Future Draft Games

[Laimbeer]

Last one..

A draft that groups eras together like so:

60’s/70’s (seasons would be 1959-60’ through 1969-79’)
80’s/90’s (seasons would be 1979-80’ through 1989-99’)
00’s/10’s (seasons would be 1999-00’ through 2018-19’)

Your entire team has to be from one of these three groups. You get one exception (e.g. 1 player from any time period)

Those games would have to use FGA/100 because of the significant difference in pace. You'd also have to retrain everyone away from a modern bias which I think would prove impossible. Otherwise literally everyone would draft the modern era to get the required shooters.

How about pairing them like 60s/10s, 70s/00s, 80s/90s - would be more equitable in terms of old school v modern.

[ardee]

On the Play Index thing... I'd be down to share a password. We could all just send money to one guy and have him pay it for the entire year. 24 participants say, that's only $4 per person for the year.

Sent from my SM-A505F using RealGM mobile app

[getrichordie]

How do I sign up for these games?

[goober]

How do I sign up for these games?

Sign Up threads are posted before a game, just have to be checking the forum regularly to see a signup thread posted.

[Laimbeer]

How about a no-draft game building around your favorite team? Maybe half your fga's must be spent on them? Or all players with one exception? We could limit the eight man team to one MVP, one all-nba, etc. per team to make it competitive.

[Odinn21]

How about a no-draft game building around your favorite team? Maybe half your fga's must be spent on them? Or all players with one exception? We could limit the eight man team to one MVP, one all-nba, etc. per team to make it competitive.

Aren't you putting the teams with better all-time teams at a clear advantage though? There aren't many teams with good player pools.

This is what I had in mind BTW;

- Coaches draft;
We pick coaches in the first round. The tweak would be, in the first 3 or 5 rounds we can draft a player that played for coach in that season or a player that played against our coach in that season's playoffs.
And maybe we could add win condition for our coach's in the playoffs. Example; if you got Pop, you can get 2003 Kobe but not 2008 Kobe. But feels like that'd be too harsh.
9 player draft with coach, 10 rounds in total. 95 fga budget to give some space though.
- Accolades draft;
100 fga* budget with extra costs for regular season accolades as MVP +3 fga, All-NBA 1st +2 fga, All-NBA 2nd +1 fga.
8.0 fga minimum per player with 1 player exemption for 5.0 fga minimum.
Minimum 16 minutes play time for each player in rotations.
Or we could disregard higher lowest fga requirement and just use accolades criteria for the usual 8 players/88 fga.

TBH, I'd very much like to do that coaches draft.

[Texas Chuck]

How about a no-draft game building around your favorite team? Maybe half your fga's must be spent on them? Or all players with one exception? We could limit the eight man team to one MVP, one all-nba, etc. per team to make it competitive.

So for the Mavs its draft Dirk and Barea and then you are pretty much screwed.

[Laimbeer]

How about a no-draft game building around your favorite team? Maybe half your fga's must be spent on them? Or all players with one exception? We could limit the eight man team to one MVP, one all-nba, etc. per team to make it competitive.

Aren't you putting the teams with better all-time teams at a clear advantage though? There aren't many teams with good player pools.

This is what I had in mind BTW;

- Coaches draft;
We pick coaches in the first round. The tweak would be, in the first 3 or 5 rounds we can draft a player that played for coach in that season or a player that played against our coach in that season's playoffs.
And maybe we could add win condition for our coach's in the playoffs. Example; if you got Pop, you can get 2003 Kobe but not 2008 Kobe. But feels like that'd be too harsh.
9 player draft with coach, 10 rounds in total. 95 fga budget to give some space though.
- Accolades draft;
100 fga* budget with extra costs for regular season accolades as MVP +3 fga, All-NBA 1st +2 fga, All-NBA 2nd +1 fga.
8.0 fga minimum per player with 1 player exemption for 5.0 fga minimum.
Minimum 16 minutes play time for each player in rotations.
Or we could disregard higher lowest fga requirement and just use accolades criteria for the usual 8 players/88 fga.

TBH, I'd very much like to do that coaches draft.

Just speaking for myself, that coach's draft sounds like too much leg work. We've done a simple accolades criteria, but the idea of a penalty is something I like as a twist.

[Texas Chuck]

I'd like to see a game with a lower FGA bucket. Say draft 7 guys for 60 FGA and then you get one exception whose FGA don't count. Would have the dual benefit of drawing some players into the game who never get picked because they shot so much and temper some of the silly superteams we always end up with.

