PC Board All-Time Fantasy League Project - Discussion Thread

[MisterHibachi]

Player Peaks: 3 yr peak where player plays atleast 70+ games twice or 170+ games in total

- I think this is a fair limit for how often a player needs to have played. We don't want to allow guys who played 45 games in a season to be considered in their peak. 170+ games over 3 years is a fairly easy goal to reach. '76-'78 Walton played 174 games. He never played 70 games in a season though until '86.

Just to iron this out a little more, how would we evaluate 3 year peaks into a single playoff series? There's no doubt stats will be brought into this, so do we use averages of the 3 years?

[MisterHibachi]

Just to consider something else I was thinking about - can we take players from the current season. For instance, can we draft Kevin Love from 2013-14 and assume he will average the same numbers over the entire season (after all, it is a significant sample size already but we cannot predict future injuries or some trade that might skew the numbers a little bit).

I believe Mister Hibachi said that a player has to play at least 75% of the 82 game season to qualify, so Love wouldn't be available, unless we did that draft after the season ends. I don't think it's necessary to wait with that because of him though. Love was still a great player in 2011 or 2012 and would be a very valuable piece for a team with a guy like Mutombo or Ben Wallace at center.

I would like to include this season as well. You just have to take the risk that the guy you're choosing is gonna keep up his production for the rest of the season. My reasoning for wanting include this season is, if you pick last year's Durant, I have absolutely no doubt that judges will be influenced by the play of current Durant, which I think is better than last year's. So that kinda gives an unfair advantage cuz its gonna be very hard to separate Durant from this year and last year cuz they are both such recent seasons. However, if it's too complicated or controversial to include this year, i'm okay with that too.

And another question - what about a season where a player was injured for some time (obviously not for too long). For instance, can we take Roy Hibbert from 2012-13 and assume that we are taking the healthy post-All-star-break-and-playoffs Hibbert instead of the Hibbert from the first half of the season who struggled mainly due to an injury that was not completely healed?

Many players play through injuries all the time in the NBA so to me it's not a major concern here. His stats for entire season should more or less even out his healthy self with his period of playing while injured.

For example, Kobe is notorious for playing through injuries, the same with Iverson, so with some guys it's really difficult to discern whether they were fully healthy or not.

I agree with this. Impact pretty much evens out over the season if you play most of the games. If you choose Hibbert, you can try to convince judges that his impact overall would've been higher if he wasn't injured in the beginning, but that's obviously a risk you'll be taking that the judges agree with you. Choosing playoffs Hibbert wouldn't be fair because of the matchup with Miami, where he looked like the best centre in the league, but didn't look the same against the other 28 teams. So, you take the whole season, not just the first or second half of the player's season.

[CaliBullsFan]

Okay so seems like most people prefer ABBB then snake, so we'll lock that in.

it'll go like this:

Round 1: a,b,c,d,e
Round 2-4: e,d,c,b,a
Round 5: a,b,c,d,e
Round 6: e,d,c,b,a
Round 7: a,b,c,d,e
and so on.

I am confused you said you want to lock in ABBB but then posted what would be snake?

IMO if we are drafting a full 12 then I think we should do it ABBBBsnake its the most balanced system with double picks starting round 7(B would get the first double picks)

[MisterHibachi]

Okay so seems like most people prefer ABBB then snake, so we'll lock that in.

it'll go like this:

Round 1: a,b,c,d,e
Round 2-4: e,d,c,b,a
Round 5: a,b,c,d,e
Round 6: e,d,c,b,a
Round 7: a,b,c,d,e
and so on.

I am confused you said you want to lock in ABBB but then posted what would be snake?

IMO if we are drafting a full 12 then I think we should do it ABBBBsnake its the most balanced system with double picks starting round 7(B would get the first double picks)

No I meant we'll be locking in "ABBB then snake"=ABBBsnake. I realize I worded it ambiguously. My apologies. And we are drafting 10 deep.

Edit: it is ABBB for the first 4 rounds then it goes snake. I hope its all clear now.

[john248]

Player Peaks: 3 yr peak where player plays atleast 70+ games twice or 170+ games in total

- I think this is a fair limit for how often a player needs to have played. We don't want to allow guys who played 45 games in a season to be considered in their peak. 170+ games over 3 years is a fairly easy goal to reach. '76-'78 Walton played 174 games. He never played 70 games in a season though until '86.

Just to iron this out a little more, how would we evaluate 3 year peaks into a single playoff series? There's no doubt stats will be brought into this, so do we use averages of the 3 years?

It would help to weed out the 1 year wonders. Discussion would be similar to how people discuss prime vs prime, at least that's what I would assume.

[MisterHibachi]

Player Peaks: 3 yr peak where player plays atleast 70+ games twice or 170+ games in total

- I think this is a fair limit for how often a player needs to have played. We don't want to allow guys who played 45 games in a season to be considered in their peak. 170+ games over 3 years is a fairly easy goal to reach. '76-'78 Walton played 174 games. He never played 70 games in a season though until '86.

