All-Time Fantasy League (2014) - Playoffs: THUNDERDAN9 WINS

[ElGee]

The 3 year peaks were used to weed out the one year wonders. You should evaluate them on their average play across those 3 years. So that eliminated one season of very high play and other seasons of low/average play. Usually all 3 seasons would be comparable, but nevertheless, its the average of the 3 years.

Thanks. I find this to be a bit awkward (to say the least) -- you're asking me to imagine a Tracy McGrady that never existed...do I keep his accurate 3-point jumper from 2003? Or do I just scale back that one skill to attain an average?

In other words, how do you take an average of skills when the skills don't keep the same proportions to each other over the 3 years? There are guys that played at the same overall level over 3 year periods where they are adding in 3 areas to offset the loss in 3 other areas...

-

Well you aren't just evaluating 03 Tmac. You are evaluating him on a 3 year period. How did he perform over those 3 years. He had a hot 03, similar to how some player may have a hot January. But in the end you evaluate him over 3 years, same way you evaluate a guy over the entire season, not just that one hot month. I realize its kinda awkward, since its one series, and we are taking 3 years of a guy to evaluate him in one series, but its just simply averages. If one player had a hot year and he dropped off in the other years, that's gotta be counted in. Most drafted players had a relatively even level of play over the 3 years, but some varied and you gotta account for that drop off/jump in play.

I would just recommend evaluating this in the same way you evaluate a guy in any given season for one game. Some players have ridiculously hot months or hot weeks or stretches. If you look back on their season and you wanna know, on average, what kind of performance they're gonna give you for any given game, you gotta take their yearly numbers, not just their hot/cold stretch cuz that skews it a lot. If you wanna evaluate 03 Tmac and how he performed that season on average, you're gonna take his yearly numbers, not his numbers from a hot stretch of weeks because its not representative of his whole season. I think its similar to how you would evaluate a 3 year stretch.

Having a "hot" year is statistically unlikely...my general evaluation process is to see where players are in April. The April-early June stretch isn't a sufficient period of time to change players...at least I've never seen it. So while I understand what you are asking, it's not quite the same thing, because (a) aging is much more dramatic over 3 seasons and so is (b) increase and loss of certain skills.

My other question is what is the premise behind the teams? Do they know they are in an all-star tournament? What's the player motivation? How long have they played together? These would be major issues in understanding team chemistry.

(The two lockout seasons -- as well as a number of other things such as roster/coaching continuity -- have demonstrated how important practicing a cohesive system can be.)

[ronnymac2]

Question — As a judge, when can I place my vote?

[penbeast0]

Suggestion. Clear the threads and restart just having 2 matchups (1 east and 1 west) at a time. Takes a lot longer but builds suspense and the other players look in and comment instead of being monofocused on their own matchups. That and easier on the judges

Alright that's good with me. Problem is I'm not on a computer right now lol and have no way of saving my write up and don't lose it (along with all the comments). Do you, as a mod, mind locking all threads except the 1-8 match ups in each conference? That way we can keep the write ups already posted along with the comments. We can then open the threads when the time comes for them.

I stickied the 2 1-8 matches and locked the others What's the time deadline on them? Also -- you might want to have a mercy rule . . . whenever 4 judges vote the same way on a match, it's over. That way you don't need to worry about tiebreakers and can start the next matchup early if it's a clearcut win.

[HeartBreakKid]

I dont think a mercy rule is necessary, because a judge can change his or her opinion.

Btw, me and Hodkins match are live, we both posted our strategy - so feel free to vote in it!

[O_6]

Overview of My Team...

14th pick: Kevin Durant ('12-'14) -- SF/PF -- 29/8/4 on 50/40/89 (.633 TS%)
- I wasn't happy when I found out that I had the 14th pick. I wanted a Top 6 pick so I could lock up a legendary player and build around him. With my 14th pick, I was really just praying that one of Garnett/Robinson/Dirk would fall to my pick. But I realized that was unlikely to happen so I focused on other players. When my turn came up, the players in the mix to be drafted by me at this spot were Durant/Ewing/Barkley/Malone in that order. I was very close to selecting Ewing with this pick because as a great 2 way Center he was easier to build around than Durant, but Durant's dominant offensive game was too tempting to pass up. KD is one of the greatest scorers of all-time when you combine volume, efficiency, and portability. His ability to dominate offensively without needing the ball in his hands makes him so valuable in a setting like this. He gives me a #1 scorer who is clearly good enough to be the go-to guy for the team that wins this tournament.

