Build Your Realistic Team - Draft COMPLETED

[Colbinii]

Honestly, we are halfway in and we don't need to race. If we finish in another 7 days [Our current pace] that allows us to run the playoffs [4 rounds] through January.

[Doctor MJ]

I think Detroit, Orlando, Houston and rhe New York Knicks are the only teams with no player picked yet.

Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

The Spurs are also yet to have anyone drafted.

I've been tracking this too with some fascination.

The thing about the Knicks specifically is that they went all-in on their roster to get to this point, and we're currently saying that them trying to build a contending team has resulted in having no Top 60 players on their roster (at least for our 16 team league). This is incredibly damning to me. As horrible as the Knicks have been the past 2 decades, I don't know if there was ever a time where the Knicks went into a season thinking they had something great, but had no one on their roster who'd get drafted in the Top 60 of a project like this.

Beyond that, the Spurs are the most interesting story because of their reputation as being the gold standard for the league until recently. It honestly makes me wonder if we're going to see them turn a corner and all of a sudden we're going to be a lot higher on the players at their current core. The reality is that for a team with (apparently) no Top 60 players, they're doing pretty good.

Current SRSes of the teams in question:

Spurs -0.11
Knicks -1.40
Rockets -7.34
Pistons -9.18
Magic -9.23

Obviously the other 3 teams in question are tank central, so it makes sense we wouldn't be too excited about their players, but we should be careful not to assume that those players are all inherently bad. Tank gonna tank.

[Doctor MJ]

Honestly, we are halfway in and we don't need to race. If we finish in another 7 days [Our current pace] that allows us to run the playoffs [4 rounds] through January.

If others feel this way, I think they should say so. This is supposed to be fun, so we shouldn't have to rush. But there have been others frustrated at the slow pace, and so in my head there's a pull to go faster.

Whatever ends up happening, I'll be fine.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Tell me guys if it makes sense to update the rules this way:
1) you have 2 hours to make a choice
2) you can use any unused time by the three guys before you?

Example:
Pick 1: 1am
Pick 2: 2am
Pick 3: 3am
Pick 4: 4am

For pick 5 you would have you 2h + 1h (not used in pick 2, as it took only 1h) + 1h (pick 3) + 1h (pick 4)
because of this, someone who knows that there are at least 3 picks before his to be made can go to bed and know his time won't be over before 8h from that moment.
If there are less than 3 picks, he'd better share a list with somebody.
What do you guys think?

[MiltChamberlain]

I'm in no hurry, but I just try to be the water, so if it's time to rush, that's what we will do.

Sent from my SM-N986U using RealGM mobile app

[Colbinii]

I think Detroit, Orlando, Houston and rhe New York Knicks are the only teams with no player picked yet.

Sent from my Nokia 3210 using RealGM mobile app

The Spurs are also yet to have anyone drafted.

I've been tracking this too with some fascination.

The thing about the Knicks specifically is that they went all-in on their roster to get to this point, and we're currently saying that them trying to build a contending team has resulted in having no Top 60 players on their roster (at least for our 16 team league). This is incredibly damning to me. As horrible as the Knicks have been the past 2 decades, I don't know if there was ever a time where the Knicks went into a season thinking they had something great, but had no one on their roster who'd get drafted in the Top 60 of a project like this.

Beyond that, the Spurs are the most interesting story because of their reputation as being the gold standard for the league until recently. It honestly makes me wonder if we're going to see them turn a corner and all of a sudden we're going to be a lot higher on the players at their current core. The reality is that for a team with (apparently) no Top 60 players, they're doing pretty good.

Current SRSes of the teams in question:

Spurs -0.11
Knicks -1.40
Rockets -7.34
Pistons -9.18
Magic -9.23

Obviously the other 3 teams in question are tank central, so it makes sense we wouldn't be too excited about their players, but we should be careful not to assume that those players are all inherently bad. Tank gonna tank.

RE: Spurs

We are sleeping on one of their players because he is inefficient but he is nearly averaging a triple double with great defense.

However, the team is extremely deep and Popovich is still a tremendous coach when it comes to maximizing his rosters, instilling confidence in everyone and consistently allowing players to grow and succeed in their role.

