ATFL Western: (1) DHodgkins vs. (8) HeartBreakKid

[Notanoob]

My problem with HeartBreakKid is having Stockton and KJ on the same team. I don't know if KJ would be cool with coming off the bench. He's too close to Stockton to be clearly worse, even though we all know that the fit is better. I don't know how big of an ego he had, but HBK might have to start him to keep the peace, or do some serious time sharing.

[HeartBreakKid]

I do agree that KJ is probably a better player than John is. The reason for starting John is this

- John has slightly more useful utility for what I need. I wanted someone I could really trust from 3 point range. I did not need to prioritize scoring (not that KJ is a hog), so Stockton's playmaking was a nice addition. I also liked Stockton's dirty D, I wanted my team to be very physical (I was going to draft Charles Oakley as well).

- KJ's aggression made him a better candidate for 6th man than John. I want KJ to be a God amongst men against the second unit. Stockton would still be a good 6th man, but in an all time type of scenario people may not be too high on his ability to take over. If KJ is coming off the bench, most people will give him credit in that he will get his.

[Doctor MJ]

First off I want to compliment both GMs for doing a thorough job explaining themselves. That's something I take seriously as a judge because it is certainly the case that any group of players can be misused. I think both guys here know what they are doing, but of course someone has to lose.

Now, my understanding is that I'm not really supposed to weight in with specifics, so I'm just going to cast my judge's vote:

HeartBreakKid wins this.

Since both participants want more details, I'll give them. Apologies up front, I'm going to tend to focus on what tipped the scales for me when i make comments such as this, so the loser is going to come across bad even though it's clearly a team with tons of potential:

I tend to start looking at teams based on the initiator on offense. If it's more of a pass first guy, then I expect to see more scorers, if he's more shoot first I expect to see more complimentary skills represented.

So with HeartBreakKid, when I see Stockton and then the 3 world class scoring threats of 3 separate types around him, it immediately makes sense. I also like the after picking Malone, he went with a more classic two-sided big for his other guy, and one proven to optimize efficiency as his volume decreases. Adding in KJ off the bench is perfect. There you have a guy who can truly take it start to finish if that's what the defensive lineup offers, and yet still a guy who is proven to know when to pass. The rest of the lineup is filled with hardnose guys that could serve as a change of pace if the more star-oriented leaders prove to be imbalanced. Just a great squad.

What about the age factor? Well it's my expectation that Malone is seen as the alpha of this team to the extent there is one. With that in place, I have no doubt that Erving and Gervin can continue to thrive and both are adept at picking their spots. I would agree with beast though that Gilmore's age is a bit tougher because you'd like to be able to think of him as a DPOY kind of guy, and he really isn't at this age. The team thus is more susceptible to penetration than you'd think at first glance.

For DHodgkins, we being with Thomas who really always thrived as the lead scorer on his squad. I shouldn't take that too far because it's not like he jacked like Iverson, but my expectation would be that a team building with Robinson & Isiah would want Robinson to be the clear #1 option (and his explanation seems to agree with this), and if you're doing that it would seem to me there are better guys to build around. I could imagine actually benching Isiah here for Rondo (to be clear: I'm not saying he's a better player than Isiah). Then I look at the other big in the lineup and it's the Webber who is only noteworthy because of his offense which always to rely on such heavy usage which he won't get here. To me he's strictly a bench guy in a league like this, but there's honestly no one on the bench I could see replacing him with.

Looking at the rest of the starting lineup we get Drexler and Nique - both guys known first and foremost for scoring, to go with two other scorers that are already paired with the 1st option Robinson. This team is going to have diminishing returns. No doubt about it. I then look to the bench and see Walker & Sprewell and I'm just confused. I don't want to blow them out of proportion - the last two picks aren't typically going to decide a matchup - but when you're drafting guys who have a reputation for having negative impact in the wrong place, you should have a very clear plan for how to use them. An approach of "hey, they might heat up" just doesn't sell for me because we're talking about which team would be better in general. Nate Robinson can win games for teams every once in a while, but you would never expect him to take a series for you.

Good job on the writeups guys and good luck to both GMs! I've lost in the first round of one of these two so I know what it's like - don't stop believin'!

[therealbig3]

Now, my understanding is that I'm not really supposed to weight in with specifics, so I'm just going to cast my vote:

Oh snap, is this true?

MisterHibachi, I can edit out my post if you would like.

[Doctor MJ]

Now, my understanding is that I'm not really supposed to weight in with specifics, so I'm just going to cast my vote:

Oh snap, is this true?

MisterHibachi, I can edit out my post if you would like.

Wasn't trying to tell anyone they were doing it wrong. But I will elaborate a bit if that's what Hibachi prefers.

[DHodgkins]

Doctor MJ is Julius Erving biased

[HeartBreakKid]

I thought it was the opposite. Shouldn't judges explain their reasoning? I certainly enjoy reading it.