19th pick: Patrick Ewing ('90-'92) -- C -- 26/11/2 + 3 blks on .529 FG% (.575 TS%)
- He was probably my 2nd choice behind Durant for my 1st overall pick, I was very happy to see him still available at this point. The only other player still available who I considered taking over Ewing was Steve Nash. I chose Ewing because he was one of the last truly dominant 2 way bigs, while there were plenty of top PGs besides Nash that could be had later on. The best perimeter scorer Ewing played with in New York during his prime was John Starks, that's a big reason why they always fell short against the MJ Bulls. Now instead of John Starks, Ewing gets to play with a mega-scorer in Durant who provides great spacing for Ewing to do his thing on the inside. Pairing up an all-time great scorer and offensive force in Durant with a 2 way monster like '90-'92 Ewing just seemed perfect.

35th pick: Penny Hardaway ('94-'96) -- PG/SG -- 20/5/7 on 50/31/76 (.581 TS%)
- With the Durant/Ewing duo being the backbone of my team, I was targeting a PG for my 3rd pick immediately after the Ewing pick. Because Durant has thrived with a PG like Westbrook who could both score and distribute, that was the style of PG I wanted to draft rather than a floor general like Stockton or Kidd. Kevin Johnson fell all the way to the 82nd pick, but this pick really came down to KJ vs. Penny. KJ was like a sick Tony Parker/Westbrook mix on offense, great player who would've been a great 3rd wheel to Durant/Ewing. But Penny was just a much more well-rounded player than KJ and someone who poses more matchup issues. Penny had such a diverse offensive game including a really mature post-up game, that was a skill I really valued because Durant's post-up game isn't elite. Again, in real life Ewing's best offensive teammate on the perimeter was probably John Starks. Now you give him a Penny/Durant duo on the perimeter? Elite PG + Elite Wing + Elite Big.

51st pick: Rasheed Wallace ('01-'03) -- PF/C -- 19/8/2 on 48/35/75 (.551 TS%)
- Rasheed was my target at this pick immediately after I made my Penny pick. I felt like he was the perfect guy when it came to bringing this team together. The 3nD player is one of the most valued assets in the league today, but usually those players are SFs. A 3nD PF is an extremely rare and unique asset, especially when that PF can abuse smaller defenders in the low post like Sheed can. Sheed was a 3nD PF who could defend guys like Duncan/KG/Howard as well as anyone in the league man-to-man while being a strong help defender. Sheed/Ewing is arguably the strongest defensive starting frontcourt in this league. Sheed can also be a Pick-n-Pop partner for Penny and Durant. His presence makes it much tougher to double Ewing, and he gives Durant/Penny more room to attack. I expect mixed feelings on Sheed because he definitely has his weaknesses, but I feel he could thrive in this setting where he will only be asked to be the #4 or #5 scoring option on the floor.

78th pick: Joe Johnson ('08-'10) -- SG/SF -- 22/5/6 on 44/37/83 (.536 TS%)
- This was a reach as far as the talent available, but I think he fits my team really well and he was a pretty damn versatile offensive SG in his prime. He can play off-the-ball and drill 3s or he can handle the ball and create for himself and others, his combination of ball-handling/passing + shooting at his size is a nice skillset to have. He's also a pretty solid defender, nothing special on that end but he's a good enough defender imo. Penny/JJ/KD/Sheed/Ewing is a lineup I plan to use a lot, and it's a matchup nightmare for a lot of teams. Everyone 6'7" or taller, 3 capable ball-handlers, 4 players with 3pt range, dominant interior defense + length on perimeter.

83rd pick: Dennis Johnson ('80-82) -- SG/PG -- 19/5/4 on 44/21/80 (.514 TS%)
- I wanted to solidify my defense with this pick. DJ was one of the best perimeter defenders still around who could also provide value on offense. His lack of a 3pt game is unfortunate, but he was a good mid-range shooter who could also get to the rim because of his athleticism. His defense was his calling card, he was a guy who could guard anyone under 6'8" due to his strength and athleticism. He would need to adjust to the 2014 perimeter defense rules, no hand-checking and less physicality. But he was such a good athlete that I think he could be an elite defender even with today's rules. As a defensive force, he's kind of like a mix of Kidd/Wade and '80-'82 is in the middle of his defensive prime. He gives me a defensive menace on the perimeter to help out my dominant interior defense of Ewing/Sheed.

