Moncrief played later with another point forward, Pressey, and they shared the court with a post up big in Terry Cummings. Payton and McMillan shared court time with Shawn Kemp and Ervin Johnson. Payton was at his best offensively in 1996 without the ball navigating screens while McMillan dictated. Johnson and Moncrief were part time ball handlers, not ball dominant. They shared the court with other players who also had to touch the ball. Neither the early 80s Bucks or the 90s Sonics had nominal starters at PF or C that would today he considered floor spacers. These were good but not dominant offenses that relied more on the other side of the court. Now they get Charles Barkley - who, as you noted, can set up from outside or in the mid post - and Wilt Chamberlain - who will set up low generally and mid when distributing. Big time offensive anchors. Barkley would have catapulted these teams offensively. Wilt gives a huge two way boost.

None of these perimeter players played with the ball constantly in real life, so I don't see the issue. They retained value offensively by being quality passers who could attack on the drive, by cutting when their man goes to help, hitting open jumpers, and doing work in transition. In Johnson's case, he added further value on the offensive glass. For Payton, he was just good enough from outside to not be left alone around the 3 point line. Better than Erving or Marion from 3, surely. Moncrief had a silky jumper from his comfort range and was always active when in the game. He didn't camp out in the corner waiting on a shot he wasn't proficient at. That said, players like Bosh (pre-3) and David West weren't lane cloggers. They had the 18 footer. Like I went over earlier, Payton was good enough out at 3. If they need to take a set jumper, Johnson and Moncrief were good at that David West distance. Barkley couldn't be left alone for other reasons. And if any of these guys gets the ball and a free head of steam, that's another problem for the defense because they can all pass.

Note: I'm not saying those Bucks and Sonics didn't have floor spacers. Dunleavy, Hodges, and Bob Lanier could shoot. Hawkins, Perkins, Detlef for the Sonics. But these guys weren't constantly on the court, or even starters. Just like Battier and McMillan are going to provide that here. And they weren't the overall offensive players that a Payton, Moncrief, Marques Johnson, Charles Barkley, or Wilt is, though that should go without saying.

As far as the defense not being able to really impact such a quality offense? Not seeing it. The 80s Bucks and 90s Sonics relied on tough perimeter defenders and they hovered around the top of the league defensively. Now some of the best elements of that combine with the addition of a premier defensive center. Different league environment now? Sure. But there has always been a recipe for success, and today's league is about pace, ball movement and mismatches. If you string together a bunch of quality defenders those mismatches aren't there to attack. If you disrupt timing offensively, the pace is weakened. If you steal the ball or deflect passes, ball movement is stifled. If you do all of these things, momentum and flow join the equation.

Battier and McMillan are 3-and-D guys, when they're on the court, but I wouldn't exactly call either of them floor spacers.
Spoiler:
I've reiterated that they aren't nominal starters but that they will have big roles. If you can hit 40+% from the corner, that's clearly spacing the floor. Al of my scorers are more efficient on average than an above the break 3 is. Not that they won't ever be above the real, Nate probably being better at that shot than Battier, but an above the break 3 isn't ideal when you are good at creating rim opportunities and possible fouls.

And again, as I mentioned in a different thread, these criticisms are all with the knowledge that these are all-star teams playing...the problems wouldn't be nearly as exploitable against a real-life team.

And again, this is just how I'm seeing it now. I'm still reading any rebuttals and/or other opinions from other analysts

Responses in spoilers. I respect your opinions, just responding with my thoughts.