The Unpopular Stars draft - Discussion thread

[Jon_3232]

I may still start Demar. Christie is just an inherently useful player I grab every time I can.

Demar is the far better player but imo Stockton/Christie/Leonard/Malone works better with Demar off the bench.

[Jon_3232]

I want back in these games. Few months off have given me my mojo back.

[MadNESS]

I think some of you are overrating Cousins lol

One man's trash is another man's treasure I guess


I'm going to sleep soon, can I send my list to someone?

Up

[Dr Positivity]

I might have to crack and bench Howard if I get the players I want. I just thought of a very sexy Magic at PF option.

[Snakebites]

Yeah, I definitely didn't forget about the switch in draft order for round 4 and plan my course based on that. Who said I did?

[Fadeaway_J]

This wasn't the intention of the game, but with me relegating Big Al to a backup I've kind of enjoyed building a more realistic team with only 69 FGA for the remaining seven players. I mean, my team actually looks like an improved version of the '96 Bulls, even though it's got less firepower than normal. Makes me want to do a redux of one of the lower-FGA drafts (maybe 75 or 80).

[Laimbeer]

This wasn't the intention of the game, but with me relegating Big Al to a backup I've kind of enjoyed building a more realistic team with only 69 FGA for the remaining seven players. I mean, my team actually looks like an improved version of the '96 Bulls, even though it's got less firepower than normal. Makes me want to do a redux of one of the lower-FGA drafts (maybe 75 or 80).

I might like to see 75 fga's used at least occasionally. Feels like a better game when you have to tap the brakes more often. When you have the luxury of cherry picking lower fga seasons, 88 is still fairly generous.

Also glad we had the option of how to use the undesirables. It added to the strategy and it seems unfair to give someone a player that have to play x minutes. Dr P's all-NBA tweak was solid, too.

[Snakebites]

I agree- I think a 30 minute mandate w ouldnt have worked.

Simply not playing the undesirable much is one way to deal with it, but it’s not as though doing so gives Fade an unfair advantage.

For me Derozan will be key in the rotation, whether as a starter or off the bench. Truthfully I’ll start Christie in most matchups, unless they’ve got a bad perimeter defender I want to exploit.

I’m worried about my bench a bit, if I’m honest.

[Fadeaway_J]

This wasn't the intention of the game, but with me relegating Big Al to a backup I've kind of enjoyed building a more realistic team with only 69 FGA for the remaining seven players. I mean, my team actually looks like an improved version of the '96 Bulls, even though it's got less firepower than normal. Makes me want to do a redux of one of the lower-FGA drafts (maybe 75 or 80).

I might like to see 75 fga's used at least occasionally. Feels like a better game when you have to tap the brakes more often. When you have the luxury of cherry picking lower fga seasons, 88 is still fairly generous.

Also glad we had the option of how to use the undesirables. It added to the strategy and it seems unfair to give someone a player that have to play x minutes. Dr P's all-NBA tweak was solid, too.

88 works fine with most pools when there's some kind of restriction. Once things get too stacked, I start to struggle with assessing perennial All-Stars being fourth and fifth options.

You're up BTW.

[wackbone]

Brent Barry was my main target for my backup SG, but getting Ingles was a tad more important to my plan

[Laimbeer]

Should we have done a smaller pool in hindsight? 90s to now with just 9 drafters is a little nuts

We needed a few more unpopular stars in my opinion. The strategy of building a stacked team around a high FGA player has been a little bit interesting.

We should have done 90s to now for the pool of scrubs but the actual draft be 00s to now.

Hindsight is 20-20

Another twist might be having a pool of unpopular stars and you pick your own - but you decide which round to do it. We did something similar, but I'd like to see a pool with the same number of unpopular stars as teams.

[Dr Positivity]

I'll stick with Horry, but didn't I have Ingles before him on my list?

[Fadeaway_J]

Didn't I have Ingles before Horry on my list?

Oh crap. That's what I get for posting while sick at 5 in the morning.

Sorry about that.

[Dr Positivity]

Didn't I have Ingles before Horry on my list?

Oh crap. That's what I get for posting while sick at 5 in the morning.

Sorry about that.

I'm probably better off with Horry anyways since I'm going with a pretty tight squeeze FGA wise

[Dr Positivity]

Do people see 2001 Shaq vs 2002 as a relevant difference?

[Snakebites]

Do people see 2001 Shaq vs 2002 as a relevant difference?

I tend to think his defense got weaker the later into the early 2000s you go.

I usually take 2001 for the playoff run.

In this game where we’re all pinching pennies I could see taking 2002 as perfectly justified.

[Fadeaway_J]

.

Up

[Fadeaway_J]

Do people see 2001 Shaq vs 2002 as a relevant difference?

In a playoff setting, I might view it as more relevant than 2000 vs 2001. Might just be my faulty memory but it seemed like he started to become a bit less mobile/agile by then between the weight gain and the injuries.

[parsnips33]

If I switch from 92 Robinson to 01 Robinson I can probably squeeze in Miami Jimmy rather than 12-13 Jimmy. Worth it?

[Colbinii]

And then Snakebites said "Cousins puts a cap on your defensive potential"