RealGM

The list
------------------
9.71 - Anthony Davis
7.90 - Carmelo Anthony
7.89 - Jabari Parker
6.96 - Klay Thompson
6.52 - Deandre Jordan
6.37 - Demar Derozan
6.31 - Michael Carter-Williams
6.00 - Kemba Walker
5.68 - Gordon Hayward
5.62 - Rajon Rondo
5.37 - Danilo Gallinari
4.51 - Greg Monroe
4.36 - Dwayne Wade
4.00 - J.J. Redick
3.54 - Josh Smith
2.43 - Deron Williams

I'd give Ariza, but not Redick. So somewhere in there.

Testing out J.J. Redick instead of David Lee. if it causes you problems let me know.

Yeah, I'd value Redick over Ariza and Matthews TBH.

bondom34 wrote:Yeah, I'd value Redick over Ariza and Matthews TBH.

over Ariza I can see--why over Wes?

Better now?

I've really enjoyed this series of topics getting a value score for players. I think it's fun and interesting, but I think more work needs to be done on the 10 options. I feel like you need guys whom you'd have a really good consensus from most posters about where they'd end up so people don't get confused. I don't think guys like JJ, Ariza and Wes would have consistent enough value in general to the point where they'd be solid options for this type of pole.

I thought David Lee was a better barometer than JJ, but I'm guessing that especially in the middle portion of this people are going to disagree. Might be worth the time to try to get a consensus 10 slots and then from there do it to get better results.

cl2117 wrote:I've really enjoyed this series of topics getting a value score for players. I think it's fun and interesting, but I think more work needs to be done on the 10 options. I feel like you need guys whom you'd have a really good consensus from most posters about where they'd end up so people don't get confused. I don't think guys like JJ, Ariza and Wes would have consistent enough value in general to the point where they'd be solid options for this type of pole.

I thought David Lee was a better barometer than JJ, but I'm guessing that especially in the middle portion of this people are going to disagree. Might be worth the time to try to get a consensus 10 slots and then from there do it to get better results.

Well, I've been trying to get a better ten guys since I first started.

I ruled out Lee because his value is largely about his contract, that means his value is going to swing wildly from one person to another depending on how much they worry about contracts. If I instead get guys who's contract is in line with their production it should be more consistant.

It's not easy to find just the right mix of guys. I do feel like it's been improving as we've been going along. Feel free, no feel encouraged, to make suggestions to make it better.

jazzfan1971 wrote:

cl2117 wrote:I've really enjoyed this series of topics getting a value score for players. I think it's fun and interesting, but I think more work needs to be done on the 10 options. I feel like you need guys whom you'd have a really good consensus from most posters about where they'd end up so people don't get confused. I don't think guys like JJ, Ariza and Wes would have consistent enough value in general to the point where they'd be solid options for this type of pole.

I thought David Lee was a better barometer than JJ, but I'm guessing that especially in the middle portion of this people are going to disagree. Might be worth the time to try to get a consensus 10 slots and then from there do it to get better results.

Well, I've been trying to get a better ten guys since I first started.

I ruled out Lee because his value is largely about his contract, that means his value is going to swing wildly from one person to another depending on how much they worry about contracts. If I instead get guys who's contract is in line with their production it should be more consistant.

It's not easy to find just the right mix of guys. I do feel like it's been improving as we've been going along. Feel free, no feel encouraged, to make suggestions to make it better.

No I totally see how it's hard to get the right mix of guys, especially in that middle portion of the pole where things get muddy, and I think you've done a tremendous job so far. I think it's a really interesting idea and I'm really curious to see what you end up with at the end.

I was actually racking my brain trying to thing of guys who would fit better, but it's really hard (as I'm sure you are well aware of). That's why I think it might be a good idea to try and get a consensus 10 guys based off of the general opinion of the board and then using that as the barometer for all subsequent polls. The reason being that if you keep changing the points of measurement on your ruler it's much harder to compare the values of the different players.

I think the series of topics have improved as you've gone on, it's just that when you change the poll options it makes it harder to compare the end value scores from one topic to the other because they're being measured with different benchmarks. And I think the ability to compare player's "value scores' is where the real benefit is in this exercise.

Regardless though, it's a lot of fun to be able to look at guys on a scale like this, so keep up the good work!

Someone voted Aldridge?
Can you like ban people from participating in polls?
That guy deserves that.

I went with Foye.
Martin is a better scorer but his salary and lack of defense means that I personally take Foye over him.
However the next option was Mayo and no one likes Orange Juice Mayonnaise so.... yeah... Foye it is.

I'd like to reassert my point that these things are majorly flawed though.

Rondo is ranked below Hayward, Walker and Michael Carter Williams? REALLY?
MCW is more valuable than Rondo? What kind of joke is that.

I_Socrates wrote:Someone voted Aldridge?
Can you like ban people from participating in polls?
That guy deserves that.

I went with Foye.
Martin is a better scorer but his salary and lack of defense means that I personally take Foye over him.
However the next option was Mayo and no one likes Orange Juice Mayonnaise so.... yeah... Foye it is.

I'd like to reassert my point that these things are majorly flawed though.

Rondo is ranked below Hayward, Walker and Michael Carter Williams? REALLY?
MCW is more valuable than Rondo? What kind of joke is that.

