Posted by smokey57 on 8/31/2014 1:08:00 AM (view original):
Posted by tarheel1991 on 8/30/2014 11:57:00 PM (view original):Take the blinders off, you downgrade in every stat for a 1-2% efg, and 93% @ sf on Garnett is a little more than I'm willing to give up. '62' Oscar @ 22.7%ast @ point verses 26.7%ast for the '63'???
Posted by smokey57 on 8/30/2014 6:38:00 PM (view original):05-06 Garnett and 62-63 Oscar
I'm curious, which KG is the right one @ the 3 and which Oscar is right @ the point?
I missed the "at the 3" part on Garnett, sorry about that, but I wouldn't draft Garnett to play him at the 3. You draft a guy in the first round to take his best season, IMO, regardless of position, and 05-06 is Garnett's best season, to play at PF/C. When you're talking about a guy with 25%+ usage, 2% is a big difference in efg%, plus 05-06 is a better free throw shooter and a better rebounder. Admittedly 02-03 is a better passer and defender, who can defend all three frontcourt positions, but the main thing you're paying for is extra minutes, that's all. Bottom line: in a $52 mil league, I am not using my first round pick on a lead/co-lead scorer with below average efg%, even when he brings as much to the table as Garnett.
Similar on Oscar. 3% efg is a huge difference for a high-usage guy. You've now built your team around two high-usage guys with below average efg% when you didn't have to. The 4% ast difference is negligible compared to the 3% efg on a guy with usage that high; not to mention, if you take Garnett and Oscar 1/2, you've already got almost 40% ast from two players even with the lower-assist versions I'm advocating. Plus yous Oscar has less rebounding and more turnovers (although fewer fouls and slightly more defense/steals). Bottom line, though, the most important thing in winning games is using possessions more efficiently than your opponents, and putting yourself behind the game in terms of efficiency in the first two rounds is not the right way to go about that.
Also, Chris Dudley. Shudder.