PC Board All-Time Fantasy League Project - Discussion Thread

[Quotatious]

Conduct a 12 hour poll in the Player Comparison forum?

This way guys who are participating in the project could vote for themselves.

[john248]

Agree with Quotatius. Get rid of a judge or recruit 1 more. If Laimbeer wants to judge since he's here, that'd help. I've been thinking about GM judges as they get eliminated...could go either way, but for the sake of consistency...

Personally, I think each round should last only 3-5 days of discussion then the judges give their votes on the last day. My guess is how many games a team wins in a series will ultimately not matter and probably will create a mess. I can see some drama where 1 team will win the series vote but the losing team somehow having more total wins.

I'd just make a separate thread for each head to head. Eventually it'll go from 8 games to 4. This is better discussed with one of the participating moderators than any of us.

[ThunderDan9]

Agree with Quotatius. Get rid of a judge or recruit 1 more. If Laimbeer wants to judge since he's here, that'd help.

Personally, I think each round should last only 3-5 days of discussion then the judges give their votes on the last day. My guess is how many games a team wins in a series will ultimately not matter and probably will create a mess. I can see some drama where 1 team will win the series vote but the losing team somehow having more total wins.

I'd just make a separate thread for each head to head. Eventually it'll go from 8 games to 4. This is better discussed with one of the participating moderators than any of us.

+1

[john248]

Alright, so any other ideas on tie breakers? I think that's the last remaining issue before I make the threads.

GM vote is a possibility.

Conduct a 12 hour poll in the Player Comparison forum?

I wouldn't mind this at all as an unofficial vote.

[O_6]

I think we should all make a General post about why our team can do damage in these playoffs before any individual matchup-related post.

- Team A makes a general post about Team A's strengths and why they can make a run in this tournament. They talk about what they bring to the table that other teams (general) will have trouble with. For example, one thing I could mention is my Ewing/Rasheed frontcourt as a great defensive frontcourt that is a good fit offensively.

- Team B makes the same post about their Team. I'm playing batmana, he can make a post about surrounding Shaq with some great athletes on the perimeter and whatever else he feels like mentioning.


I think it's important that we all make general posts about what our team brings to the table and what our team's identity is. I really want to read how the GM's feel about their teams in a general sense, not just in a matchup-related sense.

And then after that post, everyone will get a better understanding of what that particular team is trying to do. And then we can get into the playoffs where people can make matchup-related posts about why their team can take advantage of the other team in a certain area.

I'm really not sure about the tiebreaker, clearly something we have to figure out.

[MisterHibachi]

I think we should all make a General post about why our team can do damage in these playoffs before any individual matchup-related post.

That's a good idea. those should go in the Playoff thread. Discussion can remain here tho.

[MisterHibachi]

Wait, so are we against the judging system now? I thought that was a good idea because it would tell us how close the two teams really are.

[john248]

having 5 judges vote for 1 team and 4 others vote for another team does the same thing lol

now we're just adding some arbitrary number of how games a series would go and who would win it.

[ThunderDan9]

ThunderDan Suns

Howard/Divac
Grant/Bird/Josh Smith
Bird/King/Josh Smith
Ginobili/Majerle
Price/D. Harper

I wanted to build a team that feels like a real team. A team that I could envision as a functioning unit, rather than a random assembly of individually good players. I mainly tried to draft players who understand the team concept, are unselfish (!), and do whatever it takes to win. That may be a generalization, but still... No ego clashes, no headcases (I don't think there would be too much problem with even Bernard, he would like the opportunity to finally play WITH a TALENTED team).

I did not drafted defensive specialists in the mold of Bowen or Ben Wallace... the defense would be still pretty good, with a true defensive anchor in the middle (3*DPOY Dwight) surrounding him with players who again understand the importance of team play on the defensive end as well. Team defense should be great with high basketball iq guys like Bird, Ginobili, Grant, who are also capable defenders individually. Put in tenacious defenders like Majerle and Derek Harper and Josh Smith or even smart Divac... I don't think it would be pleasant to play against my team. This team would also generate some steals, and the rebounding of my starting 5 would be one of the best in the whole field (maybe even #1?). All in all: Bird is paired with an all-time great defensive center, a true difference maker, and gets another great defensive big man in Grant who is quick and athletic enough to switch the forwards of the opposing team occacionally, and good perimeter defenders like Gino, Majerle, Harper... with the fregoli man Josh Smith.

My offense should be a nice balance as well.
My team is led of course by arguably the best offensive player ever, 3*MVP Larry Bird. I don't want to go into details how many ways he can hurt the opponent... There is Dwight Howard in the middle, who doesn't shoot a great many volume of shots, but that's not a bad thing considering that my team features plenty of offensive threats... so his relative flaw (not a dominant scorer with polished offensive moves, like a Hakeem or Kareem) almost turns into a benefit. As we all know, he is still a big threat on the court due to his extreme athleticism, and he would have a) plenty of space because he is surrounded by 3 excellent shooters (Bird, Price, Ginobili) and 1 good midrange shooter (Grant), and b) when the situation occurs, he would be fed by excellent passers (again: Bird, Price, Ginobili) to score easy buckets.