110th pick: Joakim Noah ('12-'14) -- C/PF -- 11/11/3 + 2 blks on .484 FG% (.539 TS%)
- I wanted to fortify my interior with this pick. Ewing/Sheed is a great defensive 1-2 punch on the interior, but I wanted a very good #3 interior defender and I think I got one who fits in well with Noah. Noah isn't the biggest or strongest Center, but his agility and toughness make him a really good defensive player in today's game. Due to this quickness, he can guard slower PFs as well as Centers. He is also a strong rebounder which is something I wanted in a 3rd big to make up for Sheed. He isn't much of a scorer, but he is a very good passer for a Big which is something this team lacked. He can also hit the mid range jumper. I think he'd be a great and versatile hustle player who'd fit in well behind Ewing/Sheed.

115th pick: Shane Battier ('06-'08) -- SF/SG -- 10/5/2 on 45/40/74 (.575 TS%)
- I really didn't know what direction to go with this pick. I could've gone with one of a handful of PGs, but I felt like I needed to add a strong defensive wing. DJ was a great defender who could guard some SFs if he wanted to, but the addition of Battier gives me a taller option to put on wings. I wanted a guy who could defend someone like LeBron, Kobe, Bird, etc. and make them work. Battier might not shut them down but he could make them work extremely hard and was a very smart team defender. I also feel comfortable with him knowing that he can be an elite wing defender under today's rules. If DJ's lack of 3pt range or JJ's lack of elite D poses as a problem for my SG position, Battier is a guy who I can play at SG who can be the ultimate 3nD glue guy.

142nd pick: Antonio McDyess ('99-'01) -- PF -- 20/10/2 + 2 blks on .493 FG% (.532 TS%)
- With Ewing/Sheed/Noah, I felt like I had a great defensive frontcourt. But Ewing is really the only dominant interior scorer of those 3, I needed someone inside who could get buckets when Ewing was on the bench. McDyess was an explosive 20/10 big who was also an above-average defender. He was very athletic and is kind of like a poor man's Shawn Kemp. He gives me a guy who could play PF next to any one of my other bigs (Dyess/Sheed, Dyess/Ewing, Dyess/Noah) and do a lot of damage with his high energy/athletic play in limited minutes. Sheed + Dyess is a PF duo I'm really happy with.

147th pick: Terrell Brandon ('95-'97) -- PG -- 18/3/6 on 45/38/89 (.543 TS%)
- With a couple of combo guard types being the primary ball-handlers on my team, I wanted a true PG off the bench. I wanted a PG who could play fast, play slow, play off the ball, hit the 3, defend at a good enough level, and provide a good sense of floor leadership if my offense led by combo guards was looking stale. This is a player who the raw stats underrate. His Cavs were ranked DEAD LAST in Pace each of these 3 years. He played in a very slow Fratello offense and was forced to run the team in the halfcourt. His advanced metrics give you a better glimpse of how good of a player he was in his prime. He's the kind of professional PG who knows how to set others up while also being capable of scoring himself.

Ewing/Noah/Rasheed
Rasheed/McDyess/Noah/Durant
Durant/Battier/J.Johnson
DJ/J.Johnson/Battier/Penny
Penny/Brandon/DJ

I think I have a very balanced team. I don't think there are many starting perimeter offensive duos who are better than Penny/Durant in this league, considering how well they fit together and how good they were/are. I also don't think there are many starting interior defensive duos better than my Ewing/Sheed combo, and if there are any duos better I seriously doubt that that duo is also a better fit offensively than Ewing/Sheed. And as a top 4 backbone of a team, I don't think you will find many teams better off than my Durant/Ewing/Penny/Sheed core.

I surrounded those four with 2 elite wing defenders in DJ and Battier who brought different things to the table, a very good defensive big in Noah, 2 very good scorers off the bench in McDyess and Joe Johnson who weren't just scorers, and an impact floor general at the backup PG position. My team is strong at the top, deep, strong on both ends, and versatile.

[Doctor MJ]

Any bystanders interested in filling this ballot out?

Steal of the draft:
Reach of the draft:
He should have been drafted:
He should NOT have been drafted:
Best offensive team:
Best defensive team:
Strongest core (top 3 picks):
Match up you wanna see in the playoffs:
Top 3 teams:
Favourite to win the playoffs:
Any other categories you wanna comment on that I missed:

A fun thing to do. I'll fill it out once I've given votes on the first round. While in theory we can talk about steals & reaches in a vacuum, I find it both easier and more meaningful to do so within the team context.

