RealGM

I'm in a fairly standard (deeper rosters) 10 team H2H 9-cat keeper league, and for the second year in a row, it looks like my team just doesn't have it. I'm thinking about going full "trust the process", but I'm not sure who would even be a clear upgrade over the keepers I have.

We only keep 3 players per year, and mine were Harden, Wall, and M. Gasol.

PG - Wall
SG - Harden
G - Schroder
G - Bradley
SF - KCP
PF - Millsap
F - Gallinari
F - Sabonis
C - M. Gasol
C - Ibaka
Util - Gay
Util - Hollis-Jefferson
BN - Rozier
BN - Portis
BN - Cauley-Stein
BN - Dinwiddie

As you can probably tell, I'm pretty locked into punting FG% and TOs this year, while also being weak in a few other cats.

This makes trading for this season kind of difficult, so I'm wondering if I should tear it down and rebuild.

Truthfully, building an inefficient punt FG/TOs team isn't really my style, and I'm probably just not very good at it. Whenever I've had success, it's been with a team full of efficient guys. So if possible, I'd like to move my team in that direction, so I can draft accordingly starting next year.

So I'm thinking of moving Harden, but the list of guys who would be an upgrade has to be pretty short, and most are even kind of debatable: Curry, Durant, Giannis, AD(?), Towns(?), ???. I also look at Harden's stats sometimes and think, I should just hold on to this kind of guy if I have one.

I'd of course look to move Wall as well in this scenario, and either move Gasol or just not keep him next year, depending on who else I get.

Alternatively, are there any moves I should be looking to make to shore up my weaknesses (I think REB/BLK) while maintaining the double punt to try to salvage this season?

I can't really think of an easy fix for your roster. The only thing that comes to mind is that you should commit to a particular build.

Judging from how you drafted, I'm guessing that the bulk stats, non-efficiency team doesn't work for you because you draft very conservatively. If anything, this was THE season to take risks, with the rookie class being so promising, and I'm only seeing Sabonis, really, as a guy that is out playing his draft position significantly (possibly schroder).

Otherwise, yes, you should draft conservatively and punt more than one cat if you prefer efficiency over volatility

Goner wrote:I can't really think of an easy fix for your roster. The only thing that comes to mind is that you should commit to a particular build.

Judging from how you drafted, I'm guessing that the bulk stats, non-efficiency team doesn't work for you because you draft very conservatively. If anything, this was THE season to take risks, with the rookie class being so promising, and I'm only seeing Sabonis, really, as a guy that is out playing his draft position significantly (possibly schroder).

Otherwise, yes, you should draft conservatively and punt more than one cat if you prefer efficiency over volatility

Thanks for the reply.

Guys I thought would fit well into the build (Millsap, Ibaka) have not performed well, but the warning signs were there, so that's on me. I didn't feel the draft went very well as it was going on, and it's been even worse (main problem was I felt like I'd be short on forwards, but ended up with too many).

Any insight on who could be considered an upgrade over Harden, or alternatively, who I should target to build around him properly?

I don't feel there to be a legitimate upgrade over Harden, at that point it's merely contextualizing your roster. Harden, in my opinion, epitomizes the punt FT/TO build, so if you trade Harden it would require a hard pivot; which is a move you shouldn't without the trade chips to render the rest of your roster consistent to that build. I'd sell high on Gasol, since he dropped off last year. Also, wait for Ibaka to string together a few good games and move him, too. Commit to a triple punt involving blocks and you should be more competitive.

As for who you should target, I'd need to know how competitive you are in other cats as I've never played in a league with rosters this deep.