NBA/ABA Decades League Discussion Thread

SabasRevenge! · Post #41 » by **SabasRevenge!** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 2:50 am

All In The Name wrote:Regardless of whether or not we have peer judging, there will be some outside judges who also weigh in. But what does everyone think about peer judging? Good idea? Or should we scrap it?

I like the idea of only having outside judges if there are enough of them, but either way is fine with me.

Post #42 » by **Snakebites** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 2:50 am

Yeah, I like outside judges as well.

Baller 24 · Post #43 » by **Baller 24** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 3:22 am

Drexer IMO went too early, Kobe was a steal though, I seriously didn't think he'd go that low.

jcldallas24 · Post #44 » by **jcldallas24** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 3:46 am

yeah i couldn't make up my mind, so i decided to go with drexler

SamBone · Post #45 » by **SamBone** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 5:18 am

taking Clyde with Kobe available is a reach

Post #46 » by **Gremz** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 5:54 am

BlackIce wrote:At some point should we just give Cellar BPA OR let Gremz pick for him? I'd be wary with giving him BPA since it isn't obvious and this is the most important pick of the game usually..

If I'm around and Cellar has no problem with it then I can probably pitch in to help the draft along.

Post #47 » by **Snakebites** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 6:01 am

Gremz wrote:
BlackIce wrote:At some point should we just give Cellar BPA OR let Gremz pick for him? I'd be wary with giving him BPA since it isn't obvious and this is the most important pick of the game usually..

If I'm around and Cellar has no problem with it then I can probably pitch in to help the draft along.

I would assume he's fine with it.

Not that he's around to tell us as much....

Post #48 » by **CellarDoor** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 6:04 am

I'm fine with it. Larry's an alright pick too. Working off of a concussion currently and class all day tomorrow. I'll check in sporadically to see when I'm on the clock, but I'll also probably try and sit down soon and make an in-depth list too and pass it along to someone.

Myth_Breaker · Post #49 » by **Myth_Breaker** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 9:37 pm

Just to make sure - e.g. 99/00 season counts as part of the 00s since vast majority of it occurred during year 2000, right? Or do you have other ideas?

Post #50 » by **Snakebites** » Tue Feb 2, 2010 9:44 pm

Myth_Breaker wrote:Just to make sure - e.g. 99/00 season counts as part of the 00s since vast majority of it occurred during year 2000, right? Or do you have other ideas?

99/00 is 00s.

Always goes by the second number.

Warspite · Post #51 » by **Warspite** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 12:27 am

hats off for the McHale pick... I totaly forgot about his 1 peak yr.

bastillon · Post #52 » by **bastillon** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 12:41 am

you gotta understand the situation here with these 1 year peaks. most of these guys didn't get much better, just different (better) circumstances around them caused their improvement. McHale was a really good player, but I don't think he'll compliment Kobe-Walton duo as well. blackhole passer and poor rebounder won't get it done IMO. they'd be much better off with Sampson who kinda played PF that year, had okay range, was great shotblocker and would've been an assasin defensively alongside Bill Walton. especially considering that Sampson was a great passer.

Post #53 » by **TMACFORMVP** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 2:21 am

Let's send in lists for those after bryant. I want to pick again today!!

bastillon · Post #54 » by **bastillon** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 9:39 am

replaced ? I sent a list to snakebites, just like he asked me to do, what's wrong with that ? also, Dwight was number 1 on that list (Thurmond 2nd). I'd like snakebites to confirm that for me.

Myth_Breaker · Post #55 » by **Myth_Breaker** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 11:50 am

bastillon wrote:replaced ? I sent a list to snakebites, just like he asked me to do, what's wrong with that ? also, Dwight was number 1 on that list (Thurmond 2nd). I'd like snakebites to confirm that for me.

No sir, it's you who "gotta understand something". From you activity on the PC board it looks like you are nothing but a troublemaker, trying to force his unsubstantiated opinions down throats of people who often forgot about basketball more than you'll ever knew - and this reputation is unfortunately being confirmed here. You are not only delaying the selection process, but also breaking rules binding in such competitions. Your criticism of McHale's pick is: a) unnecessarily rude; b) factually incorrect (posters vary in their opinions, but I dare you to find e.g. ONE other person thinking that soft Sampson could be better defender than McHale); c) even if not for a) and b), you should post comments here, not also in the draft thread, which is supposed to be ONLY for picks; d) regardless where you post, you shouldn't mention Sampson at all since WE DON'T DISCUSS UNDRAFTED PLAYERS! So even though I don't know what final decision on your participation will be made by competent persons, I doubt your presence would be missed in this league - unless for unintentional comedy relief if next to your praises of YOUR players from the 60s/70s someone quotes your earlier disdainful posts doubting old-era players being able to compete in the current league at all...

Myth_Breaker · Post #56 » by **Myth_Breaker** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 12:01 pm

Snakebites wrote:
Myth_Breaker wrote:Just to make sure - e.g. 99/00 season counts as part of the 00s since vast majority of it occurred during year 2000, right? Or do you have other ideas?

99/00 is 00s.

Always goes by the second number.

People sometimes adapt different definitions e.g. while discussing on "the best player of the 00s", so I'm glad we're using the proper definition here. ;-)

But what about rules - we are using current rules, right?

Myth_Breaker · Post #57 » by **Myth_Breaker** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 12:17 pm

Warspite wrote:hats off for the McHale pick... I totaly forgot about his 1 peak yr.

Yeah, great pick. McHale's 1986/87 season competes for GOAT PF season (even though my Duncan's season wins it anyway :-)

). Generally I'm glad this league adopted what I've wanted for a long time: why use 3- or 5-year peaks when we are playing 1-year competition? It also makes drafting more interesting (more hidden gems, so to speak).
As to you, Warspite, I somehow predicted your Isiah's pick - and I bet another Piston in Grant Hill would be next if not taken by Baller. ;-)

Perhaps I'll e-mail you about our further choices - IMHO our conversations about it always were interesting.
What are you all thinking of Stockton's pick and my team so far?

Baller 24 · Post #58 » by **Baller 24** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 2:15 pm

I honestly was thinking about taking McHale with my 2nd pick, he has a ridiculous TS% of like 65%, yeah fantastic pick, especially next to Kobe and Walton.

As for a follow-up on my pick, I'm using the '96-'97 season for Grant Hill

(FG%/FT%/REB/AST/STL/PTS)
.496 .711 9.0 7.3 1.8 21.4

He was 3rd in MVP voting, and apart of the All-NBA First Team. He's a perfect complimentary player next to D-Wade, someone that can pretty much do it all, along with handling the ball. Wade and Hill are going to be the perfect players with their blend of all-around ability, especially rotating coming off of those nasty Russell screens

Post #59 » by **CellarDoor** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 2:31 pm

Meh, don't get the love on the McHale pick, good player, but his passing/rebounding could use some work to be at a elite/good level. Fantastic scorer though and definitely a staunch defender. If you're looking for an 80s PF, unless you move Moses, I'm not sure you can do better.

Post #60 » by **CellarDoor** » Wed Feb 3, 2010 2:33 pm

Thoughts on the Lanier pick? I've kinda fallen in love with him recently, as has TrueLAFan (to be fair, he's been in love with him for a long, long time). Better shooter and rebounder than Ewing, miles better as a passer and he's not that far behind in defense. It was either him or Thurmond that round for me...I'm glad Miller got him before he fell into the 4th and someone got a huge steal.

There's two very ridiculous 1 year primes from recent years that I'm waiting to see come off the board. I know a few of us considered taking one or both of them.