[MisterHibachi]

Thanks. I find this to be a bit awkward (to say the least) -- you're asking me to imagine a Tracy McGrady that never existed...do I keep his accurate 3-point jumper from 2003? Or do I just scale back that one skill to attain an average?

In other words, how do you take an average of skills when the skills don't keep the same proportions to each other over the 3 years? There are guys that played at the same overall level over 3 year periods where they are adding in 3 areas to offset the loss in 3 other areas...

-

Well you aren't just evaluating 03 Tmac. You are evaluating him on a 3 year period. How did he perform over those 3 years. He had a hot 03, similar to how some player may have a hot January. But in the end you evaluate him over 3 years, same way you evaluate a guy over the entire season, not just that one hot month. I realize its kinda awkward, since its one series, and we are taking 3 years of a guy to evaluate him in one series, but its just simply averages. If one player had a hot year and he dropped off in the other years, that's gotta be counted in. Most drafted players had a relatively even level of play over the 3 years, but some varied and you gotta account for that drop off/jump in play.

I would just recommend evaluating this in the same way you evaluate a guy in any given season for one game. Some players have ridiculously hot months or hot weeks or stretches. If you look back on their season and you wanna know, on average, what kind of performance they're gonna give you for any given game, you gotta take their yearly numbers, not just their hot/cold stretch cuz that skews it a lot. If you wanna evaluate 03 Tmac and how he performed that season on average, you're gonna take his yearly numbers, not his numbers from a hot stretch of weeks because its not representative of his whole season. I think its similar to how you would evaluate a 3 year stretch.

Having a "hot" year is statistically unlikely...my general evaluation process is to see where players are in April. The April-early June stretch isn't a sufficient period of time to change players...at least I've never seen it. So while I understand what you are asking, it's not quite the same thing, because (a) aging is much more dramatic over 3 seasons and so is (b) increase and loss of certain skills.

My other question is what is the premise behind the teams? Do they know they are in an all-star tournament? What's the player motivation? How long have they played together? These would be major issues in understanding team chemistry.

(The two lockout seasons -- as well as a number of other things such as roster/coaching continuity -- have demonstrated how important practicing a cohesive system can be.)

I'm not sure if I agree with evaluating a player's year based on how he looks in April, if that's what you're saying.

We never really hammered out why we were doing a draft. There wasn't really a story behind it, but I guess you can say that these players somehow all ended up in 2013 and there was a draft to disperse them amongst 16 teams (league got contracted from 30 teams for whatever reasons ). So they are competing for the NBA championship in this 16 team league, that's their motivation. Judges decide how good a chemistry they would have.

[MisterHibachi]

Question — As a judge, when can I place my vote?

In the match up threads.

[SideshowBob]

Sorry if I've missed this. When must we place a vote by? Have a good amount of free time tomorrow and Tuesday evening so I should be able to tackle the matchups then, but I can get a jump on it if it needs to be done sooner.

[MisterHibachi]

Sorry if I've missed this. When must we place a vote by? Have a good amount of free time tomorrow and Tuesday evening so I should be able to tackle the matchups then, but I can get a jump on it if it needs to be done sooner.

We haven't set a deadline. I'm not sure how long it would take to adequately settle each match up. Not everyone is, and can be, online at the same time. But I think a day or two for each match up should be good. So, I guess tmrw would be a good deadline?

How about a deadline of 1 or 2 days AFTER both GMs have posted their first write up?

Regardless, the match ups open right now aren't due tonight, so you can tackle them tmrw if that's more convenient for you.

[batmana]

Since the other matchups got locked for the time being, do I have to post my team's overall mindset and strategy here or is it OK to wait for the matchup to become active and post there? I see that my opponent already posted his general ideas and I will read his resume when I have enough time.

[MisterHibachi]

Since the other matchups got locked for the time being, do I have to post my team's overall mindset and strategy here or is it OK to wait for the matchup to become active and post there? I see that my opponent already posted his general ideas and I will read his resume when I have enough time.

The match up strategy go in the match up thread when it opens again. Your drafting strategy/process/mindset go in this thread. Why you drafted the players you did, was there a particularly tough choice, what kind of team were you aiming for, stuff like that. Your precise strategy of defeating an opponent goes in the match up thread itself.

[batmana]

OK, I am going to explain my draft choices and give a rough idea about what my team should look like.

In order of drafting them:

Shaquille O'Neal - he was an easy choice, the player I had 2nd overall behind Jordan on my personal list. He will be the centerpiece of this team. Absolutely dominant offensively, a factor defensively despite not considered a defensive specialist. An excellent passer who allowed me to build around him in a number of ways.

