Build a Franchise Season 4 Offseason- Commish Update pg. 93

[mpharris36]

Some of y’all wanna play Dewayne Dedmon at pg, and DNP Kawhi Leonard in favor of Lance Thomas half way through the season when you still have a chance to get a 6th seed. It’s crazy how the tank has become the trophy.

I agree New....I think if you built your roster to play the long game that is fine... but the purposily taking advantage of the SIM...like sitting your best players and playing guys purposely out of position to lose (which has happened). Is simply not good for the game.

Its not eliminating someone inventiveness, as you just have to show why you are doing it...if the reason you are doing it is to lose then it wont be approved

[Context]

the Ben Simmons Birthday rule

This guy Hoffa has no chill

if we're honest- its part of baf culture
hoff is just on that old school baf ****

[3toheadmelo]

[HEZI]

What do you mean I can't roll out a lineup of

Drummond
Porzingis
Wood
Reid

?

you would. Wood is listed as a PF so he could play SG...and Drummond Porzingis and Reid can all play interchangably as the 5-4-3 under the rule change.

What it won't allow you to do is play Andre Drummond at PG. That is the only thing it won't allow you to do.

[bringbackhoffa]

Some of y’all wanna play Dewayne Dedmon at pg, and DNP Kawhi Leonard in favor of Lance Thomas half way through the season when you still have a chance to get a 6th seed. It’s crazy how the tank has become the trophy.

I agree New....I think if you built your roster to play the long game that is fine... but the purposily taking advantage of the SIM...like sitting your best players and playing guys purposely out of position to lose (which has happened). Is simply not good for the game.

Its not eliminating someone inventiveness, as you just have to show why you are doing it...if the reason you are doing it is to lose then it wont be approved

Like this..

[NewEra]

[Deeeez Knicks]

Lot of people taking advantage of Air Bud logic

If there's no explicit rule against it, it's legal

Feel like I can't really say much against it cause I'm in direct competition for the teams messing with their lineups to tank, I just find it kinda annoying when people pretend that's not what they're doing when it very blatantly is

It's also a simulation, not real life, so I get why some things shouldn't have to be bound to what is in reality, like how you can play guys wherever you want in 2k. I think the split is between people who want it to be super realistic (as much as it can be given the nature of the game) vs people who want it to be unrealistic and just f*ck around

It sounds like teams can still tank and put in bad lineups though, right?

In the end, it all worked out for you anyway with the #1 pick.

Guess just dont see what the rule really accomplishes on its own though

yea it still doesnt allow for Ben Simmons to make an 18 footer.. okay New Era i got my 3 in for his birthday

Just 3? Not sure how old New Era is, but that was more like candles and one for every year

[mpharris36]

I am undecided...Some of the lineups can get ridiculous, but on the other hand I do like letting everyone do what they want.

Lot of people taking advantage of Air Bud logic

If there's no explicit rule against it, it's legal

Feel like I can't really say much against it cause I'm in direct competition for the teams messing with their lineups to tank, I just find it kinda annoying when people pretend that's not what they're doing when it very blatantly is

It's also a simulation, not real life, so I get why some things shouldn't have to be bound to what is in reality, like how you can play guys wherever you want in 2k. I think the split is between people who want it to be super realistic (as much as it can be given the nature of the game) vs people who want it to be unrealistic and just f*ck around

It sounds like teams can still tank and put in bad lineups though, right?

In the end, it all worked out for you anyway with the #1 pick.

Guess just dont see what the rule really accomplishes on its own though

Yeah it wont completely curtail tanking as its too much of a slippery slope to tell players to play a veteran expiring contract if there team is built for the future and they want to see how young guys play. I would hope people try there best to be accurate with who should play and who shouldn't for the good of the game but the role is as bish pointed out to try to void the exploitation of the SIM putting players into specific rules that they have no choice to succeed in and doing it to purposely throw games.

