Posted by ashamael on 1/25/2016 10:51:00 PM (view original):
Oh I run teams with around 5500 fgas all the time... in open leagues, where you get rookies that push that number towards 7k.  It's not very cut & dry at all.  The only way to be completely safe is to draft way more fgas than you would ever need while keeping your usage well above 100% on the floor at all times, but that would be a waste of salary.  Even then, outliers can and will occur.  It's a balancing act between many, many factors - not just one or two or a few - which is why the sim is beautiful.

I think Pts per FGA is has a lot to do with this as well. It makes winning the possession less important. I've had teams who averaged 3 less shots per game than my opponents and won the championship.

Great start on the evals dh.  Thanks.

Posted by eleibowitz on 1/26/2016 5:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ashamael on 1/25/2016 10:51:00 PM (view original):
Oh I run teams with around 5500 fgas all the time... in open leagues, where you get rookies that push that number towards 7k.  It's not very cut & dry at all.  The only way to be completely safe is to draft way more fgas than you would ever need while keeping your usage well above 100% on the floor at all times, but that would be a waste of salary.  Even then, outliers can and will occur.  It's a balancing act between many, many factors - not just one or two or a few - which is why the sim is beautiful.

I think Pts per FGA is has a lot to do with this as well. It makes winning the possession less important. I've had teams who averaged 3 less shots per game than my opponents and won the championship.

there's a way that winning the possession battle and being too efficient can actually start to eat it's own tail

Posted by copernicus on 1/26/2016 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by eleibowitz on 1/26/2016 5:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ashamael on 1/25/2016 10:51:00 PM (view original):
Oh I run teams with around 5500 fgas all the time... in open leagues, where you get rookies that push that number towards 7k.  It's not very cut & dry at all.  The only way to be completely safe is to draft way more fgas than you would ever need while keeping your usage well above 100% on the floor at all times, but that would be a waste of salary.  Even then, outliers can and will occur.  It's a balancing act between many, many factors - not just one or two or a few - which is why the sim is beautiful.

I think Pts per FGA is has a lot to do with this as well. It makes winning the possession less important. I've had teams who averaged 3 less shots per game than my opponents and won the championship.

there's a way that winning the possession battle and being too efficient can actually start to eat it's own tail

Agreed.. 

Posted by copernicus on 1/26/2016 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by eleibowitz on 1/26/2016 5:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ashamael on 1/25/2016 10:51:00 PM (view original):
Oh I run teams with around 5500 fgas all the time... in open leagues, where you get rookies that push that number towards 7k.  It's not very cut & dry at all.  The only way to be completely safe is to draft way more fgas than you would ever need while keeping your usage well above 100% on the floor at all times, but that would be a waste of salary.  Even then, outliers can and will occur.  It's a balancing act between many, many factors - not just one or two or a few - which is why the sim is beautiful.

I think Pts per FGA is has a lot to do with this as well. It makes winning the possession less important. I've had teams who averaged 3 less shots per game than my opponents and won the championship.

there's a way that winning the possession battle and being too efficient can actually start to eat it's own tail

Yup.

low turnovers + high boards + just enough usage under normal circumstances = more turnovers & lower fg% from individual possession penalty

I really like the O/U's you are doing for some teams. I agree that if harden and McGrady can't find a way to get 54 points a game, we are toast.

I'm bored, so I'll do the "Why I did it" that people used to do.

Round 1: Larry Bird
Firstly, he's a 55% efg%, tier 2 usage offensive player with either 64 or 76 defense and at least 17% ast% & 18% drb that can be my 2, 3 or 4.  This means I can go for an assist-bump strategy with a main focal point that isn't an inefficient Grant Hill, go big boards & use him as my 2, or go a more traditional approach with him at the 3.  So, in short, he gives me flexibility.


Round 2: Deron Williams
I desperately wanted to trade down, but the only offers I got weren't acceptable for one reason or another. I would have taken Camby here, as he was the only guy available I deemed worth a 1st half 2 left on the board that fit what I wanted to do, but Sly made him unavailable one pick before me and crushed my hopes & dreams haha.  None of the other low usage, high rebound bigs make the grade here for me, so I decided to keep my options open with the three strategies thing and pick a high assist guy that could play the 1 or the 2.  Of those available & worth drafting in the 1st half of the 2, only D-Will & Nash fit.  Even though I was keeping my options open, I was pretty sure I'd go for either a traditional approach or a Bird at the 2 approach, and in either case, D-Will trumped Nash because of defense.


Round 3: Tom Boerwinkle
Primed and ready to take Drummond, my guy gets taken immediately before me for the second round in a row.  Boerwinkle makes sense because he gives decent offensive boards, great defensive boards, decent defense, and high assists should I decide to go assist bump, though that door is pretty much shut, as I needed either Rondo or Nash to fall, and neither did.  Still, I'm rocking at least 70% ast% between my 3 picks thus far, so even with a traditional or a big approach, I'm still probably going to get at least a marginal bump on the offensive side.