Grant Hill - a perimeter superstar who can be relied on defensively unlike many 1-way players who were elite scorers. In real life injuries prevented us from possibly another Scottie Pippen, and I believe he would be great in such a role where he is clearly not the 1st option. Chose him over Clyde Drexler mainly because of his superior defensive ability.

Paul George - I may have reached by drafting him in the 3rd round but ultimately I am happy with this pick. An excellent 2-way perimeter player who has the size to guard 3s without a problem and who is really good (not great because I have to average out 3 seasons) offensively and can hit the 3 ball at an excellent rate.

Russell Westbrook - my version of the elite athletic perimeter player to put next to Shaq. Russell can create his own shot as good as anyone else, yet he can distribute the ball well. Defensively, he is not known as a stopper but he can play any PG 1-on-1. Offensively he will have to split the defense when there are no other options and make sure my team does not experience any scoring droughts. It is interesting that I imagined many PGs on my team that gave it different looks but ultimately settled on my PG being also a volume scorer.

Brandon Roy - another elite player at the 2/3 positions, albeit elite goes only for his offense. He was truly special and could score 1-on-1 without a problem. He could hit the 3 ball but had an excellent mid-range game which is truly important when playing against excellent defensive players/teams which I will no doubt face. Known for his clutchness.

Anthony Mason - a little bit of a jack-of-all-trades player but mainly a hard-nosed rugged defender and rebounder who would not let his size prevent him from banging with the big dudes. Deceptively skilled with the ball, could create offense for himself and others off the dribble when he had to. Could easily come off the bench without pouting. Despite the "bad boy" image not a locker-room problem.

Toni Kukoc - a skilled sixth man who could initiate offense from the wing and could score with almost unlimited range. A natural mismatch for most wings with his 6-11 frame. Active defensively and excellent in the open court. Also a clutch player.

Charles Oakley - if there is anyone more rugged and tougher than Mason, it must be this guy. An absolute enforcer, a rebounding savant, and a defensive force. Will set the entire team's mindset with his defensive leadership. Could hit a mid-range jumper if left wide open which could happen a lot on a team with Shaq and perimeter stars. Chose him over several PFs who were much better offensively but decided that my team doesn't need another offensive force who would demand touches. Neither of those other players was such a great rebounder though. I decided that for a real team it would be much better to have a player who has elite skills outside scoring, and with a post presence as Shaq, I found it unnecessary to focus on a scoring PF. Oakley (and Mason) are the perfect additions to a team that doesn't need another scorer. They provide skills that are essential to winning basketball games such as rebounding, defense and overall leadership.

Mike Conley - an underrated PG who is a great scorer while not being shoot-first. He would hit the 3 if given any space, and can play off-ball to maximize that. Defensively a truly elite PG, being capable of applying pressure on the opposing ball-handler and not afraid of getting physical despite his size. Could play the passing lanes well. As an added bonus, he is excellent in the clutch and could be used in those moments despite not being a starter.

Gheorghe Muresan - I guess I surprised everyone with this selection. I decided that since I had Shaq, there wouldn't be more than 12-15 minutes for his backup (sometimes possibly less). It made little sense to draft Daugherty or Rik Smits as they were better players and deserving of more playing time (which was unavailable); on the other hand neither would be good at the 4 position next to Shaq (having Ralph Sampson drop to me for this pick seemed, and was indeed impossible). Muresan is the perfect player to maximize his impact on both ends of the floor in limited minutes. He would be impossible to match up with and even superstar centers would be impacted by his presence.

My team would mostly employ a half-court offense (not an ultra-slow tempo though) but would look to run on forced turnovers. My wing players are deadly in the open court. In the half-court offense will be initiated by getting the ball to Shaq on the post. He could score on anyone, he had the passing ability and IQ to pass out of double-teams to find the open men. The wing players themselves possess combinations of skills that make them great 2nd and 3rd options. Aside from being capable to excellent 3-point shooters, my wing players are excellent mid-range shooters which is absolutely essential as sometimes those are the shots that are available.

My team will play tough man-to-man defense and I would really like to think of it as a defensive-minded team. Shaq is the rim and paint protector but Oakley and Mason are the defensive leaders - both leading by example and vocal players who would keep others responsible on the defensive end. The wing players I have are also good defensively, I can rely on Hill and George to match up with most perimeter stars I will meet. All of my wing players can be part of a good team defense and that is what I expect from them.