It won't fully change much other than if my team is bad...and my PG rotation last year was Frank/Lonnie Walker for most of the season. It would at least stop me from putting Frank at Center and Mo Bamba at PG. While that doesn't seem like a huge difference. At least they are in respectable positions and im not trying to have Mo Bamab turn the ball over 20 times....which also circumvents and effects stats like steals and turnovers and other things because no one would be allowed to turn the ball over 18 times in one game...that is just not accurate. And the point of the game is to try to replicate (as close as possible) real life in our SIM world

[mpharris36]

What do you mean I can't roll out a lineup of

Drummond
Porzingis
Wood
Reid

?

you would. Wood is listed as a PF so he could play SG...and Drummond Porzingis and Reid can all play interchangably as the 5-4-3 under the rule change.

What it won't allow you to do is play Andre Drummond at PG. That is the only thing it won't allow you to do.

[mpharris36]

Some of y’all wanna play Dewayne Dedmon at pg, and DNP Kawhi Leonard in favor of Lance Thomas half way through the season when you still have a chance to get a 6th seed. It’s crazy how the tank has become the trophy.

I agree New....I think if you built your roster to play the long game that is fine... but the purposily taking advantage of the SIM...like sitting your best players and playing guys purposely out of position to lose (which has happened). Is simply not good for the game.

Its not eliminating someone inventiveness, as you just have to show why you are doing it...if the reason you are doing it is to lose then it wont be approved

Like this..

Yeah I mean I think that is dirty but there is no rule that says at what point is the rating gap that far that you have to play certain guys.

Bish has the 3 year summation of the FA rating which at least penalizing tanking teams from making an impact in FA for a few years after the fact.

But yes the above still can happen an we will just have to public shame them every time they get

[Smash3]

New GM's get an amnesty... I can get behind that.

[mpharris36]

New GM's get an amnesty... I can get behind that.

I hope that wouldn't lead to more quitting by new GM's...like hey at least the new GM can get the f*ck out of my contract...

Have we ever been in a situation where a person wanted to come into our league and said no thanks that team is just too **** up?

I would almost consider it a challenge.

[Smash3]

If teams want to cheat they'll find a way, I don't see the new rule stopping that

[bringbackhoffa]

New GM's get an amnesty... I can get behind that.

I hope that wouldn't lead to more quitting by new GM's...like hey at least the new GM can get the f*ck out of my contract...

Have we ever been in a situation where a person wanted to come into our league and said no thanks that team is just too **** up?

I would almost consider it a challenge.

well i think GMs have proven that it is possible to get off almost any contract except that player that makes 40% of cap with no shot.. okay im done..

[Deeeez Knicks]

Lot of people taking advantage of Air Bud logic

If there's no explicit rule against it, it's legal

Feel like I can't really say much against it cause I'm in direct competition for the teams messing with their lineups to tank, I just find it kinda annoying when people pretend that's not what they're doing when it very blatantly is

It's also a simulation, not real life, so I get why some things shouldn't have to be bound to what is in reality, like how you can play guys wherever you want in 2k. I think the split is between people who want it to be super realistic (as much as it can be given the nature of the game) vs people who want it to be unrealistic and just f*ck around

It sounds like teams can still tank and put in bad lineups though, right?

In the end, it all worked out for you anyway with the #1 pick.

Guess just dont see what the rule really accomplishes on its own though

Yeah it wont completely curtail tanking as its too much of a slippery slope to tell players to play a veteran expiring contract if there team is built for the future and they want to see how young guys play. I would hope people try there best to be accurate with who should play and who shouldn't for the good of the game but the role is as bish pointed out to try to void the exploitation of the SIM putting players into specific rules that they have no choice to succeed in and doing it to purposely throw games.

It won't fully change much other than if my team is bad...and my PG rotation last year was Frank/Lonnie Walker for most of the season. It would at least stop me from putting Frank at Center and Mo Bamba at PG. While that doesn't seem like a huge difference. At least they are in respectable positions and im not trying to have Mo Bamab turn the ball over 20 times....which also circumvents and effects stats like steals and turnovers and other things because no one would be allowed to turn the ball over 18 times in one game...that is just not accurate. And the point of the game is to try to replicate (as close as possible) real life in our SIM world

I just see it as teams can still tank either way. Whether that is a good strategy or not is a different story.