Steve Kerr says he emulates Popovich for this and its apparent. The similarities between the two is remarkable, from having unselfish superstars, to building a culture where players can buy in and accel [whether it be unproven guys stepping in, young players finding a niche role or older players settling into a limited role].

[flaco]

I'm all for reducing the time between picks to either 4 or 2 hours per pick as long as everyone is informed about the change. I mean, we cannot change it now in the middle of the 4th round. Maybe after round 5? Generally speaking, backups are less valuable than starters.

That said, I'm fine with whatever you guys want.

[Doctor MJ]

Hehe, sorry about that Ryoga. Part of what I love about these projects is the way it distorts the shape/curvature of the league we're used to. There's room for 32 alphas in the NBA, in this league, just 16. That means below a certain level of quality, the alphas lose their role while the role players don't.

We're talking about 16 teams, though, a decent amount of the real teams are not really competitive for anything. From the there my question, are those alphas (including two all stars in 2021) really "alpha"? Or their just "fool's gold"?
Soon we'll start calling names, why some of these guys are generating so little interest.

Well I think the point Doctor MJ was making is there is more room for guys in the NBA to be high usage and the 'star' of the team.

There is a reason nobody here has picked lower-tier alphas, and that's because they aren't actually alphas, they are just players who are on teams where they are forced to be alphas.

It goes both ways though. All of a sudden DeMar DeRozan is given elite spacing [The Bulls], gets hot for 25-30 games and he is picked in the 2nd round in this game. These players being in the correct setting amplifies or--in the wrong team setting--hurts their perception.

DeMar isn't any different than he has been the past 8 years outside of outlier shooting from 10-16 feet. His team is simply built to capitalize on that and he is sharing the court with the best scorer he ever has [Zach LaVine].

Good clarifications. In my own words:

Going from a 32 team league to an N team league inherently changes the shape/curvature of a league. We see this in all-star games and Team USA, where it's easy to have a glut of "alphas" if people don't think through how to actually build a team. We also see this as players go from high school to college to the NBA.

In high school, OJ Mayo looked like a superstar.
In college, Michael Beasley looked like a superstar.

In the NBA, neither is good enough to be a star, and they don't have the other skills needed to thrive as role players.

So big picture, shape/curvature of any given league is a real thing to be talked about on a grand level, and in a project like this, something for us to be mindful of.

To the point of "If they can't be an alphas with 16 teams, then they were always fool's gold". This makes sense from a perspective of contender-building in the NBA, but note that if we apply the same standard here, then there will be guys who qualify as "legit alphas" for the NBA but are fool's gold here. Not that I think that's fair though - the goal for these projects is to build the best you can with what falls to you. In this league, there is no reason to say "I can't win the league with any of the alphas left to me, so I should sell off what I've got for high draft picks to protect my job for a few more years."

[Colbinii]

Tell me guys if it makes sense to update the rules this way:
1) you have 2 hours to make a choice
2) you can use any unused time by the three guys before you?

Example:
Pick 1: 1am
Pick 2: 2am
Pick 3: 3am
Pick 4: 4am

For pick 5 you would have you 2h + 1h (not used in pick 2, as it took only 1h) + 1h (pick 3) + 1h (pick 4)
because of this, someone who knows that there are at least 3 picks before his to be made can go to bed and know his time won't be over before 8h from that moment.
If there are less than 3 picks, he'd better share a list with somebody.
What do you guys think?

I dont think creating a time algorithm makes sense at this point.

We may need to get John Hollinger in here for this one.

[Fadeaway_J]

I'm fine either way but two hour clock only works in conjunction with the overnight amnesty. Otherwise, I would stick with the existing rules.

[Doctor MJ]

However, the team is extremely deep and Popovich is still a tremendous coach when it comes to maximizing his rosters, instilling confidence in everyone and consistently allowing players to grow and succeed in their role.

Steve Kerr says he emulates Popovich for this and its apparent. The similarities between the two is remarkable, from having unselfish superstars, to building a culture where players can buy in and accel [whether it be unproven guys stepping in, young players finding a niche role or older players settling into a limited role].

