T&T Games General Drafting/Off-Topic Thread

[Dr Positivity]

I won with Kobe but it was a lucky draw getting Malone in a non lotto and 1 draft, half the draft had no chance in that one with their 1st round picks/best non lotto players being players like Price and Miller instead of Malone. Otherwise I don't have a problem building teams that fit around Kobe but they just never really get the traction

[Fadeaway_J]

There was a stretch there where Shaq was considered unbeatable by just about everyone. Hakeem too.

I remember people would just vote "because Hakeem" or "because Shaq". The best center would win every time. Which is kind of bizarre given how the real NBA has moved away from that at this point.

Times certainly have changed. I had a general aversion to building around guys like that, so I didn't win for a while until the meta shifted away from that.

I missed that, I feel like every time I build around Shaq/KAJ/Hakeem I lose in the first round or don’t get ranked

I avoid those players not because I think I'd lose but because it's just not the style of team I generally enjoy building. I like things to be more dynamic.

In the current game I picked David Robinson in the first round, but he's a distinctly different type of big that doesn't necessarily need to be the focal point and is far more capable as an elite supporting offensive piece, in this case to Dirk.

You and I are similar in that regard. Very rarely do I build a team around Shaq, Hakeem, or Kareem and actually enjoy doing it.

I feel as though the Shaq/Hakeem dominance often became a self-fulfulling prophecy. People just accepted that those guys had a huge advantage, and that's how it played out.

[Smash3]

There was a stretch there where Shaq was considered unbeatable by just about everyone. Hakeem too.

I remember people would just vote "because Hakeem" or "because Shaq". The best center would win every time. Which is kind of bizarre given how the real NBA has moved away from that at this point.

Times certainly have changed. I had a general aversion to building around guys like that, so I didn't win for a while until the meta shifted away from that.

I missed that, I feel like every time I build around Shaq/KAJ/Hakeem I lose in the first round or don’t get ranked

I avoid those players not because I think I'd lose but because it's just not the style of team I generally enjoy building. I like things to be more dynamic.

In the current game I picked David Robinson in the first round, but he's a distinctly different type of big that doesn't necessarily need to be the focal point and is far more capable as an elite supporting offensive piece, in this case to Dirk.

I try to build around every great player at least once. I don’t have a distinct style, but yeah I think bigs like Robinson/KG/Duncan/Ewing are a lot easier to implement into offenses with a lot of firepower.

[8on]

we need to start thinking about who is actually worth a first round pick. we've definitely moved to wing/guard dominant lineups. Kawhi seems to win every game these days.

if you spend 17+ FGAs on your center, you don't have a ton of room left for supporting offense in an 85 FGA game. if you can get Mutombo, Ben or Marc, you're cool, even if one of them has to guard Shaq or Hakeem.

it definitely seems like guards and wings - whether you play one at the four or not - are the most important consideration now.

[Snakebites]

we need to start thinking about who is actually worth a first round pick. we've definitely moved to wing/guard dominant lineups. Kawhi seems to win every game these days.

if you spend 17+ FGAs on your center, you don't have a ton of room left for supporting offense in an 85 FGA game. if you can get Mutombo, Ben or Marc, you're cool, even if one of them has to guard Shaq or Hakeem.

it definitely seems like guards and wings - whether you play one at the four or not - are the most important consideration now.

I still tend to think Kawhi shouldn't be worth a first rounder.

I don't think he's good enough as a focal point to warrant that, and while he's a great defender at the end of the day he mostly just impacts the one guy he's guarding.

I think he was picked about right in this game at higher in the second round.

I like Ben and Deke but I think their impact on the offense (negatively so) should be considered more in these games.

[8on]

we need to start thinking about who is actually worth a first round pick. we've definitely moved to wing/guard dominant lineups. Kawhi seems to win every game these days.

if you spend 17+ FGAs on your center, you don't have a ton of room left for supporting offense in an 85 FGA game. if you can get Mutombo, Ben or Marc, you're cool, even if one of them has to guard Shaq or Hakeem.

it definitely seems like guards and wings - whether you play one at the four or not - are the most important consideration now.

I still tend to think Kawhi shouldn't be worth a first rounder.

I don't think he's good enough as a focal point to warrant that, and while he's a great defender at the end of the day he mostly just impacts the one guy he's guarding.

I think he was picked about right in this game at higher in the second round.

I like Ben and Deke but I think their impact on the offense (negatively so) should be considered more in these games.

You can't help off Deke, because he'll just slam it, and you can't help off Ben because he'll get every rebound there is. It's more an issue with Ben than Deke, but even with Ben, I think his defense and rebounding warrant his being on the floor against elite centers.

You don't want Shaq to conserve his energy for the offensive end, but if you do have an elite defender to cover him, that's good. If you don't have an elite defender to cover him, that's bad. It's a trade-off. Are you better off with Zo than Deke? I don't think so, because then you have to slow down your offense to accommodate Zo.

[8on]

how do people feel about 87 or 88 FGA? I feel a little restricted by 85. I didn't mind 90, but maybe trying out a compromise wouldn't be so bad.

[Fadeaway_J]

I think 85 is fine. To me, people underestimate the ability of just two or three well-fitting stars to create a highly potent offense, so there's this constant imperative to stockpile as many All-NBA guys as possible.

[Snakebites]

we need to start thinking about who is actually worth a first round pick. we've definitely moved to wing/guard dominant lineups. Kawhi seems to win every game these days.

if you spend 17+ FGAs on your center, you don't have a ton of room left for supporting offense in an 85 FGA game. if you can get Mutombo, Ben or Marc, you're cool, even if one of them has to guard Shaq or Hakeem.

it definitely seems like guards and wings - whether you play one at the four or not - are the most important consideration now.