[2010]

I think you can make the case for playing smaller players down further, like put a SG at C if you want an extreme spacing lineup

It's not too outlandish if you look at the more extreme teams in the league like Houston who plays lineups with RoCo at the 5 (according to BBallRef, he spent over 80% of his time in Houston at C)

While it's not reasonable, I don't think it's unreasonable to experiment with stuff like that. I think playing guys down from their natural positions is pretty fine, even with extremes such as Smart at C

But when you start moving guys up, putting bigs on wings or even playing PFs or Cs at PG, that really isn't a thing, with exceptions like Giannis. I think playing 5 guards is more of an, okay this guy is trying some weird sh*t but it might work out, where playing 4 or 5 bigs is absolutely a tank move

I feel you on this. Like in the playoffs I was getting destroyed by Embiid. So in my desperation I played Derrick Rose at C and didn’t cross matchup. I actually let him defend Embiid and it won me my only game against Brooklyn. At that point it didn’t matter who defended Embiid, he was gonna get his anyway. I just needed more speed in my lineup.

In the past I have voiced displeasure with blatant tanking. But I played Rose at C to win. So I think that falls in line with what K-DOT just said. And that can be explained in a quick write-up, as bish/mpharris have said. Just to operate in good faith.

But I also appreciate pooch’s perspective of not wanting to relinquish options. I respect and love his zany personality and it can reflect itself in his posts, roster construction, and even his sig! But bish has always been very fair and I think any valid concern would be alleviated with a reasonable explanation for your lineup choice.

Much respect to all my fellow GM’s. Just want to say I am happy the S&T rule has passed and will be implemented for this current free agency period. Proud to say I authored it. I think it adds an exciting wrinkle to offseason planning and aligns GM options as closely to the NBA collective bargaining agreement as possible.

[mpharris36]

It sounds like teams can still tank and put in bad lineups though, right?

In the end, it all worked out for you anyway with the #1 pick.

Guess just dont see what the rule really accomplishes on its own though

Yeah it wont completely curtail tanking as its too much of a slippery slope to tell players to play a veteran expiring contract if there team is built for the future and they want to see how young guys play. I would hope people try there best to be accurate with who should play and who shouldn't for the good of the game but the role is as bish pointed out to try to void the exploitation of the SIM putting players into specific rules that they have no choice to succeed in and doing it to purposely throw games.

It won't fully change much other than if my team is bad...and my PG rotation last year was Frank/Lonnie Walker for most of the season. It would at least stop me from putting Frank at Center and Mo Bamba at PG. While that doesn't seem like a huge difference. At least they are in respectable positions and im not trying to have Mo Bamab turn the ball over 20 times....which also circumvents and effects stats like steals and turnovers and other things because no one would be allowed to turn the ball over 18 times in one game...that is just not accurate. And the point of the game is to try to replicate (as close as possible) real life in our SIM world

I just see it as teams can still tank either way. Whether that is a good strategy or not is a different story.

Like I said you wont be able to totally curtail it and tanking is always part of the NBA too. But the point is to circumvent the SIM's limitations which the rule does have a purpose.

Again it will still be up to the GM to hopefully "do right" and play it out the right way...and there are SF like PJ Tucker that probably would have zero success at PG and this rule wouldn't stop that. But it at least stops the egregious decisions which was pointed out...the Centers playing pg to cause turnovers.

I was playing 1 star PG but at least they were a pg and they would have the occassional 5-6-7 turnover game but they would never have 15-20 turnovers in one game...you don't see that as an issue???