And here we are at a big forte of my team: passing. Bird is the best passer at his position, prime Price is a great playmaker, a sharp passer and Ginobili is also an elite passer at his position. Grant is no slouch in that department, either. The ball movement should be smooth, and would consistently create good scoring opportunities. Great passing also makes it very hard to double-team any of my key players... and Bird, Price and even Ginobili are not easy to guard 1-on-1. As a rule, Price is the player who initiates the attack, breaking down the first line of defense... a pick-and-roll with Bird would be pretty unstoppable, lol. And then comes Bird with his unpredictible game, Manu driving to the basket, dishing out to Price or Bird, or making a cut to the basket scoring of a Bird-pass from the post, the creativity (!), passing and shooting of my players would open so many possibilites. Shooting: with some cheating, I almost have TWO 50-40-90 guys... that's insane. Add Manu and a reliable midrange-shot from Grant.

i think my team is capable to pick apart any defense with these kind of well-rounded skill-sets.
For all the good points there might be - in absolute terms - a weakness to my offense: Bird doesn't have McHale in this case. Grant is not that kind of supper-efficient post-player... but then comes Bernard King off the bench with his virtually unstoppable post game from the baseline! He would be another exceptional offensive force... think about it, he was so hard to stop when entire defenses focused on him - now imagine playing him alongside with Bird and co. Majerle and Harper can't be left alone either. They are great shooters! And then there is the finesse game of Vlade, another excellent passer and team player... comparable to 86 Walton.

Let's suppose any given opponent fought bravely to force a thrilling endgame... my team is led by one of the "clutchest" players ever! Is there a better finisher at the end of games than Larry? Only that he is accompanied by a Mark Price and Manu Ginobili... Defenses should be overburdened... and you can't really afford to foul them, because both Price and Bird are 90% FT shooters...

I think my team would excel in the half-court, but could also run the fast-break effectively because of a) dominant defensive rebounding, b) the occasional steals from Manu, Larry etc., c) all of the starting 5 can run the floor, d) passing, passing, passing, passing... did I mention, passing? A Price-Ginobili-Bird fast-break would be pretty scary, with two super-athlete big men in addition... Bernard King was also a freakishly good player in the transition... It is all situational, and my players - especially Larry - would make the best decision in the heat of the game.

I like my team, it would be fun to watch.
And I trust the fierce competitiveness and high basketball iq of BIRD, Ginobili and co.

[Bruh Man]

Alright, so any other ideas on tie breakers? I think that's the last remaining issue before I make the threads.

GM vote is a possibility.

I don't think it's an issue we can just add an extra judge if it occurs, you should go ahead and create the match ups thread. Maybe we can just do one thread where we all post our strategies and then have judges vote.

[whitehops]

for starters you have to have an odd number of judges. from that there are two ways we can do it. first the judges can just vote who wins the series, whoever more judges vote for wins. second we can do wins and tally those up. if it comes down to a tie whoever had more judges think they would win gets the W (no need to re-vote). at the end of the day the tiebreak would just be the first system I suggested.


either way, get an odd number of judges and then it's pretty simple.

[MisterHibachi]

Alright, the wins system is creating unnecessary complications. We'll ditch that and stick to simple votes from judges.

We have 8 judges. If a tie occurs, we can either put it to a 12 hour vote to the PC board or we can put it to a tie breaking vote from the other GMs.

That should be the last issue. What do people prefer?

As we discuss that, I will create the threads for match ups 1-8 and 2-7 in each conference. I don't know how long it will take to decide each match up, so tomorrow, I will create the threads for the remaining match ups. Once every match up is decided, we will move on to the next round.

As ThunderDan9 did, you can write up a general strategy and post it in the Playoff thread here: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299878

It'll be easily accessable and good to read each general strategy. It would just all get lost if we write it in this thread, the thread is pretty big already. We will leave general discussion to this thread of course.

In each matchup, GMs will put forth a general strategy and will have chances to offer counters to opponent strategy. Judges can of course ask questions to help them clarify anything.

[Bruh Man]

Alright, the wins system is creating unnecessary complications. We'll ditch that and stick to simple votes from judges.

We have 8 judges. If a tie occurs, we can either put it to a 12 hour vote to the PC board or we can put it to a tie breaking vote from the other GMs.

That should be the last issue. What do people prefer?

As we discuss that, I will create the threads for match ups 1-8 and 2-7 in each conference. I don't know how long it will take to decide each match up, so tomorrow, I will create the threads for the remaining match ups. Once every match up is decided, we will move on to the next round.

As ThunderDan9 did, you can write up a general strategy and post it in the Playoff thread here: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299878

It'll be easily accessable and good to read each general strategy. It would just all get lost if we write it in this thread, the thread is pretty big already. We will leave general discussion to this thread of course.

