PC Board All-Time Fantasy League Project - Discussion Thread

[MisterHibachi]

I was hoping Ewing would fall to me; you made a great pick^.

[Quotatious]

I was hoping Ewing would fall to me; you made a great pick^.

I think everybody was hoping that. I was hoping that, for sure, but now that I'm rethinking it, Zo isn't that far behind him, and he regressed much less in the playoffs scoring-wise in the years that I want to pick. Ewing was never really a reliable scoring option in the postseason, sans for like two or three years. Mourning had as many good scoring performances in the PS in just the three year span that I want to take as Ewing had during his entire career.

[O_6]

I was hoping Ewing would fall to me; you made a great pick^.

Thanks man. I liked the Matrix pick too, I think he fits in really well with the Wade/Moses duo.

[MisterHibachi]

I was hoping Ewing would fall to me; you made a great pick^.

I think everybody was hoping that. I was hoping that, for sure, but now that I'm rethinking it, Zo isn't that far behind him, and he regressed much less in the playoffs scoring-wise in the years that I want to pick. Ewing was never really a reliable scoring option in the postseason, sans for like two or three years. Mourning had as many good scoring performances in the PS in just the three year span that I want to take as Ewing had during his entire career.

Yeah but Ewing would the greatest second option ever. And I was one pick away! Lol

[john248]

Regarding Ewing, Robinson, and Mourning...these were all guys I was considering in the draft. The problem with Mourning was that his peak season didn't qualify due to the 75% rule, but he was still very good his first several seasons. I thought Ewing and Robinson would both get sympathy from the judges, especially Robinson. I've read countless times how both needed a primary scorer and would do better in that role which I agree with.
This leaves Dwight who I originally targeted. I wanted to go Kobe/Dwight but well, I didn't want to hear how they wouldn't mesh due to what happened last season even if the Lakers finished strong after the all-star break and would find myself arguing that Kobe did work well with other big men.

[whitehops]

john I don't think anyone 'meshes' with kobe...


anyways yeah I would have been really happy with my first three picks being barkley-paul-howard, having two of the best offensive players of all time plus one of the best defensive players to boot. Dwight got picked in the second round (rightfully so) and I got 'stuck' with gasol.


hopefully judges remember how good active payers were during their primes, I feel like if you're going off narrative then the 'classics' will always reign supreme.

[DHodgkins]

.

You're up

[ThunderDan9]

I strongly feel that Drexler is a steal! I didn't expect him to slip that much...
Now I can tell that he was my first thought at #27... I wanted to pair him up with Larry, forming an absolutely amazing offensive nucleus (I thought that way). He is not a reliable outside shooter (but still able to go on streaks) - but that's about it. Anything else, he does pretty well (or even very, very well). And I was almost certain that either "Olajuwon" or "Magic" would select him. Imagine a Magic-Drexler duo in transition.


The Isiah-Clyde-Admiral trio is my favorite so far.

I also like ardee's team... I nursed some hope to be able to pick up Parish in the 4th round - not gonna happen.
But considering that my "backup plan" at C got picked in the 3rd round before my 3rd round pick, I have to be content with having grabbed Howard instead of Drexler.

[DHodgkins]

My three player three year peaks:
(Total 9 seasons)
1st Team All NBA: 6
2nd Team All NBA: 2
3rd Team All NBA: 1

Glad Clyde fell to me ... Thought he might've been taken with ardee and Bruh Man needing SGs.

[ronnymac2]

Great job drafting so far!

I just want to offer a few tidbits from my perspective as a current judge/past judge/past GM.

1. Great team 3-point shooting is an integral part of today's game. However, it is not the only way to achieve great spacing. Offensive rebounding, moving without the ball, being able to move into open spaces off a pick-n-roll as a big man and catching and finishing (See Anthony Davis), reading your defender and making baseline back cuts, posting up (even for a wing player), and transition offense are all ways players can contribute off the ball without being a 40 percent 3-point shooter. An elite mid-range shooter still has great value.

