Posted by all3 on 8/23/2011 1:58:00 AM (view original):
Weighing-in on the "Prime" vs. "Longevity" issue: I for one didn't even consider anybody who didn't have at least 5 full seasons where they performed at a top level.  Just don't see how you can say a player is one of the best players ever if he doesn't meet that criteria.  Tons of guys have had a couple great seasons, but part of being a great player is doing it year after year.  No matter if a player's failure to do so was injury, or the fact he's still to young, I believe that player's effectiveness needs to be severly limited in any such All-Time format.   

I agree with this, and most of us did choose players with long careers.  There are some short careers that I will not give full credit to. 

Posted by logain on 8/23/2011 9:49:00 AM (view original):
As for brad's post above, I don't understand the primes lining up thing. Its not like we are taking everyone as rookies to start. If two players have a 5 year prime.. imagine they played it together? Right?

The way I am going to judge these teams is.. 

A. Can this team with everyone at their prime compete for/win a championship in this "league" - I think about 8 of them can. I'll rank those 8 above the other 8 and then base the rankings from there on..

B. How many seasons can the team compete for a championship.

C. Feel.

So, for example, emps team can compete for a title for at least 5-6 seasons and is one of the favorites for my #1 spot. But I have to look at other teams closer.

As for the bolded paragraph above... yeah, you're right.  I think my WIS-wired brain was approaching this unnecessarily as a sim progressive game.

However, we do need a ruling on whether this is a 5-year or 10-year timeframe we're talking about.

Posted by longtallbrad on 8/11/2011 11:09:00 AM (view original):

Posted by snydpie on 8/11/2011 10:50:00 AM (view original):

Posted by logain on 8/11/2011 10:41:00 AM (view original):
Personally, I was looking at it as the 5 guys I would want to build a dynastic championship run with over 5-10 years.

Exactly logain, you hit the nail on the head! 

But again, are we talking 5 or 10 years?  Big difference in terms of who you can consider.  Some of today's superstuds haven't played ten years, and some all-time greats didn't have decade-long primes.

You only asked for this 12 days ago!

The only response I remember was snyd agreeing on 5-10 years leaning towards 10.  So maybe a player gets full longevity consideration if they have 8 years of high level play?

Realizing its all just fun, but drafting and then making up the rules is a bit odd :P

I know I based my picks on needing guys for a long championship run. I guess the longer the better. That is why I handcuffed Walton with Hawkins and Nance. My team has a solid frontcourt even with Walton out for a season. A 3 man big guy rotation of Nance/HAwkins/Mutombo is pretty solid even in this league. Plus, Artest can guard some of the more athletic 4s.

Walton is really a bench player here IMO.  He didn't have a season of over 2300 mins, and only 2 over 1500. 

Dwight is young, but has 6/7 solid seasons over 2800 mins and never missed any real time.  LeBron the same.

DWade barely makes the cutoff with 5 of 8 solid seasons.   Still, injury is a constant concern with him.

I think 3-5 prime years.    Durant for example is a great young player, but very green.  He does not have the mental toughness of an old vet yet. (Lebron could fall into this category as well).

For Grant Hill, a solid young player but with only 1-2 years in his prime.   That's why I did not take him earlier.

I think grant hill's first 6 seasons qualify as prime enough for me.

And yeah, evaluating Walton is difficult. If we consider say a 5 year span.. hes a starter and mvp one season (still needs a solid backup that year), would play 20 mins a night for maybe 3 years, and miss one of the years entirely. But he's a difference maker when he is on the court, even among all the star guys here when he's playing hes one of the best out there. Thus, the pick and all the handcuffing.

But that falls into the Durant thing.  Great young kid, but he'd get schooled by Bird.  

LBJ is stat-wise the best ever, but he still isn't wise enough to take over at the end of a playoff game.  Major negative points.

Posted by badja on 8/23/2011 11:07:00 AM (view original):
LBJ is stat-wise the best ever, but he still isn't wise enough to take over at the end of a playoff game.  Major negative points.

if yor going stat wise i would say wilt or oscar is the best ever

Its not quite fair to compare every player to Bird/Magic/MJ. I don't think you can slam the Lebron pick where it was made. I think each team needs some winning killer instinct. For example, Hobbit drafted Paul Pierce,  he brings some of that clutchness that Lebron doesn't bring.

In the end, I think you could draft as well as humanly possible in the bottom 10 picks of this draft and you will probably lose out to the guys at the top with the all-time title winners like Bird/Magic/MJ/Russell.

I need a guy that can play behind Kobe and with Kobe when we give Isiah a break.. so he needs to play defense, score, pass.. and I'd like some more 3 point shooting on this team. I also would like a little more crazy. I like teams with personality.

Latrell Sprewell

35000 minutes
10th career in MPG at 38.6
4x all-star
1st team all nba (one of very few SG's to do so in the last 25 years.. squeezing in during MJ's absence in 93-94).
Made 93-94 All-defensive team
Made 1104 3ps - 47th all-time
Career 34% from 3
Career averages of 18pts, 4 boards, 4 assists

Posted by logain on 8/23/2011 11:11:00 AM (view original):
Its not quite fair to compare every player to Bird/Magic/MJ. I don't think you can slam the Lebron pick where it was made. I think each team needs some winning killer instinct. For example, Hobbit drafted Paul Pierce,  he brings some of that clutchness that Lebron doesn't bring.

In the end, I think you could draft as well as humanly possible in the bottom 10 picks of this draft and you will probably lose out to the guys at the top with the all-time title winners like Bird/Magic/MJ/Russell.

Agreed 100%. 

But first,  I didn't slam any pick (except maybe Walton).

IF Hobbitt had used LBJ as his go-to guy, then he'd be in trouble.   Same with emp and Durant.  KD is the 2nd option, he's not leading the team. So that's all good.

We'd all love to have Jordan, but even Jordan lost in his "prime".  They all did.   MJ, Bird and Magic are only 1 player-who else is on the team?  Do they defend and rebound?

Posted by logain on 8/23/2011 11:07:00 AM (view original):
I think grant hill's first 6 seasons qualify as prime enough for me.

And yeah, evaluating Walton is difficult. If we consider say a 5 year span.. hes a starter and mvp one season (still needs a solid backup that year), would play 20 mins a night for maybe 3 years, and miss one of the years entirely. But he's a difference maker when he is on the court, even among all the star guys here when he's playing hes one of the best out there. Thus, the pick and all the handcuffing.

Yeah, Hill was great his first 6 seasons but once again ..... He is also my backup who has incredible versatility.

Posted by logain on 8/23/2011 11:24:00 AM (view original):
I need a guy that can play behind Kobe and with Kobe when we give Isiah a break.. so he needs to play defense, score, pass.. and I'd like some more 3 point shooting on this team. I also would like a little more crazy. I like teams with personality.

Latrell Sprewell

35000 minutes
10th career in MPG at 38.6
4x all-star
1st team all nba (one of very few SG's to do so in the last 25 years.. squeezing in during MJ's absence in 93-94).
Made 93-94 All-defensive team
Made 1104 3ps - 47th all-time
Career 34% from 3
Career averages of 18pts, 4 boards, 4 assists

Spree could go all game long! Loved watching him play