Ultimately my team will be capable of matching against any other on both ends of the floor. On offense Shaq will be the first option, Westbrook - the 2nd. From that point Brandon Roy and Grant Hill can take what the defense gives them, and Paul George and Toni Kukoc are not worse either. Oakley and Mason are what they should be - at most times the 5th option on offense, meaning they would focus on offensive rebounding (Oakley was great at it), setting screens, making the odd jumpshot and in Mason's case - sometimes using his unique skillset to create something out of nothing.

I think it's quite a sizable post by that point so I will keep any detailed strategy for the particular matchups. My first-round matchup will be amazing in case you didn't notice, against a team that has Ewing, Durant and Penny... I hope I convince more judges than my opponent!

[MacGill]

Re: Judges and Judging

Just hoping that with the judging panel we will see as unbiased decision making as possible here. While some may have more despise for other players than others, I hope we won't see that coming into the actual full team rosters created. Well too much anyway

Really looking forward to reviewing the breakdowns here

[john248]

So far, I'm enjoying what I'm reading. Then again its not my team that's being picked apart.

Sent from my Galaxy Note 3

[Laimbeer]

I'm enjoying it as well.

I wonder if anyone would object to me (or anyone really) running the tournament a second time, with teams and seedings exactly as they are, except by popular vote of the forum. It would be quite easy to do - there would just be one thread and a poll for each match up, and possibly one for general discussion and results. The GM's wouldn't have to participate. In fact, to be even handed, I'd probably ask the GM's to not post in threads concerning their teams since some wouldn't be inclined to go through it again.

Of course, I would let some time lapse between the end of the current tournament and the popular vote tournament to avoid any confusion. It would be interesting to see how different the results might be, if at all.

[Texas Chuck]

Re: Judges and Judging

Just hoping that with the judging panel we will see as unbiased decision making as possible here. While some may have more despise for other players than others, I hope we won't see that coming into the actual full team rosters created. Well too much anyway

Really looking forward to reviewing the breakdowns here

I would hope nobody would mark someone down because they personally dont like a player. That said obviously we all evaluate players differently. For example I see Kidd as being a better player than the RealGM consensus and probably more than just about any other individual here does. So I will give the team with Kidd a boost that most judges won't. On the other hand Im not as high on Patrick Ewing as most here, so I might not view his team quite as highly. This imo is perfect acceptable judging.

Now Im not a fan of Karl Malone or Kobe even tho I view both players to be all-time greats. If I were to knock their teams based on my personal view rather than the idea that I feel Kobe to be a top 10-12 all-time guy and Malone just behind the big 3 PFs then that would be different and completely inappropriate and I should be removed as a judge.

This has already shown up a little in one match-up where I think David Robinson would be the biggest factor in the series. Pretty much everyone else thinks old Gilmore could and would shut him down, but I think a more likely scenario would be that Gilmore would have to be pulled for Laimbeer (since that GM isnt using Bogut). I dont see a problem with me judging based on my evaluation even if its an unpopular one.

[MacGill]

Just to be clear, I wasn't calling anyone out. I have been here for awhile, longer than my actual join date and am very familiar with the arguments of the judges, players they champion and don't etc. My intent was only to hope that while some on the panel have particular 'strong views' regarding certain players, it doesn't come out to be like some of the debates we have in other threads. Ideally, since peak/prime seasons are picked here, it should for the most part eliminate much of that noise so yawl can really drill down to how the team gel and fitment etc.

Already good stuff here, so hoping you didn't take that as a personal slight TC.

[HeartBreakKid]

I don't see how bias toward a player is relevant or a problem. There should be bias' toward players, I totally welcome that. If people think people on my team sucks, then that is their right. I have no issues with that.

If I can't convince them other wise, then that's on me. If someone is walking around and has the reputation as the Kobe Bryant hater or something (I'm talking about hating on his game, not calling him a rapist or something non-basketball related), and he goes and votes against a team that has Kobe Bryant, then that is perfectly legitimate. It's up to the GM to convince that person to change his stance.

[MisterHibachi]

So far, I'm enjoying what I'm reading. Then again its not my team that's being picked apart.

Sent from my Galaxy Note 3

Yeah, I'm enjoying it a lot right now, but I'm just wondering how I'll feel if my team ends up getting swept out the first round lol

Loving all the breakdowns by the GMs and the great responses by the judges.

I notice tho that TMACFORMVP hasn't chimed in yet. Should I PM him? I'm not even sure he knows judging has started..