Its not just how good the player is, but also contract, injury history, and attitude. Rondo has 1 year left on his deal and wont sign with just any team, he is coming off a big injury, has yet to show he is the elite player he once was, and he isnt known to be the best teammate. And honestly, it can be hard to build around a guard that cant shoot. At least with MCW, he could still learn to shoot.

Dunham32 wrote:
Its not just how good the player is, but also contract, injury history, and attitude. Rondo has 1 year left on his deal and wont sign with just any team, he is coming off a big injury, has yet to show he is the elite player he once was, and he isnt known to be the best teammate. And honestly, it can be hard to build around a guard that cant shoot. At least with MCW, he could still learn to shoot.

With a player as good as Rondo, all that other stuff matters less.
Rondo doesn't have a terrible injury history, he's had one bad injury.
His attitude issues are overblown and yes he won't just play for any team but I thought we were disregarding fit at this time?

He is a clear cut member of the top 5-10 PG's in this league.
MCW and Walker are nice, but they're not close. MCW put up numbers on a terrible team and is on a rookie contract, is that supposed to make you valuable? Remember when Tyreke Evans was putting up 20-5-5 on a terrible Kings team on his rookie contract?

Again, PG is over saturated and that hurts the value of the mediocre/average point guards, but when you're a qualified floor general that can run offenses as well as Rondo can, you are a sought after commodity. If CHA didn't have Stephenson and instead got a shooter at the 2, they would trade Walker for Rondo in a heartbeat.

Hayward is already overpaid and a worse player, what's the story there?

Basically these votes are very subjective. Objectively, Rondo is worth a lot more than MCW, Walker and Hayward in the real world.

I_Socrates wrote:Objectively, Rondo is worth a lot more than MCW, Walker and Hayward in the real world.

This word, Objectively, I don't think it means what you think it does.

jazzfan1971 wrote:

I_Socrates wrote:Objectively, Rondo is worth a lot more than MCW, Walker and Hayward in the real world.

This word, Objectively, I don't think it means what you think it does.

I am not a C's fan, nor a Rondo fan. Judging solely based on what I've seen from watching these players and accounting for the contract situation, Rondo is still the single best asset out of any of those guys.

Feel free to disagree, but at least provide some reasoning.

I_Socrates wrote:

jazzfan1971 wrote:

I_Socrates wrote:Objectively, Rondo is worth a lot more than MCW, Walker and Hayward in the real world.

This word, Objectively, I don't think it means what you think it does.

I am not a C's fan, nor a Rondo fan. Judging solely based on what I've seen from watching these players and accounting for the contract situation, Rondo is still the single best asset out of any of those guys.

Feel free to disagree, but at least provide some reasoning.

You realize that people gave you reasoning and then you proceeded to dump all over it.

I like Rondo a ton too as a player, but being in a contract year hurts his value. As it would for any good player.

Chuck Texas wrote:

bondom34 wrote:Yeah, I'd value Redick over Ariza and Matthews TBH.

over Ariza I can see--why over Wes?

Better now to me, but its part of the thing that creates a problem w/ the polls. Different people will value the poll differently based on team need too. As an OKC fan, I'd rather Redick on OKC than Matthews.

I just can't traded Foye @ $3M per year (2 yr)for Martin @ $7M per year (3 yr)

Chuck Texas wrote:

I_Socrates wrote:

jazzfan1971 wrote:
This word, Objectively, I don't think it means what you think it does.

I am not a C's fan, nor a Rondo fan. Judging solely based on what I've seen from watching these players and accounting for the contract situation, Rondo is still the single best asset out of any of those guys.

Feel free to disagree, but at least provide some reasoning.

You realize that people gave you reasoning and then you proceeded to dump all over it.

I like Rondo a ton too as a player, but being in a contract year hurts his value. As it would for any good player.

Woah now, in fairness the poster he was responding to had given no reasoning as to his disagreement. One other poster had given reasons as to why Rondo should be ranked where he was. And is it still "dumping" on someone's reasoning if you just disagree? Especially if you do so in a non-douchey way? I feel like that's debating.

On top of that he was right about all the things he said with regards to Rondo, just as you are with regards to him being in a contract year hurting his value. Rondo had a partial ACL tear in January of 2013, well over a year and half ago and has 100% healed from that and shown he can play at an elite level again. His attitude issues are ridiculously overhyped. And while the "hard to build around" argument holds some weight, if you ignore fit (which I think we are supposed to for the purposes of this conversation), it shouldn't matter.

The fact that he is in a contract year and most likely only resigns with a select number of teams if traded there is the huge detractor for his value. The fact that the PG position is saturated right now in the NBA and therefore the market isn't as active for Rondo as one might expect is a big factor in his value not being there. Those two factors (plus team fit, if you take that into consideration) are what's holding Rondo back. The rest of that stuff about injury/attitude is just noise.

How are these values considered?

Do we consider our own teams as the basis or a roster that is basically empty?

Who in the world voted for Curry??? I wouldn't even take Kevin Martin over Stephen Curry in a league where only guys named Kevin Martin were allowed to play. And I'm not a Kevin Martin hater or anything. That is just crazy. Are you filtering out some of the obvious crazy votes?