Think of John Henson this season. This guy isn't an ISO player, and he doesn't have a great jumper yet. Definitely isn't a stretch big man. But he's effective off ball because he's active, attacks the offensive glass, and can catch and finish. Check out these highlights:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjW2lP17tss[/youtube]

This isn't to say 3-point shooting isn't important. 3-point shooting is important. It's efficient. I'm simply saying it's not the only way to have spacing.

So if you already have great 3-point shooting at PG and SF, great mid-range shooting at PF, and a low-post center, and you're thinking "Man, I need great 3-point shooting at SG or else my spacing is messed up, Daryl Morey will snear at me," well that's not necessarily true. You could get a spot-up 3-point shooter, but you could also get a hyper-active SG who hits the offensive glass and who is strong enough to cut baseline and pin down his man to receive a pass and lay the ball up.

2. You can draft the most talented and best-fitting team in the whole league, and it won't mean a thing unless you explain how your team will attack and defend your opponent's team. As a judge, I want to visualize plays, possessions, style of play, and matchups. That's what makes this cool. As fun as drafting is, doing the writeups and rebuttals is even more fun in my opinion.

3. You can't draft Anthony Davis or John Henson because this is their second season in the league. I ain't giving out freebies.

***NOTE: My views don't necessarily represent the views of the other current judges.

[john248]

john I don't think anyone 'meshes' with kobe...

anyways yeah I would have been really happy with my first three picks being barkley-paul-howard, having two of the best offensive players of all time plus one of the best defensive players to boot. Dwight got picked in the second round (rightfully so) and I got 'stuck' with gasol.

hopefully judges remember how good active payers were during their primes, I feel like if you're going off narrative then the 'classics' will always reign supreme.

Call me a homer, but Kobe has won with bigs such as Shaq and Gasol. He didn't have any issues with either other than personality differences with Shaq; otherwise it translated to banners. Prior to Pau coming to LA, everyone was questioning whether Kobe would pass the ball, but those teams he was on were pretty bad. No issues with Pau. I think people remember the off-court Dwight situation too much when on court, they were winning games even though Pau injured on and off during the season and Nash taking a reduced role. But hey, so long as 2004 isn't chosen, Kobe is still an elite player who's a proven winner.

I think you can get away with Pau and Barkley as your PF and C depending on match up. Pau was very impressive in 2009, and with Chuck, you got 2 guys who were very good offensively to go along with CP3. Offensively, looks like ardee's team will match up. Parish isn't much of a fast break guy, but you can argue that he is a great outlet passer and a great passer in general which is a rare and valuable trait in a center.
Then again, IMO, it's insane to pick a bench guy this early.

[john248]

Great job drafting so far!

I just want to offer a few tidbits from my perspective as a current judge/past judge/past GM.

1. Great team 3-point shooting is an integral part of today's game. However, it is not the only way to achieve great spacing. Offensive rebounding, moving without the ball, being able to move into open spaces off a pick-n-roll as a big man and catching and finishing (See Anthony Davis), reading your defender and making baseline back cuts, posting up (even for a wing player), and transition offense are all ways players can contribute off the ball without being a 40 percent 3-point shooter. An elite mid-range shooter still has great value.

Think of John Henson this season. This guy isn't an ISO player, and he doesn't have a great jumper yet. Definitely isn't a stretch big man. But he's effective off ball because he's active, attacks the offensive glass, and can catch and finish. Check out these highlights:

This isn't to say 3-point shooting isn't important. 3-point shooting is important. It's efficient. I'm simply saying it's not the only way to have spacing.

So if you already have great 3-point shooting at PG and SF, great mid-range shooting at PF, and a low-post center, and you're thinking "Man, I need great 3-point shooting at SG or else my spacing is messed up, Daryl Morey will snear at me," well that's not necessarily true. You could get a spot-up 3-point shooter, but you could also get a hyper-active SG who hits the offensive glass and who is strong enough to cut baseline and pin down his man to receive a pass and lay the ball up.