Round 4: Kris Humphries
Hardest pick of the draft for me.  It was time to decide on a path and stick to it.  It came down to either Boozer (who would have provided me some consistent offense & great boards), KJ (assist bump still possible), Humphries, Bogut or Dalembert (best lower usage board lords left).  I was really hesitant about Boozer because I didn't get a Camby or Wallace or any of the good defensive bigs that are 100% at both PF & C to cover his defensive liability.  Even with KJ & getting Jalen Rose later on, I'd still be maxing out at less than 150% ast%, so I really just felt like that pursuing that strategy further was a waste.  There were also quite a few guys left I was certain I could grab in round 6 to give me good offensive firepower who would be better in the possession battle (boards & turnovers) that had equally below average defense, so it was time to take a big.  I liked Humphries' overall package better, despite the lowest defense of the three.  I also considered a guy that I'm pretty sure still isn't drafted that used to go in the high 2s & occasionally the 1st, but it would have really derailed my plan, and my experience in draft leagues has been that when I deviated from a chosen course to pick up a good value that didn't really fit, it was a wasted league.  So I went with a 10/30 guy.


Round 5: Andrew Bogut
I knew I was going to get a full rotation at the 2 (or 3, Bird still could be my 2 at this point) in round 6, so I might as well shore up boards.  I liked how the salary worked out better with Bogut than Dalembert, plus he had better D, higher ast% & less fouls per 48.  The rotation works perfectly & Bogut fits better in the SL.  Jalen Rose was taken before this spot, anyway, proving that I made the right decision to not try for the full-blown ast%-bump strategy, as he was necessary to make it work at this juncture.


Round 6: Eric Bledsoe, Michael Redd
Redd is an amazing player in this sim, but at some point, people started over-valuing defense, a mistake I fell into as well during my last stint in the ODL.  It's pretty shocking that he and some fellow similar players don't even get drafted now.  Make no mistake, I value defense, but you sacrifice too much in a draft league *at this cap* to get a lineup filled with 80s & 90s.  2300 minutes of 56% efg at tier 3 usage, 17% crb (4/13 o/d), with an incredible 6% tov%?  Yes, please.  Those minutes really make his salary manageable.  Bledsoe's 1400+ minutes of 52% efg with 20+ ast%, 60+ def & an assortment of other qualities at the price makes him the perfect rotation with Redd.  I was again tempted to dismantle everything by picking the unpicked (can't say his name), but I stayed the course.


Overall:  Not my favorite squad for my comeback to the ODL, but I had a theory (that I haven't shared with anyone except nc) and stuck with it.  I drafted based on keeping options open later for multiple types of teams based on who is & who would be available later.  That made it harder to make a decision in the middle rounds than I expected, but maybe the team will be better for it.

Things I like: decent ast% for small bump, good efg% thanks to 3s, good boards, low-ish turnovers, average defense

Things I don't like: no true paint/high 2-pt fg% guy to rely on; boards aren't as strong as I'd like; while I just said the defense is average, for this league, it will be one of the weakest defensive squads; I've never used Bird or D-Will in a draft league

Prediction: Nothing special - between 40 & 50 wins, could be a 1 seed or completely miss the playoffs... it's just been too long since I've been in this league to properly gauge the environment (which has always been tricky anyway)

^ i like that, so i'm going to do one, too.

round 1: david robinson

great thing about the scoring bigs in the top 12: scoring. they're pretty efficient and good at rebounding. bad thing about the scoring bigs: they're not all good at rebounding, and most of them are bad at getting fouled. Kareem's not even that good at defense, and i really wonder how overrated he is in this league. i knew that Moses was a stretch at 11, but for some reason David Robinson wasn't. i really couldn't go wrong with 91-92 as my starting center, so i went with it. with the 11th pick? yeah, that'll do.

round 2: rudy gobert

i want an offensive rebounder next to robinson. i want 80 D, but i'll settle for 70 or even 60. the great thing about Gobes is 13 OReb%, 25 DReb%. most guys are good at one or the other. on top of that, now i've got about as good a blocking front line as there is, and it's pretty cheap, too.

round 3: kawhi leonard

so, it was between kawhi and larry nance here. actually, i don't remember whether nance was off the board or not, but i would've looked at him. here's something to consider: in order to be a great rebounding team in this league, your SF probably has to be a good rebounder. here's something else to consider: most teams have a scorer at SF. probably about half of the teams also have a scorer at C, which i have covered. Kawhi makes perfect sense in this regard. i love that he shoots 3's, steals, and has 90 D. he doesn't shoot that much and is over 5+ FTAP48 (not bad), which will be helpful if i have a lot of guys taking shots, the way my salary is setting me up now. also, his low salary opens me up for a possibility i'm looking at with my final pick (who turns out to be Millsap). being that he's one of the only guys at SF with 6+ boards, 20+% per and 80+ D, i go for it. 