I've been super-high on Kerr as a coach since I saw how the Warriors transformed under his leadership in '14-15, and yeah, I think he's got 4 major influences on him:

1. Lute Olson - college coach at Arizona (possibly biggest defensive influence)
2. Phil Jackson - coach on Bulls (biggest offensive influence)
3. Gregg Popovich - coach on Spurs (biggest structural influence)
4. Pete Carroll - football coach of USC/Seattle (emphasis on joy & confidence-building).

To me he's the runaway COY to this point (though shout out to Bickerstaff & Donovan, and continued shout out to Monty & Snyder), and I think clearly we're closing in on him being the Coach of the Decade from '14-15 to '23-24, though we'll see how it all plays out.

As I say all of that, I will say that his run as Phoenix GM did not go well. Much of that blame goes to Sarver as owner, but I do think that a lot of what's special about Kerr is the way he continues to learn and grow. Maybe he would have been a great coach if he'd just started anywhere a decade earlier, but maybe not.

[durantbird]

Tell me guys if it makes sense to update the rules this way:
1) you have 2 hours to make a choice
2) you can use any unused time by the three guys before you?

Example:
Pick 1: 1am
Pick 2: 2am
Pick 3: 3am
Pick 4: 4am

For pick 5 you would have you 2h + 1h (not used in pick 2, as it took only 1h) + 1h (pick 3) + 1h (pick 4)
because of this, someone who knows that there are at least 3 picks before his to be made can go to bed and know his time won't be over before 8h from that moment.
If there are less than 3 picks, he'd better share a list with somebody.
What do you guys think?

I'm against changing the times if we don't adjust the time limit to each time zone, which might be complicated. Although I complained about the slow pace, I don't think 2h limit can be feasible with a ten hours time difference.

[Colbinii]

I must defend my mans honor!

The bolded really feels like a stretch to me. DeMar/Zach take (and make to date) a lot of tough midrange shots in that offense. The spacing strikes me as fairly mediocre for the modern NBA, maybe slightly above average, but elite? They just don't have enough good shooting or elite finishing role players to meet that bar for me.

I'd also note that DeMar has improved his shooting touch over the last few seasons, jumping to 88%+ from the line, which is well into elite shooter territory.

I didn't intend to crap on Demar. I have long thought he was underrated because his role is "take all the difficult shots" and let others do what they do best. When your next best playmaker is Lowry next to him [I love Lowry], your team isn't going to be a strong title contender. When your next best player is [Insert one of the Spurs from past 3 season] then you aren't going to be going further than the play-in game.

But, his fit with Steph Curry--Chef's Kiss

The spacing around DeMar with Curry is going to be eye-opening. The floor balance is enhanced and the pick and roll game between the two will be terrific. It is one of my favorite duo's so far and the most intriguing.

[Dr Positivity]

17ppg 3 and D. Gary Trent Jr

[Colbinii]

As I say all of that, I will say that his run as Phoenix GM did not go well. Much of that blame goes to Sarver as owner, but I do think that a lot of what's special about Kerr is the way he continues to learn and grow. Maybe he would have been a great coach if he'd just started anywhere a decade earlier, but maybe not.

I dont refute this but let's start with this.

Sarver is a cheap ass and P.O.S. human

Look at the moves Kerr made once he began.

Draft two later 1sts [One of which is Rudy Fernandez] and trades Rudy and James Jones for Cash.

Trades Kurt Thomas and 2 Firsts for nothing.

But look at his good moves:
Signed Grant Hill
Traded for Shaq
Traded for Goran Dragic

Honestly, I don't think he was bad. He was working for a maxed [Salary Cap] team, had little resources and his disposal and tried to make improvements around the edges.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Tell me guys if it makes sense to update the rules this way:
1) you have 2 hours to make a choice
2) you can use any unused time by the three guys before you?

Example:
Pick 1: 1am
Pick 2: 2am
Pick 3: 3am
Pick 4: 4am

For pick 5 you would have you 2h + 1h (not used in pick 2, as it took only 1h) + 1h (pick 3) + 1h (pick 4)
because of this, someone who knows that there are at least 3 picks before his to be made can go to bed and know his time won't be over before 8h from that moment.
If there are less than 3 picks, he'd better share a list with somebody.
What do you guys think?