[King of Canada]

Read on Twitter

?s=21

[mpharris36]

I think you can make the case for playing smaller players down further, like put a SG at C if you want an extreme spacing lineup

It's not too outlandish if you look at the more extreme teams in the league like Houston who plays lineups with RoCo at the 5 (according to BBallRef, he spent over 80% of his time in Houston at C)

While it's not reasonable, I don't think it's unreasonable to experiment with stuff like that. I think playing guys down from their natural positions is pretty fine, even with extremes such as Smart at C

But when you start moving guys up, putting bigs on wings or even playing PFs or Cs at PG, that really isn't a thing, with exceptions like Giannis. I think playing 5 guards is more of an, okay this guy is trying some weird sh*t but it might work out, where playing 4 or 5 bigs is absolutely a tank move

I feel you on this. Like in the playoffs I was getting destroyed by Embiid. So in my desperation I played Derrick Rose at C and didn’t cross matchup. I actually let him defend Embiid and it won me my only game against Brooklyn. At that point it didn’t matter who defended Embiid, he was gonna get his anyway. I just needed more speed in my lineup.

In the past I have voiced displeasure with blatant tanking. But I played Rose at C to win. So I think that falls in line with what K-DOT just said. And that can be explained in a quick write-up, as bish/mpharris have said. Just to operate in good faith.

But I also appreciate pooch’s perspective of not wanting to relinquish options. I respect and love his zany personality and it can reflect itself in his posts, roster construction, and even his sig! But bish has always been very fair and I think any valid concern would be alleviated with a reasonable explanation for your lineup choice.

Much respect to all my fellow GM’s. Just want to say I am happy the S&T rule has passed and will be implemented for this current free agency period. Proud to say I authored it. I think it adds an exciting wrinkle to offseason planning and aligns GM options as closely to the NBA collective bargaining agreement as possible.

Wow congrats 2010...really nice rule change. I think it does alleviate teams maybe that have a expiring big name guy and doesn't think they want to be forced to resign him but it allows them to play out the year without the potential for losing them for nothing.

I think well drafted, even if it is a rule that might not benefit me (which it doesn't ) I voted for it because its a good rule and that should be the main reason a vote should pass for the betterment of the league.

[2010]

I think you can make the case for playing smaller players down further, like put a SG at C if you want an extreme spacing lineup

It's not too outlandish if you look at the more extreme teams in the league like Houston who plays lineups with RoCo at the 5 (according to BBallRef, he spent over 80% of his time in Houston at C)

While it's not reasonable, I don't think it's unreasonable to experiment with stuff like that. I think playing guys down from their natural positions is pretty fine, even with extremes such as Smart at C

But when you start moving guys up, putting bigs on wings or even playing PFs or Cs at PG, that really isn't a thing, with exceptions like Giannis. I think playing 5 guards is more of an, okay this guy is trying some weird sh*t but it might work out, where playing 4 or 5 bigs is absolutely a tank move

I feel you on this. Like in the playoffs I was getting destroyed by Embiid. So in my desperation I played Derrick Rose at C and didn’t cross matchup. I actually let him defend Embiid and it won me my only game against Brooklyn. At that point it didn’t matter who defended Embiid, he was gonna get his anyway. I just needed more speed in my lineup.

In the past I have voiced displeasure with blatant tanking. But I played Rose at C to win. So I think that falls in line with what K-DOT just said. And that can be explained in a quick write-up, as bish/mpharris have said. Just to operate in good faith.

But I also appreciate pooch’s perspective of not wanting to relinquish options. I respect and love his zany personality and it can reflect itself in his posts, roster construction, and even his sig! But bish has always been very fair and I think any valid concern would be alleviated with a reasonable explanation for your lineup choice.

Much respect to all my fellow GM’s. Just want to say I am happy the S&T rule has passed and will be implemented for this current free agency period. Proud to say I authored it. I think it adds an exciting wrinkle to offseason planning and aligns GM options as closely to the NBA collective bargaining agreement as possible.

Wow congrats 2010...really nice rule change. I think it does alleviate teams maybe that have a expiring big name guy and doesn't think they want to be forced to resign him but it allows them to play out the year without the potential for losing them for nothing.

I think well drafted, even if it is a rule that might not benefit me (which it doesn't ) I voted for it because its a good rule and that should be the main reason a vote should pass for the betterment of the league.

Thanks man! I also think it makes the offseason even more exciting. As everyone can be involved in some capacity. Even the capped out teams can at least engage in discussions if they have attractive assets.