round 6: brandon roy

this is where junk got tricky. there was no doubt in my mind that i would land Charlie Ward. well, i didn't. i was in my car, debating how i should proceed, looking at (insert player's name here), and eventually landed on this thought: "well, i already traded my 5th away because i'm certain PIerce or Dragic will be there for me in the early 6th. no worries. i'll just take Tinsley here." bad move.

thankfully scud is down to deal, so i look at my options and discover one of my favorite players in real life, Brandon Roy. 27.6 Usg%, 21.8 FGAP48, 51.2 eFG% (not that good, but i can live with it), but here's the kicker: 51% from midrange. i LOVE that. No one else on my team really shoots that much from midrange. suddenly he becomes a smaller LaMarcus Aldridge or something. the great thing about that is that most guys who get to the line a lot take the greatest number of shots in the paint. Roy only takes 32% of his shots in the paint, a relatively low number. therefore, i won't mess with David Robinson's paint scoring, and i'll get the same thing in the midrange and a couple of threes and rebounds to boot. i know it's a risk with the suspect defense and efficiency, but i actually like him better than Pierce or Dragic. (less than 3 FP48 and 3 TOP48!) Sly may have bailed me out by taking Dragic from me.

round 6: charlie edge

two of the only guys with 60+ D, 12+ OReb%, < 4.5 FP48? Charlie Edge and Rudy Gobert, both with 80+ D. boom - settled.

round 6: don buse

a good passer, a wicked thief, a good defender. for some reason, i was building my team on the basis of a $48M cap. it would've been fine for 75-76 Buse, but i realized i couldn't do that with the $47M cap. i had to have the next pick for this scheme to work, so i simply downgraded to 81-82 Buse. in hindsight, there's a different guy i might look back on and say, "man, that was the guy." but, this does give me a ridiculously low turnover count. buse isn't that inefficient. i'll take it.

round 6: paul millsap

Millsap! you might be thinking that i'm going with one of those horrendously high foul seasons with the Jazz, right? nope. 14-15 Millsap is kind of a dream. 3.1 APG, 7.8 RPG, 20+ Per%, 68 D, 99% at C,  6+ OReb%, 18+ DReb%, <4.5 FP48, <3.5 TOP48. perfect. this gives me the rebound advantage i'm looking for, and someone to play a couple minutes at center, where i know i'll have problems defensively if not for millsap.


overall: i am worried about efficiency. a little low on usage, but i see it balancing out with all the positives here. i love the defense on this team, i love Brandon Roy's fit, i love Buse never ever turning the ball over, i love Kawhi's defense, i love the Robinson/Gobert block machine. i'm very fond of it. i see the holes, but they'll have to be what they are.

things i like: rebounding SF's, Millsap's D, Kawhi's D, Roy, not terrible passing. rebounding, blocks, steals, threes are decent, fouls and turnovers are really low, FTA's are very high.

things i don't like: Roy's eFG%, Buse's really low usage, total FGA's are probably fine but a little concerning, bench besides Millsap and Edge, overall efficiency, could use more threes and assists. if i had that, plus some efficiency, i'd be golden.

prediction: i hope this is a playoff team. it could also be at the very top of the lottery, i.e. the worst team ever. i've never tried a team like this before.....i don't have anything to which to compare it. in fact, i can't even think of a team that reminds me of this one. i'm excited to see how it goes, but i think there's a 50% chance i miss the playoffs. i don't know.....maybe not. i have no idea, to be honest. somebody tell me how good it is or isn't......i'll listen

i just finished your team bds...i know you lost your 5th because of tinsley but what happened to your 4th?

I traded my 5th to cjok, because I thought Dragic or Pierce would be there in the early 6th. I took Tinsley with my 4th

oh...yikes...rough gm draft for you....guess it turned out pretty good all things considered

Drummond/Robinson would've been too much paint scoring. Chandler isn't a very good defensive rebounder, and not nearly as good a blocker as Gobert. Neither Robinson nor Boerwinkle is better than 96% at PF.

but all right. let's see what happens

Posted by bds9992 on 1/26/2016 10:14:00 PM (view original):
Drummond/Robinson would've been too much paint scoring. Chandler isn't a very good defensive rebounder, and not nearly as good a blocker as Gobert. Neither Robinson nor Boerwinkle is better than 96% at PF.

but all right. let's see what happens

whoops...you are correct about boerwinkle

chandler - 13.8/26.1
gobert - 13.5/25.5

more mins from chandler as well...not a huge drop in blk% or d rating

you can never have too much paint scoring...at least not from the pf/c positions

so there's really no difference between Chandler and Gobert, other than that Gobert's low salary allowed me to get Edge as well

i have this feeling you're probably right about my team, so whatever.