I'm against changing the times if we don't adjust the time limit to each time zone, which might be complicated. Although I complained about the slow pace, I don't think 2h limit can be feasible with a ten hours time difference.

I know it looks complicated, but the method I described works for us.
As long as we share a 4 people list before going to bed, we will be fine.

[eminence]

I'm fine with the current time set up, no rush from me.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Good clarifications. In my own words:

Going from a 32 team league to an N team league inherently changes the shape/curvature of a league. We see this in all-star games and Team USA, where it's easy to have a glut of "alphas" if people don't think through how to actually build a team. We also see this as players go from high school to college to the NBA.

In high school, OJ Mayo looked like a superstar.
In college, Michael Beasley looked like a superstar.

In the NBA, neither is good enough to be a star, and they don't have the other skills needed to thrive as role players.

So big picture, shape/curvature of any given league is a real thing to be talked about on a grand level, and in a project like this, something for us to be mindful of.

To the point of "If they can't be an alphas with 16 teams, then they were always fool's gold". This makes sense from a perspective of contender-building in the NBA, but note that if we apply the same standard here, then there will be guys who qualify as "legit alphas" for the NBA but are fool's gold here. Not that I think that's fair though - the goal for these projects is to build the best you can with what falls to you. In this league, there is no reason to say "I can't win the league with any of the alphas left to me, so I should sell off what I've got for high draft picks to protect my job for a few more years."

16 teams are not so few, but at some point we'll have to start making names and look at where some of these guys have been drafted and why some less heralded ones went way higher. And what I mean is that if you have an "alpha" game but you can't be a top2 guy in a 16 teams league, we have a problem, because it most likely means that in this scenario you're a bench guy.
Example (not draftable): Colin Sexton
the smartest thing a team should do with you is trading you and rebuild, in the real world, it seems.
We should also look at salaries, who are the highly paid guys not drafted yet and why?

On the Spurs, I will comment in a few rounds because I suspect they'll have multiple guys in the 80-100 range.
At that point we might want to start discussing why.

[Dr Positivity]

Real Warriors vs Lillard/Trent/Wiggins/Draymond

[flaco]

Since we are all waiting, here are the teams thus far. Any team(s) standing out?

PG: Garland
SG: Brooks
SF:
PF: Mobley
C: Jokic

PG: Steph
SG: Haliburton
SF: DeRozan
PF: Simmons
C:

PG: Lowry
SG: Kyrie
SF: Durant
PF: Siakam
C:

PG: Lonzo
SG: Beal
SF: Harrison Barnes
PF: Giannis
C:

PG: VanVleet
SG:
SF: LeBron
PF: John Collins
C: Jarrett Allen

PG: Luka
SG: Brown
SF: Hayward
PF: Anunoby
C:

PG: Conley
SG: LaVine
SF: Mikal Bridges
PF:
C: Embiid

PG: Caruso
SG: Booker
SF:
PF: Ingram
C: Gobert

PG: Jrue
SG:
SF: Butler
PF: Horford
C: Porzingis

PG: Trae Young
SG:
SF: Middleton
PF: Aaron Gordon
C: Myles Turner

PG: SGA
SG:
SF: George
PF: Jaren Jackson Jr.
C: Bam

PG: CP3 - Fox
SG: Mitchell
SF: Edwards
PF:
C:

PG: Ja
SG: Brogdon
SF:
PF: Miles Bridges
C: KAT

PG: Lillard
SG: Trent Jr.
SF: Wiggins
PF: Draymond
C:

PG: Dejounte
SG:
SF: LaMelo
PF: Tatum
C: Ayton

PG: Harden
SG:
SF:
PF: AD
C: Sabonis

Plenty of interesting teams. I like what Dutchball97 is doing. He only got one star in LeBron, but the pieces fit seamlessly next to each other. I reckon it would have been a great 2-way team in real life. Not sure whether it will get much love in our league cause all the players but LeBron are very underrated.