2. You can draft the most talented and best-fitting team in the whole league, and it won't mean a thing unless you explain how your team will attack and defend your opponent's team. As a judge, I want to visualize plays, possessions, style of play, and matchups. That's what makes this cool. As fun as drafting is, doing the writeups and rebuttals is even more fun in my opinion.

3. You can't draft Anthony Davis or John Henson because this is their second season in the league. I ain't giving out freebies.

***NOTE: My views don't necessarily represent the views of the other current judges.

This is my thought as well. I want guys who are good passers and who have range at their respective positions on the court. I certainly don't want a live by the 3, die by the 3 type of team.

[Quotatious]

Hibachi - John248 is still arguing that I can't pick 1998-2000 Zo, is that true? I thought you agreed that he's still eligible, having played 183 of 214 possible games in these three consecutive seasons, even though he only played 58 games in one of these seasons. That's 85,5% games played per season during that timespan. I certainly think he should qualify.

[Quotatious]

.

You're up.

[john248]

I would love to participate

Your turn.

[john248]

Hibachi - John248 is still arguing that I can't pick 1998-2000 Zo, is that true? I thought you agreed that he's still eligible, having played 183 of 214 possible games in these three consecutive seasons, even though he only played 58 games in one of these seasons. That's 85,5% games played per season during that timespan. I certainly think he should qualify.

Still? I hadn't mentioned Zo until just a few hours ago unless you mean I had posted the correct rules that it turns you had suggested which was then accepted. Someone else had also mentioned an undrafted player who'd meet the 75% rule total rule (200 games @ 81.3%) yet not meet the per season rule which I'd guess would be a certain prolific scorer. I believe the lesson learned here is to have a separate rule for each since this is the 1st draft that I'm aware of on the PC board.

[Quotatious]

Still? I hadn't mentioned Zo until just a few hours ago unless you mean I had posted the correct rules that you had suggested which was then accepted.

Sorry for being unclear with the way I phrased it. The way I see it is - I suggested the rule you're talking about (at least 75% games played in EVERY SINGLE season during that 3-year timespan, NOT AN AVERAGE of 75% games played for 3 seasons), but I thought Hibachi understood it differently and thus I assumed we're going by 75% games played total. At one point, Mr. Hibachi said that 1998-2000 Zo is indeed eligible, so I thought I don't have to worry about it, but then, I've seen that he's changed the rule to the one I originally suggested, so I hope I can still take 1998-00 Zo because he was eligible based on the rules that existed when I was making the selection.

I hope I'm being clear right now.

[john248]

Truthfully, I'd have loved to pick Kevin Love right about now. He actually falls all of 2 games ... 2! ... shy in 1 season while still playing 82% of his games. Or 1.5 games to be technical. lol I think I can mention him since well, he doesn't even qualify. Then again, he might have gone earlier given the rules.

I took Ray Allen. I originally wanted Reggie Miller due to his playoff heroics and ability to step his game up in that format though Ray is still ridiculously efficient in the playoffs even before going to Boston. Still, I'm more than happy with Ray as I do view him as a better all-around player than Miller.

[ardee]

I love the frontcourt I have right now.

The offensive synergy with Nash/Dirk/Parish should be similar to Bird/McHale/Parish with the shooting, playmaking and post-play.

Parish wasn't my first choice but now that I think of it, he fit so well with both a post-up 4 in McHale and a stretch 4 in Bird. Dirk plays both roles to perfection, so really, I couldn't have had it better.

Though honestly I think either O_6 or john248 has it best.

[Quotatious]

Though honestly I think either O_6 or john248 has it best.

My top 3/4 trios so far would be:

1. O_6 (Ewing, Durant, Penny) or DHodgkins with D-Rob, Drexler and Isiah
3. HeartBreakKid with Artis/Karl/Doc and Bruh Man with Garnett, Pippen and Reggie.

I like your trio as well, ardee, though I think you'll have to allow Nash much freedom on the offensive end, otherwise he'll be a bit limited, as he actually was in Dallas with Dirk.

I really love most of the trios being picked so far, great job guys.