[Fadeaway_J]

I'd like to see a game with a lower FGA bucket. Say draft 7 guys for 60 FGA and then you get one exception whose FGA don't count. Would have the dual benefit of drawing some players into the game who never get picked because they shot so much and temper some of the silly superteams we always end up with.

We did one fairly recently where you could only pick one player who ever attempted more than 16 FGA in a season. That was a lot of fun because it forced you to actually build around superstars instead of smashing them together.

Typically that's the best way to shake up the player pool - restrict the number of upper-echelon superstars each team can have. Same deal with the game Hawk Eye just hosted. Lowering the FGA limit normally just results in horrendous benches and cheaper versions of the usual suspects.

[Dr Positivity]

I’m interested in doing a rebounds game like the assists one

PG - 4
SG - 5
SF - 6
PF - 9
C - 11

Bench: 20

I would say about 55

[Hawk Eye]

I would like to do a draft that incorporates win shares somehow.

Maybe everyone gets a budget amount of win shares to spend on their 8 players?

[Odinn21]

Just speaking for myself, that coach's draft sounds like too much leg work. We've done a simple accolades criteria, but the idea of a penalty is something I like as a twist.

TBH, I just want to draft coaches.

[Laimbeer]

delete, my math was off

[Laimbeer]

Just speaking for myself, that coach's draft sounds like too much leg work. We've done a simple accolades criteria, but the idea of a penalty is something I like as a twist.

TBH, I just want to draft coaches.

If you draft coaches, do you still do a write up? Or do people just imagine what that coach might do?

[Odinn21]

Just speaking for myself, that coach's draft sounds like too much leg work. We've done a simple accolades criteria, but the idea of a penalty is something I like as a twist.

TBH, I just want to draft coaches.

If you draft coaches, do you still do a write up? Or do people just imagine what that coach might do?

There should be a write up surely. But I can see certain positive sides of getting coaches.

For example the team you drafted in this 200th game, they'd be playing well under Daly, Brown, Wilkens and Nelson. I don't think Jackson would do that well. But all of these names would bring something different.

I'm against drafting Artest and P-Jax, then saying Artest's playing triangle now. But when there's a clear bond with the team and the coach, it's just a beauty.

Edit; write up should correlate with coach's strong suits for sure.

[Laimbeer]

Looked at my team's stats sheet. And remembered Dr Positivity's proposal about 55 rpg draft because my team's rpg total in r. season is 70.7 and rpg total in postseason is 77.7.
LOL.

You do have Moses and Russell starting - and Ray on the bench.

If you factor up the 40 assists to rebounds based on league averages in 2018-19, you get 73.5.

I'd agree 55 is too low. It uses pretty typical numbers except maybe the bench.

[Odinn21]

Looked at my team's stats sheet. And remembered Dr Positivity's proposal about 55 rpg draft because my team's rpg total in r. season is 70.7 and rpg total in postseason is 77.7.
LOL.

You do have Moses and Russell starting - and Ray on the bench.

If you factor up the 40 assists to rebounds based on league averages in 2018-19, you get 73.5.

I'd agree 55 is too low. It uses pretty typical numbers except maybe the bench.

I think 60 or 65 would be enough of a challenge. And if we did it with before the merger, that time frame should have a 0.80 or 0.75 mutliplier like that 0.85 we use it for fga.

Rearranged conference page accordingly BTW.

[getrichordie]

Couple of ideas:

Do a 2020 draft game w/ possible trades. There's 120+ days until the draft so it would give ample time to everyone to propose trades to other GMs. It would just be fun to look back on a year to three years from now to see what the rookies become and how bad/good some selections were.

Do a 10-year (or 20-year) re-draft (snake order) from 2004-2005 to 2014-2015 or earlier. Whatever the people want. Idea is to come up with best roster.

[Dr Positivity]

Looked at my team's stats sheet. And remembered Dr Positivity's proposal about 55 rpg draft because my team's rpg total in r. season is 70.7 and rpg total in postseason is 77.7.
LOL.

You do have Moses and Russell starting - and Ray on the bench.

If you factor up the 40 assists to rebounds based on league averages in 2018-19, you get 73.5.

I'd agree 55 is too low. It uses pretty typical numbers except maybe the bench.

In the assists final I had 44 and you had 44.9. While stacking the bench with rebounds instead of assists would change that, I wouldn’t go higher than 60 or so.