In each matchup, GMs will put forth a general strategy and will have chances to offer counters to opponent strategy. Judges can of course ask questions to help them clarify anything.

This works if a tie occurs the 12 hour PC vote sounds fine, maybe even make it 24 hours so more people vote.

[MisterHibachi]

RSCD3_ vs Bruh Man: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299929

[MisterHibachi]

DHodgkins vs HeartBreakKid: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299931

[MisterHibachi]

Narigo vs. MisterHibachi: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299933

[MisterHibachi]

batmana vs. O_6: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299935

[MisterHibachi]

The other 4 match ups of the first round start tmrw.

[Quotatious]

When I mentioned that Thunder Dan's team and my team are very similar, he agreed, so I think there's not really that much to be added to his description.

My team is also led my a great defensive center (Alonzo) who can score 20 PPG on very good efficiency, but his advantage over Dwight is the fact that he could knock down 15 footers fairly consistently, and he's a significantly better FT shooter. Both guys were really poor as passers, so that's a weakness that can potentially be exploited, but it's not really that big of an issue, because you can just limit their touches, or limit how many times they pass out of the low post, so they wouldn't have the opportunity to make a bad pass. Instead, they can attack the rim and try to draw fouls, or even finish and-1's, because both are so strong that it's hard not to let them overpower you under the basket.

Our leaders are also similar in terms of the caliber of player they were - Bird and Kobe are both among the most skilled offensive players ever, and both were crazy competitors who would do anything in order to win. I'd really like it if Kobe could cut down on his FGAs, 16-18 FGA per game would be the number of shots from the field that I'd like him to take. That's already less than Kobe has ever taken in his prime. There's no reason for him to shoot more, because I also have two others 25 PPG scorers - Alex English and Chris Mullin. I went with 2007-09 Kobe, and by 2007, he was already so frustrated by playing with scrubs (except Odom), that after the 2007 playoffs ended for the Lakers, he said that he would rather play on Pluto than with them. I'm sure he'd appreciate having such talented teammates like English, Mullin or Zo. Both guys (Mully and English) were really unselfish and proved that they could coexist with other high-octane scorers (English played with Kiki Vandeweghe in the three seasons that I selected - 1982-84, and Mullin obviously played for the Warriors during the Run TMC era, with Mitch Richmond and Tim Hardaway), so I'm sure they'd be fine with less FGA. I'd like both to take 14-16 shots per game. The reason I selected 1982-84 English, even though it might not have been his peak just yet, is because who was a lower USG% player than he'd eventually become later on in his career. He was still good enough to be chosen to the All-NBA Second Team twice during this stretch, and when you consider what kind of opposition he had to play against at the SF spot, that's very impressive.
English also averaged well over one steal and one block per game during that timespan, and he was a very good athlete capable of making chasedown blocks and disrupting opponents' offensive schemes because he could jump into the passing lanes and use his very long arms pretty well in this situation.

Chauncey Billups is just a perfect complement for these guys, because he could be very effective without dominating the ball. He had excellent post game and moved without the ball very well. He was also an All-Defensive caliber player, and was actually chosen to the All-D 2nd Team twice, one of them was in 2006, so that's a year which is a part of the stretch that I chose.

Buck Williams should be a great complement for Zo because he was a very athletic, relentless, tenacious rebounder and an excellent defender.

Lamar Odom was an amazingly versatile player, capable of everything from running a team as a point forward, rebounding and playing good man defense, to knocking down jumpshots. He's a PERFECT player for a fantasy draft team.

Brad Miller was an excellent passing bigman, solid defensive rebounder, and a very good shooter with excellent range (he could even knock down an occasional 3 pointer)
Darrell Armstrong and Doug Christie were two bulldogs on defense, and also really capable of being useful and productive on offense. Christie was an elite man defender, one of the toughest opponents Kobe ever faced (well, now he won't have to worry about guarding Bryant ). He was an excellent passer and a really solid shooter (37% from the 3 point land on almost 3 attempts per game, and 85% from the FT line!!!). I think he was a better player than Shane Battier and Bruce Bowen, so I'm really happy about nabbing him.

My second unit (Miller, Odom, Mullin, Christie, Armstrong) is tailor made for playing the Princeton offense, so I'm sure I'll try to take advantage of that quite a bit. Mullin could also easily beat his man off the dribble, or create a high percentage midrange shot by throwing him off balance. Mullin/Odom pick and rolls and pick & pops are something that I'm really looking forward to run.

I want to always have two of my top 3 wing players (Kobe, English, Mullin) on the floor, so one of them will be resting on the bench, while the other two will take care of my offense. This way I won't lose anything in terms of my offensive efficiency and productivity (Kobe and English are 57+ TS% scorers, and Mullin was over 60%TS, so good luck leaving any of them uncovered on the perimeter ).

[MisterHibachi]

Guys, you mind copying and pasting that onto the playoff thread: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1299878

I don't want it getting lost in this thread.