Just to iron this out a little more, how would we evaluate 3 year peaks into a single playoff series? There's no doubt stats will be brought into this, so do we use averages of the 3 years?

It would help to weed out the 1 year wonders. Discussion would be similar to how people discuss prime vs prime, at least that's what I would assume.

Yeah that sounds good. I'm down for that criteria. 3 year peaks, with 170+ games played. Thats 69% of games played over 3 seasons. Sounds reasonable. 70+ twice is also good, as long as the third season has SOME games. It can't be a whole missed season, because then its just 56% of games played and that's not good enough. However, if that third season doesn't have too many games, like 20 or 30, even though you ARE ALLOWED to pick it, you gotta keep in mind you'll no doubt get penalized for it in the playoffs. Judges I'm sure will have problems with giving equal weight to 40 games played as opposed to 75 games played in that third season.

[MisterHibachi]

Keep in mind guys, you don't have to declare the years until the start of the playoffs. Just to make it a more cohesive team, you can choose years for everyone AFTER you have your whole team drafted. In the draft you can simply choose the player without declaring the years. But it would be more beneficial to yourself if you do have an idea of what years you want to choose. And no changing years round to round in the playoffs.

[Quotatious]

I would like to include this season as well. You just have to take the risk that the guy you're choosing is gonna keep up his production for the rest of the season. My reasoning for wanting include this season is, if you pick last year's Durant, I have absolutely no doubt that judges will be influenced by the play of current Durant, which I think is better than last year's. So that kinda gives an unfair advantage cuz its gonna be very hard to separate Durant from this year and last year cuz they are both such recent seasons. However, if it's too complicated or controversial to include this year, i'm okay with that too.

Yeah, you make a good point with the skewed perception of last year's players, I agree.

But while post-1980 may be the more fair and safe option, I just think this draft would be a lot more fun and interesting if it included guys like Wilt/Russell/70sKareem/Dr.J/Baylor/Oscar etc. I'll understand if people go against it, but I want this player pool to include post-1955 players.

Yeah, it would certainly be fun, but MisterHibachi said that he doesn't want to let anyone assemble 'superteams' and I agree with him. Superteams would be very difficult to evaluate because too many stars on one team would most likely cause friction, chemistry-wise, and you can't disregard this aspect of it. For example, if someone drafted Jordan and Isiah, I simply cannot imagine that people would actually believe they'd work well together. You'd have to get penalized for it.

Player Peaks: 3 yr peak where player plays atleast 70+ games twice or 170+ games in total

Good suggestion, although I'd say 75% of games played every season in that 3-year span would be even better. A player would have to play at least 62 games in each of his three seasons, so at least 186 games total. Theoretically, you could have someone taking a player who played all 82 games in two seasons and only 8 or 9 in the third with your proposal of 170+ games. It'd be ridiculous.

I can accept one year peaks just as easily as three year peaks and I can understand the reasoning behind both ideas.

[MisterHibachi]

Player Peaks: 3 yr peak where player plays atleast 70+ games twice or 170+ games in total

Good suggestion, although I'd say 75% of games played every season in that 3-year span would be even better. A player would have to play at least 62 games in each of his three seasons, so at least 186 games total. Theoretically, you could have someone taking a player who played all 82 games in two seasons and only 8 or 9 in the third with your proposal of 170+ games. It'd be ridiculous.

I can accept one year peaks just as easily as three year peaks and I can understand the reasoning behind both ideas.

That was my concern too. 170+ in 3 years could be 82 first two years then 7 the third year. How about an AVERAGE of 70+ games? Or an AVERAGE of 70%+ games played? Would that work better?

Edit: for example, an average of 70+ over 3 seasons would not allow us to use D-Wade in the years of 06/07-08/09 if someone wanted to use that period. 70%+ average would make those 3 years eligible. Same thing for Yao Ming, 70+ average disallows him in the combination of 04/05-06/07, but 70%+ allows those years.

So the average of 70%+ is a lot more liberal with the years allowed, and the games limit of 70+ is more strict. The advantage of using the 70% is that it gives us more years to work with, AND it doesn't make us change up the requirements for lockout seasons. 70 games is more strict and there will be more evidence for and against your team, but there are advantages to larger sample sizes for obvious reasons, AND we will have to establish different criteria for lockout seasons, which is important because whoever picks LeBron is likely to want to have that first championship season in there.

I am fine with either.

[DHodgkins]

Let's get this started!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[MisterHibachi]

Let's get this started!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I'm ready to get it started but we need to iron out the last remaining issue of the eligibility criteria for the 3 year peaks.

[DHodgkins]

Let's get this started!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I'm ready to get it started but we need to iron out the last remaining issue of the eligibility criteria for the 3 year peaks.

At least 50 games each year?

[MisterHibachi]

Let's get this started!