I still tend to think Kawhi shouldn't be worth a first rounder.

I don't think he's good enough as a focal point to warrant that, and while he's a great defender at the end of the day he mostly just impacts the one guy he's guarding.

I think he was picked about right in this game at higher in the second round.

I like Ben and Deke but I think their impact on the offense (negatively so) should be considered more in these games.

You can't help off Deke, because he'll just slam it, and you can't help off Ben because he'll get every rebound there is. It's more an issue with Ben than Deke, but even with Ben, I think his defense and rebounding warrant his being on the floor against elite centers.

You don't want Shaq to conserve his energy for the offensive end, but if you do have an elite defender to cover him, that's good. If you don't have an elite defender to cover him, that's bad. It's a trade-off. Are you better off with Zo than Deke? I don't think so, because then you have to slow down your offense to accommodate Zo.

I watched way too many 00s Pistons games to have someone tell me you can't help off of Ben Wallace...

[8on]

I still tend to think Kawhi shouldn't be worth a first rounder.

I don't think he's good enough as a focal point to warrant that, and while he's a great defender at the end of the day he mostly just impacts the one guy he's guarding.

I think he was picked about right in this game at higher in the second round.

I like Ben and Deke but I think their impact on the offense (negatively so) should be considered more in these games.

You can't help off Deke, because he'll just slam it, and you can't help off Ben because he'll get every rebound there is. It's more an issue with Ben than Deke, but even with Ben, I think his defense and rebounding warrant his being on the floor against elite centers.

You don't want Shaq to conserve his energy for the offensive end, but if you do have an elite defender to cover him, that's good. If you don't have an elite defender to cover him, that's bad. It's a trade-off. Are you better off with Zo than Deke? I don't think so, because then you have to slow down your offense to accommodate Zo.

I watched way too many 00s Pistons games to have someone tell me you can't help off of Ben Wallace...

ok.

i still think he makes up for his offensive deficiencies on the defensive end.

[8on]

I think 85 is fine. To me, people underestimate the ability of just two or three well-fitting stars to create a highly potent offense, so there's this constant imperative to stockpile as many All-NBA guys as possible.

Sometimes I think the team I want would take just a few more FGAs. I like more freedom, not less.

[ardee]

On Kobe, Timmaytime and I built a beautiful team with him, KG, Howard and Porter in a team-up game... then we lost in the final to a Billups-MJ-Chuck-Ewing team.

[migya]

On Kobe, Timmaytime and I built a beautiful team with him, KG, Howard and Porter in a team-up game... then we lost in the final to a Billups-MJ-Chuck-Ewing team.

Yea, MJ and Ewing will do that to you. Think MJ is definitely viable to build around. You have to have bigs that can shoot a bit but defend and a PG that can distribute a fair bit sets MJ up. I also thought that had Jordan played with either Magic or Stockton, if only for just one season, he would have had scored more than he ever had.

[Dr Positivity]

I like Ben and Deke but I think their impact on the offense (negatively so) should be considered more in these games.

They get docked a lot for their offense though. I feel like they get treated as the center version of Bowen and Battier level starters as the last, cheap guy more than stars

[Snakebites]

I think 85 is fine. To me, people underestimate the ability of just two or three well-fitting stars to create a highly potent offense, so there's this constant imperative to stockpile as many All-NBA guys as possible.

I remember when we got up to 90 it was just way too easy to build teams. It barely felt like a limitation at all. 88 was the same issue but a bit less.

I don’t find 85 overly constraining, I don’t think we need 87 or 88.

[Timmaytime]

On Kobe, Timmaytime and I built a beautiful team with him, KG, Howard and Porter in a team-up game... then we lost in the final to a Billups-MJ-Chuck-Ewing team.

Ahh that was the other one, I guess it did quite well. And I actually quite like it, too.

[8on]

I’d like to suggest that the time for roster and rankings submissions be shorter. By the time rankings have been submitted, we’re well into a new game.

[8on]

another idea is not to start a new game until playoffs are finished as a way to encourage people to vote.

[Laimbeer]

I’d like to suggest that the time for roster and rankings submissions be shorter. By the time rankings have been submitted, we’re well into a new game.

I'm for releasing rankings when available. I think people are much more influenced by prior votes and reasoning in a match-up than where a team was ranked. I think it revives interest in a game just as you're going into the playoffs. I like tighter time frames on rankings too but we do seem to get a few people miss it when it's one day.

I've also toyed with the idea of assigning three judges randomly to each match-up. Shares the burden and gives a variety of philosophies/opinions. Or maybe three people not even involved in the game.

[8on]

I’d like to suggest that the time for roster and rankings submissions be shorter. By the time rankings have been submitted, we’re well into a new game.

I'm for releasing rankings when available. I think people are much more influenced by prior votes and reasoning in a match-up than where a team was ranked. I think it revives interest in a game just as you're going into the playoffs. I like tighter time frames on rankings too but we do seem to get a few people miss it when it's one day.

I've also toyed with the idea of assigning three judges randomly to each match-up. Shares the burden and gives a variety of philosophies/opinions. Or maybe three people not even involved in the game.

maybe let's give one day off, then back to back for rosters and rankings. when it's spread out, we clearly forget to vote in these things. in a 9 player pool of regular players, the playoffs for the Accolade game seemed to drag on forever.