[DHodgkins]

I thought it was the opposite. Shouldn't judges explain their reasoning? I certainly enjoy reading it.

Agreed

[john248]

Doctor MJ is Julius Erving biased

I agree!

I'd like to see the judges take after the voting is finished.

[penbeast0]

I think the Playoff OP said Judges should write their comments and questions to the GMs which I take as an invitation to bloviate.

Two comments made by GMs I disagree with. First, I don't think Gilmore is going to be a true defensive anchor in his NBA incarnation. His knee injury slowed him down a lot and made him much more of a stationary, close to the basket player. This made him even more efficient offensively if you got the ball into him; he could outmuscle anyone of his era. But, without the athleticism and mobility he had in the ABA, his personality tended strongly to being overly passive. Still a terrific low post scorer and lowpost man defender but he won't show out terribly will against mobile opponents or on PnR type offenses. He also might clog up the low post for KMalone when the Mailman tries to use his strength to post up rather than play PnR at the high or mid.

Second, neither Isiah nor Drexler's strength was coming off screens as an jump shooter. Both were primarily ball in hand creators and Isiah's ego in that role might be a problem too. On the other hand, Nique, for all his highlights and iso game, wasn't a me guy and Isiah will clearly be the alpha dog running the show. The "only one ball" is going to be a bigger problem for DHodgkins's team.

Head to head, I think Heartbreak Kid's offense will be effective. Both Gilmore and Malone have a lowerbody strength advantage for establishing post position and Stockton and KJ are both outstanding passers into the post. Webber however, much as I dislike him, was an effective PnR defender; it played to his strengths which were his mobility and athleticism. DRob was outstanding in that respect too and Isiah was an extremely aggressive man defender on the point (better than Stockton though Stockton was a better team defender). I don't think the PnR is going to be supereffective; however the traditional post offense will be and attacking from the wing against Nique will be as well. So, over the series, I see HBK as being able to play his offensive game with good success.

I don't see DHodgkins doing as well. The Admiral had trouble against defenses that could pack in against him, he needed interior room to operate and with Gilmore and Malone, plus ok but far from great range on the wings, he isn't going to get that. This was traditionally a recipe for playoff offensive woes for him. Nique was never particularly efficient, nor was Isiah, though Nique can post and muscle Gervin if Erving (or Bowen) is on Drexler (and Drexler will light Gervin up too). KJ will be badly overmatched against Drexler (or Nique) as well, though Spreewell isn't dynamic enough to be the same level of problem. Since KJ has a bigger role than Spree, this could be an opportunity for DHodgkins too. But, with questionable primary options, secondary options who are not playing to their strengths, and some issues with personalities and clutch history as well, I just don't see DHodgkins's team being able to impose their will on the series as effectively.

VOTE: Heartbreak Kid

[DHodgkins]

My team is being described as selfish and having too many people wanting the ball.

Thomas = 11.9 apg
Drexler = 6.2 apg
Wilkins = 2.9 apg
Webber = 4.3 apg
Robinson = 3.6 apg

Total= 28.9

Stockton = 14.1 apg
Gervin = 2.7 apg
Erving = 4.3 apg
Malone = 4.2 apg
Gilmore = 1.8 apg

Total = 27.1

Wilkins is the one most people are saying shooting too much or wanting the ball. Gervin averages less assists per game and shoots only 0.3 FGA per game less than Nique. However, I don't see anyone seeing anyone talking about him.

[Doctor MJ]

My problem with HeartBreakKid is having Stockton and KJ on the same team. I don't know if KJ would be cool with coming off the bench. He's too close to Stockton to be clearly worse, even though we all know that the fit is better. I don't know how big of an ego he had, but HBK might have to start him to keep the peace, or do some serious time sharing.

In situations like these I tend to give the benefit of the doubt unless the player had a malcontent reputation that ties into how we see him as a player. Undoubtedly in this league more ego problems would emerge, but I don't find it productive to speculate without basis in any one direction because it'd be a potential issue everywhere.

One can also certainly make the argument that even the malcontents would probabilistically be fine in a situation like this, and depending on the argument I might buy it. While I maintain that I didn't make any decisions based on the 9th or 10th guys here, to me Walker & Sprewell are guys who need to massaged in order to buy in to team systems. Sprewell's issues are obvious, but I think easier to argue away. Walker the problem is that to me he showed bad tendencies in development almost no matter which way you looked. I don't even know what I'd want to tell him to do to be a successful part of a team.

[Notanoob]

I do agree that KJ is probably a better player than John is. The reason for starting John is this

- John has slightly more useful utility for what I need. I wanted someone I could really trust from 3 point range. I did not need to prioritize scoring (not that KJ is a hog), so Stockton's playmaking was a nice addition. I also liked Stockton's dirty D, I wanted my team to be very physical (I was going to draft Charles Oakley as well).