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I'm ready to get it started but we need to iron out the last remaining issue of the eligibility criteria for the 3 year peaks.

At least 50 games each year?

150 games out of a possible 246? That might be a little too low, in my opinion.

[Quotatious]

150 games out of a possible 246? That might be a little too low, in my opinion.

I think your previous suggestion - 70% in each season would be better. It'd be 57 games in every season, or maybe 75% (62 games) one of the two for me, personally I like 62 games more. In lockout years, it'd be either 35 games with 70% mark or 38 games with 75% mark in 1998-99 and 46 games (70%) or 50 games (75%) in 2011-12.

Let's pick one of those and get it started on the first of January.

[MisterHibachi]

150 games out of a possible 246? That might be a little too low, in my opinion.

I think your previous suggestion - 70% in each season would be better. It'd be 57 games in every season, or maybe 75% (62 games) one of the two for me, personally I like 62 games more. In lockout years, it be either 35 games with 70% mark or 38 games with 75% mark in 1998-99 and 46 games (70%) or 50 games (75%) in 2011-12.

Let's pick one of those a get it started on the first of January.

i'm down for this. 75% of games over 3 seasons is a reasonable criteria. That's 185 games out of a possible 246.

[Quotatious]

Discussion here grounded to a halt, so what's left to be determined? Are we ready to start?
I think everything's been already said, so it's time to begin the draft, right?

[Doctor MJ]

Discussion here grounded to a halt, so what's left to be determined? Are we ready to start?
I think everything's been already said, so it's time to begin the draft, right?

Alright so, presuming there's no other mod who has stepped forward, I'll agree to be a co-runner of the project which I presume you'd want since it's hard to run a project like this without being able to do things like sticky threads and be primed to deal with GMs going nuts. (You haven't asked me, and it's fine if you don't want me, but I think you'll need someone to help you if not me.)

Hibachi, I assume you'd be the lead project runner on this? As a co-runner, I'd expect to have some PM discussions with you along the way and an ability to step in to make decisions if you're away, but we'd all be expecting you to be the one putting in the biggest efforts.

So where exactly are we at? Is the list of GMs already established, or does there need to be an official sign up?

[Bruh Man]

Discussion here grounded to a halt, so what's left to be determined? Are we ready to start?
I think everything's been already said, so it's time to begin the draft, right?

Alright so, presuming there's no other mod who has stepped forward, I'll agree to be a co-runner of the project which I presume you'd want since it's hard to run a project like this without being able to do things like sticky threads and be primed to deal with GMs going nuts. (You haven't asked me, and it's fine if you don't want me, but I think you'll need someone to help you if not me.)

Hibachi, I assume you'd be the lead project runner on this? As a co-runner, I'd expect to have some PM discussions with you along the way and an ability to step in to make decisions if you're away, but we'd all be expecting you to be the one putting in the biggest efforts.

So where exactly are we at? Is the list of GMs already established, or does there need to be an official sign up?

I think everything is ironed out and it seems like we already have a list of participants so no need for an official sign up thread. We just need to determine draft order and then get this thing started.

[john248]

Discussion here grounded to a halt, so what's left to be determined? Are we ready to start?
I think everything's been already said, so it's time to begin the draft, right?

I'm guessing people are busy with holiday stuff for New Year's. At least for me, I can momentarily hop behind a computer or check on my phone once in a while. Maybe we can list all the rules in 1 post for the time being.

Participants in 16 team league:
MisterHibachi
Notanoob
Quotatious
whitehops
DHodgkins
Bruh Man
Narigo
ThunderDan9
Sagittaron
RSCD3_
CaliBullsFan
john248
Mars_Blackmon
ardee
O_6
batmana

Judges:
bastillon, TMACFORMVP

Doctor MJ volunteered to help run.

ABBBABABAB 10 round draft.

The drafted players will be discussed as how the NBA is today (ie, rules, play styles, strategies).

Each drafted player will be evaluated based on a 3 year peak/prime during their NBA career 1980+ which is determined by the participant. The player must have played in 75% of the games each season.

No player can be drafted twice (ie 1989 Jordan & 1991 Jordan).

No trades.

Set minutes/roles.

Time allowed for draft picks? Someone suggested 4 hours.

ardee put the list in a randomizer and got this.

Narigo
Notanoob
Sagittaron
batmana
RSCD3_
ThunderDan9
CaliBullsFan
john248
Quotatious
DHodgkins
Bruh Man
ardee
MisterHibachi
O_6
Mars_Blackmon
whitehops

[Doctor MJ]

Oh wow, I had no idea that there was a list and my name wasn't on it. lol Eh, might be better that way.

Okay, the one thing I see on there that's not quite adequate is in hammering in exactly how the timing works.

I would presume that people don't literally want to have to wait 4 hours for the next pick if the person on the clock has already picked. So this is going to mean that basically that if you can't check in every 4 hours - and no one can - there's going to be some kind of problem. Do people understand?

Is it decided how that problem will be dealt with?