- KJ's aggression made him a better candidate for 6th man than John. I want KJ to be a God amongst men against the second unit. Stockton would still be a good 6th man, but in an all time type of scenario people may not be too high on his ability to take over. If KJ is coming off the bench, most people will give him credit in that he will get his.

I agree with starting Stockton over KJ, I just don't know if KJ would actually be okay with it. That was my point.

[Laimbeer]

I do agree that KJ is probably a better player than John is. The reason for starting John is this

- John has slightly more useful utility for what I need. I wanted someone I could really trust from 3 point range. I did not need to prioritize scoring (not that KJ is a hog), so Stockton's playmaking was a nice addition. I also liked Stockton's dirty D, I wanted my team to be very physical (I was going to draft Charles Oakley as well).

- KJ's aggression made him a better candidate for 6th man than John. I want KJ to be a God amongst men against the second unit. Stockton would still be a good 6th man, but in an all time type of scenario people may not be too high on his ability to take over. If KJ is coming off the bench, most people will give him credit in that he will get his.

I agree with starting Stockton over KJ, I just don't know if KJ would actually be okay with it. That was my point.

Most of the bench players in this tournament were starters. No reason to wonder more about KJ than anyone else unless you have evidence he was inclined toward that kind of thing. And KJ > Stockton is realgm folklore.

[Doctor MJ]

Doctor MJ is Julius Erving biased

Funny but in all seriousness, I think it's fine to point out the potential bias of a judge. In my explanation you'll see I specifically mention I start looking at teams based on who starts the show on offense, and I've been said to have a bias toward "pure" point guards. This is something you might be able to score some points with.

Also, note that I'm responding to this comment of yours and not the one where you're listing out assists which would seem to be in response to me and others. It's not my intention to rebut your rebuttals. If you sway me I'll say something, otherwise I'll let you have the last word.

[therealbig3]

I do agree that KJ is probably a better player than John is. The reason for starting John is this

- John has slightly more useful utility for what I need. I wanted someone I could really trust from 3 point range. I did not need to prioritize scoring (not that KJ is a hog), so Stockton's playmaking was a nice addition. I also liked Stockton's dirty D, I wanted my team to be very physical (I was going to draft Charles Oakley as well).

- KJ's aggression made him a better candidate for 6th man than John. I want KJ to be a God amongst men against the second unit. Stockton would still be a good 6th man, but in an all time type of scenario people may not be too high on his ability to take over. If KJ is coming off the bench, most people will give him credit in that he will get his.

I agree with starting Stockton over KJ, I just don't know if KJ would actually be okay with it. That was my point.

Most of the bench players in this tournament were starters. No reason to wonder more about KJ than anyone else unless you have evidence he was inclined toward that kind of thing. And KJ > Stockton is realgm folklore.

It's really not. KJ at his best was awesome and peaked higher than Stockton.

[Notanoob]

Certainly, most bench guys were starters, but I think that if two players were very close, or could at least be perceived as being close, one of them might object to being on the bench. We made a point to emphasize that chemistry would be considered, and I know that I chose some guys because I thought they would be perfectly fine with coming off the bench. If we aren't going to consider that KJ might feel he's better than Stockton (he certainly scored more, which is how a lot of people evaluate things, and might cause KJ to feel he's better) during his peak, than the only real chemistry issues to consider would be outright trouble makers, and making sure none of the Bad Boys were on the same team as Bird or Jordan. That seems to make chemistry issues very minor. Now, KJ doesn't have a bad rep and Stockton is a better fit as the starter and better player, but I think we should at least consider that he might be a bit upset about coming off the bench.

[Doctor MJ]

One other factor I'd consider would be that players won't necessarily think of it as themselves vs another guy at their position. I agree with HeartBreak that Stockton makes more sense for the starting lineup, and that in many ways is because in the starting lineup it's not Stockton's team. The role of the 6th man microwave is long established and players seem to be content in the role as long as they know that they shouldn't be #1 in the starting lineup.

[HeartBreakKid]

People have mentioned KJ being upset during the draft but it doesn't really make sense here.

This is an all time draft. Everyone here is good, and ideally every star player in their prime wants to start. Just because KJ might be better than all the bench players doesn't change the fact that technically speaking, everyone will be disgruntled.

I think KJ just sticks out because he's a top ten peak PG, but it's really no different than most people's back up PGs.

Regardless, I did pros and cons when I drafted KJ in regards to his attitude toward the situation. My conclusion is, who cares? KJ is a professional, he'll still play hard as he had playing next to Barkley. The way I figured when I drafted KJ was that a pissed off KJ would still be better than everyone else's 3rd guard!

[MisterHibachi]

Judges:
bastillon
TMACFORMVP
penbeast0: HeartBreakKid
ronnymac2
Doctor MJ: HeartBreakKid
SideshowBob
Texas Chuck
therealbig3